Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,210
edits
Techum: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A person may not leave | A person may not leave the domain where he started Shabbat. This boundary of where he cannot leave is called the ''techum'' (heb. תחום; lit. border). Every person has a unique techum depending on where he was at the beginning of Shabbat. It is forbidden to walk beyond one's techum on Shabbat, Yom Tov, or Yom Kippur.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 396:1, 495:1, 611:1. [https://ph.yhb.org.il/12-06-04/ Peninei Halacha] discusses why the allowance for ochel nefesh doesn't permit going beyond the techum on Yom Tov.</ref> In general, the techum boundary is 2000 [[amot]] beyond the immediate 4 [[amot]] area around a person.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 397:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 95:1. Mishna Brurah 397:1 writes that some hold that walking beyond 12 [[mil]] on shabbat is a biblical prohibition, while others consider it a rabbinic prohibition. Magen Avraham 404:1 quotes a dispute between the Maharalbach 28 and Maharam Elshaker 41 whether 12 mil is deoritta for kelim. Ramban Eruvin 43a clearly hold it is deoritta even for kelim. Biur Halacha 404:1 is lenient to rely on Maharalbach since either way many rishonim hold that 12 mil is not deoritta.</ref> | ||
==Determining the | ==Determining the Techum== | ||
===Outside of a City=== | ===Outside of a City=== | ||
# If a person is alone in the desert, the techum extends 2000 [[amot]] beyond the 4 [[amot]] around him. If a person is in a house at the beginning of Shabbat, the techum is 2000 [[amot]] from outside the house.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1386-7)</ref> | # If a person is alone in the desert, the techum extends 2000 [[amot]] beyond the 4 [[amot]] around him. If a person is in a house at the beginning of Shabbat, the techum is 2000 [[amot]] from outside the house.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1386-7)</ref> | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
===Techum of a City=== | ===Techum of a City=== | ||
# If one is in a village, town, or city, one may have 2000 [[amot]] from the outer bounds of the city, depending on the density of the houses.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 95:2</ref> If there are 6 homes each within 70.66 [[amot]] of another home, they are considered a city and the techum would begin from 2000 [[amot]] outside the group of houses. Any home that is within 70.66 [[amot]] of the established city is included in the city. However, a house which is more than 70.66 [[amot]] from the other houses is not included in the city. The techum for residents of that house is 2000 [[amot]] from the edge of that house. Therefore, a suburban area with houses separated more than 70.66 [[amot]] are not considered part of a city and residents of a house only have 2000 [[amot]] from that house.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1387-9). Rabbi Ribiat quotes the Minchat Shabbat who explicitly writes that we do have the halachic category of chatzerot nowadays in order to form a city. We still require that there's 2 houses to create a chetzer but if there's 6 houses we have a city. Torat Shlomo Eruvin 19:19 p. 144 explicitly writes that even though we don't use the chatzerot today like rooms you can create a city without chatzerot. See Chazon Ish OC 110:20 who supports this. However, Rav Hershel Schachter ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/814168/rabbi-hershel-schachter/shiur-99-shabbos-dechiya/ Shabbat Shiur 99 (very end)] and [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/814233/rabbi-hershel-schachter/shiur-100-shabbos-chazer-vs-mavui/ Shabbat Shiur 100 (beginning)]) holds that nowadays we don't have a city for techum since we don't use our chatzerot today like a room of the house. Therefore, since we need 3 chatzerot to form a city ( | # If one is in a village, town, or city, one may have 2000 [[amot]] from the outer bounds of the city, depending on the density of the houses.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 95:2</ref> If there are 6 homes each within 70.66 [[amot]] of another home, they are considered a city and the techum would begin from 2000 [[amot]] outside the group of houses. Any home that is within 70.66 [[amot]] of the established city is included in the city. However, a house which is more than 70.66 [[amot]] from the other houses is not included in the city. The techum for residents of that house is 2000 [[amot]] from the edge of that house. Therefore, a suburban area with houses separated more than 70.66 [[amot]] are not considered part of a city and residents of a house only have 2000 [[amot]] from that house.