Chukei Chaim: Big Cities
27. Because of all the uncertainties
we’ve mentioned about the status of a reshus horabim d’oraisa, many poskim and
gedolei hador refrained as a rule from setting up eiruvim in big cities with
large populations, as doing so involves d’oraisa uncertainties.
Rebuttal:
Many Poskim? This
is simply incorrect. The main posek who was not supportive of large city eruvin
was Rav Moshe, and he only objected to an eruv in Manhattan and
Brooklyn. There is no doubt that Rav Moshe would not object to an eruv
in all the other large cities. In fact, there is no reason to believe that Rav
Moshe would oppose an eruv in Brooklyn in its current construct. There
are few poskim who object to eruvin in large cities. There are yungeleit
who oppose eruvin in large cities, and even in smaller cities. These are
misguided individuals, who don’t believe in the mitzvah of eruvin.
Chukei
Chaim: Number of Walls Needed for a Reshus Hayachid
D’oraisa
28. If there is a reshus horabim one
wants to turn into a reshus hayachid, the Rishonim argue how many walls it
takes to make the enclosed area into a reshus hayachid d’oraisa.
29. Four walls. Some Rishonim hold that an area is a reshus hayachid
d’oraisa only if it is enclosed by four walls [or three plus a lechi on the
fourth side]. With three walls, it is a karmelis, not a reshus hayachid
d’oraisa (רמב''ם פי''ד שבת ה''א, ר''ת עירובין דף י''ב ע''ב).
30. Three walls. However, most Rishonim hold that if an area has three
walls around it [or two walls and a lechi on the third side, which is also like
three walls], it is a reshus hayachid d’oraisa, even if there is no wall or
tzuras hapesach on the fourth side (רש''י עירובין דף י''ב ע''ב, תוס' בכמה מקומות, רא''ש פ''ק דסוכה, רשב''א בעבוה''ק, ריטב''א ועוד).
D'rabanan
31. Everyone agrees that d’rabanan,
three walls are not enough to make a reshus hayachid – there must be four walls
(שו"ע סי' שס''ג ס''א). This is because if there is no fourth
wall, it somewhat resembles a reshus horabim, and one may come to carry in a
reshus horabim (מ''ב שם סק''ב). But for the fourth side, Chazal say a
partial wall is enough, e.g., two very small sections of wall at the ends which
face each other or a four tefach wide wall on only one end with a lechi, kora,
or a tzuras hapesach (שו''ע שם ס''ב).
32. Only setting it up with a tzuras hapesach. Although, as mentioned,
there are multiple ways to set up a reshus hayachid’s fourth wall, each has its
own prerequisites. Setting it up with a tzuras hapesach, though, is the best
way and takes care of most scenarios. Thus, the poskim say that today, we only
set up our alleys and streets with a tzuras hapesach where permissible (רמ''א סי' שס''ג סכ''ו).
This is the minhag today – to use tzuros hapesach as walls.
33. Three full walls. To satisfy a high standard, some neighborhood
eiruvim have three full walls so that the area is a reshus hayachid d’oraisa
(above, 30). Then, the fourth side is closed with tzuros hapesach, as that is
only a d’rabanan requirement.
Rebuttal:
There are no high
standard eruvin. There are eruvin set up by misguided yungeleit
who never learnt halachah, and never were meshameish rabbanim. There is
no need for three full walls. We pasken pirtzos esser is only negated me’d’rabbanan
and therefore a tzuras hapesach would suffice to close the gap. This
is halachah p’suka, as Rav Fishel Hershkowitz declared, and we have to
stop arguing minority opinions.
Chukei Chaim: 34. Eiruv of Tottenham, London. The eiruv established in the Tottenham
neighborhood of London approved by the union of chareidi communities, Kedassia,
has three full walls, so they only established their eiruv there. One full wall
goes along the park and houses on Crowland Road; the middle wall is the bank of
the River Lea; and the third wall goes along Springfield Park up until Spring
Hill. This way, the entire area is a reshus hayachid d’oraisa. Then, by closing
the fourth side with tzuros hapesach, they made a high-level eiruv. [Egerton
Road and half of Ravensdale Road are outside the three walls, so they did not
include them within the eiruv. The notices announcing this should be
prominently displayed to passersby.]
