What is the difference between hot water, light and cooking when it comes to the Sabbath?
The accumulation of interpretation and rulings on various situations under the law means there's a thousand edge cases that have probably been brought up over the centuries and some ruling made. It all feels a bit like trying to rules lawyer god which is amusing to me as a TTRPG player but sounds exhausting if it were my real life.
[0] Though you also have to shut off the inlet water to the tank because the new water entering and being heated by the existing heated water (which you can use) counts as a violation. Source: https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/579/getting...
[1] https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/476/oven-ka...
This is probably one of the oldest traditions in Judaism, other than the Sabbath itself.
The Jewish lawyer stereotype didn't come from nowhere :)
1. of or relating to the Talmud (the collection of Jewish law and tradition)
2. characterized by or making extremely fine distinctions; overly detailed or subtle; hairsplitting.
It is extremely difficult to translate rules that were written thousands of years ago into guidance on modern life. Much of Jewish religious tradition has therefore embraced the debate, theorizing, and further definition of these rules into something that is more clear, logical, and can be practically applied by people who wish to follow them.
"Does electricity count as fire?" might seem like an arbitrary and non-sensical question to someone on the outside, but it is incredibly important to how a modern Orthodox Jewish person would practice their religion and they therefore need an answer to it. "Trying to rules lawyer god" through debate and writing on the subject seems like one of the better ways to reach a satisfying and conclusive answer to this style of question.
[0] https://www.npr.org/2019/05/13/721551785/a-fishing-line-enci...
This is not the case. An Eruv is actually a beautiful example of the halakhic (translate: "Jewish law") process working as it's supposed to. Its implementation combines sharp hermeneutics with a sensitivity to the needs of real communities and a strong understanding of the meta-halakhic principles which drive the entire process
I'm not really sure if a sub- comment on HN is the right place to expand on this, but I'm happy to discuss it via some other medium.
I'm interested in subscribing to whatever that turns out to be.
Many of the decisions also require deep knowledge into the subject matter (not just the Jewish law) in order to make a ruling. To allow electric switches one would need to know all the intricacies of both Jewish law and electricity before a valid ruling could be made.
How exactly are Jews encouraged to "rules lawyer God?" Is it literally what you said: that God gave us brains, and he expects bus to use them? Where can I find out more about this? Is there some kind of "guide to Jewish law for goyim" I can check out?
For a small, partial start to your second question, check out this story: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oven_of_Akhnai (under the Story heading).
Note that the mystical and the magical elements of the story are often seen as the rhetorical flourishes and metaphors of the Talmud's storytelling style. The fundamental point is that even if a voice rang down from heaven declaring the law to be a certain way, a majority opinion among sages would overrule said voice. The Torah (law and teachings) was given to Jewish people, and it's now our job to interpret and wrestle with the particulars.
(I mentioned this is as a partial answer to your question, because there is a lot of nuance and further thought based on the idea. It does not, for instance, suggest an each-person-for-themself personal reinterpretation of the body of laws. It is more supporting the idea that as a society it is up to us to collectively define, refine, debate, and expand on these teachings.)
Your anecdote is the last in a series, describing a debate between Rabbis Eliezer and Joshua about the kosher status of the Oven of Akhnai (a clay oven which had been ritually polluted through proximity with a corpse, but was then broken up and remade). The first anecdote has Eliezer saying, "If I'm right, let that carob tree get up and move over there!". The tree did indeed uproot itself and move a substantial distance. His interlocutor retorted "pah, what does a tree know?".
In the last anecdote as you describe, Eliezer calls out to God to back him up, and indeed God booms forth, but Joshua replies, "it [the Jewish law] is not in heaven". That is, human law is for humans to interpret, not God. It amounts to an effective way to protect the system from wholesale change by new prophets who claim to be conveying the word of God.
All cribbed from David Friedman's _Legal Systems Very Different From Ours_, an absolutely fascinating book which I strongly recommend.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/484253/jewish...
These things you describe seem like a lot of work with not much result. Do you find it onerous to observe the rules you described?
It is considered heresy to view the Bible/Tanakh as the last word on a law. Instead, the Rabbinic derivations are seen as capturing the underlying intent of biblical law as it may actually manifest in real societal practice.
An example is the famous "take an eye for an eye" statement, which is interpreted Rabinically as referring to monetary compensation for damages. Actually seeking to physically harm someone in accordance to harm done to you is a gross violation of law.
Where can I look into your statement "It is considered heresy to view the Bible/Tanakh as the last word on a law."?
This is is a new idea that I had not heard before, and it would explain a lot of discussions I have had over the years if I understood it's source. (I keep the sabbath, annual holy days, but not the Jewish laws, so I have had some interesting discussions over the years)
For a bit more info I found this Quora question, which has some good answers: https://www.quora.com/Do-people-of-the-Jewish-faith-interpre... (Only the first 3-4 answers, after which the answers divert into jokes, and a very odd fire 'n brimstone answer.)
No. It wasn't this crazy until the end of WWII.
Religious community that regulates every detail of day to day life is called a destructive totalitarian sect.
no it is not, it is called that only by those who does not follow (and which these same rules does not make a difference in their lives) and for some reason feel entitled to be offended for others
I like rules
If you have a hot water urn, that is always on and doesn't receive new water, then consuming the water isn't usually an issue. You still need to double pour (put it in one cup then in a second to ensure it isn't hot enough to cook) but using it is OK.
If you have a large hot water tank, consuming the water IS an issue. Mostly because the moment that you consume the water, you can reasonably assume that cold water will enter the tank. Once cold water enters the tank, it will likely start heating. Thus, you become the agent that turns the heaters on in the tank. But, if the hot water was flowing BEFORE shabbat and you consume the hot water, your action does not directly affect the actions taken by the heating components. The heater is already on and using an extra amount of water has minimal impact on when the heaters turn off. Thus it is more allowed.
Light is about creation and less about the light than the means to get it. Switches create sparks internally, lights create heat (even LEDs), and you are completing a circuit. Completion can be seen as the final act of creation.
And lastly, cooking takes something from in-edible to edible. Creating food from non-food. Even on foods that are permissible to warm, they must be edible before hand. They also cannot substantially change form -- nothing too liquid or anything that would go from solid to liquid. With that framework, warming up a piece of left over baked chicken would be OK, whereas making a grilled-cheese sandwich wouldn't be OK.