Vayakhel: The Philosophy of the Issur Hotzaah (Prohibition of Carrying on Shabbos)

What do you think about carrying on Shabbos? Whatever they are, I can guarantee you'll have a greater appreciation after learning Rav Hirsch's perspective!

Mar 21, 2025

Article voiceover

1×

0:00

-14:50

The Torah content for this week has been sponsored by my friend, Rabbi Dr. Elie Feder. His latest book, Happiness in the Face of Adversity: Powerful Torah Ideas from a Mom's Parting Words, shares the wisdom of Shani Feder a"h, a true Eishes Chayil. This is the kind of Torah I wish more people knew—ideas that directly impact our experience of life. Available now on Amazon.

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.

Artwork: *Gates Ablaze*, by Eytan Zana, suggested to me by my *talmid*, Avi, as the perfect representation of *“then I shall set a fire to its gates, which will consume the palaces of Jerusalem and not be extinguished” (Yirmiyahu 17:22)*

Vayakhel: The Philosophy of the Issur Hotzaah (Prohibition of Carrying on Shabbos)

Parashas Vayakhel opens with a reiteration of the mitzvah of Shabbos:

Six days may melachah be done, but the seventh day shall be holy for you, a Shabbos of complete rest for Hashem; whoever does melachah on it shall be put to death. (Shemos 35:2)

The word melachah is often translated as “work” or “labor,” but anyone familiar with the laws of Shabbos will sense the inadequacy of such a translation. Rav Hirsch (ibid.), in his discourse on our verse, underscores this point:

Shabbos melachah always takes into account the product, the productive act, and not just the general intention but the act directed to the end of producing a product. The concept of melachah applies only to constructive acts, not destructive ones. It applies only if the act is performed with premeditation … Moreover, the aim of the act must be the product for which this act is characteristically performed … Only such an act entails the desecration of Shabbos in the full sense …
If we consider these categories of melachah, it becomes clear that they are all productive activities – activities that engender change in an object. The intentional creation of such change demonstrates man's mastery over everything material. Hence, refraining from exercising this power on Shabbos is a befitting way of showing homage to the one and only Creator and Master, to Whom man – master of the world around him – is merely a vassal, a servant.
Even in the cases of the gathering together and heaping up the fruit of the earth, and the trapping of a wild animal, although these activities do not engender change in the fruit and in the animal themselves, they result in a transition from the free and natural state to the sphere of human control and possession. This, as we have explained, is the essential nature and meaning of the concept of melachah.

This concept applies to all 39 melachos of Shabbos—except one: hotzaah (carrying). Rav Hirsch notes:

Only the last of the thirty-nine melachos, hotzaah me’reshus le’reshus (carrying out from one domain to another) —from reshus ha’yachid (a private domain) to reshus ha’rabim (a public domain) or vice versa, as well as maavir daled amos bi’reshus ha’rabim (transferring an object a distance of four cubits in the public domain)—is a melachah garua (an inferior melachah) and can hardly be categorized as productive activity.

In other words, unlike the other 38 melachos, hotzaah produces no creative change in the object. For this reason, one might assume that hotzaah is less significant within the broader mitzvah of Shabbos than the other melachos. In fact, this is the opposite of the truth, as Rav Hirsch calls our attention to:

Nevertheless, precisely this melachah, which in its concrete externality is such a poor (garua) example of a melachah, is of such extreme importance that Yirmiyahu ha’Navi in the final days of the Jewish state, when he was commanded to proclaim that the state would endure and even flourish if only Shabbos would be observed and kept holy, demanded that apart from the general observance of Shabbos, to especially keep the prohibition of hotzaah.

Rav Hirsch cites the full prophecy from Yirmiyahu 17:19-26, which is crucial for understanding what follows:

Thus said Hashem to me: “Go and stand in the Gate of the Children of the People, through which the kings of Judah enter and through which they exit, and in all the gates of Jerusalem. Say to them: ‘Hear the word of Hashem, O kings of Judah and all of Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem who enter through these gates. Thus said Hashem: ‘Beware for your souls; do not carry a load on the Shabbos day to bring it into the gates of Jerusalem. And do not bring a load out from your houses on the Shabbos day, and you shall not do any melachah on it. Sanctify the Shabbos day as I commanded your forefathers. But they did not listen and did not incline their ear; they stiffened their neck, in order not to hear and in order not to accept rebuke. And it shall be that if you truly listen to Me — the word of Hashem — not to bring a load into the gates of this city on the Shabbos day, and to sanctify the Shabbos day, not to do any melachah on it, then, kings and princes who sit upon the throne of David will enter the gates of this city, riding chariots and horses — they and their officers, the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem — and this city will be inhabited forever; and [people] will come from the cities of Judah and from the environs of Jerusalem, from the land of Benjamin, from the lowland, from the mountain, and from the South, bringing burnt-offerings, peace-offerings, meal-offerings and frankincense, and bringing thanksgiving-offerings to the Temple of Hashem. But if you do not listen to Me, to sanctify the Shabbos and not to carry a load and enter the gates of Jerusalem on the Shabbos day, then I shall set a fire to its gates, which will consume the palaces of Jerusalem and not be extinguished.

