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