6084 —מחיצות הלכתיות, גבולות ציבוריים, ופרסום פסקי עירוב

B"H, Eve of Rosh Chodesh Adar, 5718.

Brooklyn.

Haraha"g vaharaha"ch vavac"h iy"a nu"m beneshek etc. Yosef David Maskowitz

Shalom u'Vrachah!

I hereby acknowledge receipt of your letter along with the "Kuntres Tikkun Eruvin," authored by your honor, which is being returned herewith. Regarding your request for an endorsement— it is well known that this is not the practice in the house of the Rav. We follow our ancestral custom. Especially since there is currently no time at all to review the book as required. Furthermore— and this is most important to me— wherever I am, in my place it is my revered grandfather, our master the Alter Rebbe, author of Tanya and Shulchan Aruch, whose rulings are followed precisely. It is clear from his Shulchan Aruch (section 363:35) that the sea does not count as a halachic wall. Your attempt to interpret this ruling as applying only when there is concern that even the garbage dump might be removed leaving only one wall— with all due respect, there is no basis for this at all; he explicitly writes his ruling there regarding a public dump not intended to be cleared away. When the sea rises and forms a sandbank, two adjacent walls remain like a doorpost and side beam or a beam on a third side.

Nevertheless, despite all of the above, I was pleased to read at the end of your kuntres that "the reward for one who rents and collects..." (even though certainly without reciting a blessing and not as might be implied from a superficial reading— since several doubts remain unresolved and blessings are not indispensable). In my opinion it is a great and wondrous merit for you—even if according to some opinions there may be room to debate certain details or doubts. Still, it is absolutely clear and firm in my view that it should not be printed or otherwise publicized that the matter has been completed and an eruv established (at least according to your view). What you wrote at the end about publicizing for benefit—to save even those who act intentionally against halachah as cited in Nazir 23a—you surely estimate how many such intentional transgressors study or even just know about such books or pamphlets; whereas regarding those who observe Torah and mitzvos—about whom our Sages said they permit themselves leniencies (if only they find some basis or pretext)—publicizing this could lead them to breaches etc. After publication it will be impossible to correct even if one wishes. The strong warning at the start of your kuntres has already been seen in practice not to help when something is printed and spread because unfortunately there prevails an attitude favoring leniency. Especially in this country where "ra-banim" stand guard—an opposition guard against G‑d and His Torah—to breach the wall of religion and Judaism.

May it be G‑d's will that in his days and ours will be fulfilled what our Sages said (Yerushalmi Taanis ch.1 end halacha 1): If Israel would keep one Shabbos properly Mashiach would immediately come. In Bavli (Shabbos 118b) it says two Shabboses properly; this does not contradict what was said in Yerushalmi Taanis above—as explained by our master the Alter Rebbe in Likkutei Torah Parshas Behar on "Es Shabbsosai Tishmoru." See there. Additionally see Shemos Rabbah (end ch.28): Why? Because it equals all mitzvos.

With honor and blessing.

P.S.: As is my custom out of affection for Torah discussion, I am adding some notes I jotted between pages: At the beginning of your kuntres section 1 (by you): Are rabbinic commandments positive commands or prohibitions? You cite Shabbos 23a: Where were we commanded? Rabbi Avya says from "Lo Tasur," Rabbi Nechemiah says from "Ask your father..."—which these two dispute above. Indeed so; apparently this dispute is explained by Ran's Drashot Hashem Derush Hei. But we do not find among those who count mitzvos that they include "Ask your father..." among positive commandments; so his interpretation stands alone! But according to all those who count mitzvos we must say that "Ask your father..." is indeed a command but not among the 248 positive Torah commandments; thus according to them there is no opinion holding rabbinic mitzvos are only positive commands.