Rav Hirsch comments:

We have cited here this whole passage in order to show the great import the prophet attaches to the issur hotzaah, the prohibition of carrying out from one domain to another, on Shabbos, but especially to point out that the issur hotzaah appears here not as an integral part of the general issur melachah (prohibition of “work”), but as a concept that runs parallel to it. According to the prophet, keeping Shabbos entails issur hotzaah and issur melachah: “not bring a burden out from your houses … and you shall not do any melachah on it” (Yirmiyahu 17:22).

Yirmiyahu’s prophecy raises several questions:

What is the underlying philosophy of the issur hotzaah that warrants a special warning alongside the issur melachah?
Why are the reward and punishment for hotzaah specifically tied to the flourishing and destruction of Jerusalem and its gates?
Why is Yirmiyahu’s rebuke directed primarily at the “kings of Judah”? This emphasis is also evident in the reward: “then, kings and princes who sit upon the throne of David will enter the gates of this city.” Is this simply because leaders are responsible for the conduct of the people, or is there a reason specific to hotzaah?

Rav Hirsch takes an important first step by conceptualizing the essence of hotzaah:

If we look for the common idea underlying all the other melachos, we find that they all demonstrate man's position as master over the material world. Hotzaah, however, belongs strictly to the social sphere. The most complete picture of a full national life would be: the relation of the individual to society, and of society to the individual, i.e., what the individual does for the community, and what the community does for the individual and the furthering of social causes in the social sphere. These are relations that come to clear expression in hotzaah (taking out) and hachnasah (bringing in) from the public domain to the private domain and from the private domain to the public domain and in transporting [an object] four cubits in the public domain.

Let us pause to appreciate the depth of this insight. Before reading Rav Hirsch, one might view hotzaah as merely “transferring an object from one domain to another,” assuming that the domains halachah happens to care about are private and public. Rav Hirsch argues that hotzaah pertains specifically to the interchange between the private and public spheres—that is, between the individual and society.

When Rav Hirsch states that hotzaah “belongs strictly to the social sphere,” he is not speaking poetically or symbolically but halachically. Every other melachah can be performed by a person alone on a deserted island; hotzaah cannot. It exists only within a societal framework—one that includes both individuals with private domains and a collective public domain.

Rav Hirsch then develops the philosophy of hotzaah in relation to the other melachos:

Accordingly, if the issur of all the other melachos subordinates man to God as regards his position in the physical world, the issur of hotzaah apparently expresses man's subordination to God as regards his position in the social world. The former is subordination to God in nature; the latter is subordination to God in history. Whereas the former places man's work in nature under the rule of the Creator, the latter places man's work in the state under the same rule. Just as the conception of our world comprises both nature and state, the conception of God's sovereignty over the world includes His direction and command of nature and history. God's kingdom on earth, which man is to build up by keeping Shabbos, will be complete and real, only if man subordinates himself to God's Will in both his natural life and his national life …
The issur hotzaah, then, places the Jewish state, the individual Jew's activities on behalf of the community, the community's activities on behalf of the individual, as well as the activities of the rulers of the state, under the sovereignty of the Creator, Who demands obedience.

At this point, one might object: “Structurally speaking, Rav Hirsch makes a strong argument—hotzaah can only happen when an object is transferred between domains defined by individuals in relation to society. But is hotzaah really a ‘societal melachah’? What does that even mean? How does any of this illuminate Yirmiyahu’s prophecy?”

The answer to this objection requires an examination of a parallel passage later in Tanach: Nechemiah 13:15-22. Nechemiah, leading a segment of exiled Jews back to Jerusalem, is working to rebuild a Torah society amid many challenges. One such challenge is Shabbos observance. And which melachah does he single out in his rebuke?

In those days I observed in Judah [people] treading on winepresses on Shabbos and [people] bringing sheaves and loading them on the donkeys, as well as wine, grapes and figs and every load, bringing them to Jerusalem on the Shabbos day. I warned them on the day they sold their provisions. [Also,] the Tyrians who dwelled there would bring fish and every merchandise and sell [them] on the Shabbos to the people of Judah and in Jerusalem. So I contended with the aristocrats of Judah, and I said to them, “What is this wicked thing that you are doing, desecrating the Shabbos day? Did not your ancestors do this, and then our God brought all this evil upon us and upon this city? And now you bring additional wrath against Israel by desecrating the Shabbos!”
It happened when the gates of Jerusalem cast shadows before the Shabbos, that I ordered that the doors be closed, and I ordered not to open them until after the Shabbos. I stationed some of my servants at the gates, [that] no load could come in on the Shabbos. So the merchants and the sellers of every merchandise lodged outside Jerusalem once and then a second time. I warned them, and said to them, “Why do you lodge across from the wall? If you repeat this, I will send a force against you!” From that time onward they did not come on the Shabbos.

