daf bit: Eruvin 6

[cellio]

This week we begin a new tractate, Eruvin. On Shabbat one is not permitted to carry items from a private domain (like a house) into a public domain (like the street) or vice versa. However, this doesn't apply to houses around a central (fenced or walled) courtyard, an architectural style common in ancient Israel; this can be viewed as one big private domain even though it's multi-dwelling. (There are rules, like the people living there actually need to share food on Shabbat.) Applying similar principles, a larger space, like a town, can be enclosed by an eiruv and thus treated as a private domain.

The first several pages of this tractate discuss alleys. An alley is not like a courtyard because it's open at both ends (it's a thoroughfare). The rabbis discuss the effects of walls, posts, doorways, and openings below a certain width. On today's daf we learn that it was taught in the name of R. Yochanan that Jerusalem, a walled city with a central road running through the center, would have been treated as a public domain because of the road, were it not for the fact that its gates were closed at night, rendering it like a courtyard. 'Ulla, too, said the same of the city of Mahuza, which also had gates that were closed at night. But Beit Hillel said you don't need to close the doors; they just need to be present.(6b)

Comments

[http://users.livejournal.com/merle_/]

Huh. Well, I googled, but then went to ask, but those darn fools seem to have thought ahead of me, so I could not post having found a kind of an answer in a previous thread:

http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/640/mail-delivery-on-shabbos
"It would seem that there may be basis to bring in the mail from the mail-box (provided their is an eruv). If however there is mail which IS muktzeh mixed in with mail permitted to be handled it probably constitutes a teruvos (mixture) to which the laws of borrer (selecting) apply and one could only select the permitted mail, by hand, immediately prior to when one is going to read it. On the other hand, there might be basis to handle the entire mixture at once, especially if the majority is permitted (probably not though)."

Uhm. I think I'd wait on my Shabbat-related magazine until the next day. The rest of the thread becomes incomprehensible to me due to my lack of terminology.

So a Roomba would be muktzeh? After all, should one forget to turn it off before the Shabbat and it merrily goes on cleaning like an infidel...

[cellio]

Oh right; I had forgotten about that question. The accepted answer seems pretty good to me, and also seems to do a reasonable job of explaining technical terms. Which ones can I help you with? (The other two answers don't cover any territory not already covered in the main one.)

The Roomba is muktzeh, and if you forget to turn it off you just have to wait for it to wear its little heart battery out. Or, if it should wander into a closet or something, I think you would be permitted to then close the door.

[talvinm.livejournal.com]

But can you open the door to let the Roomba in? :)

[http://users.livejournal.com/merle_/]

I'm getting a hang of the technical terms, but slowly, as there are few things in my internal lexicon to map chosen ritualistic behaviours to. It's a fun challenge.

Figured a Roomba would be muktzeh. A pre-programmedf coffee maker would be too, although it seems valid to accept and use the product it delivers should the intent be general rather than setting it up so it specifically does its work on Shabbat

Most of the debates seem to be about determining the intent of the law rather than how to subvert the letter of the law. The latter is necessary chaos, but the use of it for the former is a good thing. That resonates nicely with who I want to be.