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1387-9). Rabbi Ribiat quotes the Minchat Shabbat who explicitly writes that we do have the halachic category of chatzerot nowadays in order to form a city. We still require that there's 2 houses to create a chetzer but if there's 6 houses we have a city. Torat Shlomo Eruvin 19:19 p. 144 explicitly writes that even though we don't use the chatzerot today like rooms you can create a city without chatzerot. See Chazon Ish OC 110:20 who supports this. However, Rav Hershel Schachter ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/814168/rabbi-hershel-schachter/shiur-99-shabbos-dechiya/ Shabbat Shiur 99 (very end)] and [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/814233/rabbi-hershel-schachter/shiur-100-shabbos-chazer-vs-mavui/ Shabbat Shiur 100 (beginning)]) holds that nowadays we don't have a city for techum since we don't use our chatzerot today like a room of the house. Therefore, since we need 3 chatzerot to form a city (Shulchan Aruch 398:10) we can't have a city today. This is based on the Rama, Chazon Ish OC 65:52, and is discussed by Imrei Baruch Eruvin 40-41.</ref> | ||
# Many cities have 2000 amot from the edges of the city. Generaly, the techum is drawn as a rectangle around the outermost extremities of the city along the directions of a compass; that is, the techum of the city is 2000 amot from the edge of the northern most house, eastern most house, southern most house, and western most house. However, if the city is already rectangle, L-shaped, or arc shaped may not have this extension of squaring off the city.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1391-2)</ref> See [[#Squaring Off a City]] for details. | # Many cities have 2000 amot from the edges of the city. Generaly, the techum is drawn as a rectangle around the outermost extremities of the city along the directions of a compass; that is, the techum of the city is 2000 amot from the edge of the northern most house, eastern most house, southern most house, and western most house. However, if the city is already rectangle, L-shaped, or arc shaped may not have this extension of squaring off the city.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1391-2)</ref> See [[#Squaring Off a City]] for details. | ||
# Because the laws of establishing a techum and extending the techum with a Eruv techumin are complicated one should consult a local Orthodox Rabbi. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1393)</ref> | # Because the laws of establishing a techum and extending the techum with a Eruv techumin are complicated one should consult a local Orthodox Rabbi. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 4, pg 1393)</ref> | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
===Joining Cities=== | ===Joining Cities=== | ||
# If two cities are within 141.3 amot of each other they are considered like one city and the techum is drawn around both of them.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 398:7</ref> | # If two cities are within 141.3 amot of each other they are considered like one city and the techum is drawn around both of them.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 398:7</ref> | ||
# If when drawing the square around a city that would include part of another city, some poskim hold that the two cities are considered one large city and the techum is drawn around both of them.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 8:33 explains that since the squaring of a city is taken into account before we add the 70 amot of the city if the squaring off of a city includes another city everything should be considered one large city. His proof is the concept of Eruvin 55a that the arms of a bow-shaped city join as long as they are within 4000 amot of each other. Kovetz Chaburot Halacha v. 3 p. 26 questions his proof. The Chazon Ish 110:16 wasn't sure whether or not the cities join when the squaring off of each other join. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49174&st=&pgnum=383 Shoneh Halachot 398:19 and 21] writes that Chazon Ish held that they do join but left it unresolved (הדבר צריך הכרע). Zecher Tzvi (techum Shabbat p. 21) holds that one can be lenient based on Chazon Ish. Dirshu 398:21 quotes Rav Dovid Landau who holds that since Chazon Ish left this unresolved one must be strict. Dirshu 398:21 cites Rav Wosner (Kitzur Hilchot Medidat techumin) as holding that one can be lenient, but Rav Elyashiv as holding that one should be strict. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21547&st=&pgnum=250 Mechzeh Eliyahu 1:74] and 77 is lenient. Machneh Yisrael of Rabbi Dimitrovsky p. 19-22 writes that one who is lenient has what to rely upon and supports this from the Rambam and Meiri. He also cites Rav Elyashiv as being strict. Mdarkei Hatechum p. 18 quotes Rav Dovid Feinstein, Rav Belsky, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Nissim Karelitz as holding that we cannot cities based on the squaring off of the city.</ref> | # If when drawing the square around a city that would include part of another city, some poskim hold that the two cities are considered one large city and the techum is drawn around both of them.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 8:33 explains that since the squaring of a city is taken into account before we add the 70 amot of the city if the squaring off of a city includes another city everything should be considered one large city. His proof is the concept of Eruvin 55a that the arms of a bow-shaped city join as long as they are within 4000 amot of each other. Kovetz Chaburot Halacha v. 3 p. 26 questions his proof. The Chazon Ish 110:16 wasn't sure whether or not the cities join when the squaring off of each other join. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49174&st=&pgnum=383 Shoneh Halachot 398:19 and 21] writes that Chazon Ish held that they do join but left it unresolved (הדבר צריך הכרע). Zecher Tzvi (techum Shabbat p. 21) holds that one can be lenient based on Chazon Ish. Dirshu 398:21 quotes Rav Dovid Landau who holds that since Chazon Ish left this unresolved one must be strict. Dirshu 398:21 cites Rav Wosner (Kitzur Hilchot Medidat techumin) as holding that one can be lenient, but Rav Elyashiv as holding that one should be strict. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21547&st=&pgnum=250 Mechzeh Eliyahu 1:74] and 77 is lenient. Machneh Yisrael of Rabbi Dimitrovsky p. 19-22 writes that one who is lenient has what to rely upon and supports this from the Rambam and Meiri. He also cites Rav Elyashiv as being strict. Mdarkei Hatechum p. 18 quotes Rav Dovid Feinstein, Rav Belsky, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Nissim Karelitz as holding that we cannot join cities based on the squaring off of the city. Gvul Rishonim p. 78 quotes Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky, Rav Yakov Bloi, Rav Yakov Kamenetsky, and Rav Moshe Feinstein held that cities can be joined by squaring off each one. He also writes that he heard from reliable sources that Rav Elyashiv was lenient in a case of need but knows that Machaneh Yisrael quotes Rav Elyashiv as being strict. He also quotes that he heard Rav Dovid Feinstein was lenient, even though others quote him as being strict.</ref> | ||
#This dispute directly impacts if one may walk from Brooklyn to Manhattan. If one is lenient about the above question, if someone starts Shabbat in Manhattan he can walk to Brooklyn and vice versa. If one is strict about the above dispute he may not.<Ref>Mdarkei Hatechum p. 19</ref> | #This dispute directly impacts if one may walk from Brooklyn to Manhattan. If one is lenient about the above question, if someone starts Shabbat in Manhattan he can walk to Brooklyn and vice versa. If one is strict about the above dispute he may not.<Ref>Mdarkei Hatechum p. 19</ref> | ||
#Nontheless, even those who are strict not to consider both cities to be like one large city agree that if someone starts Shabbat within the squaring off of the techum of one city he may walk throughout that city. For example, if he starts Shabbat in a specific section of Manhattan that is within the squaring off of the techum of Brooklyn, he may walk throughout Brooklyn on Shabbat.<ref>Mdarkei Hatechum p. 19</ref> | #Nontheless, even those who are strict not to consider both cities to be like one large city agree that if someone starts Shabbat within the squaring off of the techum of one city he may walk throughout that city. For example, if he starts Shabbat in a specific section of Manhattan that is within the squaring off of the techum of Brooklyn, he may walk throughout Brooklyn on Shabbat.<ref>Mdarkei Hatechum p. 19</ref> | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
===Techum of Brooklyn=== | ===Techum of Brooklyn=== | ||
