Elevators on Shabbos: Electricity, Automatic Elevators, and the Practical Psak

Topics

• Elevators on Shabbos: Electricity, Automatic Elevators, and the Practical Psak
• The Question: May You Ride an Elevator on Shabbos?
• A Modern Elevator: Going Up and Going Down Are Different Questions
• Grama, Pesik Reisha, and the Status of Electricity
• Is Taking an Elevator Like Traveling by Train?
• A First Chazarah
• Poskim Who Were More Lenient—And a Story About the Chofetz Chaim
• Pressing a Button Is a Separate Problem
• What Is the Issur of Electricity? The Chazon Ish and the Acharonim
• A Practical Chazarah: Some Distinguish Going Up From Going Down
• Rav Ovadia Yosef: Theoretical Leniency and the Need to Examine the Actual Elevator
• The More Sophisticated the Machine, the More Questions It Can Raise
• What a Shabbos Elevator Tries to Do
• Does "Mutar" Mean You Should Use It Lechatchilah?
• An Older Person or Someone Who Cannot Climb Many Flights
• A Train, an Airplane, and Techum Shabbos
• The Elevator Operator and the Button
• Amirah Le'akum: When Someone Else Operates the Elevator
• What if the Operator Is Going to the Same Floor Anyway?
• What if the Purpose Is a Mitzvah?
• Maris Ayin
• When the Operator Is a Jew
• A Side Question About Yom Tov
• Reading the Psak Inside: Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Shabbos
• What if the Elevator Operator Is Pressing the Buttons?
• A Difficult Case in Ma'ayan Omer: Going to Shul
• The Shul That Moved to a Higher Floor
• Should a Building Install a Regular Elevator if People Will Use It on Shabbos?
• The Practical Conclusion: Don't Misunderstand the Heter

Transcript

# Elevators on Shabbos: Electricity, Automatic Elevators, and the Practical Psak

## The Question: May You Ride an Elevator on Shabbos?

Rabosai, I was asked to address a very important halachic question: **may a person use an elevator on Shabbos?**

People live in apartment buildings with many floors. There are elderly people who may feel that they simply have no choice, and younger people who would certainly prefer not to climb so many flights of stairs. Are they permitted to use an elevator? When are they not?

Before answering, we have to understand something about the actual **metzius** of elevators. An elevator today is not necessarily the same as an elevator made years ago. We cannot say "elevator" and assume every mechanism is identical.

I want first to discuss what I am calling the **old-fashioned hydraulic elevator**. There are hydraulic systems in which fluid is pumped through a cylinder to lift a platform. I am comparing the process, for purposes of this shiur, with other powered machinery. In the language of the original discussion, I sometimes describe the old system as using gasoline and burning fuel, as in a car. **Engineering clarification for publication:** a hydraulic elevator does not, merely by being hydraulic, use a gasoline combustion engine; many use electric motors and pumps. The actual power source and controls must be checked for the specific installation, so my analogy should not be turned into a technical identification of every hydraulic elevator.

Think of the mechanisms that lift heavy platforms at airports. You see equipment moving up and down, raising a staircase or a loading platform, and people call such things hydraulic. There may be many different designs, but the point is that operating powered machinery introduces its own Shabbos issues.

You don't drive a car on Shabbos. And riding in a car while a person is driving is certainly not simply a permitted way to travel because you are sitting in the back seat. The machinery is doing work to move you. A person cannot explain away the result by saying, "I'm not interested in whether the engine works." Of course you are interested! You need the engine to work in order for the car to move.

We have spoken many times about **pesik reisha delo nicha lei**. People sometimes misunderstand the phrase. It doesn't mean that I am indifferent to how something works while still wanting the resulting benefit. If I need a mechanism to function so that I can travel, I cannot easily claim that its operation is something I don't want.

Now, I'm not making an independent practical ruling about every hydraulic lifting platform based solely on that comparison. I am trying to establish the principle that before discussing a heter for an elevator, you must know **which machinery is actually installed**.

There are old buildings with older elevator systems. And there are also very old buildings in which the elevators have been modernized. A building's age, by itself, does not tell you which equipment it uses. A building that was constructed a hundred years ago might have an entirely new elevator today. Conversely, certain older designs remain in service.

So do not assume that because you heard a discussion allowing an elevator in some cases, **your** elevator must be included. You first need to know what it is and how it operates.

What about an **escalator**? That's a separate subject. We'll come to it later.

For tonight, I am moving to the **modern electrically driven elevator**, because that is the mechanism relevant to much of the discussion among the contemporary poskim.

The first practical lesson is simple: **identify the equipment before relying on a theoretical heter**. Don't assume that all elevators use the same technology merely because they all carry people from one floor to another.

## A Modern Elevator: Going Up and Going Down Are Different Questions

Now we are discussing a **modern elevator**, where the primary issue is electricity. We are not necessarily speaking about a person pressing a button. Even when the car travels automatically, could the person's **weight** affect the electricity consumed?

To understand the question, I have to explain just a little bit of engineering—not a whole engineering course! *Handasah*, what do you call it in English? Engineering, physics, whatever you want. I'm not here to turn you into elevator engineers. I just want the metzius to be clear enough that we can learn the halachah.

Many elevators use a **counterweight** and a system of cables and pulleys. The car moves one way while the counterweight moves the other way. Depending on the relative weights, the motor may have to provide energy to move or control the system.

Now, imagine one person riding up. In some configurations the load and counterweight may already be fairly close to balance, and the motor's effort for that journey is different from what it would be with a full cabin. Other times the additional passenger weight can change the demand on the system when going down.

