Dutch court orders Orthodox Jews to carry ID on Shabbat

[Super Mentalita]

http://www.yourjewishnews.com/2013/02/25946.html#.US1zDv2-LCk.facebook

allright people, what do you think of this? We in Holland all have to carry our ID with us, just like in a lot of other country's. Who is agree with me that also Jews have to carry there ID on Shabbat, same as every other Dutch citizen has to carry it with them? PS: I'am not supporting this ID obligation, but i think we are all equal.

[muman613]

I am against any secular national laws which impede a Jew from observing the Sabbath. We are not permitted to 'carry' things on Shabbat, although there is a Halachic way to allow it (called the eruv), so it makes it difficult for a Jew to make it to Shul to daven on Shabbat.

When I stay with my congregation for Shabbat they set up an eruv so that we can carry our tallit (some people wear it while walking to shul)...

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/257752/jewish/Eruv.htm

One of the 39 melachot forbidden on Shabbat is carrying from a private to a public domain or within a public domain. Private domains are residential areas, and originally referred to an individuals home or apartments that were surrounded by a "wall" and can be deemed to be "closed off" from the surrounding public domains. Public domains are non-residential areas like thoroughfares, highways, and open plazas.

What's if one lives in a small neighborhood that is primarily Jewish but not surrounded by a wall? Clearly, the area outside each private home counts as the "public domain" and carrying objects from one home to the next is forbidden. However, there is a way to make these larger areas and even whole cities one private domain: the circumvention of the whole domain by a wall or gate, which would permit carrying throughout the entire city. This wall or gate, the Eruv, is an enclosure that legally transforms a non-private public thoroughfare into a private domain.

The sages, however, were concerned that people would entirely forget about the prohibition of carrying on Shabbat, so they established the concept of eruvei chatzairot.

Everyone in the city (or area of the eruv) contributes food (or, as is usually done, one person in the city can supply the food for everyone) and this food is kept in one of the houses. [Today, eruvs are normally done with matzah, because it lasts a long time and doesn't have to be replenished very often.] This symbolizes that all the people who dwell within the eruv are now 'sharing' food, and are therefore one big happy family living in one "private" domain. In fact, the word eruv actually means, "mixing"-- its purpose is to blend and mix the entire community together.

This must, of course, go along with the physical enclosure of the eruv of the city (or area). According to Jewish law, the enclosure does not have to be actual walls, rather they can be continuous posts connected with string or wire according to very exact halachic specifications for height, distance between the posts, and method of attachment. Erecting these poles and running the cable is significantly more difficult than making the actual (food) eruv. in fact, the laws of eruv are from the most complicated laws in the Talmud and thus putting up an eruv requires expert assistance and input from a rabbi.

[Super Mentalita]

So it's a difficult situation. Religion ore law?

[muman613]

So it's a difficult situation. Religion ore law?

Yes. I do know that some cities have problems with eruvim, especially those with only a minority Jewish population. Luckily the place I go to daven is a Jewish University which has its own Rabbi who makes sure the eruv is kosher...

[muman613]

Actually this story is in the news this week:

http://www.thejc.com/community/community-life/102668/leader-defends-anti-eruv-councillor

Leader defends anti-eruv councillor
By Marcus Dysch, February 25, 2013
Follow Marcus on Twitter

Barnet Council’s leader has rejected calls for the resignation as a cabinet member of a Tory colleague who organised a Shoah event having previously made disparaging comments about a proposed local eruv.

Councillor Richard Cornelius insisted this week that Councillor David Longstaff’s suggestion that an eruv should be opposed because it might encourage Jews to move to the area did not compromise his suitability to organise the Shoah commemoration.

Although admitting to a “poor choice of words” when commenting on the Barnet eruv plan at a council meeting, Councillor Longstaff said that he had put his “heart and soul” into organising the HMD event.

On Monday, Barnet opposition leader Councillor Alison Moore called for his immediate resignation, claiming he had “compromised himself and his office.

“Councillor Longstaff’s comments were highly insensitive and have undermined his role as the cabinet member leading on HMD and community engagement.”

