"There's a Wire Above Manhattan That You've Probably Never Noticed" - Fascinating

[cmkeller]

I once wrote a whole staff report on the subject of Sabbath prohibitions and eruv, but it got lost when the Chicago Reader got sold and the Straight Dope web site migrated. I will attempt to answer these posts in a nutshell:

@Quoted by astro in the OP

The eruv encircles much of Manhattan, acting as a symbolic boundary that turns the very public streets of the city into a private space, much like one’s own home. This allows people to freely communicate and socialize on the Sabbath—and carry whatever they please—without having to worry about breaking Jewish law.

The leading American rabbi of the 20th century, Rabbi Moses Feinstein, issued a ruling that Manhattan is not eligible for an eruv. I am not aware of any Orthodox Jews who believe there is a valid eruv around any significant portion of Manhattan, though I don’t claim to know every individual. But I did live most of my life on the lower east side of Manhattan, and certainly no one I was acquainted with there thought they could carry on the Sabbath.

@Sicks Ate

Yeah, I’m sure God is fooled.

@Quimby

It’s actually really silly some of the hoops some Orthodox Jews jump through to adhere to the letter of the law but throw away the spirit.

Two things to answer here:

1. It has nothing to do with “fooling” G-d. What you need to understand about the Torah is that the letter of the law IS the spirit of the law. The words of the Torah (in Orthodox Jewish theology) are our only insight into the intentions of G-d, outside of what G-d revealed to us (by those means), the thoughts of G-d are so far beyond our understanding that we couldn’t possibly guess at any non-textual “spirit” of law.

To put it another way: if the letter of the law APPEARS to contradict your understanding of the “spirit” of the law, then you are mistaken in your understanding of the spirit of the law.

2. The eruv does not circumvent a restriction laid down by G-d. The Biblical prohibition against carrying in public places on the Sabbath applies only to open spaces of a certain width. This is called “public domain” and such an area can NEVER be made permissible to carry in by means of an eruv. Where an eruv applies is in an open area of LESSER width (called “Carmelis” in Hebrew), which was later forbidden by the Rabbis, so that people would not accidentally mistake it for an open space which is wide enough for carrying to be Biblically prohibited. However, the Rabbis allowed carrying in such a lesser open space if that space is circumscribed by wall-like or door-like boundaries, which would make the nature of that lesser open space more akin to an enclosed space. The eruv is a RABBINICAL legal structure that is built-in to the RABBINICAL prohibition of carrying in a “Carmelis”, NOT something that “fools” G-d about getting around prohibitions from the actual Bible.

Little Nemo:

@Little Nemo

It always surprises me when Jews choose not to use obvious workarounds on some laws. For example, the meat and dairy law. The Bible says “You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.” So why don’t Jews say “This cheeseburger’s fine. It’s made from cows. The cow that produced the milk for the cheese was unrelated to the cow used for the beef. And it’s fried not boiled.”

Who decided that some laws needed to only be obeyed literally and others had to be obeyed in spirit, even in a way that goes far beyond the literal law?

There are established methods of deriving the “non-literal” laws from the text, and when those methods are used, the derived laws are considered just as literal as the ones you can read directly in the text. as Bricker mentioned, the Mishnah and Talmud lay out many of these derivations. The specific one about “kid in its mother’s milk” really meaning any meat in any milk is laid out in the Talmud portion “Hullin” page 113b.

Max the Immortal:

I’ve been wondering: How are the super-observant Jews generally regarded by the Jewish community as a whole? Are they seen as more morally upstanding than their less committed brethren? Or are they seen as a little nuts? Or is it more like, “Wow, that guy really likes being Jewish.”

It varies between those extremes, although these days, there’s an added element of seeing them as bigots since gay rights became mainstream.

[Ike_Witt]

@cmkeller

The leading American rabbi of the 20th century, Rabbi Moses Feinstein, issued a ruling that Manhattan is not eligible for an eruv. I am not aware of any Orthodox Jews who believe there is a valid eruv around any significant portion of Manhattan, though I don’t claim to know every individual. But I did live most of my life on the lower east side of Manhattan, and certainly no one I was acquainted with there thought they could carry on the Sabbath.

Was there something about Manhattan that made it unsuitable for an eruv? Was that ruling every changed and is the current eruv, for lack of a better word, fake?

[Filbert]

@Bricker

Strike that – I was inexplicably thinking of aardvarks when I wrote that, conflating the scaly skin with the swimming capys.

Aardvarks aren’t scaly either, were you thinking of pangolins?

Not that either of them spend any notable amount of time in water, that is probably capybara.

[Bricker]

cmkeller

Because Little Nemo brought up travel, as opposed to carrying, and you were a long-time New York resident, I’d be curious to know what the techum shabbat for the city is.

[Bricker]

@Filbert

Aardvarks aren’t scaly either, were you thinking of pangolins?

