I’m not looking to exclude people TB Eruvin 60

The Mishnah on TB Eruvin 59a describes two kinds of cities, a public city that has 600,000 residents and a private city which is smaller than that. What happens if that large public city’s population dwindles to the extent there is now becomes a small private city. “And if a public city loses residents over time and becomes a private city, one may not establish an eiruv for all of it unless one maintains an area outside the eiruv that is like the size of the city of Ḥadasha in Judea, which has fifty residents. Carrying within the eiruv is permitted, but it remains prohibited to carry in the area excluded from the eiruv. The reason for this requirement is to ensure that the laws of eiruv will not be forgotten. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: The excluded area need not be so large; rather, it is sufficient to exclude three courtyards with two houses each.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara on today’s daf TB Eruvin 60 explains why Rabbi Yehuda used the village of Ḥadasha as the model of the community that needs to be outside the former public city’s eruv. “The mishna stated that if a public city becomes a private city, one may not establish an eiruv for all of it unless he maintains an area outside the eiruv which is like the size of the city of Ḥadasha in Judea. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda said: There was a certain city in Judea and its name was Ḥadasha, and it had fifty residents including men, women, and children. And the Sages would use it to measure the size of the section that must be excluded from an eiruv, and it itself was the excluded section of the eiruv of a larger city that was adjacent to it.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Then the Gemara adds a third opinion to the debate. “It is stated in the mishna that Rabbi Shimon says: The excluded area must be large enough to include at least three courtyards with two houses each. Rav Ḥama bar Gurya said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. However, Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Even one house and one courtyard suffice. The Gemara expresses surprise at the wording of this statement: Can it enter your mind that one courtyard even without a house is sufficient? Rather, correct it and say as follows: One house in one courtyard.” (Sefaria.org translation)

 We now have three opinions. 50 people need to be excluded according to Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon only requires three courtyards with two houses each meaning a grand total of six houses. Rabbi Yitzḥak only requires one house and one courtyard. Even though we have a clear halakha based on the Mishnah, “Rav Ḥama bar Gurya said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon,” we don’t exclude anybody from that eruv!

The Arukh Hashulkhan, a work of halacha written by Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein (1829-1908). This work attempts to be a clear, organized summary of the sources for each chapter of the Shulkhan Arukh and its commentaries, with special emphasis on the positions of the Jerusalem Talmud and Maimonides, published in 1884, brings three different solutions why we make eruvs without taking into consideration excluding even one person.

1. We rely on Rashi’s understanding that a public town has 600,000 residents and our towns never reach that population so the law of excluding people from the eruv doesn’t apply.

 2. Some explain that the Gentile population of the town can be considered those that are excluded from the eruv.

 3. The solution Epstein himself prefers is the towns described in the Talmud are those that are surrounded by a wall in our cities are not surrounded by a wall. Those wall cities needed to leave some people outside the eruv and this small group of people either couldn’t carry or make their own separate eruv. We imagine our cities as if they were surrounded by wall. If the people want to carry they just have do is destroy one of their “symbolic doorways,“ a type-of eruv used in alleyways that open up in two directions. One is forbidden to carry through that type of ruined eruv. He says that there is no greater sign to remind people of the laws of eruv than that. Also he writes that when there’s no wall no one house designates the end of the city limits. Those beyond the symbolic doorways, serve as the excluded ones. (I hope I translated him correctly. Feel free to offer an alternative translation )

“תמהו רבים דלמה אין אנו נוהגין כן, ואנחנו מערבין הערים שלנו בלי שום שיור, וזהו נגד המשנה (נ"ט.) והגמרא וכל הפוסקים. ויש מי שתירץ, דאנן סמכינן על פירוש רש"י ז"ל, שפירש 'עיר של רבים' - היינו שיש בה ששים רבוא. (מג"א סק"ב) ויש מי שכתב, דסמכינן על מי שסובר דבתי אינם יהודים - נחשבים כשיור, (א"ר סק"ב) והדוחק מבואר. ולי נראה שאין שום התחלה לקושיא זו, דזה שהצריכו חכמים שיור - זהו בערים שלהם שהיו מוקפות חומה סביב העיר, ולא נחסר שם רק העירוב, ובזה צריך שיור להיכר כמ"ש. אבל בערים שלנו שאין מוקפות חומה, ואסור לטלטל בעיר, אלא שאנו עושין אותה כמוקף על ידי צורתי פתחים, וכשנתקלקל אחד מצורות הפתח מכריזים שאסור לטלטל - אם כן אין לך היכר גדול מזה, והכל רואים הצורת הפתח שבכל קצוות העיר, ושתיכף אחר הצורת הפתח אסור להוציא, ואין לך היכר גדול מזה. (ועוד דבלא היקף חומה - אין בית מסויימת לקצה העיר, וממילא שיש בתים אחרי הצורת הפתח, והם השיור)” (Arukh Hashulkan, Orekh Hayyim, 392:1)

The Gemara tells a story that “The Gemara relates that certain residents of the city of Kakunya came before Rav Yosef and said to him: Provide us with someone who will establish an eiruv for our city. The city had originally been a public city and had turned into a private one, requiring that part of the city be excluded from the eiruv. Rav Yosef said to Abaye: Go, establish an eiruv for them, and see to it that there is no outcry against it in the study hall, i.e., make sure the eiruv is valid beyond any doubt.”

I think modern-day rabbis don’t want to hear any outcry from people who are excluded from the eruv, so they found a way to ignore this halakha altogether. I know of no city that purposely excludes people from the eruv.