Комментарий к Шаббат 13:3

הקורע על מתו – for a dead person for whom he is not required to tear clothing [when hearing of his passing] for he is ruining it and is exempt [from a sin-offering], but for a dead person for whom he is obligated to tear clothing and he repairs it/reconstructs it, he is liable [for a sin-offering].

Introduction This mishnah is a continuation of yesterday’s mishnah where we learned that one is liable for tearing only if she tears in order to sew two stitches.

ובחמתו כל המקלקלים פטורין – but our Mishnah is superseded and the Halakha is that a person who rends [his garment] in his anger is liable [for a sin-offering] even though he ruins it, regarding the clothing, he repairs it, regarding his inclination, and his mind is at rest for him through this.

He who tears in his anger or [in mourning] for his dead, and all who damage are exempt. According to this mishnah, one who tears his clothes in anger or as a sign of mourning over the dead is not liable, for there is no constructive purpose to such tearing. However, the Talmud notes that when one is liable for rending one’s clothes as a sign of mourning for one’s dead, for instance over a close relative (parent, sibling, child or spouse), then there is constructive purpose to such tearing it fulfills the commandment to tear. Therefore, when a person is obligated to tear and she tears on Shabbat, she is liable. However, if one is exempt from tearing and nevertheless does so, she is exempt. There is also an interesting note on tearing in anger. According to the Rambam, despite what the mishnah says, one is usually liable for tearing in anger because by such tearing one cools down. Again, this makes the tearing constructive and therefore carries with it liability. However, other commentators argue with the Rambam and say, based on a passage in the Talmud, that destroying things out of anger is akin to idol worship, because both are submissions to one’s evil inclination. If a person’s evil inclination dictates that they destroy something, and they submit, they have begun down a slippery slope which will eventually lead to total demise which is symbolized in the Talmud by idol worship. Since such tearing is ultimately not productive, there is no incurred liability. Similarly, any forbidden labor which is performed with only destructive intentions, does not cause one to be liable.

But he who damages in order to repair, his measure [for liability] is as for repairing. As noted, a person is liable for destructive acts only if such acts are performed with constructive intent. If they are performed with such intent, then the measure for liability is the same as the measure for the positive act. For instance, one is liable for erasing only if it is with the intent of writing. Since to be liable for writing one must write two letters, so too with erasing she must erase two letters in order to be liable.