But don't jump to the conclusion that going **up** is always the permissible direction, or that going **down** is always the difficult direction. It depends on **the particular machine, the counterweight, the direction, and the number of people in the car**. The halachic analysis must take account of those facts.

One of you is already calling his brother for the technical information. Excellent! Call him. You were actually there when the system was explained; I wasn't, so I would have to see it myself.

Think of a pulley. One part of the system goes up; the other comes down. Now put one person in the car. Change it to two people. The weight changes, and therefore the relationship between the car and the counterweight changes.

There are cases where additional weight means **more motor effort** for a particular direction. There are also configurations where descending weight may assist movement or change the way braking and other controls operate. In contemporary systems, energy can sometimes be regenerated as well. [Engineering note: actual power use depends on the elevator's design and drive; weight change does not map universally to a single direction of electric current or to an additional forbidden action.]

So, what is the halachic problem?

A person says, "I'm just standing in the cabin. The machine would travel anyway. If my body adds weight, perhaps additional electricity flows, but **I did not turn anything on directly**."

He wants to call it **grama**, an indirect cause. He wants to ask whether the added demand is a *pesik reisha*, or whether the effect is uncertain.

That is the big question. **Am I regarded as causing a prohibited electrical action merely by being present in an elevator that operates automatically?**

Don't answer it yet. The nature of the electricity, the possibility of a direct action, and the law of *grama* are all parts of the discussion.

If a person presses the button, that is another problem. For the moment, let's imagine a car that travels according to a fixed schedule without anyone pressing a button. Even then we have to ask whether riding in it changes anything.

You can see why there are major differences of opinion. First we have to understand what the passenger changes in the elevator; then we need to understand how halachah treats that change.

That is the starting point for the machlokes ha-poskim about elevators on Shabbos.

## Grama, Pesik Reisha, and the Status of Electricity

Now we understand one possible concern. The passenger is not pushing a button; the elevator has already been set to travel. But when he enters, his additional weight might change how much **electricity** the elevator uses.

Some Acharonim say that this is a real problem. Perhaps the passenger's involvement is significant enough to be prohibited, even though the machine operates automatically. Others ask whether it is **grama**, indirect causation, and whether the actual change in electric demand is sufficiently certain to be treated as a *pesik reisha*.

And remember: there is a broad machlokes among the poskim about **what electrical activity itself constitutes**. It is not the same discussion as an ordinary combustion engine burning fuel. Some electrical acts may involve heating or incandescent light; others raise issues such as **boneh**, **molid**, or other categories according to the different opinions.

We should not say that because electricity is complicated, everything involving electricity must be mutar. That would be ridiculous. Nor should we say that because some circuits involve an issur de'oraisa, every possible change in current in every machine is automatically the same act. The details matter.

A passenger doesn't always know how much power is being used with his weight as compared with the elevator running empty. The way the machinery is configured can matter, and the result may be different going up and going down.

So some poskim look at the whole situation and say: **there is too much uncertainty and too many possible prohibitions; don't ride on Shabbos**.

Others say that if the effect is indirect, uncertain, and involves a category that may be rabbinic, perhaps there is a basis for leniency under carefully specified conditions. We are going to meet that approach when we look at the great contemporary poskim.

But then comes another concern, even if we could solve the electrical questions: **uvdin d'chol** or **zilusa d'Shabbos**, engaging in activities that are contrary to the character and sanctity of Shabbos.

### Is Taking an Elevator Like Traveling by Train?

There are poskim who argue that riding a train on Shabbos is prohibited even if the passenger does nothing to operate the train. The **Chasam Sofer** and the **Beis Yitzchak** are brought in discussions of train travel on Shabbos. [The exact responsa and their differing reasoning require verification.]

Why? The journey itself may be a weekday-type activity. It is not only the question of whether your added weight makes the engine use more energy.

But I ask you: **what is it that makes the activity so weekday-like?**

On a train, I understand the concern. Traveling from city to city, taking a long journey—that is a familiar weekday activity. But what about a **boat**? People traveled for weeks or months by sea, including over Shabbos. Those cases have their own halachos, but you can see why they are not automatically identical to taking a commuter train.

What about an **airplane**? Is it more like a train or a boat? Some poskim compare it to train travel; others discuss other aspects of the journey. There are also possible questions of **techum Shabbos**, which we'll discuss later.

Now return to the **elevator**. A man moves from one floor of his apartment building to another. Is that really the same as traveling miles on a train?

Someone says, "If everybody uses this elevator on Shabbos, then it becomes Shabbosdik!" Perhaps public custom affects some aspects of the question, but we cannot dismiss *uvdin d'chol* merely by calling an activity familiar. The poskim consider the activity's actual character and the relevant halachic factors.

I have difficulty defining *uvdin d'chol* by a simple formula. It is an important concept, but the comparisons are not obvious.

The result is that we have **two separate discussions**: the **electrical effect** of being inside the car and the **character of the activity**, even where no prohibited electrical effect has been established.

Some Acharonim forbid elevator use because of electrical effects. Others are concerned with *zilusa d'Shabbos*. And still others find grounds for leniency in a genuinely automatic system.

### A First Chazarah

So let's make a quick chazarah, rabosai. First, determine what kind of elevator you're discussing; don't make assumptions from the building's age. Second, find out whether the passenger's presence and weight cause electrical changes. Third, ask what halachic category those changes fall into. And finally, ask whether **uvdin d'chol** is a separate problem.

We're going to see that not every posek reaches the same conclusion. And before you begin looking for a practical heter, remember that a **regular button-operated elevator** introduces additional concerns we haven't resolved at all.

