Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › New Brooklyn Eruv: Time to Accept? › Reply To: New Brooklyn Eruv: Time to Accept?
Dear Youdont,
I don’t see the purpose in this. It happens to be fun and more stimulating than most threads here.
1) You trust Rav Dovid’s statement about the Chicago Eruv (An eruv even more contentious than Brooklyn. I doubt you know or care about that). Yet, you reject Rav Dovid’s statements about the Brooklyn Eruv and his father’s knowledge of the statistics. And conveniently, you never mentioned Rav Dovid’s statement about the Los Angeles eruv.
2) Rav Elyashiv signed onto Rav Dovid’s letter against the Brooklyn Eruv. As did Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Chaim Pinchos Scheinberg. And I don’t understand why this is problematic for you, if it’s all about learning the teshuvos and knowing the inyan. Why does it matter who disagreed?
3) Rav Moshe says it is all in chelek aleph, yet you find a novel idea in that very letter. If you can’t answer this, you are obviously very wrong here. And there really is nothing else to discuss. But for fun, I’ll divert you from what is clearly the strongest proof against you. I am aware that not all of Iggros Moshe is of the same authenticity. The same is true of virtually every sefer. Including, Mishna Berurah, Aruch Hashulchan, Achiezer, and Chazon Ish. This is why we actually learn things well, instead of just rattling of sources. Your theory that Rav Moshe is saying something else in response to putting on a hat protector is laughable. (I actually laughed.)
4) This thread was a non halachic thread at one point. You either didn’t grasp what was going on when you joined, or you deliberately contradicted yourself so as to not have to answer. I don’t know what you know or don’t know. But I do know what was going on here on these pages and have the reading comprehension to see that you are not answering what you claim you are answering. It is clear to me how Rav Moshe understands what makes a rsh”r. It is also obvious that you think there is many shitos to this and have no clarity on it. It is very straightforward as Rav Moshe puts it into a single phrase. If you didn’t bother to uncover how Rav Moshe understands rsh”r independent from hilchos eruvin, than you really shouldn’t be learning hilchos eruvin. So I am not dismayed by your claim to superior knowledge.
Here is where you have the lesser side in this debate.
” I will post again, as you have comprehension issues. Rav Moshe in this same teshuvah changed his mind from chlek aleph, so please stop with your nariskeit. Rav Moshe needed to formulate, at this time, his opinion, since Manhattan’s metzious was unlike Brooklyn. I reiterate, in his Brooklyn teshuvah Rav Moshe only referred to his Manhattan teshuvah in regards to his chiddush that shishim ribo is conditional on 12 mil by 12 mil.”
So you seem to realize that you need to answer this, and this is your answer.
The question I posed was that Rav Moshe wrote here that “it is all written at length in every single detail in my sefer Iggros Moshe siman 139 (Which you refer to as the Manhattan Teshuva ).” Yet you say that he changed his opinion immediately after writing that he didn’t. So you didn’t solve the actual issue at all. You have a reason for this, that Rav Moshe was formulating his opinion about Brooklyn. [It is funny to think that Rav Moshe had not had an opinion about Brooklyn when he wrote the teshuva in Chelek Aleph. As if someone of Rav Moshe’s stature has to figure out his general ideas about an eiruv when the question arises. It is even funnier when we note that the first pert of the Manhattan teshuva is about Brooklyn. And a clear understanding of the entire letter will reveal (the assumption) that Manhattan had a more solid basis for an Eruv at the time.] According to you Rav Moshe’s 12 by 12 is a standalone idea of his Manhattan Teshuva. [I think you are very mistaken on that. That teshuva is very interconnected. Again, I don’t know if you realize what I think you are missing here, or just ignoring it again and again. But it doesn’t really matter. See the next point.] And then you finish off your response by saying that Rav Moshe “only referred to his Manhattan teshuvah in regards to his chiddush that shishim ribo is conditional on 12 mil by 12 mil.” What are you doing here? Even if you are correct about everything else, Rav Moshe is still changing that very Chiddush from being about 600,000 people around town within a specific perimeter to the population of it’s residents. This would require a completely different basis that what brought about his chiddush in chelek aleph. So how could reference a teshuvah that does not back up this new novelty that you claim is his his new formula regarding Brooklyn? [You may say that it is a question on Rav Moshe, but it is solely a question on you. Rav Moshe is saying that all these numbers are just short math for coming to the chiddush in his first teshuva. And it doesn’t matter the exact count because once we get close to this number we have no precedent for building eruvin, as Rav Moshe showed from the Yerushalmi (After he already proved the concept. Which you never addressed because you {possibly or purposely or purportedly} misread the major teshuva as a bunch of disjointed parts.) And even though we can point to eruvin earlier in the century, Rav Moshe would counter that they were either not accepted, not built, or came about in a very unique way. Again, the question is on you as to what could possibly be Rav Moshe’s basis for counting the population of the residents.
The above paragraph is just to highlight how you are contradicting yourself while not even answering the question on either side of the contradiction. You have done this countless times. I have no indication that you realize what you are saying. There were many points here that had nothing to do with halacha, and you still contradicted yourself. Your goal regarding the eruv seems to be clouding your mental grasp. This is why I am comfortable having this debate with someone who quite likely knows far more about eruvin than I do. The actual debate is below.
My point is clear. Rav Moshe writes that it is explained at length in every single detail…
This fits with my saying that the Manhattan Teshuva is interconnected with it’s many parts and Rav Moshe is not writing anything new in 1979 besides for the what kind of city he would not promote eruvin in regardless of the actual halachic details. According to you none of the length of The Manhattan Teshuva is relevant. And it certainly wasn’t explained in detail. It is actually a new detail! Which runs counter to the ideas behind Rav Moshe’s chiddush in The Manhattan Teshuva. Moreover, Rav Moshe brings no basis for why the population size should matter as a stand alone measure. He rejected that in chelek aleph. He doesn’t even hint that he changed his mind after writing; “it is all written at length in every single detail in my sefer Iggros Moshe siman 139.” The inconsistencies of your method are astounding!