Halakhah in America: The History of City Eruvin, 1894-1962 by Adam Mintz A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Skirball Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies New York University September, 2011 __________________________ Prof. Lawrence Schiffman TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES iii INTRODUCTION 1 PRE-RABBINIC AND RABBINIC SOURCES 20 POST-TALMUDIC SOURCES 81 ERUVIN IN THE EARLY MODERN AND MODERN PERIODS 132 THE ST. LOUIS ERUV 176 THE EAST SIDE OF MANHATTAN ERUV 229 THE TORONTO ERUV 283 THE MANHATTAN ERUV 341 CONCLUSION 406 EPILOGUE 422 BIBLIOGRAPHY 427 ii LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 1 Map of St. Louis, 1878 200 Fig. 2 Rabbi Seigel‘s Map of New York City, 1907 254 Fig. 3 Rider's New York City Map, 1916 259 Fig. 4 Plan of the City of Toronto, July 19, 1923 285 Fig. 5 Map of Toronto, Google Maps 323 Fig. 6 Map of the New York City Subway System, 1954 368 Fig. 7 Rabbi Moskowitz‘s Map of New York City, 1959 371 iii Introduction The Gemara describes an encounter in Pumbedita between the Rabbah bar Rav Hanan and Abaye. Rabbah bar Rav Hanan asks Abaye why there was no eruv in the alleyway of two great rabbis [Abaye and Abaye‘s uncle, Rabbah]. In an attempt to vindicate himself and Rabbah, Abaye answers that it was not befitting Rabbah‘s dignity to go from door to door collecting the requisite matzahs, and that he, Abaye, was so preoccupied with his learning that he had no time to supervise the eruv.1 Mordekhai ben Hillel, the renowned thirteenth century German rabbinic authority, infers from this Gemara that under normal circumstances when the rabbi of an area is not similarly preoccupied, he has an obligation to erect an eruv for his community.2 Eruv, a word that signifies ‗mixture‘, ‗combination‘ or ‗fusion‘ will be used in this dissertation to refer to an eruv hatzerot, the joining of the residents of a limited area or space for the sake of establishing a localized neighborhood in which carrying objects is allowed on the Sabbath.3 The eruv has been a focus of concern for rabbis from the Mishnaic period to the modern age. The ability to transform an area in which carrying on the Sabbath had been prohibited into an area in which carrying on the Sabbath is permitted created both challenges and opportunities for the rabbis in each 1 Eruvin 68a 2 Mordekhai, Eruvin no. 515. 3 Erubin. Translated by Dr. Israel W. Slotki (London, 1938), xi. 1 generation. The concept of an eruv was introduced in the Mishnaic period in Roman Palestine in order to allow Jews to carry their possessions into the hazer, the semi- private courtyards around which several Jewish families lived, on the Sabbath. Since the courtyard was utilized as a shared space for many activities including eating and sleeping, there was a need to create a procedure to allow the residents of the hazer to carry their articles in and out of the hazer on the Sabbath. As the Jewish community expanded to include multiple adjacent courtyards, the rules of the creation of an eruv were adjusted to reflect the changing reality of these new Jewish ―neighborhoods.‖ Over time, as the Jews moved to Babylonia and subsequently expanded their communities in European and other Eastern countries to include larger neighborhoods throughout numerous cities, the rabbinic definition of an eruv was adapted to these changing realities. The creation of the rabbinic eruv requires the physical enclosing of the desired area as well as a symbolic collection of a food item from every resident of this area. Each of these aspects of the eruv created certain challenges for the rabbis as the Jewish communities expanded beyond the traditional courtyards of Roman Palestine. Although the Mishnah describes the symbolic enclosing of the courtyard through the utilization of crossbeams and endposts at the entranceway to the courtyard, these structures no longer sufficed as the Jews moved outside of self-enclosed areas and into larger neighborhoods that were not enclosed as were the earlier courtyards. This change of circumstance required the rabbis to utilize natural or existing enclosures 2 such as city walls and bodies of water to create enclosures around these neighborhoods and later around the cities in which the Jews resided. In addition, the Talmud explains that the sharing of food in the courtyard serves to unify the residents of the courtyard allowing them to establish an eruv community. However, as the Jewish community outgrew the courtyards, they often shared living areas with non-Jews or Jews who did not accept the principle of the eruv. Furthermore, once the Jews began to reside in neighborhoods throughout larger cites, the Jews became a minority within the area which was to be enclosed by the eruv. The rabbis addressed the creation of an eruv community in these