Siman 288

It is forbidden to fast on Shabbat, and for the purpose of a fast—even one hour is forbidden. And even without specific intent, one must eat before midday, for so it is stated in the Yerushalmi at the end of the third chapter of Ta'anit, that it is forbidden to fast on Shabbat until six hours, and even if one is occupied with Torah and prayer—it is forbidden. And certainly this refers to one without specific intent, for if it were for the purpose of a fast—even one hour is forbidden. And the reason for six hours seems to be because the final time for the period of eating is in the sixth hour, which is the mealtime of Torah scholars, as written in siman 157, and from then on it is like throwing a stone into a leather bottle as written there; therefore, one should not delay the eating until after this time. And even though it was explained there that for ordinary people their mealtime is in the fourth hour, nevertheless, since from then on it is also not like throwing a stone into a leather bottle—we have no concern with it. Furthermore, the primary concern is with Torah scholars, as we learn in the Yerushalmi (cited by the Beit Yosef): "Shabbatot and Yom Tov were only given for eating and drinking; Shabbatot and Yom Tov were only given to occupy oneself with words of Torah." And it is explained in the Tanchuma that they do not disagree, for Torah scholars who occupy themselves with Torah all the days of the week—to them it was given more for eating and drinking, and for those who occupy themselves with labor all the days of the week—it was given more to occupy themselves with words of Torah. And it is a simple matter that if one recited kiddush and ate a kezayit before midday—he may wait even until after midday. And so it seems to me that when one drinks hot drinks before the prayer—it is also permitted to wait until after midday, for he has already left the category of fasting. And this is a daily occurrence, that people perform kiddush and taste a tasting, and wait with the second seudah until after midday.

And behold, truly in my humble opinion, the second meal must be only before midday, for just as the third meal must be only after midday, as will be explained in siman 291. And the reason appears to be that since we derive the three meals from the three mentions of "today": "And Moses said, eat it today, for today is a Sabbath to Hashem, today you will not find it in the field" (Exodus 16:25) (117b) — there must be for each one a fixed time for itself: one at night, one during the day before midday, and one after midday. But I wonder why not one of the poskim mentioned this matter, and also many are not concerned for this. And perhaps the reason the third meal is not before midday is not because of the three mentions of "today," but because every meal must have its name upon it: that of the night is the evening meal, that of the day is the morning meal, and the third is the mincha meal, and mincha is only after midday. However, according to this, the morning meal also would not be after midday, and if we were to say that one does not fulfill the obligation of the third meal unless he prayed mincha beforehand — it would work out well, but in truth it is not so, as I wrote in siman 291. Therefore, I say that even though the poskim did not mention this — nevertheless, it is clear that the second meal must have its beginning at least before midday, and so I practice.

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 2: "There are those who say that a person for whom eating is harmful, such that it is a pleasure for him not to eat—he should not eat." Thus far his words. And it is obvious that this is so, for it was given for pleasure and not for suffering. And he wrote with the phrasing "there are those who say" not because there are those who disagree on this, but because it is his way regarding a matter where he derives the law from only one posek—he writes with the phrasing "there are those who say." And afterward he wrote in section 3: A person who fasts every day and eating on Shabbat is a suffering for him because of a change in habit—there are those who say that they saw several pious men and men of action who fasted on Shabbat for this reason, and they also said that our teacher, Yehuda HeChasid, used to do so. Thus far his words.

And ostensibly this is the law in section 2, but in truth it is not so, for previously he said that one whom eating harms is exempt, and then he says even one whom eating does not harm and perhaps even enjoys it, but because of the change in habit he also has a bit of pain as is understood—that the palate feels the sweetness of the food but the change in habit causes him a bit of pain in his bowels—he is also exempt, for in any event this is not called "Oneg Shabbat." And know that also regarding this which he wrote, that one whom it harms is exempt, even if at the time he enjoys it but afterwards it harms his health—he is also exempt, and it is simple. And so too, one for whom a certain food is not pleasant to his palate—he should not eat it on Shabbat, for this is not "Oneg."

