Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxr.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!ihnp4!ihuxr!lew From: lew@ihuxr.UUCP (Lew Mammel, Jr.) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Speaking of fences ... Message-ID: <932@ihuxr.UUCP> Date: Tue, 28-Feb-84 17:56:38 EST Article-I.D.: ihuxr.932 Posted: Tue Feb 28 17:56:38 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 1-Mar-84 02:44:08 EST Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 27 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