But Councillor Cornelius accused Labour of attempting to score political points.

“I have never seen any sniff of antisemitism [from councillors] in Barnet.

“Councillor Longstaff is not in any way anti the Jewish community.

“An eruv is something to be discussed. Personally I support them. If we can make life easier for our Jewish residents then that’s great. An eruv is harmless.”

http://washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&ArticleID=18877

2/20/2013 12:31:00 PM
Eruv, bedrock of Orthodoxy, has divided some communities

by Eric Hal Schwartz
Staff Writer

"Honor the Sabbath and keep it holy" is a concise commandment, but the ways and means of observing the day of rest have been a subject of endless reinterpretation as time and circumstances have changed. One of the most significant methods observant Jews use to follow the commandment but still function is the eruv.

"Eruv is a way of halachically enclosing an area as a private domain. It means join or combine," said Rabbi Nissan Antine, associate rabbi of Beth Sholom Congregation and Talmud Torah in Potomac.

"According to the laws of Shabbat if one does not have an eruv, one is not allowed to carry anything outside the home," he said.

Eruvim are areas declared as communally private, which allow Jews within the area to move things about that otherwise could not be taken outside the house. Eruvim are ubiquitous in towns and cities with observant Jewish communities around the world and make it feasible for observant Jews to carry basic items like keys as well as push wheelchairs and strollers that would otherwise violate the commandment. Eruvim also usually include a communal food box, often at the synagogue, and encourage potlucks and other group activities.

"It's almost impossible to start a community without an eruv," Antine said. "It's one of the most important parts of building a community."

The boundaries of the home defined by an eruv can vary enormously and include pre-existing man-made borders like fences and telephone poles or be specifically built for an eruv or even natural features like hillsides or rivers if properly marked. Depending on the size and pre-existing structures that can be co-opted into the eruv, they can become quite expensive but for many Jewish communities they are essential.

Most of the time, eruvim are subtle and go unnoticed by the community at large, with people often only noticing it when it is pointed out.
.
.
.
One requirement of an eruv, however, is to acquire document of permission from any relevant authorities, known as kinyan kesef, which draws attention to the eruv and, occasionally, stirs up controversy from a community that either misunderstands the purpose of an eruv or simply does not want one in their community. There are hundreds of eruvim in the United States, and they are rarely the source of controversy but sometimes communities can become hostile to a Jewish community that wants to construct one.

"It flares up periodically," Freundel said.

That's been the focus of the intense legal struggle in Westhampton Village, N.Y., since Hampton Synagogue, the only local Orthodox synagogue, applied for permission to construct an eruv in the town five years ago. Last week, a federal judge dismissed one of the three federal lawsuits brought to court by groups on both sides of the issue. The suit had been brought to court by a group against the construction of an eruv in town, the Jewish People for the Betterment of Westhampton, though an appeal is likely.

Although not the first community to divide itself over the prospect of an eruv, the combination of the Hamptons location and the presence of Jews on both sides of the issue has drawn national attention to the small town, with articles in newspapers and magazines and even a segment on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart on the subject.

In court documents and interviews, residents have expressed concern over whether an eruv violates laws against separation of religion and government as well as how an eruv might increase the population of observant Jews who would change the character of the town in ways they don't like.

In the past, attempts to halt construction of eruvim on the grounds that they violate the constitutional rules keeping religion and government separate have been dismissed by courts since no public funds are used to construct the boundaries, and there is no pressure put on anyone to adhere to the rules of observant Jews. That precedent, most prominently set by the case of Tenafly, N.J., will likely play a role in future litigation in Westhampton Village, but there are often deeper feelings of prejudice against observant Jews from citizens and local politicians that create long-lasting tension in a town, regardless of the legal outcome.