Not that either of them spend any notable amount of time in water, that is probably capybara.

Feakin’ hell!

Armadillos! Not aardvarks! Sheesh. I am not going to earn any laurels as a zoologist. I was picturing armadillos, calling them capybaras, and correcting myself to aardvarks. I better sit down before I’m attacked by a pangolin.

[burpo_the_wonder_mutt]

^ Probably Armadillos.

Capybaras are the largest rodents in the world. (Insert your joke here.)

ETA: Ninja’d

[RTFirefly]

@Bricker

The fire happens when a switch closes a circuit. The spark that occurs in the instant before the contacts meet is the creation of fire.

So if a switch could be designed that, by whatever mechanism of physics, didn’t create a spark as it closed: would orthodox Jews then be able to use electricity on the Sabbath?

[txjim]

@Bricker

The fire happens when a switch closes a circuit. The spark that occurs in the instant before the contacts meet is the creation of fire.

If technology is a valid work-around, could a solid-state switch be used to work around the problem? Can Alexa be summoned as a gentile to work around these issues?

(not trying to be a wise-ass, genuinely interested in the “legal” aspects of religion)

[Crybaby_Boobie]

So I can eat armadillo on Friday, is what you’re saying?

[panache45]

These days, since Manhattan has long become gentrified, I’m wondering whether there’s an eruv around certain areas of Brooklyn instead.

Supposedly there’s one around my neighborhood, since I’m on the periphery of a densely ultra-Orthodox community. But I couldn’t identify where the actual eruv is. I probably pass through it daily.

[Musicat]

@Max_the_Immortal

I’ve been wondering: How are the super-observant Jews generally regarded by the Jewish community as a whole? Are they seen as more morally upstanding than their less committed brethren? Or are they seen as a little nuts? Or is it more like, “Wow, that guy really likes being Jewish.”

In my experience, there are many levels of Jewishness, from the ultra-othodox to the highly reformed. Each group has a different interpretation of biblical laws; the ultras take most literally; the reformed, figuratively; and many philosophies, in-between. Often I find one group thinks the other is heretical and will be damned for eternity. Pretty much the way it is with Christian sects.

Which reminds me of an Emo Phillips routine:

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, “Don’t do it!” He said, “Nobody loves me.” I said, “God loves you. Do you believe in God?”

He said, “Yes.” I said, “Are you a Christian or a Jew?” He said, “A Christian.” I said, “Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?” He said, “Protestant.” I said, “Me, too! What franchise?” He said, “Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?” He said, “Northern Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?”

He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region.” I said, “Me, too!”

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912.” I said, “Die, heretic!” And I pushed him over.

[x-ray_vision]

@txjim

Can Alexa be summoned as a gentile to work around these issues?

But does the Echo have to be turned off before Shabbos? This author believes that it does because the device actually hears and processes every word that is being said. This is done by its Texas Instruments DM3725 ARM Cortex-A8 processor and with its 256MB of LPDDR1 RAM. This processing is Naichah lay, something that the owner is desirous of, because the owner wants it not to respond to everything. We want Alexa to filter out all other words and only respond to the start-up word – “Alexa.” Luckily, there is a mute button on the device itself.

Are there circumstances when it can be used? It would seem not, and even if it were a case of Pikuach Nefesh, the Echo cannot really accomplish anything useful.

As an interesting aside, Rav Moshe rules (Igros Moshe YD Vol. II #4) that when a Shochet, in fact, does violate the prohibition of using a microphone it is forbidden to eat from his Shechita. This would also most certainly be the case if he were to be using his Amazon Echo.

The Amazon Echo and Shabbos - The 5 Towns Jewish Times

@panache45

These days, since Manhattan has long become gentrified, I’m wondering whether there’s an eruv around certain areas of Brooklyn instead.

See map:

The Nearly Invisible Wires That Enclose Nearly All Major Cities of The World

[TriPolar]

I do love this kind of reasoning. My cousin will not work on the Sabbath. Asked if he and his wife and daughter were walking to shul on the Sabbath and his daughter fell and broke her leg would he carry her to a doctor to get help? He said he would pick up his daughter, his wife would move next to him, he would hand her the girl, he would walk around to the other side of her, she would hand him the girl, and in this way they would transport the girl to a doctor without actually carrying her and doing work. He’s nuts, this kind of stuff is nuts, but at least as far as religious nutcases go I have respect for people who stick to their loony principles unlike those who find an excuse to ignore them whenever it is convenient.

[Hari_Seldon]

First let me point out, a propos the OP, that Manhattan does not have overhead wires. So an eruv is something special. Brooklyn does have some, but one day I was walking down Flatbush Ave and noticed a thin wire way up at least 50 feet. I guessed it was an eruv and asked my very orthodox friend about it and he said it was. He mentioned that there are some groups in Brooklyn that go around stringing up eruvim and another group of even purer orthodox that go around taking them down. Fun for all. A lot of the Brooklyn have combination locks (the kind with 5 numbered keys that you have to punch in the combination) because they cannot “carry” a key on Sabbath.

