Hagaon Harav Tuvia Goldstein, zt”l (Responsa Emek Halacha, vol. 1:26), quotes the Ben Ish Hai’s ruling permitting the use of a non-motorized bicycle on Shabbat in an area with an eruv. The Ben Is Hai rejects the argument that riding a bike should be prohibited due to mar’it ha’ayin since mar’it ha’ayin only applies to cases where the action appears like a biblically prohibited act (e.g., eating meat with almond milk). Riding a bike, however, is not such an act since it is clear that the person is moving via peddling, not via a motor.
He also dismisses the opinion that riding a bike should be prohibited because some may mistakenly infer that riding in a motorized or horse-drawn coach is permitted by saying it is impossible to take into account every fool’s error. Regarding the concern that the bicycle may break and the rider will be tempted to fix it, the Ben Ish Hai writes that it is not a common occurrence. Yet, many others disagree with the Ben Ish Hai’s ruling.
Responsa Yaskil Avdi writes that perhaps the Ben Ish Hai was not proficient in the workings of a bicycle since they were not common in his time. When alerted to the true facts, the Ben Ish Hai reportedly prohibited their use on Shabbat, even within an eruv.
Rabbi Goldstein cites Responsa Keren David (Orach Chayyim 96), who discusses wheeling baby carriages in an area with an eruv. He disagrees with those who prohibit doing so due to the possibility of metaken kli shir, since that prohibition applies only to specific instances enacted by the sages. It should not be prohibited due to uvdin d’chol either, since although Tractate Beza (25b) prohibits a blind man walking with a stick and a disabled person being carried on the holidays for long distances, baby carriages are not used for distant transport. Rather, they are used to stroll in public places.
We noted that the Machtzit Hashekel (Orach Chayim 522:1) cites numerous authorities that permit using a cane when there a concern that a person will fall.
* * * * *
Responsa Keren David concludes that there is no violation of uvdin d’chol in wheeling a baby carriage since it is not intended for distant transport. Rabbi Goldstein infers from this conclusion that a vehicle that is meant for distant transport – like a bike –would be forbidden to use on Shabbat due the violation of uvdin d’chol and the denigration of Shabbat.
Indeed, we find that the Tzitz Eliezer (vol. 7:30) rules that riding a bike is forbidden on Shabbat for precisely that reason: uvdin d’chol. (Rabbi Goldstein notes that the Tzitz Eliezer gives a different reason for classifying its use as uvdin d’chol – because its user is not resting and his body is wandering about, i.e., moving as he pedals.) He also offers yet another reason to forbid its use – a gezeira lest one go beyond the 2,000-amah techum. (See Responsa Maharshag, vol. 2:13.)
Rabbi Goldstein also cites the Kaf HaChayim (Orach Chayim 404:8), who refers to the Ben Ish Hai’s permission to ride a bike on Shabbat. He writes: “However, there are some later authorities who are stringent in this matter because most of those who ride bikes [on Shabbat] are not b’nei Torah. If they are given permission to ride within the town limits, they will go even beyond the limits and easily exceed the techum, for even in just a minute one can traverse numerous amot.
The Kaf HaChayim also notes another problem not mentioned heretofore: We must consider the possibility of a flat tire (previously we only considered mechanical failures) and the rider being tempted to repair the damage and violate the biblical prohibition of metaken manah. Indeed, in Eretz Yisrael bicycles are used neither on Shabbat nor on yamim tovim, even within a town that has an eruv.