Part 30: REBUTTAL TO THE LAWS OF AN ERUV

Encounters:

How to Calculate the 600,000

1.  - ששים רבוא בכל יוםa street which is traversed by 600,000 people every day

According to this opinion, there must be 600,000 people using the street every day. That is equivalent to 7 people every second for 24 hours straight. Considering that the typical commuter travels both directions each day, this would require 14 commuters per second. Some poskim strongly object to this opinion, as it is unlikely that such a significant condition exists without much of a hint from the Gemara. Nevertheless, there are strong sources for this opinion, and it is fairly accepted that any street without this traffic volume is at worst a safek reshus harabim, a questionable reshus harabim. According to this view, aside from Times Square (worthy of a separate discussion), there may very likely not be any reshus harabim in America.

Rebuttal:  The authors are purposefully conflating the issues. The poskim (Rishonim) who strongly object to the fundament of shishim ribo because it is not mentioned in the Gemara are those who oppose the criterion of shishim ribo altogether. Those who make these arguments that it would take an improbable number of commuters per second to attain 600,000 people are not poskim but only yungerleit, and their contention does not hold water. In fact, the improbability of ever fulfilling the criterion of shishim ribo is why those Rishonim who uphold the fundament argue that there is no reshus harabbim today. This ignorant argument is in essence questioning the Rishonim who posit that there is no reshus harabbim anymore. In fact, the authors admit (see their sefer, pp. 56-57, notes 42-43) that the pashtus of many Rishonim and the Shulchan Aruch is that the criterion of shishim ribo requires that they actually traverse the street (they only question if the requirement would be daily). The authors should stop and think for a moment who are they questioning, the Rishonim and the simple reading of the Shulchan Aruch?

[Moreover, the authors’ specific argument, “Considering that the typical commuter travels both directions each day,” hence, we would need additional commuters to meet the criterion of shishim ribo (since we do not count the same people twice) is specious. As I mentioned in Part Two (see my rebuttal of note 42), people take more than one step per second. Hence, it is conceivable to attain shishim ribo traversing the street in half the time the authors realize, and it is a real possibility. Additionally, a road that can possibly support this volume of commuters would not necessarily have them travel in both directions on the same sixteen amos (hence, it would be possible to have shishim ribo traversing a road even if we would only once tally those commuters traveling multiple times on the road daily).]

 

Encounters:

2.עיר שיש בו ששים רבוא  - a city which has 600,000

This opinion is based on the simple reading of Rashi in Eruvin which states that a reshus harabim is a city that has 600,000 people. According to this understanding, the entire grid of streets is one domain and will collectively form a public domain encompassing all the streets. While in Europe most cities were smaller, in America many cities have more than 600,000 residents. R' Elyashiv followed this opinion and did not sanction eruvin in any big city.

Rebuttal: As I mentioned previously, Rashi (Eruvin 59b) is informing us as to how cities were planned. Cities in the past had a main road which all residents used to enter and exit the city (because most cities were walled), and this thoroughfare was the reshus harabbim of the city. Therefore, when Rashi and the Rishonim who follow him use the word city in reference to shishim ribo, they are not signifying that the criterion is conditional on a city but only that the main thoroughfare in a city containing shishim ribo would be classified as a reshus harabbim if it is actually traversed by its entire population.

Following this since the populace of today’s cities — because they are not walled — make use of many thoroughfares, it is not a given that the main arteries are actually traversed by its entire population. Consequentially, even if a city contains a population of shishim ribo, it is almost certain that no street would be classified as a reshus harabbim since they are not traversed by the city’s entire populace.

Furthermore, even though Rashi mentions city, he cannot be supposing that the criterion is conditional of the city. The Gemara (Shabbos, 6a) cites a Tosefta stating that there are three areas which are categorized as a reshus harabbim: sratya [an intercity road], platya [marketplace], and mavo’os hamefulashim [alleyways that open into the sratyas and platyas]. Nowhere in the Gemara do we see that a city is an area classified as a reshus harabbim.

I reiterate, there were cities in pre-war Europe that contained a population greater than shishim ribo, and the townspeople availed themselves of their eruvin. 

As I mentioned, Rav Elyashiv zt”l (in his sefer Ha’aros, on Maseches Shabbos, 6b) advanced numerous reasons why Yerushalayim does not fulfill the criterion of shishim ribo (e.g. we require that the shishim ribo traverse its confines the entire day, that we do not include in the tally non-residents, women, children, infirm, and non-Jews). Consequently, it is possible that Rav Elyashiv would agree that most large cities do not fulfill the criterion of shishim ribo, and an eruv of tzuras hapesachim can be established. Additionally, most cities can make use of mechitzos omed merubeh al haparutz, and Rav Elyashiv would definitely allow these eruvin.