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote: "And so too, one who has pleasure if he cries, so that the pain shall depart from his heart—it is permitted to cry on Shabbat." Thus far his words. And his intention is clear, that even regarding pain from worldly matters when he has it, from a death or from a loss of money and the like—it is certainly forbidden to be pained on Shabbat. However, if in any event it is not within his power to dispel the pain from his heart until he cries, for such is the way of human beings that through crying the pain is eased—it is permitted for him to cry, for this too is pleasure, as through this the pain departs from his heart. And it is brought in the Aggadah that the students of Rabbi Akiva found him crying on Shabbat, and he said, "I have pleasure." And there is one who explained that this was from the greatness of his cleaving to the Holy One, Blessed be He, as is common among those who pray with kavvanah, for so we find regarding Rabbi Akiva in the Zohar Chadash, that when he said Song of Songs—he burst into crying, because he knew to what heights the matters reach. But to cry over pain—it is certainly forbidden, for if so, everyone in pain would cry, and he wondered at our teacher, the Rema (Taz, subsection 2).

In my opinion, the words of our teacher, the Rema, are very correct, and certainly the incident in the Aggadah is a different matter than that of the Zohar Chadash; for if it were like this incident, the students would not have wondered at his weeping, nor would he have needed to say it is a pleasure for him, for it is obvious that they are weeps of joy, inspirations from the secrets of secrets in the holy Torah. Rather, he certainly wept from some distress, and for this they asked him, and he replied that through this he has pleasure. And as for what he questioned, that if so, every distressed person should weep—behold, our teacher, the Rema, explicitly says: "specifically when through this the distress leaves his heart," and otherwise, it is forbidden (and so wrote the Tosefot Shabbat), and such is the halakha.

However, regarding a fast for a dream, our sages, of blessed memory, said (Ta'anit 12b): That a fast is as effective to nullify a bad dream as fire is to flax, and specifically on that very day, and even on Shabbat, in order to nullify the distress of his body. (Rashi) But he must fast afterward on Sunday for having fasted on Shabbat. And even though the fast is a pleasure for him—nevertheless, he has nullified the pleasure of Shabbat, and therefore he requires a fast for his fast. (Tur) And it is not similar to the previous laws, where one nullified the pleasure of Shabbat because eating is harmful to him, or because of a change in habit, where he does not require a fast for his fast, for there the abstention is not due to his will but due to his lack of ability. But regarding a dream, if he wishes not to pay attention to the dream—the permission is in his hand, and most dreams are vanity, as Kohelet said: "For in the multitude of dreams and vanities etc.", but rather it is his will to be concerned for the dream. And who can say that there is substance in it, and perhaps he nullified the pleasure of Shabbat in vain, and therefore he requires a fast for his fast.

And if the first day is a public fast—he must fast another day, for since he requires atonement for having nullified the delight of Shabbat, this is not an atonement when he is compelled to fast (Magen Avraham, subsection 3). And even if it is not a public fast, but rather he is always accustomed to fast on it, such as Erev Rosh Chodesh or the days of Selichot—it does not count for him (ibid.). However, if he is not accustomed to fast, or if he does not always complete the fast and now completes it—it counts for him. And some say that even a complete fast counts for him for this as well (Turei Zahav, subsection 3), and the proof is from that which we hold that one fulfills the obligation of peace-offerings of rejoicing on Yom Tov with vows and voluntary offerings, and so too here the fast counts for both. And since it is a legal doubt in a rabbinic matter—one for whom fasting is difficult may rely on the lenient view. And in my humble opinion, the primary view is like the "some say," for behold even in matters of atonement we find this, as a woman after childbirth who brings her obligation of a nest for a sin-offering and a nest for a burnt-offering, they said in Zevachim (5b): that if she transgressed several positive commandments—she is atoned for through this burnt-offering, for a burnt-offering atones for those liable for a positive commandment, see there. Behold explicitly that even though she became liable for the burnt-offering as the obligation of a childbirth offering—nevertheless it atones for other positive commandments, and all the more so that this fast atones also for having fasted on Shabbat, and this is a clear proof. (And what the Magen Avraham wrote, "atonement for nothing we have not found"—perhaps he said this by way of metaphor, and what is the connection between this and that, for there the meaning is atonement without the placement of blood, as Rashi explained in Zevachim 37b.)

