lew@ihuxr.UUCP (Lew Mammel, Jr.) (02/29/84)
There was a news item last summer about an orthodox Jewish community which was seeking to expand its symbolic fence to enclose a larger area. This is the fence which defines a "household" and so expands the allowed activities on the sabbath in the enclosed area. I can't remember the correct name for it. There was some controversy because the fence (actually a sort of string) used public utility poles, and many non-Jews lived in the area as well. There were some remarks attributed to a rabbi who was advocating this expansion which I found rather amazing. He denied that the "fence" was a religious symbol, characterizing it rather as a necessary aid to those who would otherwise be prevented from carrying out various activities. In other words, he gave the sabbath laws the status of physical law, making the "fence" a form of technology to overcome its limitations. Here we have a case where a contrivance for subverting an observance takes on the character of an observance itself. A similar case is that of the randomly activated telephone. This is a phone which has a level of indirection built in so that by picking up the receiver, the user can avoid violating some interpretation of the proscription against building a fire on the sabbath. I'm wondering what Andy et al. think of this sort of thing. I find it hard to commend such ingenuity in subverting the laws that are supposedly held sacred. Lew Mammel, Jr. ihnp4!ihuxr!lew
trb@masscomp.UUCP (02/29/84)
Lew speaks of the ritual fence, the eruv. I've already read what Avi had to say about the eruv, I have a bit to add. Maybe I can keep it short. A Jew can't carry things "outside" on Shabbos. The Jewish community makes an eruv, a barrier which many might consider a ridiculous artifice. The notion of eruv might not make sense to you. You know what? It doesn't make sense to me either, but it's universally accepted as Jewish law. One of the *fundamental pillars* of Judaism is that the Jews accepted (and accept) the Torah and its associated laws WITHOUT QUESTION. That means without question. Clear? Good. Perhaps one of the yeshiva students out there can retell the story of when God was looking for a nation to whom to give the Torah, I'm not sure I remember it properly, but the unquestioning acceptance of the Torah by the Jews is a central theme. Rationally, there are some Jewish laws, like eruv, or the kosher laws, which I don't understand, but I accept that they're ok. There are other legal interpretations, which I think are a low-class wimpout on the part of moronic Jews who are trying to pull a fast one. First and foremost in this department are the laws which some claim enable Jews to smoke cigarettes on Shabbos and Yom Tov. Cooking is explicitly permitted on Shabbos and Yom Tov through exceptions in the laws which prohibit working and lighting fires. Cigarette smoking, I would think, should be right out, but some weasels have odd interpretations of the laws which allow lighting and smoking of cigarettes on Yom Tov. I think that's a real crock of crap, and I've even seen Chasidim smoke on Yom Tov. I would think that Judaism would prohibit smoking entirely, considering what it does to your lungs. Jews aren't allowed to defile their bodies. Chasidim also drink unbelievable amounts of vodka to celebrate various holidays, they do it in the name of the glory of God, I find it ridiculous. Andy Tannenbaum Masscomp Inc Westford MA (617) 692-6200 x274
mmc@zeppo.UUCP (03/01/84)
#R:ihuxr:-93200:zeppo:59500001:000:2434 zeppo!mmc Mar 1 09:48:00 1984 I must take issue with Andy on several points. I do not know of any traditional (i.e., Orthodox or Conservative) code which permits cooking of smoking on Shabbat. The only thing which comes close is the permissibility (under extremely restricted circumstances) of keeping food warm os Shabbat, providing the process was initiated on Friday before candle-lighting time. The position with respect to Yom Tov is considerably different, since work (m'lachah) associated with the preparation of food is explicitly (BIBLICALLY) permitted, including the lighting of a fire (though preferably the fire in question should be lit from an already burning flame). The lighting of a candle (or even a cigarette) is permitted even by the most stringent authorities -- also from an already burning flame. Where differences of opinion occur is in the question of extinguishing a flame on Yom Tov. The more stringent traditional authorities prohibit this. PERSONAL NOTE: My grandfather was a Rabbi and a descendent of a major Chassidic "dynasty". He smoked at the Seder table, as did his father. His father, however, rolled his own cigaretttes during Passover to avoid the possibility that the glue used in the factory-made cigarettes might contain a grain product (e.g., wheat paste). More generally, I believe that mainstream Judaism, while based on the Torah, rests on interpretation and development of the Biblical concepts (not only of the Pentateuch but of subsequent material). I suspect that the principal difference among the three or four major movements in Judaism lies in the extent (both in time and in substance) over which such interpretation is valid. I therefore take strong exception to the charaterization of well-reasoned and compassionately promulgated ordinances as "wimpouts". Many such are designed to make living in this world possible (e.g., the eruv and the evasion of the Biblical law against usury) or humane (e.g., the prohibition of polygamy and of divorce without the consent of the wife), or in an attempt to preserve Judaism (e.g., the Conservative relaxation of the prohibition against driving to Synagogue on Shabbat). One may questions the validity of a particular halachic development, but I believe that one must start with the assumption that those who initiate and adopt such developments are acting from understanding and in good faith. Mark Chodrow AT&T BL WH 2C-3444A (201) 386-6804
arnold@gatech.UUCP (Arnold Robbins) (03/01/84)
In reference to Andy Tannebaum's suggestion that smoking should be prohibited.
I have been told several times that Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, the most widely
accepted "posek" (decider of questions) in American Orthodoxy has written
that smoking is wrong: if one does not smoke, he should not start, and if he
does, he should try to quit. I cannot cite the specific place, but I can
find it if necessary.