We'll now turn to the contemporary teshuvos and see how the poskim have approached this.

## Poskim Who Were More Lenient—And a Story About the Chofetz Chaim

Now, rabosai, I want to mention a number of great poskim who discussed the possibility that **riding in an elevator that is operating independently** may be permitted, at least from the standpoint of the passenger's indirect electrical effect.

We have **Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin**, **Rav Moshe Feinstein**, **Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach**, and **Rav Ovadia Yosef**, zichronam livrachah, whose discussions are brought in this sugya. [We must check their exact teshuvos separately; I am not saying they all permitted every type of automatic elevator or shared an identical ruling.]

Some people say: "What is the problem? I'm one passenger. How much additional current can my body possibly cause? The elevator is going anyway." That is the line of reasoning behind some lenient approaches.

But you must know the particular case. An old elevator with one set of mechanisms and a modern elevator with sensors and computerized weight measurements may have completely different halachic implications. We will come to the modern features shortly.

Rav Elyashiv, toward the end of his life, is reported to have taken the elevator question seriously, with discussions among talmidei chachamim about the kinds of elevators being used and how they should be evaluated. The specific story and participants need independent historical verification. But the larger point is that one can't merely say "electrical elevator" and assume the case is settled.

There is also a story repeated among later poskim about the **Chofetz Chaim**. According to the account, he asked a rav to retrieve a document from an upper floor. The rav took an elevator while the Chofetz Chaim was present, and the Chofetz Chaim did not object.

Some people want to use this as a raya that the Chofetz Chaim permitted elevator travel on Shabbos. But I don't think you can build such a strong proof from the story.

Perhaps he did not wish to embarrass the rav who was helping him. Perhaps he did not think a public protest was necessary at that moment. Perhaps there were other considerations we don't know. **Silence in an anecdote is not necessarily a clear psak**. And the source and details of the story remain to be verified.

So I am not telling you that everyone agreed. Some poskim permitted certain **automatic arrangements** in principle; others were stringent. It's a major machlokes.

## Pressing a Button Is a Separate Problem

Now stop for a moment. You are all becoming excited because you hear that some poskim discuss using an elevator on Shabbos. But **you may not conclude that you are allowed to press the buttons**.

I want to repeat this clearly. The heterim we are considering relate to a machine that is **already operating independently** of your pressing a button.

If you get into a normal elevator and choose your floor, you are performing an additional electrical action. There are questions about whether every such action is de'oraisa or derabbanan, what circuits are involved, and how the machine responds. But that debate is not a license to press the buttons on Shabbos.

What about a button which does not visibly turn on any light? Somebody says: "There is no glowing bulb when I press it, so perhaps it isn't a problem." The absence of a visible lamp tells you very little about what happens inside the control system.

Similarly, in other electrical devices—including **hearing aids**—the Acharonim distinguish devices set before Shabbos from those directly turned on or adjusted on Shabbos. The exact applications differ, but they show why we must look at what the person is doing.

You are asking me about an elevator **that travels without your pressing anything**. That's the case we will continue to analyze.

Before we go further, I want one more chazarah. The direction alone does not decide the halachah for every machine. Some poskim distinguish up from down in common designs; others take a more restrictive approach. And some modern elevators have features that introduce problems even though the cabin stops automatically on every floor.

Do not think that a building can simply put up a sign saying **"Shabbos Elevator"** and thereby create a heter. We need to know how the system is actually configured.

## What Is the Issur of Electricity? The Chazon Ish and the Acharonim

The truth is, rabosai, we are touching on one of the complicated sugyos in the halachos of Shabbos: **what exactly is forbidden when a person uses electricity?**

The **Chazon Ish** famously discusses electrical circuits in relation to **boneh and soser**, building and dismantling. Other poskim approach certain electrical operations in terms of *molid*, and where something becomes incandescent there are different considerations involving *mav'ir* and other melachos.

Now, does every temporary electrical change become the same type of boneh? Does it matter if an electrical connection lasts only a moment? What if the device was already running before Shabbos and we are discussing a small fluctuation in current rather than turning it on? Acharonim analyze all these distinctions.

Some poskim therefore argue that merely adding a small load to a running elevator does not create a direct, definable new melachah on the part of the passenger. Others are concerned that the change is a natural and intended consequence of being inside the moving car.

Someone asks about **electricity used for only a fraction of a second**. We had a related conversation earlier about a **hearing aid**. Is it correct to call that a prohibited new use, or is it just a momentary effect in a device that was already running? Don't assume the two situations are identical, but I want you to see why the question arises.

Now let us apply the possibilities to our case.

Suppose the elevator is traveling automatically. I enter. Maybe the motor draws more current because of my weight. Maybe it is in a condition where the added weight has a different effect. We discussed that already. The question then becomes: **how certain is the effect, how direct is the action, and what issur does that effect represent?**

Some Acharonim combine several possible leniencies: uncertainty about the effect, the indirect nature of the action, and opinions that certain electrical changes are prohibited only *derabbanan*. I am describing the reasoning, not telling everyone to rely on it.

And just because there are **tzirufim**, combined considerations, does not mean there is no problem at all. Other poskim remain concerned even with an automatic elevator.

Books upon books have been written about these questions. I am summarizing the types of arguments, not substituting my brief explanation for a technical or halachic analysis of a particular machine.

## A Practical Chazarah: Some Distinguish Going Up From Going Down

Now I want to be clear, because people are going to walk away and tell their friends, "The Rabbi said you can go in an elevator!"

No. I said **there are different opinions** and different cases.

