King Solomon's Takanah: Rambam's Eruv - Hakirah.org

202 : Hạkirah, the Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought
Shlomo feared would be lost in the consciousness of the people. 50
. וכבשוה is that of ששת ימים The task of
Shlomo’s two takanos were intended to ingrain within the
nation the two goals of הגוף and שלמות הנפש that are the
essence of Judaism. According to Rambam, the “handles” that
Shlomo added to the Torah were a new aspect to takanos. He added
takanos that would change the mindset of a people and help them
grasp the concepts of the Torah.
Rambam’s Eruv
מלאו הארץ
שלמות
As we have noted before, according to Rashi (Eruvin 6b, 59a) 51 the
methodology of making an eruv in large cities consists of first turning
them into a חצר דרבים by canceling any רשות הרבים that may exist
within them and then being מערב to turn the חצר הרבים which is a
presents is handled with רה ‏"ר The problem that a ‏.רה ‏"י into a כרמלית
which cut off traffic from this road that penetrates the city. It is דלתות
understood that it is בקיעת רבים (a large amount of traffic) that is
and as soon as this problem is handled there is no ‏,מבטל מחיצות
problem creating a דרבים ‏.חצר When the Tur (Orach Chaim 391)
addresses the issue of עיר he treats it no differently than ‏,מבו and
both are made up of חצרות that had previously been ‏.מערב 52 This
are identical in his opinion and differ from that י
‏.חצר as an individual is to a מבו י is to חצר only in that ‏,חצר of
י
מבו and עיר of עי רוב
50 It is also worth noting that Rambam does not speak of a fear the
people would not know that it is prohibited to carry four amos in a
and, in fact, the takanah allows carrying within an area without an eruv.
The only educational concern was with regard to carrying from the
public to the private.
51 See Orach Chaim 364:2 and 392:6.
52 Note also he speaks of being מערב rather than using the terminology of
) which is used by both ( משתף
רה ‏"ר
כולם עשו ערוב אחד...‏ אין יכולין לערב כולם ביחד
he (Orach Chaim 386) and Rambam (Hilchos Eruvin 1:7) for a ‏.מבוי Unlike
Rambam, the Tur is not concerned with making a clear distinction
between the process of שתוף and ‏.ערוב The Tur only devotes an
independent siman (392) to this discussion of עיר because it is necessary
to discuss the details of whether the ערוב requires שיור (leaving part of
the city out of the eruv).