Monday, September 28, 2020

Part 24: REBUTTAL TO THE LAWS OF AN ERUV

The Sefer – Page 60 (continued):

Private roads and roads less than sixteen amos wide

Occasionally, in housing complexes there are private roads that are only open to members of that particular complex and their guests. Such roads are similar to the muvaos in the time of Chazal and may be enclosed with an eruv according to all opinions.  Similarly, alleyways within the public street system usually serve only local traffic, and they may be enclosed with an eruv according to all opinions. There may be rare instances where a mavoi too can become a reshus harabim if the public traffic uses the mavoi as a shortcut. A city street that is less than sixteen amos wide is not a reshus harabim according to all opinions.  

Rebuttal: This is obvious and does not require commentary.

 

The Sefer – Page 60 (continued):

There is a question, however, whether the space where the cars park in the street can count towards the required sixteen amos.(55)

Footnote 55:

כך שמענו ממו״ר הגר״ד צוקער שליט״א ומהגר״ש מילר שליט״א שמקום שחונים שם ה cars אינם בכלל הט״ז אמה. אבל שמענו מהגר״י בלסקי ומתלמידים אחרים שלדעת הגר״מ פיינשטיין זצ״ל הכל נעשה לצורך ההילוך של הרבים ונחשבים כחלק של הרה״ר.

Rebuttal: I am impressed that the authors would mention this machlokes, but I think that the authors should have mentioned a more essential disagreement, if we include the occupants of a vehicle in the tally of the shishim ribo.

Many don’t realize that most poskim maintain that the occupants of a vehicle are not tallied in the shishim ribo (Bais Ephraim, O.C. 26; Maharsham, 1:162; Yeshuos Malko, siman 26-27; Harei B’samim, 5:73; Bais Av, 2:9:3; Mahari Stief, siman 68; Satmar Rav, Kuntres Meoz U’Mekedem p. 27; Divrei Yatziv, 2:172:13; V’yaan Yoseph, 1:155:1; Kuntres Tikkun Eruvin Manhattan, siman 12 p. 105; Kinyan Torah, 4:40:6, and Rabbi Eliezer Y. Waldenberg zt”l, author of the Tzitz Eliezer, as cited in The Contemporary Eruv, 2002 p. 54 note 119). The reason is either because a vehicle itself is considered a reshus hayachid and therefore its occupants are not incorporated in the count or because we only include pedestrians (holchei regel) who traverse the street in the tally.

It is important to note that the concept that only holchei regel creates a reshus harabbim is already mentioned in the Rishonim (Or Zarua, Hilchos Erev Shabbos siman 4, and Rabbeinu Avraham ben HaRambam in Birchas Avraham, siman 15).

However, I must say that I am pleased to hear that Rav Zucker shlita and Rav Miller shlita maintain that the space that parked cars occupy is not included in the width of the criterion of sixteen amos. I would add that Rav Yaakov Blau zt”l mentions this argument as well (Nesivos Shabbos, Perek 3 note 2). Regarding Rav Moshe, if the authors would have learnt through Rav Moshe’s teshuvos, they would have realized that there is no need to quote what others have to say in his name. Rav Moshe wrote himself in Igros Moshe, O.C. 5:28:8 that cars do not minimize the criterion of sixteen amos.

 

The Sefer Page 60 (continued):

Application: One would like to make an eruv using tzuros hapesach on the side street in front of his house. If the street is less than sixteen amos wide, such an eruv may be possible; as above, it is questionable if the parking spots are measured as part of the sixteen amos needed to create reshus harabim. If the streets are wider than sixteen amos, than a ba’al nefesh should avoid using such an eruv.

Rebuttal: No, a Baal Nefesh can rely on our eruvin, either because we uphold the criterion of mefulash u’mecahvanim or the criterion of shishim ribo l’chatchilah. Moreover, once a tzuras hapesach is established, the issue of delasos is only d’rabbanan, and then there is no doubt that we can rely on the criterion of shishim ribo to remove this proscription. Moreover, many cities can rely on mechitzos, in which case the encompassed area is classified as a reshus hayachid.  

 

The Sefer – Page 60 (continued):

 However, there is basis to be lenient, even if the city has a population of 600,000.

Rebuttal: It is not a leniency to rely on the criterion of shishim ribo; it is halachah p’suka. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of poskim maintain that the criterion is not conditional of the population of the city, but only of 600,000 people actually traversing the street.

 

The Sefer – Page 60 (continued):

If however, the density of the city is such that 3,000,000 are present in an area twelve mil by twelve mil, Hagaon Rav Moshe considers every street a reshus harabim, and an eruv should not be made. In general an eruv should never be attempted on a street or sidewalk without the guidance of an expert in the topic of eruvin.

Rebuttal: In most cities there is no 8.1 by 8.1 mile area encompassing a population even close to three million; no doubt, Rav Moshe would allow an eruv anywhere in these cities. Moreover, Rav Moshe would allow most city eruvin if they are making use of mechitzos (see Section One, 3:2). 

No comments:

PART 3: THE TRUTH REGARDING THE STAMFORD HILL ERUV

Their argument: But the Mishnah Berurah argues that most poskim uphold asu rabbim u’mevatlei mechitzta , so according to most poskim the...