2020/5781

The saying goes that you don’t have a real Jewish community until you have a Shul, a Mikvah and an Eruv. So what is the purpose of an Eruv in the Jewish community?

First we must explain what an Eruv is. On Shabbat, there is a prohibition of Hotza’ah, carrying in the public domain or between different domains. There is also a prohibition of Techumin, walking beyond the 2,000 cubits (approximately one kilometer) boundary around  beyond the area in which one lives. This area is determined by the town when living in an urban area (assuming the distance between houses is below 70⅔ cubits), and from one’s house in a rural area. 

 These prohibitions can be  remedied through an Eruv Chatzeirot for Hotza’ah and Eruv Techumin for Techumin. Eruv Techumin means  placing food or walking to a location up to 2,000 cubits from one's home, and declaring that as an extension of one’s residence. One would then be allowed to walk 2,000 cubits in every direction from that extended location, allowing someone to walk up to 4,000 cubits in one direction instead of only 2,000. This can aid  reaching a distant  point when living in rural areas but is mostly unnecessary within cities and towns that have homes fairly close to one another. 

The more commonly used Eruv, though, is the Eruv Chatzeirot. The Eruv Chatzeirot involves the residents enclosing an area and then designating commonly owned bread as their “Eruv”.  It allows for carrying within an enclosed region. There is a debate as to how it precisely works.  In Masechet Eruvin, Shmuel says that Eruv Chatzerot works based on Kinyan, a transaction, while Rabbah says it works based on Dirah, creating one residence for everyone (49a). In the Talmud Yerushalmi, Rabbi Yosi ben Rabbi Bon says that the eruv makes the enclosed area  into one Reshut, one domain (Eruvin 8:1). According to the Bavli, it appears that the Eruv turns the area into a single private domain with a debate as to how, while according to the Yerushalmi it is one unified domain. 

The debate surrounding Eruv Chatzeirot’s mechanism has important ramifications LeHalachah. The Chacham Tzvi (112) says that because the Eruv Chatzeirot creates one unified house, you cannot have multiple Eruvim set up within the same walled area; if you do, they will contradict each other. Rav Yissachar Shlomo Teichtal counters that the placement of the food for the Eruv itself is mostly a symbolic way to remind us that the enclosed area is a communal domain to be shared and used equally (She’eilot UTeshuvot Mishneh Sachir Orach Chaim 135). It does not literally become one house. We simply make the area equally accessible to all as if everyone was living in one house, so placing two Eruv Chatzerot would not be a problem. 

While an Eruv solves some of the technical Shabbat issues, we still need to discuss why it is prohibited to leave one’s general area of residence and to carry between domains on Shabbat. The Gemara (Shabbat 49b teaches that prohibited Melacha  is KeNegged Avodat HaMishkan, corresponds to the work that was done in the Mishkan. Rashi and Rav Saadyah Gaon argue about whether this means actions done in the construction of the Mishkan or actions done in the daily upkeep of the Mishkan. Even though the Gemara explicitly mentions that Hotza’ah was done in the Mishkan, Shabbat 96b derives this prohibition from “VaYetzav Moshe VaYaaviru Kol BaMachaneh,” “Moses thereupon had this proclamation made throughout the camp” (Shemot 36:6).  Pesachim 85b derives the prohibition of Hotza’ah  from “Al Yeitzei Ish MiMekomo BaYom HaShevii,” “Let no man leave his tent on the seventh day” (Shemot 16:29). Why would we need two specific sources for the prohibition of Hozta’ah? Tosafot (Pesachim 85b s.v. Hotza’ah Ketiv Beih KeShabbat) explain that we need two sources because Hotza’ah is a Melacha Geruah, an inferior Melacha. Carrying and Techum are not obviously Melacha as you do not create or construct anything in the process, you just move things from place to place. Both are therefore  referred to as a Melachah Geruah, an inferior action. The prohibition against carrying between domains is a little more understandable as Melacha because transporting material was done in the construction of the Mishkan and continues to be a major industry. It is harder to see, however, where Techum fits in as Melacha: how can simply walking a couple of kilometers constitute a problem?