This also fits with what is explained about its inner meaning in Chassidus on Maamar "Mai Mevarech" (from year 5680), year 5691 by my revered father-in-law Admor zatzal nbgm zya." The Rambam's view on this matter he wrote explicitly: They are included both under "Lo Tasur" (negative commandment) and under "You shall do as they instruct you" (positive commandment)—see Sefer HaMitzvos Shoresh Rishon (and see Ramban's comments there), end of list of mitzvos at start of Mishneh Torah Hilchos Mamrim ch.1 beginning—and for this reason Rabbi Avya cited specifically "Lo Tasur," since negative commands are stricter than positives; while Rambam in Hilchos Berachos ch.11 halacha 3 cited instead "Asher yomru...," since we do not recite blessings over negative commands—as also written by Bnei Binyamin on Yad there and Torah Temimah Devarim 17:11.

It requires further study why Rambam in Hilchos Berachos ch.6 halacha 2 cites only beginning phrase "Al pi haTorah asher yorucha," likewise at start Hilchos Mamrim; while Sefer HaMitzvos ed. Harav Chaim Halevi Heller—the publisher notes missing word "vego'" after "yorucha." Similarly Sefer HaChinuch mitzvah 492—which generally follows Rambam's wording—quotes entire verse.

Regarding enumeration of rabbinic commandments—which ones are counted—I copy here what I wrote previously: From Midrash Rabbah: Their mnemonic is NaB'SiMaCHaH: Netilas Yadayim (washing hands), Eruvin, Berachos (blessings), Ner Shabbos (Shabbos lamp), Megillah, Chanukah, Hallel (Megaleh Amukos Ophan Ayin Hey; cited Yalkut Chadash entry Mitzvos sec. Ayin Hey). So too Sefer HaChinuch at end of indexes counts them.

The reason these specific mitzvos were counted—not others—is explained in Sefer Mitzvas Hashem: Only those decreed by Chazal with blessings recited over them which have no basis in Torah law are included; see Torah Ohr by our master the Alter Rebbe on Vayomer... Mi Sam Peh; also Likkutei Torah commentary on Eleh Pekudei ch.3 end commentary on Shchorah Ani—all are specifically positive actions.*

The number seven for rabbinic mitzvos was also brought by Shelah Parshas Yisro Toar Olam section start quoting earlier authorities; Maorei Or sec.Zayin subsec.Yud Gimel etc.—though apparently Smag at end positive commandments counts only five rabbinic positives (Eruvin, mourning, Ninth Av fast, Megillah Chanukah) concluding he already explained Netilas Yadayim as rabbinic—and perhaps he omits Berachos because it's included under Birchas Hamazon or omits Hallel because it's included under Chanukah or holds it's biblical as some authorities cited by commentaries on Rambam's Sefer HaMitzvos Shoresh Aleph & Perla's commentary on Rasag's Sefer HaMitzvos positive commandment 59—but more difficult since Shaarei Kedusha by Rav Chaim Vital part I gate IV counts several rabbinic mitzvos.

To avoid contradiction with above authorities one can simply say Smag & Rav Chaim Vital did not intend to enumerate specifically seven but rather list all rabbinic enactments & explain their laws—but they too agree there are seven rabbinic mitzvos completing total of 620 pillars of light; those who hold Hallel biblical substitute another rabbinic mitzvah instead so total remains seven—as we find various opinions which mitzvos enter into tally of 613 biblical ones.

Though several hints were given for number seven extra letters atop Ten Commandments corresponding to seven rabbinic mitzvos—not just simple hint corresponding to seven rabbinic enactments—even more difficult from Midrash Rabbah ch.XIV sec.XVI: corresponding to seven days Creation; Matnos Kehunah Bamidbar Rabbah XVIII:21—the kabbalists wrote they hint at seven sefirot—but apparently none dispute actual number entering tally but rather each gives different aspect—as above—for Torah has seventy facets.

By way: acronym ASHIR = Einayim Shenayim Yadayim Raglayim—cited Midrash Shmuel Avos chap IV.

Summary

This letter emphasizes fidelity to established halachic tradition regarding eruvin boundaries while warning against publicizing potentially lenient rulings that could lead others astray. It also explores how rabbinic commandments are enumerated within Jewish law and tradition.