Part 2: THE TRUTH REGARDING RT. 9 AND AN ERUV IN LAKEWOOD

What classifies a road as a sratya

The Rishonim, when discussing the classification of a sratya as a reshus harabbim, clearly maintain that it is an intercity road, which is not included in the city.[3] Therefore, most roads running through a city are clearly not categorized as sratyas. 

However, the question arises regarding the classification of the segment of a sratya that continues through the town itself. Do we consider this section as a continuation of the intercity road, and hence, halachically, it would be comparable to a sratya that runs out of the city limits [and for it to be classified as a reshus harrabim, the segment would not need to fulfil all of its criteria]? Or, is it that since this segment is part of the city proper, its halachic classification would be equivalent to the cities mavo’os [and it would need to fulfil all criteria of a reshus harabbim to be labeled as such]?

 

Does the segment of a sratya that continues through the town itself need to fulfil all criterion of a reshus harabbim

The above issue can be resolved by perusing Rashi. In fact, regarding Yerushalayim and Mechuza, Rashi (Eruvin, 6b) upholds that any road included in these cities, even the central road that connects the intercity roads/sratya, would need to satisfy all the criteria of a reshus harabbim. Hence, the Ramban [see introduction] and the few Achronim who follow him would no doubt allow that even according to Rashi the section of a sratya running through the city would need to fulfil all criterion of a reshus harabbim.

Likewise, those Achronim , (the Bais Ephraim and Avnei Nezer), who refer to a sratya as being included in a city maintain that it would need to satisfy all criteria of a reshus harabbim.      

Hence, it is irrelevant how we classify the segment of the intercity road running through the city as it would, according to the Rishonim and Achronim, need to fulfill all criterion of a reshus harabbim. 

Moreover, the overwhelming majority of Rishonim[4] and Achronim disagree with the Ramban and maintain that there is no difference between roads inside the city and those that are outside of the city. Both would need to fulfill the criterion of shishim ribo to be classified as a reshus harabbim.

The Rama (357:3) maintains that a sratya even outside of a city requires shishim ribo to be classified as a reshus harabbim. We, Benei Ashkenaz, follow the Rama. The overwhelming majority of poskim uphold the Rama’s opinion, so there is no doubt that we rule leniently in this matter. Consequently, there is no doubt that any part of a road that could possibly be classified as a sratya would need to fulfil at least the criterion of shishim ribo to be categorized as a reshus harabbim.  

 However, as demonstrated above from Rashi, any road running through a town, even if we would label it a srtaya, would need to fulfil all criteria of a reshus harabbim including mefulash u’mechavanim[5] and shishim ribo.

---

[3] Rashi, Shabbos 6a;  Rabbeinu Yonason MeLunel, Shabbos 6a; Ravyah, Eruvin siman 379; Ramban, Eruvin 59a; Semag, Asin Drabbanan 1; Riaz, Shabbos, 1:1:17; Meiri, Shabbos 6a; Ritva, Shabbos 6a; Rabeinu Yerucham, Toldot Adom V’Chavah 12:4; Ran, Shabbos, Rif pagination, daf 2a; Shitas Hamyuchos LaRan, Shabbos 6a; Ohel Moed, Shar HaSabbos 13:2; Rivash, siman 405, and Nimukei Yosef, Eruvin, Rif pagination, daf 6a.

[4] Rav Amram Gaon, Hilchos Psukos, siman 70; Sar Shalom Gaon, Sharei Teshuvah siman 209; HaEshkol, Hilchos Tzitis, ois 31; Smak, Mitzva 282; Rosh, Beitzah, 3:2; Ritva, Shabbos 6a, and Terumas Hadeshen, siman 55, and the over twenty Rishonim who state that there is no reshus harabbim today at all, which implies that even sratyas would not be classified as such.

[5] Unlike the criterion of shishim ribo, the criterion of mefulash u’mechavanim m’shaar l’shaar has no bearing outside of the city; hence, I am only referring to the segment inside of the city proper.