- This topic has 436 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 4 weeks ago by .
-
Posts
-
I only follow the Halachic opinions of people who post endlessly on YWN.
The Chasam Sofer says this was taught by Yaakov Avinu when he switched his hands on Yosef. Even when right becomes left we must listen to them as they know better but only in the same generation.
“Avira, the Rav Haflaah says on הכהן אשר יהי-ה בימים ההם we cannot question the ruling of the gedalim from one generation to another, so chutzpah does not apply.”
Nobody would argue that we should trust the Rabbonim of the current generation, but waiting anxiously for a gadol to pass on so that we can ignore his psak halacha immediately certainly seems like chutzpah to me. If we’re talking about a change in metzius that would allow an eiruv in Manhattan or Brooklyn today (decades later) then fine, but they put these eiruvs up when there was absolutely no change in metzius other than the unfortunate loss of the posek hador, Reb Moshe. Some were erected while he was still alive, blatantly ignoring his answer on the matter.
As for the main discussion here, Reb Moshe did not wholesale asser eiruvin in the NY metropolitan area. He was matir the Kew Garden Hills eiruv as they proudly display on their website. The reason being (I think) that it’s partitioned off by highways dividing it into a smaller reshus. If there has been a recent change in Brooklyn’s urban layout (which I have not heard of) then theoretically it could actually make a difference. That being said, I haven’t seen anyone actually make that claim here or elsewhere.
No one waits anxiously that a gadol ch’v should die but if they do, another gadol does not have to follow them.
I was told that R’ Moshe’s reason for allowing Eruvin in Queens but not in Brooklyn is because of the way the boroughs are viewed. If you mail a letter to someone in Brooklyn, you address it to “Brooklyn, NY”, no matter which area in Brooklyn it is. Nobody writes “Boro Park”, “Midwood”, etc.
In Queens, the common practice is to write the name of the area – it will be addressed to “Kew Gardens”, “Kew Garden Hills”, etc.
So R’ Moshe allowed eruvin in Queens, but each section has its own, and they also have to make eruvin to allow for crossing from one area to another. That is indeed how it’s done in Queens.Actually you would address a letter to “Flushing” if writing to someone in Kew Garden Hills, and he definitely wasn’t matir an eiruv for all of Flushing.
From their website, it seems like it has to do with the highways. This being said, I heard they connected the KGH and Forest Hills eiruvin in recent years, which would mean crossing over the Van Wyck. That expansion cannot claim to have the backing of Reb Moshe.
It’s curious. Rav Moshe was mattir on peanut oil for Pesach. Do those who cite him on eruvim also argue for peanut oil?
Anon, again, apples and oranges; kitnios is a minhag. Hotzaah is deoraysoh. And it wasn’t only rav moshe – it was tje vast majority of poskim in America who joined him.
Besides that, you’re cherry picking a handful of psakim which rav moshe made which were not accepted. Rav Moshe paskened the biggest shailos in the country and was, in the satmar rovs words, “mara d’asra of America” despite their disagreements. Most of his psakim became the common standard for American jewry. It’s disingenuous to quote a couple of psakim and make it as though they represent the bigger picture.
“Rav Moshe was mattir on peanut oil for Pesach. Do those who cite him on eruvim also argue for peanut oil?”
By this logic, nobody can ever cite anyone. There are a handful of well-known cases where the American community breaks from the trend and does not follow Reb Moshe’s psak (eg. peanuts on pesach, shabbos timers, arba kosos davka being wine).
The minhag of most, but not all, of the frum tzibbur is to follow Reb Moshe’s psak regarding the Brooklyn eiruvin. In Manhattan, the entirety of the frum, non-MO tzibbur follows his psak regarding the eiruv.
Yes, we know there are those that are matir Brooklyn eiruvs. The discussion here is that the OP seems to be suggesting that even those of us who don’t should change our shittah due to some new change in metzius that he has been suspiciously unable to specify with a halachic source. Is it possible that this situation happened? Sure. Brooklyn could be deserted like Gary Indiana and no longer be a reshus harabim according to anyone, but I see no evidence that anything like that happened.
Here is the deal. The yeshivshe velt thinks they are making a stand for the Torah of Eruvin. This is more than just a question of halachic decision. The R”Y organized a meeting (Please tell me if you know this to be true or false. Third hand information. I trust the second hand’s reporting, but not his grasp.) to discuss Meseches Eruvin in concept [Among other things. The point was to be above the table about their differences.] but the major matirim didn’t show.
