Anonymous

Hotzaah: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
1,626 bytes added ,  30 September 2022
Line 19: Line 19:
#If the entranceway in from of a house or building is 4 tefachim wide by 4 tefachim long in front of the door, has two walls on either side and a roof above it, it is a reshut hayachid. Alternatively, if it is 10 tefachim above the ground, and 4x4 tefachim, it is a reshut hayachid. If isn't so high, large, lacks the walls, or roof is considered like the domain that it is facing.<Ref>Rama 346:3</ref>
#If the entranceway in from of a house or building is 4 tefachim wide by 4 tefachim long in front of the door, has two walls on either side and a roof above it, it is a reshut hayachid. Alternatively, if it is 10 tefachim above the ground, and 4x4 tefachim, it is a reshut hayachid. If isn't so high, large, lacks the walls, or roof is considered like the domain that it is facing.<Ref>Rama 346:3</ref>
===Summary of Dispute Between Mishkenot Yakov and Bet Efraim===
===Summary of Dispute Between Mishkenot Yakov and Bet Efraim===
# Mishkenaot Yakov<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=113 Responsa n. 120]</ref> makes 3 arguments to support his contention that using tzurat hapetach for a communal eruv is invalid. His argument stands even if only one of his arguments stand:
# Mishkenaot Yakov<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=113 Responsa n. 120]</ref> makes 2 independent arguments<Ref>One minor argument he tacks on is that even in a mavoy mefulash there is a dispute whether a tzurat hapetach is sufficient. The Rashba and Rabbenu Yehonatan hold that doors are necessary. Even though most rishonim (Rif, Rambam, and Rosh) are lenient about this point, he brings 2 proofs from the gemara for the Rashba.</ref> to support his contention that using tzurat hapetach for a communal eruv is invalid. His argument stands even if only one of his arguments stand:
## Most rishonim hold that a reshut harabbim is defined by having a street that is 16 amot wide, even if it isn't traveled by 600,000. He counts 16 rishonim who disagreed with the opinion of 5 rishonim that held that a reshut harabbim requires 600,000 people.
## He<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=116 s.v. v'ad]</ref> counts 16 rishonim who hold that reshut harabbim does not need a population of 600,000 including: Rif, Rambam, Rabbenu Tam, Rashbam, Raavan, Ramban, Rashba, Ritva, Ran, Hagahot Mordechai, Rivash, Rash, Riva, Ri Halevi, Mordechai, and Riaz. Simultaneously, he argues that really only 5 rishonim hold that 600,000 is necessary including Smak, Smag, Sefer Hatrumah, Roke'ach, and Maharam. Therefore, he holds that the halacha follows those rishonim who do not require 600,000.
## Even according to those who require a population of 600,000, they also hold that a wall of a tzurat hapetach is nullified by the travel of all the townspeople, even though they aren't 600,000.  
## Even according to those who require a population of 600,000, they agree that a wall of a tzurat hapetach is nullified by the travel of all the townspeople, even though they aren't 600,000. This argument rests on the assumption that we hold ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta'' (heb. איתי רבים ומבטל מחיצתא; trans. the masses come and nullify the wall). This argument is predicated on the Hagahot Ashri.
###This argument rests on the assumption that we hold ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta''.
#Bet Efraim's<ref>Responsa 26 s.v. u'lifi zeh</ref> defense of modern eruvin is either we follow Rashi that we don't have a reshut harabbim today because our cities lack 600,000 people or we follow Rabbanan who hold that there's no ''ayti rabbim''. He also shows why the Mishkenot Yakov's arguments are dependent on each other, while his argument is upheld if he is correct on either account.  
## Even in a mavoy mefulash there is a dispute whether a tzurat hapetach is sufficient. The Rashba and Rabbenu Yehonatan hold that doors are necessary. Even though most rishonim (Rif, Rambam, and Rosh) are lenient about this point, he brings 2 proofs from the gemara for the Rashba.
#Bet Efraim's<ref>Responsa 26 s.v. u'lifi zeh</ref> major defense of modern eruvin is either we follow Rashi that we don't have a reshut harabbim today because we lack cities with 600,000 people or we follow Rabbanan who hold that there's no ayti rabbim.  
## Bet Efraim counts 25 rishonim who hold that 600,000 is necessary for a reshut harabbim. They include: Bahag, Rashi, Raavan, Smag, Smak, Roke'ach, Maharam, Rosh, Tur, Mordechai, Sefer Hatrumah, Or Zaruah, Rabbenu Simcha, Rash, Hagahot Maimoni, Hagahot Ashri, Shibolei Haleket, Maharam Rikanti, Aguda, Isur Vheter, Hagahot Iser Vheter, Mahari Vayil, Trumat Hadeshen, Sedah Lderech, and Rabbenu Yerucham.
