Vandalism in Tottanham

To all my readers from Stamford Hill: Regarding the vandalism that occurred this week, realize that the only answer is to expand the eruv to include the entire neighborhood. Approximately twenty years ago in Boro Park, the eruv only included part of the neighborhood, and we experienced similar issues with vandalism.  At that point, Rav Ephraim Fishel Hershkowitz zt”l implored Rav Chaim Leib Katz shlita, the Rav HaMachsher, to include the entire Boro Park within the eruv. When an eruv belongs to an entire community, it is more difficult to defend vandalism.   

Above all, do not be deceived by the arguments presented by yungerleit claiming that only the Tottanham neighborhood can be enclosed. They claim that the world follows the Bais Ephraim who maintains that in a situation of three mechitzos (as opposed to pasei bira’os) pirtzos esser is on a d’Oraysa level.  Accordingly, since only Tottenham can be encircled without including any pirtzos esser, the other neighboring areas are classified as a reshus harabbim and no eruv can be erected therein.

This dear readers is shtusim. The Bais Ephraim does not make this distinction; they invented this argument in order to negate eruvin at all cost, and it illuminates their desperation. The Bais Ephraim clearly maintains that lo asu rabbim u’mevatlei mechitzta even of three mechitzos as can be determined from his diagrams. While there are some questions as to how he explains certain issues (and I can explain all of them away), this cannot change the fact that the Bais Ephraim’s second diagram clearly says otherwise. As to pirtzos esser being on a d’Oraysa level in a situation of three mechitzos, the entire teshuvah of the Bais Ephraim demonstrates otherwise. In essence, they are arguing that the only reason the Bais Ephraim allows pasei bira’os [an enclosure consisting of four two-sided posts of at least an amah wide in each direction forming the corners of a square] to delimit a reshus harabbim is because then even pirtzos esser would be allowed. However, in a situation of omed merubeh of three mechitzos, we say that pirtzos esser is on a d’Oraysa level and turzas hapesachim would not suffice, when in fact the Bais Epharim argues that the reason he requires pasei bira’os is because otherwise asu rabbim u’mevatlei mechitzta (I realize that this is a very complicated inyan, and I hope to write about this at length in the future). It’s about time these yungerleit stop inventing new objections to our eruvin.

There is no reason whatsoever not to include additional neighborhoods in the eruv. It is simply punishing the rest of the community and midas Sidom.