The
argument: Reb Shlomo Zalman Auerbach who was himself one of
greatest geonim of our times said Reb Moshe is in another league completely
than all other contemporary poskim. Reb Moshe could finish the entire mesechta
Zevachim on a Friday night after the meal. I saw this myself; I was by him
several times.
The
rebuttal: This is irrelevant. No one is arguing about the gadlus
of Rav Moshe. The issue is if we follow
all of Rav Moshe’s piskei halacha. Rav Shlomo Zalman zt”l was not always
in agreement with Rav Moshe’s piskei halacha. Even regarding the
criterion of shishim ribo, Rav Shlomo Zalman did not agree with Rav
Moshe since it is apparent that he maintained that the criterion is conditional
of the street (Minchas Shlomo, 2:35:19). Moreover, Chabad does not
follow all of Rav Moshe’s piskei halacha. Why should eruvin be
different?
The
argument: If someone were to build a proper tzuras hapesach (wire eruv)
around a reshus harabim it is only an issur drabanan to carry there (according
to some opinions, while others say that it remains an issur d’orasia – Tzemach
Tzedek Chidushim Eiruvin and Shut Divrei Nechemya 23). However, to make a
proper tzuras hapesach you must know the halachos of eruvin well and you need
to check the eruv properly. You cannot just check from a car, you have to walk
by foot around the entire Crown Heights (not a short distance). You have to
check every single inch of the way to make sure everything is in place. No one
is giving testimony that this was done or by whom.
The
rebuttal: According to some opinions? This is simply misleading.
There is no doubt that the Alter Rebbe maintained that once a tzuras
hapesach was established the issue was only a matter of a d’rabbanan.
To mention here that it is only according to some opinions is inexcusable.
The Divrei
Nechemya’s question if the Alter Rebbe actually maintains that a tzuras
hapesach is sufficient on a d’Oraysa level is mitigated by the fact
that the Tzemach Tzedek clearly understood that his grandfather upheld
as such (Chiddushim, Eruvin, {perek 2:4 and} 59a).[6]
[Moreover, the Divrei Nechemya only mentions that he was not sure about the
Alter Rebbe’s stance and acknowledged that he said it without fully examining
the issue, therefore the Tzemach Tzedek’s testimony definitely stands.]
That the Tzemach
Tzedek in the end argued that a yorei shomayim should be stringent and
not rely on this shita of the Alter Rebbe does not change the fact that
the Alter Rebbe wrote in his Shulchan Aruch, without any qualifiers, that
a tzuras hapesach is sufficient on a d’Oraysa level. Moreover, we
know today that many Rishonim and most Achronim agree with this shita
of the Alter Rebbe. [Furthermore, the Tzemach Tzedek would not classify
Brooklyn as a reshus harabbim since no street is mefulash
u’mechavanim to a sratya and a platya, and that Brooklyn is
encompassed on three of its sides by mechitzos b’ydai adam.]
Rav Heller’s
further declarations regarding checking an eruv on foot, is simply
unsupported.
The
argument: Even if great poskim would come and say that an eruv can
be built, Anash are bound by the psak of Alter Rebbe and the Tzemach Tzedek.
It’s not enough to say that the Rebbe said not to build, even though that it’s
completely true, because they could answer that they’re not so mekushar to
follow every hora’a of the Rebbe.
The
rebuttal: Anash can rely on the following three
reasons why Brooklyn would not be classified as a reshus harabbim: 1) Brooklyn would not
be classified as a reshus harabbim since there is no street where
600,000 people traverse any section of it on a daily basis.
2) Even if one does
not agree that the criterion of shishim ribo is conditional of a street,
no part of Brooklyn would be classified as a reshus harabbim since there
is no street that is mefulash u’mechuvan on one side to a platya
and on the other side to a sratya.
3) Even if one would
argue that the criterion of mefulash is only conditional of a walled
city and that the criterion of shishim ribo is conditional of a city, nevertheless,
the entire borough would be classified as a reshus hayachid me’d’Oraysa since
the streets are encompassed (on four sides) by mechitzos habbatim, and,
moreover, the borough is bounded on three of its sides by mechitzos
which are omed merubeh al haparutz.
Furthermore, even if
one would allege that according to some poskim the above criteria would
not remove from Brooklyn the classification of a reshus harabbim,
nevertheless, they would have to agree that each issue is still at the very
minimum a safek. Consequentially, we are dealing with a sfek sfek
sfeika, and we would therefore go l’kula even if the matter was a d’Oraysa.[7]
How much more so, according to the Alter Rebbe, once a tzuras hapesach
was established the issue would not be a matter of a d’Oraysa only of a d’rabbanan.
[6] Furthermore, it would
be a strange dichotomy; some of the greatest Polish and Hungarian poskim
[Avnei Nezer, O.C. 283:2, C.M. 107; Prei HaSadeh,
2:81; Zichron Yosef, siman 274, and Mahari Stief, siman
68; see also Kaf HaChaim, O.C. 364:12] made use of the Alter
Rebbe’s shita that a tzuras hapesach is sufficient on a d’Oraysa
level but in Chabad they understood otherwise.
[7] The Tzemach Tzedek states (Eruvin,
5:6) that since shitas Rashi was not accepted by most of the Rishonim
and most poskim do not agree that a tzuras hapesach would
reclassify a reshus harabbim as a reshus hayachid, a yorei
shomayim should not employ these criteria. However, as I mentioned
previously, the Rebbe assumed that we do rely on the criterion of shishim
ribo. Moreover, today we know of additional Rishonim and
that most Achronim maintain that a tzuras hapesach would
reclassify a reshus harabbim as a reshus hayachid. Consequently,
there is no reason not to enact these criteria as a sfek sfeka.
Furthermore, the Tzemach
Tzedek would classify Brooklyn as a reshus hayachid because the
streets are not mefulash u’mechavanim on one side to a sratya and
on the other side to a platya. Moreover, even if one would argue that
the Tzemach Tzedek would categorize our streets as sratyas and platyas,
the fact that the borough is encompassed by mechitzos which are omed
merubeh al haparutz would classify the city as walled and the Tzemach
Tzedek would definitely require the streets to be mefulash u’mechavanim,
as well.
Consequently,
even if one would argue that these criteria are not
applicable, they would have to admit that, at the minimum, the Tzemach
Tzedek would accept that these issues are a sfek sfek sfeika, and
thus, even (on requirements me'd'rabanan) a yorei shomayim can rely on the fact that Brooklyn would not
be classified as a reshus harabbim.
No comments:
Post a Comment