## Bet Efraim counts 25 rishonim who hold that 600,000 is necessary for a reshut harabbim. They include: Bahag, Rashi, Raavan, Smag, Smak, Roke'ach, Maharam, Rosh, Tur, Mordechai, Sefer Hatrumah, Or Zaruah, Rabbenu Simcha, Rash, Hagahot Maimoni, Hagahot Ashri, Shibolei Haleket, Maharam Rikanti, Aguda, Isur Vheter, Hagahot Iser Vheter, Mahari Vayil, Trumat Hadeshen, Sedah Lderech, and Rabbenu Yerucham.
###Part of their argument in interperting several rishonim revolves around how to understand the Ritva's explanation of Rashi. Mishkanot Yakov explains that even Rashi meant that 600,000 doesn't actually mean that they need 600,000 people there. It just needs to be a metropolitan area that is open to the masses to live there or visit there for commerce. Bet Efraim argues that the Ritva means that 600,000 do have to live there or travel there with some frequency. If there isn't 600,000 people who live or travel over a period of time<ref>Bet Efraim isn't clear about within what span of time 600,000 must travel to that city. In passing he writes that certainly if 600,000 does not frequent there at least within two years it isn't a reshut harabbim. </ref> certainly it isn't a reshut harabbim. He accepts the Ritva's understanding of Rashi.  
###Part of their argument in interpreting several rishonim revolves around how to understand the Ritva's explanation of Rashi. Mishkanot Yakov explains that even Rashi meant that 600,000 doesn't actually mean that they need 600,000 people there. It just needs to be a metropolitan area that is open to the masses to live there or visit there for commerce. Bet Efraim argues that the Ritva means that 600,000 do have to live there or travel there with some frequency. If there isn't 600,000 people who live or travel over a period of time<ref>Bet Efraim isn't clear about within what span of time 600,000 must travel to that city. In passing he writes that certainly if 600,000 does not frequent there at least within two years it isn't a reshut harabbim. </ref> certainly it isn't a reshut harabbim. He accepts the Ritva's understanding of Rashi.  
## Bet Efraim's first argument with the Mishkenot Yakov is whether we hold that ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta''. Certainly Rambam held that we do not hold ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta,'' but he also proves that Rif and Rosh concur with this. Although the Ramban writes that Rif and by implication Rosh hold ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta,'' the Bet Efraim disagrees.  
## Bet Efraim's tries to prove that we do not hold ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta''. Certainly Rambam held that we do not hold ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta,'' but he also proves that Rif and Rosh concur with this. Although the Ramban writes that Rif and by implication Rosh hold ''ayti rabbim umevatel mechitzta,'' the Bet Efraim disagrees. By making this argument, Bet Efraim undermines Mishkenot Yakov's second argument altogether.
###Additionally, Bet Efraim argues with Mishkenot Yakov's understanding of the Hagahot Ashri.<ref>Hagahot Ashri (Eruvin 1:8) writes that a tzurat hapetach is sufficient for a ''mavoy mefulash'' only if the inhabitants of a mavoy travel through it, but if all the townspeople travel through the mavoy they would uproot the tzurat hapetach. He concludes with the words of the Ram from Ivra that this point is true even for Rashi that requires a population of 600,000. Mishkenot Yakov interpreted this to mean that even if we hold like Rashi as long as the townspeople travel on this road they invalidate a tzurat hapetach. Bet Efraim argues that he's discussing a case where there is a reshut harabbim on either side of the street in question. According to Rashi, the reshut harabbim requires 600,000 and then if there is 600,000 on either side then the street used by the townspeople in between is also a reshut harabbim.</ref>
### Tangentially, Bet Efraim explains that the Rambam holds that it is sufficient to close off a reshut harabbim with doors that could close even though practically they don't close. Furthermore, he explains that perhaps Rif and Rosh agree with this. However, Shiltei Giborim, Tur and Bet Yosef 364:2 read Rif and Rosh as disputing this point.
### Tangentially, Bet Efraim explains that the Rambam holds that it is sufficient to close off a reshut harabbim with doors that could close even though practically they don't close. Furthermore, he explains that perhaps Rif and Rosh agree with this. However, Shiltei Giborim, Tur and Bet Yosef 364:2 read Rif and Rosh as disputing this point.


Anonymous user