Some poskim have distinguished between **going up** and **going down** in particular counterweighted elevator systems. Depending on how the counterweight compares with the load, the operation of the car and its motor or generator may differ in the two directions.

You might hear a psak allowing ascent but restricting descent. Or perhaps you are dealing with an installation for which a particular concern applies in a different manner. There are also poskim who are stringent in **both directions**, and those who are more lenient with a carefully designed automatic system.

Do not turn a machine-dependent analysis into a universal rule that one direction is always mutar.

Someone asks about a very old building. Again, check the actual equipment. An old shaft does not necessarily mean an old engine. Conversely, a modern hotel may have advanced electronics that introduce new questions.

Now here's an interesting point. The more the equipment is modernized, the more sophisticated the control systems become. Sometimes that makes the machine more efficient, and sometimes it creates **additional electrical sensors and computations** that respond to the passengers.

So one can't say "modern means permissible." The newest machine may be harder to analyze than a simple, older automatic system.

This is why I say, half in jest, you don't want the very oldest mechanism and you don't necessarily want all the newest complicated gadgets either. You want to know **exactly what your elevator does**.

The bottom line at this stage is that no one should infer permission to **press the floor buttons** from a theoretical discussion of **passive riding** in a machine operating on a predetermined schedule. I want that point understood before moving further.

And now we can begin to examine the teshuvos of **Rav Ovadia Yosef** and the engineering changes associated with a dedicated **Shabbos elevator**.

## Rav Ovadia Yosef: Theoretical Leniency and the Need to Examine the Actual Elevator

I want to bring you a beautiful teshuvah in **Yabia Omer**, **Orach Chaim, chelek aleph, siman 19**, as I recall the reference. Rav Ovadia Yosef discusses electricity and has a very important analysis of electrical appliances, including a hearing aid. The discussion connects to the general reasoning of **Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach** about certain electrical effects. [The precise relation of this responsum to the elevator question must be checked. The fuller elevator ruling also appears in later writings, including Yalkut Yosef and Halichos Olam.]

It may well be that, in principle, a person can ride an **automatic elevator** when he has done no deliberate electrical act to start or control the elevator. That is a major position in the discussion.

But I am being very careful with my words: **in principle**. What if the equipment actually causes additional electrical operations when you enter? That is not necessarily the same situation.

And you know me; I cannot get through the subject of electricity without making another joke. Someone is asking whether I am speaking about a *hydraulic hearing aid*. If you have one of those, you're going to hear the fire of Matan Torah in your ears! Of course not. We are talking about small electrical devices and their halachic implications.

### The More Sophisticated the Machine, the More Questions It Can Raise

Now let us look at an actual modern elevator. The passenger enters, and the elevator may have **an electronic weighing device**, sensors measuring the load. There may be computer controls which respond to the weight.

Does that matter? Of course it may. We have a distinct question about **making a measurement** and initiating or changing a computerized operation.

The elevator has to open and close its doors. It may have **floor indicators**, lights that turn on and off, audible signals, safety sensors, and programs governing how long the door remains open.

Someone asks whether the cabin lights are always on. Maybe they are, in his building. But perhaps in another building the indicator changes when the elevator reaches a floor, or a sensor responds to a person entering. We have to know the facts.

A fellow says, "But if the lights are already on, why should that matter to me?" It might not. The point is that we cannot infer the absence of every electrical effect from the fact that one light is always on. We need to examine the entire control system.

And remember: a **digital scale** on Shabbos is not a simple matter. If a person entering the elevator triggers a digital weighing system, that presents questions separate from the indirect effect of body weight on the motor.

We also have to examine **door sensors**. An elevator door is programmed to remain open for a certain period. If a person walks through while it is closing, his presence may interrupt the sensor beam and cause the door to reopen. That is a very different act from standing in a cabin whose stops have already been scheduled.

Now we are beginning to understand the point of a specially designed **Shabbos elevator**.

### What a Shabbos Elevator Tries to Do

The idea is not merely to paint the word "Shabbos" over the door! A Shabbos elevator is arranged to travel automatically, stop at predetermined floors, and open its doors without the passenger pressing floor-selection buttons.

In some designs, engineers and halachic supervisors also modify or configure **weight sensors**, door timing, and other controls to minimize electrical actions triggered directly by passengers.

But the exact features vary by model and installation. It is not accurate to say that every Shabbos elevator has every sensor physically disconnected, or that every such modification eliminates all of the underlying halachic controversy.

Somebody says, "What if the door starts closing while someone comes in? Does it restart the timing? Does it reopen?" That is a crucial question. There may be a signal or buzzer warning that the doors are about to close. One must not deliberately **interrupt the closing doors** in a way that activates the system.

And please, rabosai, safety comes first. I am not telling anyone to risk getting caught in elevator doors to avoid a sensor activation. The proper approach is to wait for a safe, permitted opportunity, or not ride.

So when we hear the words **"Shabbos elevator"**, the question is: **what has been set up in advance, which effects have been eliminated, and what remains?**

Only after understanding that can we learn the poskim's practical conclusions about whether—and for whom—such an elevator may be used.

## Does "Mutar" Mean You Should Use It Lechatchilah?

Now, rabosai, we've seen how a specially configured **automatic Shabbos elevator** can reduce some electrical problems. So is it mutar? Can everybody now book a hotel on the twentieth floor and announce, "No problem, I have a Shabbos elevator"?

I want to ask you a question: **Does mutar mean mutar lechatchilah in every case?**

Sometimes a posek analyzes a disputed activity and writes **"אין למחות"**—one should not protest against people who rely on the lenient position. Does that mean he recommends the practice? Not necessarily! There is a tremendous distance between "do not rebuke a person relying on a legitimate heter" and "everybody should choose to do this."