[edu]

I agree with muman613. I wll just add, that some members of the Jewish community can't even use the Eruv solution to carry on Shabbat, because in their view it is rare that the Eruvs constructed today can meet all the requirements to make it effective.
In any case, there are also Jews that live outside areas where any type of Eruv is constructed.
However, I will point to a possible unpleasant solution that I see in the (5744-1984 edition) of the English translation of Shemirath Shabbath Kehikchatah page 219

A soldier may, if the need arises in the performance of his security duties, go out into reshuth ha-rabbim wearing a chain with an identification disc (bearing his name, number, blood group and so forth) around his neck.
Subject to the following two conditions, a person is allowed to go out into reshuth harabbim with an identity card or certificate, during the time of war or emergency.
1) It must be carried in an unusual way, for example stuck into one's hat.
2) One must be on one's way to perform a mitzva' for example to prayers or to study Torah.

One however who faces this situation would have to ask however their local Orthodox Rabbi, does the decree of the government mandating wearing ID's define one's situation as being in an emergency.
There might be one other solution within the framework of halacha, but I prefer that someone else offers the solution.

[ChabadKahanist]

I thought of a novel solution:how about boring a hole in the ID card & wearing it as a necklace?
Solves the problem.
Otherwise get the local rabbanim to construct an eiruv.

[Zelhar]

If there is no eruv line then the religious Jews must not carry ID. This law is a violation of civil rights and religious rights and they must act according to their beliefs.

I think the requirement to carry ID is fascist and should be resisted on violation of freedom and civil rights by everyone. I think everyone should deliberately not carry the government ID with him as much as possible.

The law in Israel is similar, we are supposedly obliged to carry ID all the time but it is not enforced. Also in Israel there is eruv line almost everywhere so religious Jews can halachicly carry with them ID.

[ChabadKahanist]

If there is no eruv line then the religious Jews must not carry ID. This law is a violation of civil rights and religious rights and they must act according to their beliefs.

I think the requirement to carry ID is fascist and should be resisted on violation of freedom and civil rights by everyone. I think everyone should deliberately not carry the government ID with him as much as possible.

The law in Israel is similar, we are supposedly obliged to carry ID all the time but it is not enforced. Also in Israel there is eruv line almost everywhere so religious Jews can halachicly carry with them ID.

Nobody carries the teudat zeut on shabbat that I know of

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Wonder what Geert Wilders has to say about this.

[angryChineseKahanist]

But IDs don't use batteries or produce fire.
what's the problem with slipping an ID in their large black coats?

[briann]

What are the laws regarding this in the USA or California?   Ive heard you have to carry an ID, but that law enforcement cannot force you to show your id (since that would be discriminatory against Illegal aliens).

[Mein Koran]

How many Jews are there in Holland? I go there all the time and I don't recall ever seeing any.....

[Zelhar]

But IDs don't use batteries or produce fire.
what's the problem with slipping an ID in their large black coats?

If they carry a personal item from their private domain into the public domain then it's like doing work (carrying some sort of luggage, however small). There are two ways to circumvent this:
1. place some sort of delimiter (a line stretched over poles and it counts as a fence) around the neighborhood or town, so it joins all the inside area into one joint personal domain.
2. Use a shabbos goy to carry their luggage for them.
(Personally I recommend #2 option).

[Super Mentalita]

Wonder what Geert Wilders has to say about this.

Geert Wilders is a hero for the real Jewish people, but i think he will say: law above religion.

[muman613]

But IDs don't use batteries or produce fire.
what's the problem with slipping an ID in their large black coats?

You don't read the thread? My first response answered the question clearly. It has nothing to do with electricity or fire....It has do do with the prohibition of 'carrying'... I reproduced the explanation from Chabad here : http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,67547.msg585306.html#msg585306

[angryChineseKahanist]

what if you sew the ID onto the inside of your large outer coat. That way its part of your coat and you are not actually carrying anything?

[Zelhar]

what if you sew the ID onto the inside of your large outer coat. That way its part of your coat and you are not actually carrying anything?

Are you sure you are not Jewish ?

[muman613]

what if you sew the ID onto the inside of your large outer coat. That way its part of your coat and you are not actually carrying anything?