This matter of "a fast for his fast" is not necessarily on the following day specifically, and if it is difficult for him to fast two days one after the other, he should not fast on the first day and should fast afterwards. And certainly if the first day was Rosh Chodesh, or Chanukah and Purim, or a Yom Tov, even the second Yom Tov of the diaspora—one should not fast until afterwards, and so too on other days upon which we do not fast, he should leave the fast for afterwards. And there is one who says that on other days that are only a custom, he should fast, as is implied by Sefer Chasidim, that when one fasted a fast for a dream on Yom Tov, he should fast on the next day, and that is Isru Chag; and consequently, all days except for Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah, and Purim are so (Magen Avraham, subsection 4). And I do not understand, for since there is no necessity for it to be on that very day, why should he nullify such a custom that in all the dispersions of Israel they practiced a prohibition to fast on them? And so wrote the Perishah, that one should not fast on them, see there. (And so wrote the Eliyah Rabbah and the Tosefot Shabbat, and in Sefer Chasidim it seems to me there is another intention, and he did not specifically mean the next day, but rather he comes to teach us that if he dreamed on the first Yom Tov and on the last Yom Tov and fasted on both of them, it is sufficient for him to sit a fast for his fast for one day, see there and examine carefully) (And in the Zohar Vayakhel, page 207, it implies specifically the next day, see there).

And that which they said in Berakhot (31b): "Anyone who sits in a fast on Shabbat—they tear up for him a decree of seventy years," our teachers explained that this refers to a fast for a dream (Tosafot in the name of our teacher, Chananel). And when one sits in a fast for a dream on Shabbat, the Ba'al HaHalachot Gedolot explained that he says "Anenu" in "Elokai Netzor" and even establishes a blessing for himself, since it is not within the eighteen (ibid.). However, the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch in section 6 wrote: "One who fasts on Shabbat—says 'Anenu' without a signature after the conclusion of his prayer, and includes it in 'Elokai Netzor'." Thus far their words. And he should say after his prayer: "Master of the Worlds, it is revealed and known before You that our will etc." as on a weekday, and he may say "My G-d, before I was formed etc.", and even though he concludes: "May it be Your will that I sin no more," and requesting supplication is forbidden on Shabbat—this is regarding requesting his needs, but not regarding matters of sins to request that he should not sin (Magen Avraham, subsection 11).

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote in section 4: "There are those who say that one who sleeps an afternoon nap and dreamed a bad dream—he should fast from midday until midnight and then recite havdalah, and on the first day he should fast as if he had fasted the entire day of Shabbat." Thus far his words. For even though he did not fast the entire day and ate before midday, and had he wished he could have refrained from eating until night, nevertheless, since he refrained from eating for the sake of a fast—he requires atonement (ibid. subsection 6). From this it is explained that even regarding a dream that he dreamed during the day—one must be concerned, though the world is accustomed to saying that a dream of the day is of no substance. Aside from this, the Tur wrote later in siman 568 in the name of Rav Amram and our teacher Kalonymus: that one should not fast a dream fast on Shabbat in this time, because we are not expert in the interpretation of dreams as in the time of the Talmud, see there; and here he mentioned it according to the law of the Talmud. Furthermore, here he did not write an obligation regarding this, but rather for one whose soul is aggrieved and is concerned about the dream, and the fast will be a pleasure for him, but there is no obligation here, see there (and so wrote the Taz in subsection 3). And it is better not to pay attention to dreams, and specifically a dream that one contemplated regarding that matter during the day—it is obvious that it is of no substance. And likewise if he filled his belly with food and drink, for then the vapors rising to the head show him visions and imaginings, and they have no substance.

This is the wording of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, in section 5: "Some say that one should not fast a dream-fast on Shabbat unless they saw it three times. And some say that in this time one should not fast a dream-fast on Shabbat, for we are not experts in the interpretation of dreams to know which is good and which is evil. And the world says that it is found in ancient books that for three dreams one fasts on Shabbat, and these are they: one who sees a Sefer Torah that was burned (and the same applies to tefillin, Magen Avraham), or the beams of his house or his teeth that fell out, (and in Midrash Miketz they interpreted this for a woman that she would give birth to a male, and so it was, see there). And some say one who sees Yom Kippur, even not at the time of Neilah (and certainly at the time of Neilah), and some say one who sees that he is reading from the Torah, and some say one who sees that he is marrying a woman. And that which was said regarding one who sees his teeth fell out—specifically his teeth, but if his cheeks fell out—it is a good dream, for the counselors who advised evil against him have died. And it appears to me that the dreams which they said in the chapter 'HaRoeh' are bad—one also fasts for them on Shabbat." Thus far his words. And a person must be precise, for many things follow the name in the language, such as 'shunra' 'shinra' (Magen Avraham, subsection 10). And one should not fast for dreams that involve financial loss, but rather for something for which one would desecrate Shabbat (ibid. in the name of Sefer Chasidim).