And sometimes the posek writes **"ראוי להחמיר"** or **"נכון להחמיר"**—it is appropriate to be stringent when possible. That doesn't mean he has withdrawn every heter. It tells us the kind of practical weight the machlokes carries.

Rav Ovadia Yosef's approach in this sugya is important. In the later **Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Shabbos, chelek hei, around page 192**, we find a qualified permission for **an automatic elevator** that travels and stops without the passenger pressing controls, especially in a place of need. But the text also says that **where possible, it is proper to be stringent about descending** in such an elevator. There is a great difference between this and unlimited permission to ride any elevator for convenience.

So now you can understand why the phrase **"Shabbos elevator"** sometimes misleads people. Someone says: "It says Shabbos; surely using it is practically a mitzvah! I have Shabbos food, Shabbos clothes, and a Shabbos elevator!"

No, no! You're mixing different things. A Shabbos elevator is a **device configured to minimize certain prohibited operations**. Its name does not mean that every posek approves unrestricted use.

I say this half in jest, but the point is serious. A person can have a heter and still be advised not to seek out the activity unnecessarily.

### An Older Person or Someone Who Cannot Climb Many Flights

Now where does the heter become particularly important?

Think of a person living on the **twenty-fifth floor**. He is elderly and cannot realistically climb twenty-five flights of stairs. Or a person is sick, weak, recovering from childbirth, caring for small children, or otherwise has a genuine difficulty with the stairs.

Are we going to tell such people that they cannot come downstairs for the entire Shabbos?

This is where the lenient opinions concerning a **properly configured automatic elevator** may become extremely significant.

The cited Yalkut Yosef specifically mentions **an older person, someone who is ill, a woman after childbirth, and a woman with a stroller carrying twins** as examples of people for whom the need is particularly relevant.

But remember what I keep telling you: **that discussion concerns a genuine automatic arrangement**, not an ordinary elevator in which a person presses the floor button.

Nor does it mean that because someone is elderly, every technical problem of every elevator disappears. There are separate rules concerning illness and danger, but we must not jump from one heter to another without understanding it.

A student says, "But if it is technically permitted, why not everybody?"

Again: some of the poskim distinguish **a situation of need** from **choosing convenience lechatchilah**. Their practical guidance is more cautious than a simple yes-or-no slogan.

And now I want you to compare this to a **train on Shabbos**. The train might stop by itself at the next station; you may not have to press anything. Still, the poskim raise additional concerns that don't disappear merely because it moves automatically.

## A Train, an Airplane, and Techum Shabbos

Let me explain why simply being a passenger doesn't settle every Shabbos question.

Take a **train**. Suppose it runs on a fixed schedule. You are not telling the driver to go anywhere or instructing the train to stop at your station. Perhaps, at least for purposes of this example, your individual weight has no meaningful effect on the operation.

Does that automatically mean you may ride a train on Shabbos? No.

First, there is the issue of **zilusa d'Shabbos**, the character of train travel as a weekday activity, discussed by the poskim.

And second, there is **techum Shabbos**. The train might travel beyond the permitted boundary. The laws of techumim become an independent question even where the passenger has not activated the engine.

**Rav Yitzchak Yosef**, in the Yalkut Yosef, discusses distinctions between travel in a vessel and travel on a train, including the question of whether the vehicle is halachically regarded as being connected to the ground.

Somebody asks: "But I'm sitting in a train car, not walking on the earth. Perhaps I am above the ground like someone on a boat or flying in an airplane?"

That is exactly the kind of *chakirah* that the poskim address. A train is supported by wheels on rails, and the rails are connected to the ground; this fact may matter when considering whether the journey is within the usual framework of techumim. The precise halachic explanation and practical distinctions need to be read in the original source; I do not want to pretend a quick physical analogy resolves the sugya.

There are also debates about **airplanes** and travel above a certain height. Some cases raise different questions from ground transportation. We cannot simply assume an airplane is permitted or forbidden because it resembles a train or boat in one respect.

And what if a person was **already on the train before Shabbos** and then found himself unable to leave before Shabbos began? That's another shailah entirely. What can he do? When may he disembark? Where is he permitted to walk after leaving?

I cannot resolve those cases with one sentence. They involve the circumstances of the journey, the boundaries, danger, and other halachic considerations.

Somebody asks if we can devote a future shiur to being stuck at an airport, on the road, or on a train as Shabbos begins. If that is what the olam needs, then absolutely, we can learn it.

I want you to know something, rabosai. **My life is to teach you Torah**. That is my purpose. If the subjects that will help you are airplanes, trains or getting stuck on Friday afternoon, then that's what we'll learn. Whatever it takes for the olam to understand Torah and know what to do.

But let's come back to the elevators, because we still have a very important practical problem to deal with.

## The Elevator Operator and the Button

So far, much of our discussion concerned an **automatic elevator**—one that travels and stops without you doing anything to select a floor.

But suppose there is a **doorman or elevator operator**. You walk into the elevator, and he asks, "What floor, sir?" You answer, "Four," and he presses the button.

Have you avoided the Shabbos problem because you didn't touch the button yourself?

Of course not so fast!

We now enter the sugya of **amirah le'akum**, instructing a non-Jew to perform melachah on Shabbos, and the laws of benefiting from an action performed for a Jew.

You can't solve the problem merely by saying, "I'll let him press the button for me." Nor can you always arrange before Shabbos for him to perform the melachah for you on Shabbos; that too requires its own halachic analysis.