See Talmud Shabbat 11b which prohibits a Tailor from carrying his needle once Shabbat starts.... The Gemara then goes on to ask what if the tailor sticks the needle into his coat, the opinion seems to fall on the side that this too is prohibited.

http://halakhah.com/shabbath/shabbath_11.html

We learnt: A TAILOR MUST NOT GO OUT WITH HIS NEEDLE NEAR NIGHTFALL, LEST HE FORGET HIMSELF AND GO OUT. Surely that means that it is stuck in his garment?9 — No: it means that he holds it in his hand.10  Come and hear: A tailor must not go out with a needle sticking in his garment. Surely that refers to the eve of Sabbath? — No; that was taught with reference to the Sabbath. But it was taught, A tailor must not go out with a needle sticking in his garment on the eve of the Sabbath just before sunset? — The author of that is R. Judah, who maintained, An artisan is liable [for carrying out an object] in the manner of his trade.11  For it was taught: A tailor must not go out with a needle stuck in his garment, nor a carpenter with a chip behind his ear,12  nor a [wool] corder with the cord in his ear, nor a weaver with the cotton13  in his ear, nor a dyer with a [colour] sample round his neck, nor a money-changer with a denar14  in his ear; and if he does go forth, he is not liable, though it is forbidden: this is R. Meir's view.15  R. Judah said: An artisan is liable [for carrying out an object] in the manner of his trade, but all other people are exempt.

I have not studied this gemara other than to know it exists. It appears this only applies to a artisan carrying his/her tools on Shabbat...

Upon deeper inspect it is possible this may be a solution to the problem because if the action is not 'normally done' this way then it is allowed. But then one could ask if everyone is doing it then it becomes the 'normal' way of doing it...

[angryChineseKahanist]

Are you sure you are not Jewish ?

si senior

[angryChineseKahanist]

But what does an ID have to do with work?
An ID is passive. You can't use it to sew or to make woodwork.

What if you wear glasses or a hearing aid?
What if you have surgically implanted deep-brain stimulators? Batteries for them are surgically implanted in the patient's chest. Not removable.
What if you have a pace maker? You'd be dead if its off.

How do you tell time?

What if you have to wipe your arse?

[muman613]

But what does an ID have to do with work?
An ID is passive. You can't use it to sew or to make woodwork.

What if you wear glasses or a hearing aid?
What if you have surgically implanted deep-brain stimulators? Batteries for them are surgically implanted in the patient's chest. Not removable.
What if you have a pace maker? You'd be dead if its off.

How do you tell time?

What if you have to wipe your arse?

Some of your questions have nothing to do with the Melachot which is the issue 'carrying'.

Here is the answer concerning issues of a wrist-watch:

http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipDate=3/31/2011

Wearing or Winding a Wristwatch on Shabbat

Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in his work Halichot Olam (vol. 4, p. 265), discusses the Halachot concerning watches on Shabbat. He writes that if a person has a watch that runs without batteries, it is permissible to adjust the time of the watch on Shabbat, and also to wind the watch so that it will continue running and not stop. However, if the watch had stopped, then it is forbidden on Shabbat to wind it to restart its operation. Winding a watch that had stopped would constitute “Metaken Mana” (fixing a broken utensil), which is forbidden on Shabbat. As mentioned, however, if the watch is still ticking, then one may wind the dial to prolong its runtime.

By the same token, it is permissible on Shabbat to wear a watch that is operated by the movement of one’s hands. Since the watch is already running, one may wear and walk around with the watch even though every movement he makes with his hand has the effect of extending the watch’s runtime.

It is forbidden, however, to adjust a battery operated watch on Shabbat, since this entails discontinuing and then restarting the watch’s mechanism, which runs on electricity. Battery-operated watches may be worn on Shabbat, and we do not consider the watch a “Bassis” (“base”) to the battery such that it should be considered Mukse. Even if the watch has buttons that perform certain electric functions, such as a button to illuminate the screen, it is permissible to wear the watch on Shabbat. Hacham Ovadia writes that we cannot legislate a new prohibition against wearing such watches out of concern that one may press the buttons. Thus, it is permissible to wear a battery-operated watch, though it is forbidden to press the buttons or to adjust the time.

Summary: It is permissible to adjust the time on a watch that does not run on batteries. One may wind such a watch to prolong its runtime, but not if it had stopped running. A battery-operated watch may be worn on Shabbat, but it is forbidden to press any of the buttons or to adjust the time.

