My guess is that the toilet in his dorm had one of those colors-the-water-when-you-flush disinfectant thingies, and that he would not have had objections otherwise. Some rabbis say those disinfectants are a problem, others say it’s not.
Yes, this guy was full of crap, in more ways than one. I pity his roommate.
Sure, if you want. Or you could buy a box of tissues.
panache45:
Totally
This is something I’ve wondered about: wouldn’t a baseball cap by itself qualify as a head covering, without a yamulke?
Depends on a lot of things.
Mainly, the more directly one asks, the more forbidden it is. “Please turn on the air conditioner” is a lot worse that “It’s really hot! I wish the a/c was on!” This is because if I ask someone to do it, them I’m doing it indirectly through him. But if I hint without making a request, then he’s doing me a favor of his own volition.
The importance of the issue is also a factor. Leaving a toilet unflushed all day is a major esthetic problem which hampers enjoying the Sabbath, and a health issue too. Different values conflict, and decisions have to be made. For a less-important issue one would have to just put up with it, but I can see how this could be an area where doing it via a non-Jew is allowed.
Other details too, but that’ll do for now…
Yes, but some people seem to like having both on, for reasons I’m still trying to figure out. Some say that it is so that the head will still be covered even if the baseball cap comes off. But in real life, if one comes off then they both do. I think it might just be easier than putting the yarmulka in one’s pocket.
I could add that not all rabbis agree on the fine details of such regulations, either, not even within orthodox sects.
I am not Jewish, but used to work closely with one of the rabbinical organizations that certified kosher food preparation. I was amazed at the violent infighting that took place between competing organizations, each accusing the other of misinterpreting or misapplying God’s sacred laws.
If you start with only “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy” as your principal doctrine, most everything else must be derived from that. Leaves a lot of room for interpretation.
And for every prohibition, it seemed there was a loophole. Finding or creating one was considered a worthy task, and if all else failed, just hire a Shabbas Goy. *
- A gentile who could do it for you and not violate any laws for either. Funny how the mind of God works, eh?
Seems to me that a slice of bread from a loaf is as different as a peice of paper from a roll.
So preemptive cutting of toilet paper is ok?
Well of course not, it’d be hard for him to shit in the woods without tearing leaves.
Thanks, GilaB. I don’t mean to be a pest with goofy questions. I’m a government lawyer, and codes of little regulations are often fascinating to me.
Ritual is its own reason. It is neither more nor less “stupid” than any other ritual.
Now you know why so many lawyers are Jews. 
[Note: I myself am a lawyer, and Jewish].
I’m quite serious - as a culture, Judaism is very concerned with the skills that lawyers need - the focus is on literacy, study statutes (the Torah) and of precident (the Talmud), application of precident to new fact situations …
I might make the same statement about your post. Instead I’ll say don’t do this again.
Gfactor
General Questions Moderator
Quoth GilaB:
On the other hand, if he had been schlepping them into your neighbors’ yard, that would (probably) have been a violation, correct? But your own yard was permissible, since it wasn’t “public”?
Yes, it is unfortunate that some people let their sincerity take over. If it actually got violent, then I’d like to apologize on their behalf.
As I posted above, this doesn’t work in all situations. I depends on how urgent the need is. But as regards “the mind of God”, I should have pointed out that since Judaism does NOT require non-Jews to observe our Sabbath, it’s not really “the mind of God” we’re talking about. Rather, it’s the mind of the Rabbis, who instituted a new law not found in the Torah itself, forbidding us to ask our non-Jewish friends and neighbors to do stuff for us willy-nilly. Doing so is similar to us doing it indirectly, and it detracts from the holiness of the day. But since God never said not to do it, they only prohibited it for ordinary circumstances; if there is an unusually important need, then they allowed it. Entire books have been written on where to draw the line.
Excellent point.
However, if the community was enclosed by an eruv, then it would all be considered “private”, both one’s own, and the neighbor’s together.
Well, the town in which I grew up has an eruv, meaning that one can carry within the entire space enclosed by the eruv, which includes both my parents’ house and the neighbors.
On preview, I see Keeve has already discussed this.
Tom - you’re not a pest, although I was beginning to wonder if you were planning on walking me through your entire morning bathroom routine! (Get your minds out of the gutter, people.) For the sake of study, though, we’re going about this all wrong, starting from tiny modern examples rather than deriving it from first principles.
So if there’s no ultimate authority on this (unless you think God actually cares about this stuff), and rabbis can’t agree on the correct interpretation of the rules, why bother adhering to this kind of thing? I mean, I can understand having a day of rest in your religion, but adherence to these kind of ultra-technical rules doesn’t seem like it’s within the spirit of Shabbos at all.
When I first read this, I didn’t realize the significance of what you put in parentheses.
Indeed, if a person feels that God does NOT care about this stuff, then the reasons to follow the rules would be mostly cultural, I suppose. But if one DOES feel that God cares (as I do, and several others in this thread), then the rules become very important. What does God want me to do? What does He want me to avoid? Sometimes the difference between forbidden and required is very subtle, but if you consider it important, then you’ll work hard to figure it out.
Any legal system will have rules, and the rules have to have clear definitions, or else it won’t work. For example, see the thread currently here in GQ, titled “How does the IRS verify a church’s validity?”
The fact that the rabbis don’t agree among themselves does not prove the system to be flawed. It only means that the source material is vague. (The Supreme Court is made up a bunch of very smart and dedicated people, and they don’t always agree on what the Constitution says.)