What if the operator is **Jewish**? That's an even more serious situation, because one Jew must not cause another to violate Shabbos for him. We will get to that case.

And what if the operator presses a button **for himself**, with no action added for you? That might be a different question. The circumstances matter: whose benefit is the action for, and would it have been done without you?

Let's learn the underlying rule carefully before applying it.

## Amirah Le'akum: When Someone Else Operates the Elevator

Now, rabosai, I see that the olam is struggling with **amirah le'akum**, so let's speak it out clearly.

Suppose the elevator is operated by a non-Jew. You're standing in the lobby, and he says, "What floor do you want?" You tell him your floor, he presses the button, and then you ride.

You haven't solved the problem by using his finger instead of yours. You are **asking a non-Jew to operate the elevator for you on Shabbos**.

And it is not necessarily permitted to arrange the operation **before Shabbos** and then take the ride on Shabbos. The fact that you said the words on Friday doesn't automatically make the Shabbos melachah permissible if it is being performed on your behalf.

What if you don't use any words? Suppose he knows you live on the fourth floor and automatically presses "4" when he sees you. Or you say, "I'm tired; I live so high up," hoping he will take the hint.

People love these clever ways of getting someone to do a melachah without asking directly. But the poskim have detailed rules about **hinting**, indirect requests, and benefiting from acts performed for a Jew. There is no simple permission that every hint is allowed.

The **Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 325**, distinguishes between work that a non-Jew performs **for himself** and work performed **for a Jew**, and there are additional considerations about what the Jew may benefit from. Those distinctions help frame this case.

### What if the Operator Is Going to the Same Floor Anyway?

Now suppose the operator wants to go to the seventh floor **for his own reasons**. He presses the button for himself. You also wish to go to the seventh floor and get off there.

That's potentially different. The action may have been done for the operator independently of you. But the actual circumstances must fit the halachah—one cannot arrange an obvious pretense and then claim the operator acted solely for himself.

What if you want the **ninth floor** and the operator is only going to the seventh? Then you cannot simply ask him to continue up to nine for you, nor can you treat his going to seven as permission for him to press nine.

And there may still be independent concerns about the **elevator's weight-sensitive operations**, even if you haven't requested a floor.

Someone says, "But driving the elevator is his job! He would be working anyway." That fact alone does not settle the question of whether the particular operation is being done on your behalf.

### What if the Purpose Is a Mitzvah?

Now consider a case where the man is trying to get to **shul**. He lives high up, and wants to attend a minyan.

There are special discussions of **amirah le'akum b'makom mitzvah**. Sometimes the poskim allow a non-Jew to perform certain acts where the need is a mitzvah, depending on whether the prohibited act is biblical or rabbinic and on the precise circumstances.

But don't say, "I'm going to shul, so I can have any non-Jew do any melachah for me." That's not how the halachah works.

What exactly is the activity, and what level of issur does it involve? Is this a community mitzvah, an individual need, or something else? The details of *shevus d'Shevus b'makom mitzvah* cannot be collapsed into a blanket heter.

Someone is still asking about hinting to a non-Jew when the lights have gone out in the house. That too depends on **the form of the hint**, the type of benefit, and the presence of legitimate need. It cannot be answered by saying everybody does it.

As **my Rebbe Rav Yisrael Belsky** used to say, it sometimes seems everybody has the same rav: **"Everyone does it!"** That's the authority they cite. But the fact that everyone has a practice does not establish the halachah.

One of the bachurim suggests inviting the non-Jew inside for a cup of tea and letting him decide on his own to turn on the lights. I'm not telling you this is a guaranteed heter. Very often, after you make the elaborate arrangement, he finishes his tea, turns **off** the light, and walks out! Then you've accomplished the opposite of what you intended.

All right, a little humor. But the serious point is that you need to know the din.

### Maris Ayin

There is also a concern raised in the Acharonim about **maris ayin**. If people see you stepping into an elevator on Shabbos, will they think you asked the operator to press the button? Will a child watching conclude that riding any elevator is permitted?

Others say people understand that a **Shabbos elevator** runs automatically, just as they understand that a lamp can operate on a Shabbos timer. The appearance may depend on what people in that community know and what type of elevator they see.

**Rav Yehoshua Neuwirth**, in discussions associated with *Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasah*, is cited regarding the caution about an ordinary elevator, including a possible concern for appearances. [Precise passage and wording require checking.]

So even after you solve an electrical issue, there may remain a question of **how the activity appears and what it teaches the people around you**. But we must distinguish actual halachic prohibitions, a stringency, and a concern of maris ayin instead of using the terms interchangeably.

Now what happens if the operator **is a Jew**? That's an especially important case, because his act may raise the laws of **ma'aseh Shabbos** and **lifnei iver** in addition to the original electrical question.

## When the Operator Is a Jew

Now suppose the person pressing the button is **Jewish**. He isn't an automatic elevator; he is pressing buttons as a person. You walk in, and he presses the floor you need.

That's a very serious question. Apart from the electrical action itself, you have the laws of **ma'aseh Shabbos**, benefiting from melachah performed on Shabbos, and perhaps **"לפני עור לא תתן מכשול"**—you must not put a stumbling block before another person (Vayikra 19:14).

If he pushes the button specifically because of you, can you treat yourself as a passive bystander? It is not so simple.

But somebody asks, "Perhaps this Jewish person is not fully aware of the laws of Shabbos. Do we regard him as **meizid** or **shogeg**? Does he understand the issur?"

That's a real halachic question. The consequences of an act done intentionally and an act done unintentionally can differ, including for certain applications of ma'aseh Shabbos. But the details are not a simple permission to benefit from whatever somebody else does.

