A friend from Texas recently called about his 8-year-old son’s bedwetting challenge. This is a very common challenge for children of this age. Children are typically very embarrassed by this condition, and the need to resolve the issue is considerable.
The child’s doctor prescribed a technique involving sensors that sound extremely loud alarms triggered by moisture. The alarm is designed to wake the child and deter the bedwetting. After the alarm sounds and the child is roused from his sleep, the child turns off the alarm. The child and the rest of his family will not be able to return to sleep if the alarm is not disabled.
Shabbat and a Child Below The Age of Bar Mitzvah
The halachic question is whether the system may be activated for the boy’s Friday night sleep. Although the child is a katan (below the age of bar mitzvah), the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 343:1) forbids directing a katan to violate Shabbat. The Shulchan Aruch clarifies that this applies even to an activity prohibited on a rabbinic level.
Choleh She’en Bo Sakana
However, the Rama (Orach Chaim 328:17) writes that the needs of a katan are regarded as the needs as a choleh she’en bo sakana, an ill individual facing a non-life-threatening malady. Dr. Abraham S. Abraham (Nishmat Avraham 1: Orach Chaim 328:17) cites leading 20th-century authorities who debate until what age a katan is defined as a choleh she’en bo sakana. The options range from age three to age nine. Dr. Abraham wisely suggests that it depends on the katan and his needs.
In our case, it is clear that the 8-year-old in question is defined as a choleh. A choleh, as I heard numerous times from Rav Herschel Schachter, is defined as one who is not functioning normally. It is essential for a boy suffering from bedwetting to resolve his challenge for the sake of their self-esteem and healthy social development. It is crucial that the treatment be continuous to reinforce the behavior change expeditiously. Refraining from the therapy on Shabbat is a problematic option in our situation.
The question, though, is whether we may violate Shabbat to help a choleh she’en bo sakana. We are forbidden to violate a Torah-level prohibition on behalf of a coleh she’en bo sakana (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 328:17). There is a great debate, though, under what circumstances we may violate a rabbinic prohibition to help a choleh she’en bo sakana.
The Shulchan Aruch (ibid.) cites no less than four opinions regarding this matter. The accepted view (Mishna Berura 328:57) and Yalkut Yosef (Orach Chaim 328:2) is that we may perform a rabbinically forbidden activity with a shinui. A shinui refers to unusually performing an act. Performing a prohibited action on Shabbat with a shinui, such as writing with one’s left hand, constitutes a rabbinic-level prohibition. Performing a rabbinically prohibited activity with a shinui is a situation of trei d’rabanan, a double rabbinic prohibition, which is permitted to support a choleh she’en bo sakana.
Opening an Electric Circuit
The question we now face is whether shutting the alarm (i.e., opening an electric circuit) violates a Torah-level or rabbinic-level prohibition. This question is the subject of a great debate that raged between the Chazon Ish (Orach Chaim 50:9) and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Teshuvot Minchat Shlomo 1:11). The Chazon Ish argues that completing a circuit constitutes an act of boneh (building). He further insists that since completing a circuit is defined as boneh, opening a circuit is classified as a Torah-level prohibition of soter (destruction).
Rav Shlomo Zalman argues at length that completing a circuit is a rabbinic-level prohibition. He further contends that even if one argues that completing a circuit is a Torah-level act of boneh, this does not necessarily prove that opening a circuit is defined as a Torah-level prohibition of soter. Rav Shlomo Zalman notes as an example that making cheese is defined as boneh, but the crumbling of cheese is not defined as soter.
Rav Yisrael Rosen, the highly respected founder and head of the Zomet Institute in Alon Shvut, notes (Techumin 38:59 and 60) that the consensus opinion among halachic authorities follows Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, at least in case of considerable need. Thus, shutting off the alarm is defined as a rabbinic prohibition.
Conclusion
I permitted the family to activate the sensors before Shabbat and the young man to turn off the alarm with a shinui when he wakes up. Turning off the alarm constitutes a rabbinic-level prohibition that the halacha permits with a shinui in case of a choleh she’en bo sakana. A shinui would not simply be shutting the alarm with his left hand. Rather, he would use his elbow or some other very unusual means of shutting down the device. I look forward to rejoicing with the young man and his family when he soon overcomes his challenge with Hashem’s help!
Postscript #1
Rav Sion Vaanunu of Congregation Shaarei Orah notes that it would be optimal for the Zomet Institute to create a Gerama switch so that the alarm can be deactivated indirectly. Gerama is permitted on Shabbat in case of essential needs, such as the case we describe (Rama Orach Chaim 334:22, Biur Halacha ad. loc. Shevadia and D’Gram, and Rav Ovadia Yosef Tehumin 1:518).
Postscript #2
Please be sure to consult your rabbi about this or any similar question you may face. Please do not compare one situation to another without proper consultation. There is a very fine line between forbidden and permitted activity on Shabbat, so consultation with one’s rav is of the essence.
Rabbi Haim Jachter is the spiritual leader of Congregation Shaarei Orah, the Sephardic Congregation of Teaneck. He also serves as a rebbe at Torah Academy of Bergen County and a dayan on the Beth Din of Elizabeth.
