3 ms·

An Eruv isn’t really a loophole. The rule is that you are allowed to carry indoors, or in a walled city. In ancient times the walls of the city basically denote

An Eruv isn’t really a loophole. The rule is that you are allowed to carry indoors, or in a walled city. In ancient times the walls of the city basically denoted the extent of the community. Cities aren’t walled anymore for practical reasons, but the principle that you ought to be able to carry within the community is still valid. Instead of getting rid of it, rabbis determined the smallest possible wall that still counts, and that is constructed in order to allow carrying. It’s purpose isn’t to undermine the spirit of the rule, but allow it to continue even as the world changed. The TV hack is basically an urban legend. I’ve never met anyone who actually uses it, and it definitely violates several rules.

LeifCarrotson 7y ago
I'm curious about the city wall classification. If, in ancient times, a small section of the wall fell (analogous to an Eruv wire break), would the area typically contained by the wall no longer be considered a walled city/community? The article writes "When a group of rabbis in the ’80s took a boat around Manhattan to create a map, they realized that most of the wire was gone." and the other article [1] describes the condition of the wire as "intact on every Shabbat except one 2010 snowstorm" and worthy of a Twitter feed to check the weekly status. I don't imagine that a chipped stone on top of Jerusalem's wall in 600 BC would have made the walled city not walled for the purposes of an Eruv. Manhattan is an island, wouldn't it be enough for the community to declare the shoreline the border of the city? (Or maybe I'm trying to apply logic in a place where it's superseded by authority...) [1]: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/eruv-manhattan-invisible-wire-jewish-symbolic-religious-home https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/eruv-manhattan-invisib...
- monkeynotes 7y ago
  Indeed, at what point do you consider an actual wall interrupted. How much of the rubble counts as a wall? Would a spider web spanning a gap count?
- shliachtx 7y ago
  Not to worry, this is all discussed. Technically, the string makes it a series of doorways which together make up a wall. An actual wall would not have this issue, as having a majority of the wall up would be enough to deem any opening a doorway/gap in the wall.
monkeynotes 7y ago
When you start abstracting these ideas to their limits you realize how ridiculous life can be. There is nothing that would physically prevent a 'wall' being put around the planet and deeming the planet a community. Is the wall to show people where the boundaries are or to show God? It all seems to meaninglessly arbitrary.
- xwowsersx 7y ago
  Incorrect. Study the laws of Eruv, which are quite complex, and you'll understand why. Certain areas (the exact definition of which is quite rigorous) simply cannot be turned into private domains for purposes of the laws of Eruv and the Earth falls into this category. No the boundaries are not to "show God".
  - monkeynotes 7y ago
    I just read this article: https://www.halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Introduction_to_the_Modern_Eruv https://www.halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Introduction_to... Bonkers if you ask me. There are three biblical areas > ...reshut ha-yahid (a private domain) and reshut ha-rabbim (a public domain). Any other area is considered a makom patur (an exempt area) Then Rabbis made up a fourth: > To avoid inadvertent violations of Shabbat, however, the rabbis introduced a fourth type of domain called a karmelit. This category includes some areas that would be considered a reshut ha-yahid on a biblical level and some areas that would be considered a makom patur on a biblical level. Which ends up with some oddities that seem to conflict with biblical dictate... > while an open field is a biblical makom patur [an exempt area], on a rabbinic level it is a karmelit [treated like public domain]. Then the whole discourse degenerates into this... > Rabbi Yosef Teomim, author of an important commentary on the Shulhan Arukh called the Pri Megadim, raised the possibility that the tzurat ha-petah is only effective in enclosing an area according to rabbinic law. According to biblical law, however, the tzurat ha-petah is ineffective. Subsequently, using a tzurat ha-petah to enclose an area that is considered to be a “public domain” on a biblical level would simply be an insufficient means to convert it into a “private domain.” A karmelit, however, is considered a makom patur on a biblical level and is only considered “public” by the rabbis; thus by erecting a rabbinically sanctioned enclosure, one successfully converts it into a “private domain.”[4] Every input here just leads to more questions, ultimately I think little of it would make actual sense to me even I studied a lifetime's worth of doctrine. To avoid a rabbit hole conversation I bow out and just chalk this up to humans being humans. Others are obviously free to think whatever they like, I have no problem with that.

