Wednesday, September 09, 2020

Part 9: REBUTTAL TO THE LAWS OF AN ERUV

 3:1 - According to Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l – The criterion of shishim ribo

While, according to Rav Moshe zt”l, we would not be able to rely on the criterion of mefulash u’mechavanim, there is no doubt that he would allow that we can rely on the fundament of shishim ribo.

 Let’s explore Rav Moshe’s shitos regarding the criterion of shishim ribo:

Like most poskim, Rav Moshe originally maintained (Igros Moshe, O.C. 1:109) that the criterion of shishim ribo was dependent on the street having shishim ribo traversing it. However, later (ibid., 1:139:5) he formulated his chiddush in which shishim ribo, when applied to a city, was not dependent on a street but over a twelve mil by twelve mil area [approximately 8.1 by 8.1 square miles]. Rav Moshe added that the criterion of shishim ribo ovrim bo would require a sizable population living and commuting into the twelve mil by twelve mil area so that it could physically satisfy the condition of 600,000 people collectively traversing its streets. When these criteria are met, the area would be classified as a reshus harabbim and a tzuras hapesach would not be adequate; delasos at the pirtzos would be needed. However, at this time, Rav Moshe did not quantify how many people would be required to live in this twelve mil by twelve mil area.

In the first teshuvah quantifying how many people would be required to live in this twelve mil by twelve mil area, Rav Moshe stated (ibid., 4:87) that since, historically, eruvin had been erected in cities with populations exceeding shishim ribo, one could not classify a city as a reshus harabbim solely on the basis of the existence of a population of 600,000. He then added that, although the actual number of inhabitants could possibly vary according to the city, in Brooklyn, it would most likely require four to five times shishim ribo. In the final two teshuvos which followed regarding Brooklyn, we see that Rav Moshe codified his chiddush that the requirement is, "just about three million people," (ibid., 5:28:5) or, "at least five times shishim ribo," (ibid., 5:29) which could amount to even more than three million people. Consequently, in the Chicago eruv pamphlet (West Rogers Park Eruv, 1993 p. 23), it is stated that Rav Dovid Feinstein shlita was in agreement that according to his father's shitah there must be a minimum of three million people in order for the city to be defined as a reshus harabbim.

It’s important to note that Rav Moshe maintained the above regarding shsihim ribo only as it applied to a city. However, with regard to a sratya [intercity road], Rav Moshe stated (Igros Moshe, O.C. 1:139:5, 4:87, 5:28:16) that the shishim ribo would need to traverse a particular section of the road on a daily basis to be classified as a reshus harabbim.

In most cities, since 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 consisting of tzuras hapesachim anywhere in these cities.

3:2 - According to Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l – Mechitzos

Rav Moshe states regarding Manhattan (ibid., 1:139, and referenced in 5:28:5), that the bridges leading from the city ― which were open along their sides and hence not enclosed by three mechitzos ― would possibly, according to his opinion, need to be rectified with delasos. Nevertheless, Rav Moshe states clearly (ibid., the end of anaf gimmel) that if the tzuras hapesach is erected in a reshus hayachid [in Manhattan proper which is encompassed by more than three mechitzos, as opposed to the bridges which are not], it is sufficient, and delasos would not be required.[32]

Many cities can establish their tzuras hapesachim in an area that is encompassed by three mechitzos [such as mechitzos habatim[33]], a reshus hayachid, and delasos would not be required according to Rav Moshe and the overwhelming majority of poskim.



[32] Regarding Manhattan, Rav Moshe stated that, based on additional shitos yechidaos (shitas HaRashbah regarding platyas and Rabeinu Ephraim), even with mechitzos and delasos at the pirtzos, Manhattan would not have been classified as a reshus hayachid (Igros Moshe, O.C. 1:39:5-6).

However, Rav Moshe only utilized these shitos in conjunction with his chiddush regarding delasos [on the bridges] to nullify the benefit the mechitzos encompassing Manhattan would have provided (ibid., 1:39:6). Therefore, since Rav Moshe concurred that delasos are not necessary when a tzuras hapesach is established in a reshus hayachid, there is no question that Rav Moshe would have allowed eruvin in these situations, and would not have been concerned about these other shitos yechidaos [even more so, we do not have be concerned with shitas HaRashbah, since we usually do not have any platyas today; see note 13].

[33] However, Rav Moshe did not agree to the chiddush of the Chazon Ish that the omed creates a mechitzah (as understood by most people, however see Section Four), and would usually classify the entire city as a reshus hayachid, even if only one street was enclosed by three mechitzos which few city eruvin would need to rely on, since they can make use of three mechitzos habatim for every street.


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...