And even regarding the three dreams that were explained as those for which one fasts—there is one who wrote that even for them one should not fast unless his soul is distressed, and by fasting he will find peace of mind, and I am accustomed to rule that he should fast two days during the week (ibid. subsection 7 in the name of the Shelah). And there is one who wrote that if his soul is distressed—he should fast for all dreams, and for these three—he should fast even if his soul is not distressed (ibid. in the name of the Bach), and it seems proper to be lenient not to fast, for behold, to fast on Shabbat is a Torah prohibition (ibid.). And there is one who wrote in this wording: 'If he is a man who is not concerned with a bad dream, or if the fast is bad for him and he suffers from it much more than he suffers from the fear of the dream—it is forbidden to fast on Shabbat, and even on a weekday it is not a mitzvah' (ibid. in the name of the Rivash). And it is obvious that when he reflected during the day or slept with a full stomach—that there is no substance in this as I have written, and now they are accustomed to go to the sage in the city to interpret the dream for him, and he interprets them for good and for blessing, and a person should not accustom himself to dreams.

It is stated in the Gemara (119a): It is written regarding Shabbat, "and you shall honor it": Rav said—to advance the time of the meal from that of a weekday, and this is its honor (Rashi); and Shmuel said—to delay it from that of a weekday, and this is its honor, for he desires to eat (ibid.). And they do not disagree, for this depends on his nature: if advancing the meal is a delight for him, such as if the night meal has been digested—he should advance it; and if delaying is a delight for him, such as if it has not yet been digested—he should delay it.

And we say there further: The sons of Rav Papa bar Abba said to Rav Papa, for example, we, for whom meat and wine are common every day, with what shall we change it? He said to them: If your habit is to eat early—delay it; if your habit is to delay—eat early. And therefore, one who is wealthy and eats good foods every day—he should make the change on Shabbat by advancing the time slightly or delaying the time slightly, and through this there will be a distinction for the honor of Shabbat. And it appears to me that the law is the same if he eats on Shabbat in a room more pleasant than where he eats during the weekdays—it is also a distinction for the honor of Shabbat, and likewise if he uses expensive vessels on Shabbat and during the week he does not use them, and likewise anything similar to this. (And it requires further study why Rav Papa did not command something like this).

One does not fast on Shabbat for any trouble at all, and if there is an occurrence that requires mercy and the time is urgent—one should supplicate and fall on his face in private (Magen Avraham, subsection 13). And one does not cry out on Shabbat nor sound an alarm for any trouble, except for the trouble of sustenance, for which they cry out verbally on Shabbat but not with a shofar; and similarly a city surrounded by oppressors or surrounded by water, or a ship tossed at sea, and even an individual pursued by oppressors or bandits or upon whom an evil spirit has fallen, for this is a danger of the day—they cry out and supplicate in prayers on Shabbat. But they do not blow the shofar, unless they blow to gather the people to help their brothers and rescue them, which is pikuach nefashot, and in siman 576 this will be explained further.

And one pursued by an evil spirit, this is a type of dangerous illness, and there are those who wish to kill themselves, to drown in a river or to be strangled, and the same law applies to any sick person who is in danger today—one cries out and supplicates and prays. And so it is accustomed to say prayers and supplications for the sick who are in danger today, and so it is accustomed to bless him in the beit knesset and to change his name and to say Tehillim for him if the danger is great on that very day. But for an ordinary sick person—one does not do so, but rather one blesses with a "Mi Shebeirach" and says "It is Shabbat, from crying out etc.," as I wrote in siman 287, see there. And a woman struggling to give birth—she is included in the category of a sick person who is in danger today. And one may bless the sick person even though he is in another city, and we do not fear that perhaps he died, for the majority of the sick are for life, unless he left him as a gosses, for then one does not bless him unless it is known that he is alive. (See Sha'arei Teshuvah, subsection 3, who brought in the name of the Maharil a puzzling thing, that one does not bless a sick person who is not in the city because perhaps he died, and certainly the intention of the Maharil is regarding a person who is dangerously ill and close to being a gosses.)