Rebuttal:
The claim that
the Tottenham Eruv was only established because they were able to make use of
three walls is a travesty of halachah. Unfortunately, this eruv was
hijacked by yungeleit who are rewriting hilchos eruvin. It is
simple midas S’dom not to expand the eruv to include additional
parts of the neighborhood. These yungeleit are playing with people’s oneg
Shabbos, which is a matter of a d’Oraysa, according to many.
Chukei
Chaim: Areas Where Tzuros Hapesach Work
Tzuras
Hapesach
35. A tzuras hapesach consists of two
upright poles spaced apart from each other with a beam on top of them or a
string stretched from the top of one pole to the top of the other one. A tzuras
hapesach is viewed as a wall (שו"ע סי' שס''ב סי''א). The specific halachos will be discussed
later in the series, בעזהשי"ת.
36. A final full wall. A tzuras hapesach can be used as a full wall to
complete the required number of walls.
37. Closing a gap. A tzuras hapesach can also be used to close a gap in
a wall, even if the gap is wider than ten amos (שו''ע סי' שס''ב ס''י).
38. According to the Rambam (גם דעת הסמ''ג והסמ''ק), a tzuras hapesach cannot be wider than
ten amos. However, if there is a wall which is “עומד מרובה על הפרוץ,” i.e., the majority of the wall’s length
is full, proper wall, a gap may be closed with a tzuras hapesach even if it is
wider than ten amos (שו''ע שם). For example, if that side is one hundred
amos long, and there are seventy amos of full, proper wall, the wall may be
completed with a thirty-amah tzuras hapesach even according to the Rambam. The
Acharonim hold it is proper to take the Rambam’s opinion into account (מ"ב שם סקנ''ט).
Rebuttal:
Actually, most Achronim
maintain that the minhag was not to follow the Rambam. However, it is
worth noting a strange dichotomy: the large city eruvin that many of the
Chevrah Hilchos Issurei Eruvin oppose make use of mechitzos that
would satisfy the Rambam’s shita. Hence, large city eruvin can
many times be classified as a Rambam eruv, while many of the smaller eruvin
do not satisfy the Rambam’s shita.
Chukei
Chaim: Full Walls or Tzuros Hapesach?
39. All the walls. Most Rishonim hold that an entire area, even a large
one, can be enclosed by tzuros hapesach without any full walls. In other words,
poles can be erected around an area with string stretched across the tops of
the poles. This makes the whole area enclosed, giving it the status of a reshus
hayachid. This is how eiruvim around cities are usually made.
40. Rambam’s opinion. However, the Rambam holds that only when there
are two walls facing each other do tzuros hapesach help to close the other two
sides, but all four sides cannot be closed using tzuros hapesach.
41. Neighborhood eiruv. Thus, many neighborhood eiruvim are made on a
high level with at least two full walls (above, 40) consisting of more wall
than gap (38) so that they are kosher even according to the Rambam. The other
two sides are closed with tzuros hapesach.
Rebuttal:
I reiterate,
there is no such thing as a high-level eruv. If they are stringent
regarding issues that were not accepted l’halachah, that does not make it
high-level. It simply demonstrates that those
erecting these eruvin need to go and learn the halachic process. We do
not accept all opinions of the Rishonim as halachah p’suka. Most
poskim do not follow the Rambam regarding this issue, and many city eruvin
do satisfy shitas HaRambam.
Chukei
Chaim: Fixing a Reshus Horabim with Doors
Doors
42. In a reshus horabim d’oraisa –
i.e., a 16-amah-wide street according to the machmir opinion (7) or a place
with 600,000 people even according to the meikel opinion (8), on that street
(18) or in a city where the main road serves them (19,20) – the only way to
enclose the area to give it the status of a reshus hayachid is with doors. In
other words, doors must be installed in the reshus horabim (שו''ע שס''ד ס''ב). [We will explain the details of these
halachos later in the series, אי"ה.]
Rebuttal:
It is inexcusable
that Rav Bleier omits the criterion of mefulash u’mechuvanim.
Furthermore, he should have noted that according to many/most poskim, doors
would only be needed me’d’rabbanan.