Regarding a pacemaker or other electronic device used to prolong life... Of course Pikuach Nefesh (saving a life) over-rides any prohibition on Shabbat. Thus even driving is permitted if it will save a Jewish life.

Regarding the question of glasses, I found the following discussion:

http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=549

It is commonly assumed that one may wear eyeglasses outdoors on Shabbat, even in an area that is not surrounded by an Erub, and that this does not constitute “carrying” on Shabbat. Interestingly enough, however, the Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) wrote that it is forbidden to wear eyeglasses in a place without an Erub on Shabbat. It seems that the Mishna Berura was referring to different kinds of eyeglasses than the ones normally worn today. He spoke of lenses in a frame without earpieces, which just sat on the nose. Because these lenses were not securely fastened to the face, the concern arose that one may remove them, and the Mishna Berura therefore forbade wearing them in a public domain on Shabbat. Today’s eyeglasses, of course, have earpieces that ensure that they are worn securely on the face, and there is thus no concern that one may remove them. Therefore, according to the vast majority of recent and contemporary Poskim, it is permissible to wear eyeglasses in a public domain on Shabbat, though it is, of course, forbidden to remove them in a place without an Erub.

Hacham Ovadia Yosef similarly allows wearing sunglasses outdoors on Shabbat, as we are not concerned that one will remove them. Once again, it is certainly forbidden to remove sunglasses on Shabbat in a place without an Erub.

Is it permissible to wear goulashes over one’s shoes in a public domain on Shabbat?

Rav Moshe Feinstein (Russia-New York, 1895-1986) addresses this question in his Iggerot Moshe, and rules that it is permissible to wear goulashes in a place without an Erub on Shabbat. He explains that although goulashes are worn over one’s shoes, they are nevertheless considered a garment, since they provide additional warmth and prevent the feet from getting wet. Therefore, they may be worn on Shabbat in a public domain, just as Halacha permits wearing any garment in a public domain on Shabbat, and does not consider a person to be “carrying” the garment. However, this applies only to fitted goulashes. If the goulashes are not properly fitted, then one might remove and carry them in the public domain, in violation of Shabbat. Fitted goulashes, however, may be worn on Shabbat, as discussed. This is also the ruling of the Aruch Ha’shulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein of Nevarduk, 1829-1908).

Summary: It is permissible to wear eyeglasses and sunglasses outdoors on Shabbat in a place without an Erub, unless the eyeglasses do not have earpieces and simply rest on the nose. Of course, one may not remove one’s glasses outdoors on Shabbat in a place without an Erub. One may wear fitted goulashes outdoors on Shabbat; goulashes that are not fitted should not be worn outdoors on Shabbat in a place without an Erub.

[muman613]

And once again the concept of Pikauch Nefesh (saving a life) explained:

http://m.chabad.org/m/article_cdo/aid/1113745

When treating on Shabbat a patient who is critically ill, or when dealing with an individual whose life is in danger – known in Hebrew as pikuach nefesh – one is commanded to "violate" the Shabbat. This applies even if there's a doubt whether it is – or could evolve into – a life threatening situation.

Even if retroactively it becomes clear that the act was unnecessary, or didn't accomplish its goal, it is not considered a desecration of the Shabbat, and the individual who acted receives reward for attempting to save a life.

In all these matters, if one is in doubt about the correct mode of behavior, it is better to err on the side of violating the Shabbat, rather than potentially putting a life in danger.

One who is faced with a situation that might be construed as a matter of pikuach nefesh, and goes to consults with a rabbi about the situation is considered a murderer₁—because due to his excessive "piety," and the resultant delay in implementing the proper measures, he might be endangering a life. And the rabbi who is asked is disgraceful—because he should have taught his community the proper manner of action when dealing with pikuach nefesh, i.e., to take action without delay.₂

When it is necessary for the sake of pikuach nefesh to disregard the Shabbat laws, it does not matter who violates the Shabbat; the one who's able to perform the task most quickly should do so, and whoever does so is praiseworthy.