However, there exists in Talmudic Law the concept of a "Gezerah sheh HaTzibur
ainu yacholim la'amod bo", a decree that the public cannot accept upon
themselves. This means that we don't make laws/decrees that people will not
be able to fulfill (as a silly example, all Jews must buy Cadillacs. Not
all Jews can afford Cadillacs, so we don't require them to buy Cadillacs.)
Several rabbis have indicated to me that not smoking falls into the category of
something that people can't accept. I also don't like smoking, but this
falls into the category of personal choices....
Now, how do religious people smoke and cook on Yom Tov? On Shabbos, cooking
and smoking are forbidden entirely, NO exceptions. If you're starving and
all you have is raw meat, you can't cook it (unless you will *literally*
die from hunger; if you can wait 24 hours, you may not cook). The Talmud
says that Yom Tov is just like Shabbos, except for "Ochel Nefesh", food
needed for survival. This is learned out from the phrasing in the Bible.
By Shabbos it says "Kol Malacha", All "malacha", which is often translated
as "work", but really means "creative activity". So *everything* is forbidden.
By Yom Tov it says "Kol Malechet Avodah", all creative *work*, and the
tradition/explanation is that work necessary for Ochel Nefesh is OK.
One can not start a fire on Yom Tov, but can add or remove fuel from an
existing fire. Thus people who smoke light their cigarettes/cigars/pipes
from an already existing fire. This by the way, is why carrying is permitted
on Yom Tov. It was permitted originally to carry food from one place to
another. Once that was permitted, the Rabbis decided to permit carrying of
any permitted/necessary thing, like a key to one's house, or one's child.
There was a big difference of opinion about this between Hillel and Shammai;
Hillel won.
An excellent source for reasons behind Shabbos laws is the book "The Sabbath",
by Dayan I. Grunfeld, published by Feldheim and available in any good Jewish
bookstore.
Hope this clears some things up!
--
Arnold Robbins
CSNET: arnold@gatech ARPA: arnold.gatech@CSNet-relay
UUCP: ...!{akgua,allegra,rlgvax,sb1,ut-sally}!gatech!arnold
Did'ja ever have one of those re-incarnations?dave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman) (03/05/84)
[I posted this a few days ago when Lew's article first appeared, but somehow inews swallowed it and it didn't even make it to utcsrgv. Fortunately I'd mailed Lew a copy and he has kindly sent it back to me...] | From: lew@ihuxr.UUCP (Lew Mammel, Jr.) | There was a news item last summer about an orthodox Jewish community | which was seeking to expand its symbolic fence to enclose a larger | area. This is the fence which defines a "household" and so expands | the allowed activities on the sabbath in the enclosed area. I can't remember | the correct name for it. The correct term is "eruv". What it defines is not a household but an enclosed area such as a walled city. The only Sabbath activity to which the eruv relates is is carrying. One is not permitted to carry *anything* outside the city. This includes carrying things in one's pockets. The ancient city of Jerusalem, for example, is a walled city. Carrying in the walled city on the Sabbath is permitted. | There was some controversy because the fence (actually a sort of string) | used public utility poles, and many non-Jews lived in the area as well. | There were some remarks attributed to a rabbi who was advocating this | expansion which I found rather amazing. He denied that the "fence" was | a religious symbol, characterizing it rather as a necessary aid to those | who would otherwise be prevented from carrying out various activities. There is an eruv in Toronto which has been the subject of some controversy. It was set up a number of years ago. Three of the borders are Lake Ontario and two rivers (the Don and the Humber), which legally constitute enclosures for the purpose of defining a walled city. The northern border consists of high-tension electrical wires running along the north end of Metro Toronto, supported by metal posts (the big ones that look a bit like stick men with arms sticking out). Recently the Jewish community has moved further north, beyond this border, and the eruv was extended to a new set of high-tension wires (north of highway 7). It has been approved by Rabbi Price, one of the senior Orthodox rabbis in Toronto. However, some people choose not to follw it for technical reasons. (The technical reasons include the size of the area covered, the relatively large distance between the posts which constitute the northern boundary, and the presence of Highway 401 which brings tens of thousands of people through the "enclosed area" every day. Rabbinical opinions differ; there are certainly some rabbis who maintain that an eruv is not possible in Toronto because of its size.) | In other words, he gave the sabbath laws the status of physical law, making | the "fence" a form of technology to overcome its limitations. The Sabbath laws, like all laws in Judaism, have defined limitations and requirements. Everyone agrees that if you put up a fence which meets certain requirements around your backyard, it is permissible to carry in the backyard. Creating an eruv around a city follows the same principles. | Here we have a case where a contrivance for subverting an observance takes | on the character of an observance itself. A similar case is that of the | randomly activated telephone. This is a phone which has a level of | indirection built in so that by picking up the receiver, the user can | avoid violating some interpretation of the proscription against building a fire | on the sabbath. I have never heard of such a telephone, and I know of no Orthodox Jews who use the telephone on the Sabbath. I do not agree with the phrase "contrivance for subverting an observance". The wall around Jerusalem is hardly a contrivance. | I'm wondering what Andy et al. think of this sort of thing. I find it | hard to commend such ingenuity in subverting the laws that are supposedly | held sacred. If you want to challenge the eruv on technical grounds, fine. Technically is it questionable (*NOTE*: I am saying questionable, I am not saying it it invalid!). But there is no question of "subverting" of laws going on here. As a matter of fact, the presence of an eruv in Toronto is wonderful, particularly for women with small children (note: carrying children isn't allowed if there's no eruv, and pushing a stroller or carriage is not allowed either). With an eruv, the ladies are able to come to the synagogue on Shabbos. Dave Sherman Toronto -- {allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!dave