A student tries to give me a psak on the spot. Rabosai, please, **don't pasken shailos before you have learned them!** You're taking half a distinction and declaring a conclusion that we haven't established. We need to learn the subject properly.

And there is another practical concern. How do you know that the elevator operator is **not Jewish**? In New York, you may see someone and assume he isn't Jewish, but how do you know?

I remember a ma'aseh that happened here in **Kew Gardens Hills**. The lights went out in the home. It was cold, and there were children, so I was concerned about their well-being. I went outside, spoke to somebody in the street and asked if he could help.

The fellow was very friendly. "Sure, I'd be happy to help," he said. He came with me, and while we were going upstairs he said something about **the mitzvah of helping on Shabbos**!

Suddenly I realized that I had made an assumption about his identity without knowing. Maybe he was Jewish! I stopped him.

This is why you have to be careful. **Don't ask someone to perform a melachah for you on Shabbos without first understanding who he is and what the halachah allows.** Even when you think you have a heter for a non-Jew, you may be making an entirely different problem if the person is Jewish.

And there may be genuine exceptions for illness, danger or small children, but you have to learn those laws separately. This was a particular family situation, not a general authorization to ask strangers to switch on electricity.

### A Side Question About Yom Tov

I want to throw out another possible area of discussion. **Yom Tov** has a different halachic structure from Shabbos in certain matters, particularly questions involving food preparation and the permitted use of a preexisting flame. And **Yom Tov Sheini** brings additional sugyos.

Could those differences affect certain electrical questions or elevator usage?

I am **not issuing a psak** here. I'm not telling anyone to use a regular elevator on Yom Tov or to press buttons. There are serious issurim and major disagreements about electricity on Yom Tov, and the familiar heterim involving an existing flame do not automatically permit electrical devices.

Somebody wants me to give a signal with my hand: "Tell us secretly whether it's all right." What does that even mean? Maybe my hand means yes, maybe it means no, and maybe it means you're about to get a *frask* if you do it! You can't get a psak from reading into my hand.

So leave that question for a separate shiur. The main issue tonight remains **Shabbos elevators**, and I want to conclude with the actual words of the poskim.

Remember where we stand: **automatic elevators** have a significant machlokes with qualified lenient positions; **ordinary button-operated elevators** are not included in that blanket discussion. In all of these cases, we must check the actual technology and the action performed.

## Reading the Psak Inside: Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Shabbos

Rabosai, I want to stop speaking in generalities and **read the halachah inside**. We have been discussing different opinions for a long time. Now let's hear the practical language of **Rav Yitzchak Yosef**, in **Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Shabbos, chelek hei, page 192**, concerning elevators.

First, the source distinguishes a **regular elevator** from an **automatic elevator**. A regular elevator, where a person presses buttons to select floors and operate the system, is prohibited on Shabbos. That is not the same question as simply riding in a machine programmed to stop automatically.

But now look at the automatic elevator. The text describes **"מעלית אוטומטית, שעולה ויורדת ללא מגע יד, ונפתחת וננעלת ליד כל קומה"**—an automatic elevator that ascends and descends without a person touching the controls and opens and closes at each floor.

It continues: **"מעיקר הדין מותר להשתמש בה בשבת, בין לעלות בה ובין לרדת"**—according to the basic ruling, there is permission to use that kind of automatic elevator both to go up and to go down.

Stop! That sounds very lenient. Some of you are already ready to announce: "Wonderful! You can ride!"

But the text continues: **"ובפרט במקום צורך"**—particularly in a situation of need. It gives examples such as an elderly person, someone who is ill, a woman after childbirth, or a person handling the difficulty of a stroller with twins.

And then there is another important warning: **"אך יזהרו שלא יכנסו למעלית בעת שהדלת נסגרת"**—one must be careful not to enter while the door is closing, because interfering with the sensor may cause the elevator to reopen.

Finally, listen carefully: **"ומכל מקום במקום שאפשר נכון להחמיר לגבי ירידה, שלא לרדת במעלית אוטומטית"**—nevertheless, where possible, it is proper to be stringent about **descending** in an automatic elevator.

Now do you see why I have been stressing the distinction between **technical permissibility**, **a situation of need**, and **the recommended conduct where a person can avoid the disputed activity**?

The details are everything. A person must not take one phrase—*mutar*—and forget the qualifications that follow.

And even this source addresses the type of elevator described there. **Modern equipment can have new sensors and electronic systems** not present in an older installation. Merely having a label declaring the elevator automatic is not proof that it satisfies the technical assumptions under which a leniency was issued.

### What if the Elevator Operator Is Pressing the Buttons?

Someone asks again: "What if somebody else, a non-Jew, presses the floor button?"

I want to distinguish that from the automatic-elevator permission we just read. Here, a human operator **does** perform an electrical action. We must learn the laws of asking a non-Jew, benefiting from his action, whether he acts for himself or for us, and the possibility of needing the ride for a mitzvah or a person in distress.

The exact Yalkut Yosef discussion of an operator's action has to be read separately; it is not decided automatically by the permission for a scheduled elevator.

And in **Eretz Yisrael**, where many residents of a building are Jewish, the practical situation may differ from a New York building with a non-Jewish elevator operator.

Don't let those cases blend together. The laws of **electricity**, **amirah le'akum**, **ma'aseh Shabbos**, and **techumim** belong to different sugyos, even when they intersect in a single practical question.

## A Difficult Case in Ma'ayan Omer: Going to Shul

Now let me show you something powerful from **Ma'ayan Omer**, around the page recorded in my notes as **229**. The sefer brings oral rulings of **Rav Ovadia Yosef**, as related through his talmid.