new situations and adapted the original process of food sharing to meet the changing realia. Finally, the rabbis were required to confront the problems raised by the fact that this Jewish minority was attempting to create a ―halakhic neighborhood‖ within a larger urban area controlled by a local governmental authority that might not be sympathetic to the concept of the eruv. Yet, in spite of these challenges, eruvin were created by Jewish communities throughout the world. In Europe and the Middle East, rabbis met the challenges and the difficulties and spearheaded the creation of these eruvin in small Jewish neighborhoods and larger urban settings. As the medieval walls of many European cities were taken down in the nineteenth century, rabbis replaced these eruv boundaries with other natural or man-made boundaries. The invention of the telegraph in the mid-nineteenth century with its poles and wires that closely resembled the 3 original crossbeams and endposts of the courtyards of Roman Palestine presented potential new eruv boundaries in the modern city. However, this new option also raised many new halakhic issues that were a matter of heated dispute among the leading rabbis of the time. As the Jews immigrated in increasing numbers to North America at the end of the nineteenth century, the rabbis were faced with the question of how to transplant the European tradition of community eruvin to their new cities. Interestingly, prior to 1970, only four city eruvin were created in North America; in St. Louis, The East Side of Manhattan, Toronto and Manhattan. These eruvin were established by Eastern European rabbis who based their arguments for the validity of these eruvin on the precedents that had been set by the rabbis of earlier generations and the actual eruvin that these rabbis had created. This dissertation will address the evolution of the community eruv from the days of the courtyards of Roman Palestine to the modern period. It will explore and analyze the halakhic arguments that enabled the rabbis to adapt a rabbinic concept that originally had limited application into a broad practice that allowed tens of thousands of Jews throughout the centuries to carry on the Sabbath. How did these rabbis, through their adaptation of the original rabbinic sources and their creative ingenuity, apply the traditional sources to the new geographic realia that they found in each? 4 Although this work will evaluate the evolution of the halakhic history of communal eruvin, it will primarily focus on the community eruvin that were created in North America prior to 1970. On one hand, these eruvin were built based on the precedent of the earlier eruvin. Yet, at the same time, there were certain aspects of these eruvin that reflected the unique situation of American Orthodox Jewry during its developmental stages in North America. Studying the challenges of adapting the model of the earlier eruvin to American realities will enhance the understanding of the American Orthodox rabbinate of this period and its relationship both to the Orthodox laity and the broader Jewish and non-Jewish communities. Since 1970, there has been a proliferation of communal eruvin built in American cities and towns. These eruvin reflect the further development of Orthodoxy in America and deserve a separate study the parameters of which will be discussed in greater detail in the conclusion of this work. The relationship of the American eruvin to the earlier eruvin raises several considerations. First, the American Orthodox rabbis utilized halakhic precedents that were established by the rabbis of earlier generations as they built eruvin throughout the world. How did these halakhic precedents apply to the American urban situation? Were there aspects unique to American cities that had not been addressed by earlier rabbinic authorities? How would the American Orthodox rabbis address these new issues? Would they seek counsel from the rabbis of Eastern Europe or would they attempt to resolve these issues on their own? Finally, as eruvin began to be created in 5 America, did rabbis who established the later American eruvin rely on the precedent of the earlier American eruvin or did they too base their work solely on the model of the earlier European eruvin? These questions reflect the place of the American Orthodox rabbinate in its early stages. Did these rabbis feel that they were merely a continuation of an earlier tradition or did they believe that it was their role to forge new halakhic ground in North America? Furthermore, the interplay of halakhah and social factors as the underlying reason for the creation of these eruvin. The fact that otherwise observant Jews were carrying on the Sabbath even though there was no eruv was a concern expressed by the rabbis since the beginning of the Early Modern Period.