A Half Baked Idea TB Shabbat 4

 Today’s daf TB Shabbat 4 entertains a very interesting question. May somebody violate a rabbinic ordinance, דרבנן, (which is less severe) to prevent somebody else from violating a Torah prohibition, דאורייתא, (which is very severe). One of the 39 prohibited types of work, מלאכות, is baking. The type of bread baking described in the Gemara is like our pita bread. The baker would stick the dough on the side of the brick oven to bake it. Removing the baked pita bread from the oven wall, רדיית הפת, on Shabbat is considered a skill; consequently, prohibited derabanan. The question raised by Rav Beivai bar Abaye is: May one remove the dough before it is baked on Shabbat and violate a rabbinic prohibition so one won’t violate a Torah prohibition.

“Since Rav Beivai bar Abaye’s dilemma was mentioned in passing, the Gemara proceeds to discuss the matter itself. Rav Beivai bar Abaye raised a dilemma: One who erred and stuck bread in the oven on Shabbat, did they permit him to override a rabbinic prohibition and remove it before it bakes, i.e., before he incurs liability to bring a sin-offering for baking bread on Shabbat, or did they not permit him to do so?” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara tries to clarify what exactly is the situation. And goes through several different possibilities. One possibility is the person didn’t remember that the day he was baking was Shabbat. Another possibility was the person forgot that was Shabbat, but remembered that it was Shabbat before the bread was completely baked. A third possibility is a baker forgetting that it is Shabbat places the bread on the oven’s wall and another person removes the bread before it is baked. May the second person remove the dough before it is baked on Shabbat and violate a rabbinic prohibition so the baker won’t violate a Torah prohibition when the bread is baked? The last possibility is the baker purposely baked on Shabbat, with the same question basic question.

“Rav Aḥa bar Abaye said to Ravina: What are the circumstances? If you say that he stuck the bread to the oven unwittingly and did not remember either that today was Shabbat or that it is prohibited to do so on Shabbat, to whom did they permit to remove it? If he remains unaware that a prohibition is involved, it will not occur to him to ask whether or not he is permitted to remove the bread before it bakes.

“But rather, is it not a case where he then, before it baked, remembered that it is prohibited? In that case, is he liable to bring a sin-offering? Didn’t we learn in a mishna: All those who sin unwittingly and are therefore liable to bring sin-offerings are only liable if the beginning of their action was unwitting and the end of their action was unwitting. This means that throughout the entire action until its completion, the person remains unaware that his action is prohibited. Consequently, in our case, since he became aware that his action is prohibited while the bread was still baking, his very awareness exempts him from a sin-offering and removing the bread is no longer necessary to prevent him from incurring liability to bring a sin-offering.

“Rather, say that that person stuck the bread in the oven intentionally, but afterward regrets having done so and does not want to violate the prohibition. However, if that is the case, the formulation of the dilemma is inaccurate. It should have said: Before he comes to violate a prohibition punishable by stoning. One who desecrates Shabbat intentionally is liable to be stoned, he is not merely liable to bring a sin-offering.

“Rav Sheila said: Actually, it is referring to a case where he did so unwittingly, and the dilemma whether or not they permitted removing the bread is not with regard to the person who stuck it in the oven, as he remains unaware of his transgression. Rather, with regard to whom is Rav Beivai raising a dilemma whether or not the Sages permitted him to remove the bread? It is with regard to others who wish to spare the unwitting sinner from violating a Torah prohibition.

“Rav Sheshet strongly objected to this. And does one tell another person: Sin so that another will benefit? Permitting one to violate a prohibition, even one prohibited by rabbinic law, in order to help another perform a mitzva is inconceivable. The same is true with regard to preventing another from violating a more severe prohibition.

“Rather, Rav Ashi said: Actually, it is referring to a case where he stuck the bread in the oven intentionally. And say, emend the text as follows: Before he comes to violate a prohibition punishable by stoning. Indeed, Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, would teach it explicitly in that manner; not as a dilemma, but rather, as a halakhic ruling. According to his version, Rav Beivai bar Abaye said: With regard to one who stuck bread in an oven on Shabbat eve, the Sages permitted him to remove it from the oven on Shabbat before he comes to violate a prohibition punishable by stoning.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara doesn’t answer this question here. Tosafot write that we do not generally allow a person to transgress a lesser prohibition to save another person from transgressing a more severe prohibition. Nevertheless, there are cases when it is permissible to do so. It is an interesting position that we shall study when we reach TB Eruvin 32b. The Magan Avraham poskins, decides Jewish law, that one who has stuck bread on an oven knowing full well that it is Shabbat, only he may remove the bread before he becomes liable of the penalty of violating the Shabbat. He must remove the bread in a different fashion than normally done. (Shulchan Aruch, Orech Hayyim 254:6)