The source of the prohibition of Techum derives from Shemot 16:29: “Re’u Ki Hashem Natan Lachem HaShabbat Al Kein Hu Notein Lachem BaYom HaShishi Lechem Yomayim Shevu Ish Tachtav Al Yeitzei Ish MiMekomo BaYom HaShevii,” Mark that the LORD has given you the sabbath; therefore He gives you two days’ food on the sixth day. Let everyone remain where he is: let no one leave his place on the seventh day.” Chapter 16 of Sefer Shemot generally deals with Hashem giving us Manna and commanding us to collect it with certain restrictions, such as each person taking only an Omer measurement, not leaving it overnight, collecting double portions on the sixth day, and observing the seventh day as Shabbat by not leaving to collect more. The verse above comes after some the Jews failed to observe Shabbat and went outside the camp to collect more manna. But why prohibit leaving one’s location on Shabbat?

The Sefer HaChinuch explains that walking past the Techum of 2,000 cubits is an issue of not being restful and not participating in Oneg Shabbat. The Aruch HaShuclhan adds that Shabbat is designed not just for rest but to learn Torah as well, and excessive walking would detract from that goal. Perhaps the reason why the Jews were told in the desert not to go out and collect the manna was the experience that could be had from being in the Israelite camp. The Jewish people’s time in the desert was a unique time in history where their every need was taken care of by God. God provided Manna for food, water flowed from the rocks, and neither their clothes nor their shoes ever wore out. It was a time devoted to learning what it means to be a nation, God’s nation, and for at least one day a week even the act of walking a short distance to collect the daily rations would detract from that atmosphere. 

When the Talmud Yerushalmi expounds the maximal distance for Techum on a De’Oraita, biblical, level, they arrive at a measure of 12 mil, 12 times 2000 cubits,  based on the size of the Jews’ encampment in the desert. Why do we derive this Halacha from the way we camped? Because Techum is designed to bring us back to what it was like to live with God providing our every need, as we focus on what it means to be a people, or today what it means to be a community. 

The Gemara (Beitzah 36a), when explaining why it is forbidden to ride an animal on Shabbat, first tries to prove it is a problem based on Techum. In the end,  because the Gemara considers Techum to be a rabbinic prohibition, it decides that riding an animal is a Rabbinic protection lest you break a branch to hit and guide your animal. What did the Gemara originally have in mind for the prohibition against riding animals? Teshuvah Beit Yitzchak, a late 19th century leading Poseik, inferred based on the Gemara Beitzah that the Talmud was trying to create a blanket ban on transportation, and applies this idea to forbid bike riding. The Gemara’s rationale may have been a reaction to the fact that rising urbanization could lead to a situation where people could walk for the entirety of Shabbat but still technically be within the city limits and Techum. The only way to ensure that people would remain rooted in one location for Shabbat was to ban all forms of transportation. The distance a horse can travel in a day is twice that of a human, and a car can travel over a thousand kilometers. 

One of the great debates in the mid 20th century Jewish community was whether  it was permissible to drive to Shul on Shabbat. The Orthodox movement was firmly against, while the Conservative and Reform permitted driving to Shul because of Shul’s significance. Leaving aside the Halachic arguments for a moment, let's take a look at what happened to each respective Jewish community as a result of this decision. The Conservative and Reform communities could now drive to Shul, which meant they no longer needed to live within a mile or two of Shul for access on Shabbat.  They could then begin to move farther and farther away from where the Jewish community lived, while still being able to attend services on Shabbat. Unfortunately, as a result, many Conservative and Reform communities grew farther and farther apart until they no longer were able to be a community. The Orthodox communities on the other hand kept growing organically around the shuls, developing into the Orthodox communities we recognize to this very day. Why did they each grow differently? 

Shabbat isn’t simply about attending services in Shul— it is about the holistic experience that can be had by spending 25 hours in one place dedicated to experiencing Shabbat without the distraction of work or travel, simply focusing on what it means to be a Jew who is part of a family and a community. Sacrificing Techum, the limited location one resides in for Shabbat, in order to attend prayers on Shabbat, had the opposite of the intended effect. 

Ironically, even though Techum is no longer an issue in most urban communities, and Eruv Techumin is rarely used, Eiruv Chatzeirot has come to fulfill a similar purpose. A community without an Eruv confines people with small children, the elderly, and anyone who needs to carry anything with them, to their homes in order to not violate a biblical prohibition. By building an Eruv Chatzeirot and creating one large area, one large connected community, everyone is able to join together as a community, a Kehilah,  and experience Shabbat in all its splendor.