If a person has a garment that creates static electricity – a spark that is felt when touching it – is it permissible for him to wear the garment on Shabbat, or does this violate the Shabbat prohibition of Mab’ir – igniting a flame?
Hacham Ovadia Yosef addresses this question in his Hazon Ovadia (vol. 6 pp. 107-109), and he rules that it is permissible to wear such a garment on Shabbat, even if one knows for certain that static electricity will be produced. He explains that to begin with, producing a spark – as opposed to an actual flame – is in general forbidden only on the level of Mi’de’rabbanan (Rabbinic enactment), as opposed to Torah law. The Gemara establishes that "Nisosot En Bahem Mamash" – sparks are not significant, and thus do not violate the Torah prohibition of Mab’ir. Igniting a spark is forbidden only on the level of Rabbinic enactment. This point was also made by the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in responding to a question posed to him by a man who had struck a match on Shabbat and produced a spark. The man wanted to know how he should go about repenting for this violation, and in his response the Ben Ish Hai noted that the man had not committed a Torah violation, but rather a Rabbinic enactment.
Hacham Ovadia proceeds to explain that when it comes to a prohibition enacted by the Sages, we may be lenient in situations of "Pesik Resheh" – where one has no intention to perform the forbidden act. There is a famous ruling of the Aruch which permits performing an action on Shabbat even though it will inevitably result in a Shabbat violation, as long as one has no interest in that result. An example is the practice that was common long ago to use a stone to prepare oneself for defecation, a process which inevitably results in removing hair. The Aruch permits such a practice on Shabbat, since one has no intention to remove hair. Another example would be candles placed near a door on Shabbat, such that the flames will flicker every time the door opens because of the wind. The Aruch would permit opening the door, even though this causes the flame to rise and then descend (which violates the prohibition of Mab’ir), since the person has no interest in causing this effect.
The Shulhan Aruch rules stringently in both cases, and maintains that one may not perform an act that will invariably result in a Shabbat violation. However, Hacham Ovadia asserts that the Shulhan Aruch would likely rule leniently if the violation at stake is forbidden only Mi’derabbanan. Although the Shulhan Aruch does not accept the Aruch’s position permitting actions that result in Torah violations, we can assume that he would accept this position with regard to prohibitions enacted by the Sages. Therefore, when it comes to producing static electricity, which entails a Rabbinic violation, it is permissible when this result is unintended. This is certainly the case when one wears clothing which creates static electricity – as he has no intention whatsoever to create electricity – and it is therefore permissible to wear such clothing on Shabbat.
Summary: It is permissible to wear on Shabbat clothing which creates static electricity.
