Breaks of More Than Ten Amos — Eruvin 94a
רש"י עירובין דף צד/א
חצר שנפרצה לרשות הרבים - במלואה, או יותר מעשר:
From The Contemporary Eruv:
Whether a break wider than ten amos interrupts omed merubeh [an area whose perimeter is mostly enclosed may be considered wholly enclosed] is one of the many topics disputed by the Mishkenos Ya’akov and Beis Ephraim. The Chazon Ish (Orach Chaim 107:5) holds that me’d'oraysa, omed merubeh al ha'parutz overrides a gap even if it is greater than ten amos. The Igros Moshe, ibid., 5:28:3 rejects this Chazon Ish, and holds that the breaks of more than ten amos invalidate the enclosure even me’d'oraysa (if they are not rectified by tzuras ha'pesach). Reb Moshe’s reasoning here is unclear (see the attempt by the editors of this, the latest volume of the Igros Moshe, there to clarify the issue; see also Nesivos Shabbos 3:1 note 8 and 23:2, note 14).
Rabbi Akiva Yosef Kaplan noted that, although he does not cite the Chazon Ish explicitly, Rabbi Aharon Kotler, in Mishnas Rabbi Aharon 1:6:2:1-8, is inclined to accept the contention of the Mishkenos Ya’akov, that a break wider than ten amos does interrupt omed merubeh al ha’parutz. Reb Aharon interprets Rashi here d.h. Chatzer She’nifratza, on the basis of the Mishkenos Ya’akov’s contention as well. Rashi there seems to indicate that a reshus ha’rabbim may narrow to a width of ten amos yet still retain its character as a reshus ha’rabbim. Rabbi Chaim Twerski remarked to me that, nevertheless Rashi is discussing the walls surrounding a courtyard, which may well, at least on the side bordering on the reshus ha’rabbim, not be omed merubeh. However, Rabbi Akiva Yosef Kaplan noted that the Chazon Ish does not propose this approach in Rashi, and that the language of Rashi does not necessarily support this possibility.