- Sections
- Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions
Answer: The melacha of boneh (building) classically applies to the ground and things attached to it, e.g., buildings and their walls, floors, etc. It includes acts of building that are not done strongly (Shabbat 102b). (Although "there is no boneh for movable objects" (see Beitza 22a), in some cases, it applies also to them – Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 314:1). A counter is attached to the house and therefore is subject to strict laws of boneh.
Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions (568)
Rabbi Daniel Mann
571 - Ask the Rabbi: The Sick Fasting on Tisha B’av
572 - Ask the Rabbi: A Child Removing a Suction-Held Divider on Shabbat
573 - Ask the Rabbi: When Should an Onen Recite Havdala?
Load More
We will look at three major factors in determining whether boneh/soter applies. 1) How firmly the addition is connected to the building – The Beit Yosef (OC 315, accepted by the Rama, OC 315:1 and Magen Avraham 315:1) says that the reason hanging curtains is permitted is that it can blow in the breeze, i.e., its attachment is weak. 2) How long it is to be connected – The Chazon Ish (OC 52:13), in arguing on the Beit Yosef’s claim that the curtain’s weak connection eliminates boneh, explains the gemara as referring to a case where the curtain will not remain for long. This distinction has a source in the gemara (Beitza 32b). It is unclear exactly how long the cutoff point is. 3) To what extent does the addition fit in as part of the edifice (stringent) or as a separate, albeit connected, entity with its own purpose (see Orchot Shabbat 8:(18); Piskei Teshuvot 313:4).
The way all the factors interact is complex. For example, something meant for a very short time or a very flimsily connection might be permitted by itself, whereas in more moderate cases, we might need and be able to combine multiple lenient factors (see Piskei Teshuvot ibid.).
Let us analyze your case. Contemporary poskim (Shemirat Shabbat K'hilchata 23:39; Orchot Shabbat 8:12) view suction cups as a moderately strong connector and as a candidate for it being forbidden to connect/remove. You use the divider to create a counter with separations; it has no independent utility. Therefore, grounds for leniency would have to be the length of its stay/ frequency of its removal. Even if your son takes it off frequently, the fact that this is not the intended use makes it likely that a Rabbinic extension of the prohibition, due to how the matter appears, applies (Mishna Berura 313:23).
Although a parent should not let a child who can be trained violate a halacha (Shulchan Aruch, OC 343:1), there is more room for leniency when he acts of his own volition and it is not fully clear it is forbidden. We have cited (see Living the Halachic Process II, C-13) the Shemirat Shabbat K’hilchata (16:(53)) as being lenient about a child’s toy when we would not let an adult do so under similar circumstances. However, part of the leniency is that the Rabbis probably did not extend their prohibitions to toys, and your divider is not a toy.
In closing, you should not reattach the divider on Shabbat. Whether to allow your son to remove it depends on specifics whose permutations we cannot exhaust. If you want your son to have it, consider removing the divider, which you apparently do not need constantly, before Shabbat.