A family living in a high-rise building faces an extremely difficult situation. A man wants to go to shul, but he can't manage the long climb; there are family circumstances and illness, including a wife with a serious medical condition. The available elevator is a **regular elevator**, not a specially configured automatic Shabbos elevator.

Can we permit using it because they want to go to shul, or because of their difficult personal situation?

In the source as I am reading it, Rav Ovadia's response is very striking: **"האיש יתפלל ביחיד"**—the man should daven alone.

Do you hear? Instead of creating a broad permission to use an ordinary elevator for a minyan, the response says that he should daven **beyechidus** if that is what avoiding the prohibited elevator requires.

And the illness of another family member raises questions that must be assessed separately on their own halachic and medical facts. The oral case as quoted here is not a ruling that a person in danger must avoid an elevator regardless of medical necessity.

This is why I want you to understand the sharp difference between **a true Shabbos elevator, about which there are significant lenient opinions**, and **a normal elevator operated by buttons**.

The phrase *tzorech mitzvah* does not mean that a person may simply override the rules about ordinary electrical operation in order to attend a minyan.

And I have still another remarkable example from this sefer about using even a specially designed Shabbos elevator for a new shul.

## The Shul That Moved to a Higher Floor

Now listen to another fascinating question recorded in the **Ma'ayan Omer**.

There was a **beis haknesses in Sefard** that had been on a lower floor. They had to renovate or rearrange the building, so the congregation moved the shul much higher up—in the story as related, to approximately the **tenth floor**.

Now the community asked a very practical question. Could they install **a Shabbos elevator**, specifically an automatic elevator designed for use on Shabbos, so that people could come to daven without climbing all those flights of stairs?

Here they were not even asking to use a regular button-operated elevator. They wanted to put in a proper **Shabbos elevator**.

What would you think? The purpose is a mitzvah. They want people to come to shul. There are older and weaker members of the congregation. Surely this is the kind of situation in which the lenient opinions become relevant.

But listen to the response as quoted in the original shiur: **"לעשות דבר זה לכתחילה להסתמך על מעלית שבת אין כדאי"**—it is not advisable to arrange such a thing **lechatchilah** in order to rely on a Shabbos elevator.

Rabosai, that is an extraordinary point. Even though there are opinions that permit a carefully configured automatic elevator in cases of need, there is a difference between a person already facing a difficulty and a community **planning from the beginning** to create a situation that will make them rely on a disputed heter every Shabbos.

I want you to hear that distinction: a **heter in a difficult situation** is not necessarily a reason to design a new situation which requires that heter.

[Editorial note: this Ma'ayan Omer exchange is reproduced from the shiur as an attributed oral psak. Its precise Hebrew text, location and factual details should be verified against the printed edition before publishing it as an authoritative quotation.]

## Should a Building Install a Regular Elevator if People Will Use It on Shabbos?

Now I want to finish with one last halachah.

Suppose someone is constructing or managing an **apartment building**. He wants to install a regular elevator, but he knows that some residents may use it improperly on Shabbos. Is that a reason **not to install the elevator**?

The source discussion quoted in this shiur raises this as a separate question. It concerns not merely whether a resident may ride, but what responsibilities those planning a building have when they foresee that other people may violate Shabbos through the use of the equipment.

We must distinguish **installing an elevator for legitimate weekday needs** from **enabling a specific foreseeable prohibited use**, and then consult the exact poskim. The shiur cites a stringent response about installing the elevator in the particular case presented. I would not turn that orally reported conclusion into a universal prohibition on constructing ordinary elevators in every apartment building without checking the question's complete facts and the written answer.

The teaching Rabbi Walkin emphasizes is that even where there are technical arguments for a leniency, the **overall sanctity and practical observance of Shabbos** cannot be treated as a minor afterthought.

## The Practical Conclusion: Don't Misunderstand the Heter

Rabosai, think back over everything we discussed tonight.

We began with the old elevator mechanisms and moved to **electricity**. We asked whether being in the car causes additional electrical demand. We studied the possibilities of **grama**, **pesik reisha**, and the different halachic categories of electricity.

We asked about **uvdin d'chol** and **zilusa d'Shabbos**, and about trains, airplanes and techumim.

We distinguished a **regular elevator**, where one presses buttons or has an operator do so, from **an automatic elevator** that has been programmed before Shabbos to stop on its own.

And we learned that the modern controls—the sensors, computerized weighing, indicators and door mechanisms—can introduce new problems. The exact technology matters.

We saw that some poskim find grounds to permit **certain automatic elevators** in circumstances of need, especially for a person who is old, ill, weak, or otherwise faces a genuine hardship. And we saw that other poskim are more stringent, and that even lenient sources may advise **not using such an elevator where avoiding it is possible**.

So please don't walk away and tell the world, **"The Rabbi said you're allowed to use an elevator on Shabbos."**

If that is what you heard, you missed the entire point!

The halachah depends on **the type of elevator, what the person does, what electrical operations are triggered, whether the elevator is properly configured, the particular need, and the psak being followed**.

For practical cases, especially those involving illness, limited mobility or emergencies, these details require consultation with a knowledgeable rav; risks to health and safety must not be ignored.

That is the conclusion I want you to remember, rabosai. Not simply mutar or asur in the abstract. **Learn the metzius, learn the sources, and understand precisely which case the poskim are talking about.**

Have a good Shabbos.

[End of the shiur. The final TorahAnytime announcement is distributor audio, not part of Rabbi Walkin's Torah discussion.]