Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions
Answer: It is a fair assumption that the videoing process only included Rabbinic prohibitions. We will see the significance of that below.
We will start with the assumption that the video was done by a Jew. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 318:1) rules like the middle opinion in Ketubot 34a, that if one violated Shabbat intentionally, the result of his action is forbidden for the violator forever but is permitted for others after Shabbat. The Mishna Berura (318:5) comments that while the household of the violator may not use that which was done even after Shabbat, others can, including people whom the violator had in mind when he violated Shabbat. Therefore, ostensibly, even your relative might be permitted to benefit from the video.
However, we must consider two issues. The K’tav Sofer (OC 50), regarding a restaurant, posits that while generally a Shabbat violator may sell the food he cooked on Shabbat, that is because he is penalized for his violation in that he cannot eat the food himself. However, in a case of someone who regularly cooks on Shabbat to sell to customers, the penalty must preclude his doing according to plan, so that it is forbidden for him to sell. Consequently, it is forbidden to buy from him. While this could forbid the celebrants to pay the videographer, this does not impact their showing it to you.
The bigger issue is the question of when Shabbat "ends" in this regard. There are opinions that anyone who wants to benefit needs to wait bichdei sheya’asu (the amount of time it would take to get the result if one started after Shabbat). This question is critical here, because one cannot video the bar mitzva after Shabbat, so requiring bichdei sheya’asu would forbid it forever. This concept is found regarding a non-Jew who did work on behalf of a Jew, even in cases that the Jew did not improperly tell him to do so (Beitza 24b). Two possible reasons are advanced for this halacha. Rashi (ad loc.) says that it is in order to not benefit from work done on Shabbat. Tosafot (ad loc.) says that it is to reduce the chance one will ask the non-Jew to do work. The Pri Megadim (Eshel Avraham 325:22) reasons that Rashi’s reason should apply to a Jew who regularly violates Shabbat, whereas according to Tosafot’s reason, we do not expect a religious Jew to ask a Shabbat desecrator to do work on Shabbat. The Mishna Berura (ibid.) adds a reason not to say bichdei sheya’asu for a Jew’s violation – a Jew will not listen to a request to do melacha. One can argue that this does not apply to regular Shabbat violators. The Pri Megadim leaves the matter unresolved, and there is not a consensus among contemporary poskim (in Bemareh Habazak I:31 we leaned toward leniency; Orchot Shabbat 25:(25) leans toward stringency). Bichdei sheya’asu is also less likely to apply to Rabbinic violations (see Mishna Berura 325:42).

Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions (626)
Rabbi Daniel Mann
619 - Ask the Rabbi: Purim Meshulash
620 - Ask the Rabbi: Watching a Bar Mitzva Videoed on Shabbat
621 - Ask the Rabbi: Owning Guns
Load More
We have seen significant grounds for leniency; there are additional, creative grounds, but we do not wish to commit them to writing. Therefore, if you feel that watching the video helps maintain a good relationship with the family, not only may you watch the video, but you should do so. May your relationship help bring increased appreciation and observance of mitzvot to the bar mitzva and his family.

Ask the Rabbi: Transporting Children before or after Shacharit?
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Kislev 5786

Ask the Rabbi: Kohen Who Has Trouble Standing
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Cheshvan 5786

Ask the Rabbi: Giving a Tallit on a Sefer Torah to a Visitor
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Cheshvan 5786

Ask the Rabbi: Depriving a Tree of Water
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Tishrei 5786

Rabbi Daniel Mann

Encouraging a Child to Criticize His Parent
5774

Tisha B’Av Pushed Off Until Sunday
Av 6 5776

Calling a Kohen Who is a Katan
Av 22 5777






