#The techum of Brooklyn and Queens is squared off according to the cardinal directions.<ref>Kovetz Chaburot Halacha v. 3 p. 36 writes that since Brooklyn and Queens have contiguous settlement they are one city. He documents how to cross Prospect Parkway, Ocean Blvd, etc. On this basis he writes that Brooklyn and Queens' shape is not rectangular and has no straight side. Therefore, even Chazon Ish agrees that the techum of Brooklyn should be according to the cardinal directions.</ref> The only question is whether the techum should be a rectangle or follow the curvature of the island near Red Hook, Brooklyn since it is an L shape with a stretch of more than 4000 amot. Either way, the techum of Brooklyn includes most of North Manhattan. | #The techum of Brooklyn and Queens is squared off according to the cardinal directions.<ref>Kovetz Chaburot Halacha v. 3 p. 36 writes that since Brooklyn and Queens have contiguous settlement they are one city. He documents how to cross Prospect Parkway, Ocean Blvd, etc. On this basis he writes that Brooklyn and Queens' shape is not rectangular and has no straight side. Therefore, even Chazon Ish agrees that the techum of Brooklyn should be according to the cardinal directions.</ref> The only question is whether the techum should be a rectangle or follow the curvature of the island near Red Hook, Brooklyn since it is an L shape with a stretch of more than 4000 amot. Either way, the techum of Brooklyn includes most of North Manhattan. | ||
##Method 1: The city as a whole is measured by cardinal directions and goes as far as Union City, NJ and includes the southern part of Manhattan. | ##Method 1: The city as a whole is measured by cardinal directions and goes as far as Union City, NJ and includes the southern part of Manhattan.<Ref>Gvul Binyamin p. 302. Kovetz Chabuot Halacha v. 3 pp. 32-33 discusses this as well. See next note.</ref> | ||
##Method 2: Only go north from the Queens Midtown Tunnel area because | ##Method 2: Only go north from the Queens Midtown Tunnel area because to the southeast there are two inlets in the shape of an L which have a gap of more than 4000 amot.<ref>Kovetz Chabuot Halacha v. 3 pp. 32-33. The reason to follow the cardinal directions for Brooklyn is based on Mechzeh Eliyahu 1:82's understanding of Chazon Ish 110:26 that a L shaped area which has an angle smaller than 90 is not judged like an L. Instead, it is judged by the cardinal directions. However, Zecher Tzvi (Techum Shabbat Umedidato p. 11) argues that Chazon Ish meant it isn't judged like an L and is squared off as long as the gap isn't greater than 4000 amot. According to this approach, the techum of Brooklyn does not start with the furthest point to the west. Rather, it only starts at about the Queens Midtown Tunnel since from there going northeast the east side of the island is pretty straight. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe OC 4:88 implies that the squaring off of Brooklyn begins from the southern part of Brooklyn and includes the Lower East Side of Manhattan. This implication isn't clear; see Gvul Binyamin p. 302 for lengthy discussion of that point.</ref> | ||
<center><gallery> | |||
Ikar_Ha'ir_of_Brooklyn.png|Outline of contiguous settlement of no breaks of 141 amot [https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/edit?mid=1wfOMpI1VOBTg5gAd9Qr8DIskFN5ENtc&usp=sharing google maps] | |||
Ribu'a_Haolam of Brooklyn.png|Method 1: according to the cardinal directions on [https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/edit?mid=1wfOMpI1VOBTg5gAd9Qr8DIskFN5ENtc&usp=sharing google maps] | |||
Zecher_Tzvi of Brooklyn.png|Method 2: part of the eastern side doesn't have a ribu'a on [https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/edit?mid=1wfOMpI1VOBTg5gAd9Qr8DIskFN5ENtc&usp=sharing google maps] | |||
</gallery></center> | |||
# Many poskim hold that Manhattan and Brooklyn are considered one city for purposes of techum.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 7:24 quotes the Satmer Rebbe held that Manhattan and Brooklyn were one city for purposes of techum. Rav Yechezkel Roth (Emek Hahalacha 3:25), and Otzrot Halacha (v. 6 p. 427) agree. See Mishna Halachot 8:178. However, Gvul Binyamin (p. 298) quotes Rav Yishayhu Shimonovitz in the name of his father and Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky that in fact it is forbidden to cross the Williamsburg bridge on Shabbat. Gvul Binyamin argues that the minhag to walk over the Williamsburg bridge is not because of joining cities with overlapping squares but because the squaring off of Brooklyn includes most of Manhattan and the squaring off of Manhattan includes Williamsburg. Walking to the end of the squaring off the city one started Shabbat in is certainly permitted.</ref> This could be based on several approaches: 1)Chazon Ish suggested that cities join as long as their squared off boxes overlap. This occurs between Manhattan and Brooklyn. However, many poskim including Rav Elyashiv and Rav Dovid Feinstein do not accept this leniency.<ref>See [[#Joining_Cities]] above.</ref> 2) Minchat Yitzchak<Ref>7:24</ref> writes that the bridges which are built with guard booths join onto the city and connect the cities. Shevet Halevi<Ref>4:40</ref> disagrees with this logic. 3) There are tunnels between Manhattan and Brooklyn and some poskim consider that to join onto the city and connect the cities.