If there are several people who can attend to the endangered individual, it is preferable that the Shabbat "desecration" be done by the greatest Torah-scholar and the most pious person present. When a sage attends to pikuach nefesh it serves as a lesson as to the immense privilege it is to save a life.₃ Needless to say, one may not seek to be "ultra-religious" by asking a gentile to desecrate the Shabbat for the sake of pikuach nefesh.₄

Some more details:

* Any procedure which is necessary to perform for the patient, but it is clear that it does not at all need to be performed on Shabbat, should be delayed until after Shabbat.₅

* If a person is ill before Shabbat and he will need care on Shabbat that will include acts forbidden on Shabbat, one should prepare whatever possible before Shabbat to minimize or eliminate the need to desecrate the Shabbat.₆

* In order to desecrate the Shabbat, one must be convinced that there is at least a certain measure of doubt that the case involves pikuach nefesh.₇ In situations where during the week people do not react with a sense of immediate urgency, one may not desecrate Shabbat.₈

* One may only disregard the Shabbat laws when there is an existing situation that might involve pikuach nefesh; e.g., an elderly patient fell and needs to be rushed to the hospital.

* The laws of Shabbat may also be violated in anticipation of a potential life-threatening situation, provided that it is highly reasonable to assume that indeed it is an immediate concern.₉ Example: If the machines in an intensive care unit are not functioning, they must be fixed on Shabbat even if at the moment there is no knowledge of a patient requiring life-support.

* That said, far-fetched hypotheses such as "I need to travel on Shabbat to university to pursue my medical studies, since one day I'll save lives with my medical expertise," or, "I need to go shopping for a sweater on Shabbat because it's supposed to be cold and I might catch pneumonia and die..." do not qualify as pikuach nefesh. ₁₀

* Elective operations, or other elective procedures warranting a stay in a hospital, should not be scheduled for the second half of the week (i.e., Tuesday night and on).₁₁

* Community-wide risks and concerns are determined using broader parameters of pikuach nefesh. Consequently, Jewish ambulance volunteers might be permitted to carry their radios on Shabbat. Likewise, security patrols in Israel might not required to wait until they hear about a terrorist attack in order to operate metal detectors in public places (an expert rabbi should be consulted in cases such as these).


FOOTNOTES
1.   Jerusalem Talmud, Yoma 8:5.

2.   Ibid., as explained in Terumat Hadeshen 1:58.

3.   Taz on Orach Chaim 328:5.

4.   A woman in childbirth is an exception to this rule. Though childbirth is generally considered a situation of pikuach nefesh, one should, wherever possible, use a gentile when it is necessary to disregard a Shabbat law.

5.   Code of Jewish Law, Orach Chaim 328:4.

6.   Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Orach Chaim 330:3; Chatam Sofer, Yoreh De'ah 338 s.v. gam ma; cf. Igrot Moshe OC:I 131; Shemirat Shabbat Khilchato ch. 32 fn. 104;

7.   Responsa Rabbi Akiva Eger 60.

8.   Shulchan Shlomo, Refuah I pg. 231.

9.   Chazon Ish, Ohalot 22: 32.

10.   See Pitchei Teshuvah YD 363:5.

11.   Likutei Sichot XVI pg. 518 ff. Cf. Shemirat Shabbat K'Hilchata 32:33; Igrot Moshe OC I:127.

[angryChineseKahanist]

So if my glasses are already on, I can walk around with them. I just can't remove and replace them.
What if the nose piece is wearing down on my nose bridge and I have to de-oil my skin or it itches like hell and I have to scratch?


I'm so glad you are allowed to wear glasses otherwise you would end up like this:

http://cdn.ebaumsworld.com/thumbs/2012/11/30/024826/82939460/pole.jpg

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

http://www.yourjewishnews.com/2013/02/25946.html#.US1zDv2-LCk.facebook

allright people, what do you think of this? We in Holland all have to carry our ID with us, just like in a lot of other country's. Who is agree with me that also Jews have to carry there ID on Shabbat, same as every other Dutch citizen has to carry it with them? PS: I'am not supporting this ID obligation, but i think we are all equal.

I don't believe that your comment was written in English.   Please try again.