In my town one group of Jews just went around the town and designated a set of wires (electric, telephone, whatever) as constituting an eruv. It was purely conceptual; no actual wires were strung although I think certain blessings were said. Other people in the town took strong exception to this and asked the town council to ban it. Ban what? Saying prayers over some wires. Or under some wires, in fact. The council declined to get involved.

It is against the rules to spend money on Sabbath. Back when McGill had Saturday classes some Orthodox students worked out the following plan. They would tear a couple of bus tickets off the book on Friday (tearing is prohibited work–don’t ask about toilet paper) and then go to a bus stop where there were already people waiting, so the bus, like the Shabbos elevator referred to about, didn’t have to stop just for them, get on and drop the ticket into the fare box. Just for the record, attending lectures was not banned.

Finally, the mention of the capybara reminded me of what a Japanese man told. Until the taboo was broken by the Meiji emperor in 1867 (IIRC) there was a taboo against eating mammal meat. There were two big exceptions. Whale was classified as fish and squirrel as bird. This is still recognized in the Japanese grammar where whale and squirrel are classified as fish and bird, resp. The language recognizes about 20 of these classes, a bit like genders in IE languages.

[Bricker]

@TriPolar

I do love this kind of reasoning. My cousin will not work on the Sabbath. Asked if he and his wife and daughter were walking to shul on the Sabbath and his daughter fell and broke her leg would he carry her to a doctor to get help? He said he would pick up his daughter, his wife would move next to him, he would hand her the girl, he would walk around to the other side of her, she would hand him the girl, and in this way they would transport the girl to a doctor without actually carrying her and doing work. He’s nuts, this kind of stuff is nuts, but at least as far as religious nutcases go I have respect for people who stick to their loony principles unlike those who find an excuse to ignore them whenever it is convenient.

But there is also a religious principle, pikuach nefesh, that protecting human life and health override almost all observances of the Law.

[running_coach]

@TriPolar

I do love this kind of reasoning. My cousin will not work on the Sabbath. Asked if he and his wife and daughter were walking to shul on the Sabbath and his daughter fell and broke her leg would he carry her to a doctor to get help? He said he would pick up his daughter, his wife would move next to him, he would hand her the girl, he would walk around to the other side of her, she would hand him the girl, and in this way they would transport the girl to a doctor without actually carrying her and doing work. He’s nuts, this kind of stuff is nuts, but at least as far as religious nutcases go I have respect for people who stick to their loony principles unlike those who find an excuse to ignore them whenever it is convenient.

I understood that medical emergencies (among others things) that Sabbath observances were “suspended” to deal with the emergency.
I realize my phrasing is rather clumsy.

[TriPolar]

@Bricker

But there is also a religious principle, pikuach nefesh, that protecting human life and health override almost all observances of the Law.

Yes, but only if necessary. My cousin’s opinion is that bucket-brigading his daughter to get medical care is sufficient. He’s not a complete idiot, I’m sure he’d do anything necessary if he thought that his daughter’s care could not be delayed, but it shows the mindset of the [del]cult[/del] religion, find any way possible to adhere to the letter of the law. Anyway, logic doesn’t work with crazy people.

ETA: He’s not any ordinary Orthodox Jew, he’s out on the fringe of even that.

[running_coach]

@TriPolar

Yes, but only if necessary. My cousin’s opinion is that bucket-brigading his daughter to get medical care is sufficient. He’s not a complete idiot, I’m sure he’d do anything necessary if he thought that his daughter’s care could not be delayed, but it shows the mindset of the [del]cult[/del] religion, find any way possible to adhere to the letter of the law. Anyway, logic doesn’t work with crazy people.

ETA: He’s not any ordinary Orthodox Jew, he’s out on the fringe of even that.

I guess he fails to realize that not only can a broken leg produce emergencies beyond the broken bone but the excessive handling will cause further damage.

[kanicbird]

It seems like an amazing sense of community, something God would be quite pleased with. Taking a law and turning it for the people, for them getting together and fulfilling the words of Jesus: Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." (Marc 2:27)

[TriPolar]

@running_coach

I guess he fails to realize that not only can a broken leg produce emergencies beyond the broken bone but the excessive handling will cause further damage.

It was a hypothetical. I don’t know what he’d actually do. But normal people don’t even bother to consider if there is an alternative to transporting an injured person to get medical care in the most rapid way possible. It is the hypothetical nature of these issues that gave rise to this type of reasoning. People didn’t stop to go ask a rabbi if they could carry their daughter to a hospital, these questions were posed to rabbis hypothetically, and you end up with this kind of reasoning. Some rabbi would always mention that in order to preserve the life and health of a person that the laws could be ignored, but they’d spend much longer deconstructing every aspect of the issue and offering all possible alternatives.