Tuesday, October 13, 2020

Part 31: REBUTTAL TO THE LAWS OF AN ERUV

Encounters:

3. משתמש לששים רבוא - 600,000 utilizing the street

This opinion reckons each street on its own, and requires 600,000 on the single street. It does not require that each of the 600,000 individuals actually use the street every day, and as long as there 600,000 people, each of whom use the street occasionally, it is considered a reshus harabim. This arguably includes many of the main streets in large cities. The Mishnah Berurah and many contemporary poskim are machmir based on this view.

Rebuttal: There is almost no posek who maintains that it would be sufficient if 600,000 people would only traverse the street on occasion. It is illogical to argue that the population of a city reflects the number of people who can make use of any street. Many people who live in one section of a city do not utilize the main streets in other sections of their city, so why should they be included in the tally of all the main streets of the city? As the Maharsham argued (3:188), if the criterion of shishim ribo includes even those who occasionally use the street, how do we apply limits on the amount of time needed to fulfill the criterion. To label a street as a reshus harabbim, the criterion of shishim ribo requires that there be 600,000 people traversing the street at least on some/many days of the year. Hence, there is almost no street, even in large cities, that would be classified as a reshus harabbim.

The authors are conflating the issues regarding the Mishnah Berurah. First of all, we do not know if the Mishnah Berurah accepted these alternative conditions of the criterion of shishim ribo. The Mishnah Berurah only states that we need to study these alternative conditions l’halachah, and he does not say that we should follow these opinions. In fact, the Mishnah Berurah (Shaar HaTziyun, 345:25) clearly maintains that shishim ribo is dependent on the street and not the city [the Mishnah Berurah indicates this by the usage of the phrase, “derech hamavoi hamefulash”].

In any case, as mentioned previously, the Mishnah Berurah is following the Mishkenos Yaakov who has an unusual understanding of these Rishonim, and the Bais Ephraim strongly objected to his reading of these Rishonim.  We follow the Bais Ephraim regarding eruvin. Furthermore, today the kisvei yados of these Rishonim have been published, and we have their entire statements regarding the inyan (and not just what is quoted in their name), and they demonstrate that the Bais Ephraim was definitely correct.          

 

Encounters:

4. The Opinion of R' Moshe Feinstein - 3 million In the city

R' Moshe Feinstein  views the entire grid of streets throughout the entire city as one collective reshus harabim, and theoretically the collective volume of 600,000 people would make every public street into a reshus harabim (similar to the second abovementioned opinion). However, R' Moshe adds two significant leniencies. First, he limits the size of the city to 12 by 12 mil, approximately eight by eight miles. Secondly, he requires that all 600,000 people be present on the streets at the same time. R' Moshe determined that if there is a total population of 3 million people (within eight by eight miles), then we are to assume that there will be 600,000 present in the streets during high traffic moments. However, since the primary criterion is the presence of 600,000 on the roads, business districts that have commuters who use the roads within the 12 by 12 mil square, must count the commuters as well.

R' Moshe's opinion results in both a kula and a chumra. In the larger cities, it results in a stringency that all streets are forbidden, not just the main roads. On the other hand, in the cities that don't reach this threshold, R' Moshe would allow an eruv even on the streets that service 600,000 people, as long as they do not use the street every day, while most other poskim would be machmir on such streets.

Rebuttal: Mostly this is an accurate observation of Rav Moshe’s shitos (I have a few quibbles, but they are not essential). However, the authors are not being forthright regarding Rav Moshe’s shitos resulting in kulos. Rav Moshe wrote that his understanding of the criterion of shishim ribo is a chiddush since the simple understanding of the Shulchan Aruch is that the criterion of shishim ribo is conditional of the street. Hence, the litmus test if Rav Moshe’s methods result in kulos would be to judge it against his shitos’ counterpart, namely that shishim ribo is conditional of the street. Undoubtedly, Rav Moshe would be considered a machmir. Moreover, the entire premise is misleading since there is no shita (besides for the Mishkenos Yaakov who is a daas yachid) that upholds servicing a road is sufficient to label a street as a reshus harabbim (if the street never had shishim ribo traversing it within a day and at the minimum on occasion).  Hence, to label any part of Rav Moshe’s shitos as a kula is not being honest since Rav Moshe’s entire approach is a chumra. [One thing is for sure, it is not, “most other poskim (who) would be machmir on such streets,” since it is at the most only one or two poskim of repute that entertain this concept that it is sufficient to classify a street as a reshus hrabbim if the streets only service 600,000 people.]       


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...