LeifCarrotson 7y ago

I'm curious about the city wall classification. If, in ancient times, a small section of the wall fell (analogous to an Eruv wire break), would the area typically contained by the wall no longer be considered a walled city/community? The article writes "When a group of rabbis in the ’80s took a boat around Manhattan to create a map, they realized that most of the wire was gone." and the other article [1] describes the condition of the wire as "intact on every Shabbat except one 2010 snowstorm" and worthy of a Twitter feed to check the weekly status. I don't imagine that a chipped stone on top of Jerusalem's wall in 600 BC would have made the walled city not walled for the purposes of an Eruv. Manhattan is an island, wouldn't it be enough for the community to declare the shoreline the border of the city? (Or maybe I'm trying to apply logic in a place where it's superseded by authority...) [1]: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/eruv-manhattan-invisible-wire-jewish-symbolic-religious-home https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/eruv-manhattan-invisib...

monkeynotes 7y ago
Indeed, at what point do you consider an actual wall interrupted. How much of the rubble counts as a wall? Would a spider web spanning a gap count?
shliachtx 7y ago
Not to worry, this is all discussed. Technically, the string makes it a series of doorways which together make up a wall. An actual wall would not have this issue, as having a majority of the wall up would be enough to deem any opening a doorway/gap in the wall.

monkeynotes 7y ago

When you start abstracting these ideas to their limits you realize how ridiculous life can be. There is nothing that would physically prevent a 'wall' being put around the planet and deeming the planet a community. Is the wall to show people where the boundaries are or to show God? It all seems to meaninglessly arbitrary.

xwowsersx 7y ago
Incorrect. Study the laws of Eruv, which are quite complex, and you'll understand why. Certain areas (the exact definition of which is quite rigorous) simply cannot be turned into private domains for purposes of the laws of Eruv and the Earth falls into this category. No the boundaries are not to "show God".
- monkeynotes 7y ago
  I just read this article: https://www.halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Introduction_to_the_Modern_Eruv https://www.halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Introduction_to... Bonkers if you ask me. There are three biblical areas > ...reshut ha-yahid (a private domain) and reshut ha-rabbim (a public domain). Any other area is considered a makom patur (an exempt area) Then Rabbis made up a fourth: > To avoid inadvertent violations of Shabbat, however, the rabbis introduced a fourth type of domain called a karmelit. This category includes some areas that would be considered a reshut ha-yahid on a biblical level and some areas that would be considered a makom patur on a biblical level. Which ends up with some oddities that seem to conflict with biblical dictate... > while an open field is a biblical makom patur [an exempt area], on a rabbinic level it is a karmelit [treated like public domain]. Then the whole discourse degenerates into this... > Rabbi Yosef Teomim, author of an important commentary on the Shulhan Arukh called the Pri Megadim, raised the possibility that the tzurat ha-petah is only effective in enclosing an area according to rabbinic law. According to biblical law, however, the tzurat ha-petah is ineffective. Subsequently, using a tzurat ha-petah to enclose an area that is considered to be a “public domain” on a biblical level would simply be an insufficient means to convert it into a “private domain.” A karmelit, however, is considered a makom patur on a biblical level and is only considered “public” by the rabbis; thus by erecting a rabbinically sanctioned enclosure, one successfully converts it into a “private domain.”[4] Every input here just leads to more questions, ultimately I think little of it would make actual sense to me even I studied a lifetime's worth of doctrine. To avoid a rabbit hole conversation I bow out and just chalk this up to humans being humans. Others are obviously free to think whatever they like, I have no problem with that.