Editing Masekhet Shabbos (section)

== One Who Tears in Anger on Shabbat ==
The Mishna states (Shabbat 105b): One who tears in anger or over his dead and all who damage are exempt. The Gemara questions this from a contradiction: "One who tears in anger, in mourning, or over his dead is liable." The Gemara resolves that regarding anger there is no contradiction - one ruling follows Rabbi Yehuda who says a melachah not needed for itself is liable, while the other follows Rabbi Shimon who says a melachah not needed for itself is exempt.

The Gemara asks: Could the Mishna be discussing someone transgressing this serious prohibition of tearing garments in anger? For Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said in the name of Chilfa bar Agra who said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri: "One who tears his clothes in anger, breaks his vessels in anger, or scatters his money in anger should be in your eyes like an idol worshipper, for this is the craft of the evil inclination - today it tells him do this, tomorrow it tells him do that, until it tells him to worship idols and he goes and worships."

Rabbi Avin brought proof from the verse "There shall not be within you a strange god and you shall not bow to a foreign god" - what is the strange god that exists within a person's body? This refers to the evil inclination. The Gemara answers that he isn't tearing the garment because he is actually angry and lost control, but rather to show his household members that he is very angry, to educate them in the proper path and prevent them from acting inappropriately.

The question is whether this reasoning - that tearing a garment to instill fear in household members is considered a melachah - applies even according to Rabbi Shimon who holds that "a melachah not needed for itself is exempt"? Can we say that since the person isn't tearing out of loss of control but with premeditated intent to tear the garment to instill fear in his household members, therefore the melachah is considered a melachah? The Tzemach Tzedek, in his work on Shas, rules that no - even such an action is not considered a melachah according to Rabbi Shimon's opinion.