Nechemiah’s testimony, in which he explicitly harkens back to the sin of Shabbos desecration in Yirmiyahu’s time, highlights a key shift in the role of hotzaah. For most Jews today, hotzaah is merely a matter of inconvenience. The only questions we ask are mundane: “Do I have to bring my tallis to shul on Friday afternoon, or can I carry it on Shabbos?” “Do I have anything in my pockets?” “Will my child have toys to play with?” Jews living in communities with an eruv may never have to think about hotzaah at all.

But in the times of Yirmiyahu and Nechemiah, hotzaah played a far more central role in society—commerce. The Jews then weren’t merely violating a technical ritual prohibition. As Dov S. Zakheim writes in Nehemiah: Statesman and Sage, “Shabbat had become the regular market day” (p.216). Shadal, in his commentary on Yirmiyahu 17:22, explains why this was so egregious:

According to my approach, the prohibition concerns commerce, as public trade desecrates the sanctity of Shabbos. When commerce is permitted, people become entirely engaged in their business, and the sanctity of the day is not evident at all … While commerce is not technically classified as melachah and is only Rabbinically prohibited due to the concern that one might come to write (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 23), when public commerce takes place, the sanctity of Shabbos is entirely undermined. Shabbos was meant to be a sign that distinguished Israel from the nations. It appears that the non-Jews of that time had no fixed weekly day of rest or holiday similar to Shabbos. Therefore, when the Jews desecrated Shabbos, they were assimilating into the nations and forgetting Hashem, their God. This is why the prophet rebuked them for Shabbos desecration in the same way he rebuked them for idolatry.

Let us revisit Rav Hirsch’s distinction in light of our reading of Nechemiah. Whereas the other 38 melachos transform the material world through individual action, hotzaah—as the foundation of commerce and the exchange of goods between the private and public sectors—transforms society itself. The society of Judah and Jerusalem in the times of Yirmiyahu and Nechemiah was materialistic. They pursued success in terms of wealth, status, and political prominence. Within such a value system, suspending commerce on a viable market day was unthinkable. Success demanded unbridled participation in the rat race, and the issur hotzaah stood in the way.

But that is not the Torah’s vision. A Torah society is built on the model set forth in the Decalogue: “Six days shall you labor and do all your melachah, but the seventh day shall be a Shabbos for Hashem, your God” (Shemos 20:8-9). We work for six days so that on the seventh, we can reconnect with Hashem and His values—both as individuals and as a nation. Radak (Bereishis 2:3) explains that this is the true “blessing” of the Shabbos day:

and He blessed it – “Blessing” is an addition of good. The day of Shabbos has an added benefit for the soul, as it gains rest on this day from worldly affairs and can engage in wisdom and Godly matters. God blessed it and sanctified it by commanding the Children of Israel to rest on it and to sanctify it.

This is why Yirmiyahu and Nechemiah rebuked the kings and aristocrats of Judah. Beyond their practical role in leading the community, they also shaped the vision of success to which the people aspired. The reins were in their hands. Had they promoted a value system rooted in the ideals of Shabbos and enforced its observance, the people would have followed suit. The people's lapse in halachah was ultimately a failure of leadership—a failure to uphold the Torah’s true metric of success.

This also explains the middah kneged middah (measure-for-measure) punishment. Yirmiyahu, in effect, told them: “You believe the key to Jerusalem’s prominence among the nations is to lean into the pursuit of material success? To the contrary—such unrestrained ambition will sever Israel from its values, causing it to fall to the same economic and political forces that bring down all other empires. And if that is Jerusalem’s fate, then let it burn.”

Rav Hirsch concludes with a summary of the significance of hotzaah:

Now we understand why the words of the prophet cited above make the survival of the state dependent first and foremost on keeping the Shabbos through issur hotzaah and herald the fall of the state due to desecration of the Shabbos by hotzaah. Issur hotzaah impresses the seal of God on the whole life of the state; hotzaah on the Shabbos day tears away the banner of God from the state and from the social life within the state.

So next time you refrain from carrying something on Shabbos (or check the eruv!), remember that you are accepting the sovereignty of the Creator not only over the natural world, but over society and history as well.

What do you think of Rav Hirsch’s analysis? And my analysis of Rav? How would YOU answer the questions on Yirmiyahu’s nevuah?

The Rabbi Schneeweiss Substack

Discussion about this post