<ref>Rav Yitzchak Shpitzer and Rav Yechezkel Shraga Weiss (Poalim Ltorah v. 17 pp. 113-131) and Tikkun Eruvin (fnt. 89)</ref> | # Many poskim hold that Manhattan and Brooklyn are considered one city for purposes of techum.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 7:24 quotes the Satmer Rebbe held that Manhattan and Brooklyn were one city for purposes of techum. Rav Yechezkel Roth (Emek Hahalacha 3:25), and Otzrot Halacha (v. 6 p. 427) agree. See Mishna Halachot 8:178. However, Gvul Binyamin (p. 298) quotes Rav Yishayhu Shimonovitz in the name of his father and Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky that in fact it is forbidden to cross the Williamsburg bridge on Shabbat. Gvul Binyamin argues that the minhag to walk over the Williamsburg bridge is not because of joining cities with overlapping squares but because the squaring off of Brooklyn includes most of Manhattan and the squaring off of Manhattan includes Williamsburg. Walking to the end of the squaring off the city one started Shabbat in is certainly permitted.</ref> This could be based on several approaches: 1)Chazon Ish suggested that cities join as long as their squared off boxes overlap. This occurs between Manhattan and Brooklyn. However, many poskim including Rav Elyashiv and Rav Dovid Feinstein do not accept this leniency.<ref>See [[#Joining_Cities]] above.</ref> 2) Minchat Yitzchak<Ref>7:24</ref> writes that the bridges which are built with guard booths join onto the city and connect the cities. Shevet Halevi<Ref>4:40</ref> disagrees with this logic. 3) There are tunnels between Manhattan and Brooklyn and some poskim consider that to join onto the city and connect the cities.<ref>Rav Yitzchak Shpitzer and Rav Yechezkel Shraga Weiss (Poalim Ltorah v. 17 pp. 113-131) and Tikkun Eruvin (fnt. 89)</ref> | ||
# According to those who hold that Manhattan and Brooklyn are one city for purposes of techum, it is permitted to walk across the Williamsburg bridge on Shabbat. | # According to those who hold that Manhattan and Brooklyn are one city for purposes of techum, it is permitted to walk across the Williamsburg bridge on Shabbat. | ||
| Line 69: | Line 70: | ||
===Chicago=== | ===Chicago=== | ||
#Skokie and West Rogers Park are within the same techum according to many rabbonim for two reasons: 1) Perhaps a highway doesn't divide a city. 2) The two halves of the city have overlapping squares which according to Chazon Ish's suggestion joins them together.<ref>Mdarkei Hatechum (Rabbi Mordechai Melanchik)</ref> | #Skokie and West Rogers Park are within the same techum according to many rabbonim for two reasons: 1) Perhaps a highway doesn't divide a city. 2) The two halves of the city have overlapping squares which according to Chazon Ish's suggestion joins them together.<ref>Mdarkei Hatechum (Rabbi Mordechai Melanchik)</ref> | ||
===Yerushalayim=== | |||
#Machaneh Yisrael<Ref>pp. 73-91</ref> discusses the techum of Yerushalayim at great length. In the north, he suggests that Ramat Shlomo is the northmost border and Ramot is excluded. To the west there's roughly a border from Gavat Shaul to Har Nof to Hadasah Ein Karem. To the south there is a border from Ganim to Gila. Generally, there is no very large squaring off of the city in his opinion because there are several sections which are in the shape of a bow or an L that are filled in. Once that section is already filled in, another larger square is not drawn around it. | |||
#Another option he raises is to draw the squaring off of the city based on the Rabbanut Eruv map. He is hesitant to do so because perhaps Ramot cannot be joined to the rest of the city. | |||
*Do not rely on this map at all for practice as it is drawn imprecisely just to give a very rough sense of the main shape of the city of Yerushalayim. | |||
<gallery> | |||
Ikar Ha'ir of Yerushalayim.png|Rough drawing of Yerushalayim's shape on Google maps | |||
Mapa.jpg|Rabbanut eruv map of Yerushalayim on [https://www.daat.ac.il/daat/shabat/eruv/shaar-2.htm daat.ac.il] | |||
</gallery> | |||
==Moving Packages Received on Shabbat== | ==Moving Packages Received on Shabbat== | ||
# If one isn't sure if an item was brought from beyond the techum on Shabbos, one may not to move it beyond 4 amot even though techum is rabbinic.<Ref>Beitzah 24b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 515:1</ref> | # If one isn't sure if an item was brought from beyond the techum on Shabbos, one may not to move it beyond 4 amot even though techum is rabbinic.<Ref>Beitzah 24b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 515:1</ref> | ||
| Line 108: | Line 118: | ||
==Sources== | ==Sources== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
{{Shabbat Table}} | |||