According to Rav Moshe himself, one can rely on (at least some of) the poskim who approve of the Eruv. (Even though they are wrong on the matter.) But it doesn’t change this issue. The Yeshivaliet will not approve of an Eruv here even if the metzius would change. In their eyes, the whole business is a callous approach toward Torah and Mitzvos. It strikes too close to the core of what it means to be a Ben Torah in a Yeshiva, to ever gain acceptance.
To the OP – This must be the fifth time I wrote this response to you. I think you got this answer in real life.
“The Yeshivaliet will not approve of an Eruv here even if the metzius would change.”
As a member of the “yeshivish velt” I would contend this point. If a meteor were to fall on Brooklyn and destroy it altogether, then if people moved back and rebuilt a small village on its remains, Reb Moshe’s psak would not apply to that small village.Obviously it doesn’t need to be that big of a metzius change, but you get the idea.
Dear Nevile,
My apologies, I was not intending to speak for anyone. I was thinking about a new metzius of eruvin that would resemble a city that is enclosed. But as long as it’s basically the same Brooklyn, it’s a Torah question and not just technical halachah.
The Torah does not want us to worship any Talmid Chacham but to understand his view and the view of the other side. To do this properly, I recommend to analyze fully the Shut Yabia Omer above at Chelek 9 Teshuva 33 and then discuss this topic in a fully informed manner.
Nom, rav moshe never said one can rely on the rabbonim who are matir the eruv(regarding the eruv). Rav Belsky was very close to him, and he said that Rav Moshe told him to fight the eruv once he’s gone, and not give in an inch. And that’s exactly what rav belsky did for decades.
“The Torah does not want us to worship any Talmid Chacham but to understand his view and the view of the other side.”
I don’t think anyone disagrees with you. The people following Reb Moshe’s psak aren’t “worshipping him” and the people following the matirim aren’t worshipping their ravs either.
I’m not a hardliner on the Brooklyn eruvs. A lot of really frum people hold by the Boro Park eruv. You have to stop making this an issue of emunas chochomim. We’re making an informed decision to follow a certain rav. If a new questions arises (i.e. a change in metzius) we’ll ask a currently living rav, but I’m still not hearing that that’s happened.
Nomesorah: I would like to believe you’re wrong and that we would reevaluate for any metzius change, but I know you’re probably right. You’ll like this story: the first time I spent a Shabbos in LA, I called a rav to ask about using the eiruv because the area it encloses seems at least as trafficked if not more than Brooklyn. When he told me it was fine to use the LA eiruv, I asked out of curiosity what makes LA different than Brooklyn in this regard. He answered, “because Reb Moshe explicitly said Brooklyn can’t have an eiruv.”
Neville > In Manhattan, the entirety of the frum, non-MO tzibbur follows his psak …
this is no good scotsman fallacy: you exclude frum MO from the tzibbur and now you can say “entirely”
[I have no dog in this food fight: personally do not use this eruv and do not care for the term “frum” ]What is effect of WFH on Brooklyn traffic? In many cities there are now less people in downtowns and there is less weekday traffic on major highways out of traffic, and probably also on weekends as people can have a weekend the whole week. I don’t think the traffic might fall below the levels of R Moshe’s time, though.
Neville, why would you say only non-MO follows the psak? In general, MO do not use eruvin in Brooklyn or Manhattan. R’ Schachter shlita paskens not to use it, with only one exception that I know of (which I’ll get back to).
The ones who don’t follow R’ Moshe on this issue are mostly chassidim. They’re the ones who are behind this new attempt, and also backed some of the earlier attempts.As for the exception R’ Schachter gave, I only know of one. By Mt. Sinai hospital, there is an eruv around one side of it, allowing people to walk from one building to another. One street is bordered by Central Park, and there is a dead-end a bit further down on the main street the hospital is on, I believe.
I spoke to a friend who was a student of R’ Schachter’s about it, and asked him why he’d allow it, when R’ Moshe was opposed. He told me he’d asked R’ Schachter that himself. The response was, “People are dealing with a difficult enough situation when a loved one is in the hospital, especially over Shabbos. So I looked to see if there was a way to be lenient in this situation. In the end, I found that the situation around the hospital is actually not the same as the rest of the areas R’ Moshe paskened about, and I felt that R’ Moshe himself may have been lenient in this case too.”
My friend also told me that he heard from another close student that R’ Schachter left out one piece when he responded. He was so scared to go against a psak of R’ Moshe, even when he felt that he wasn’t really contradicting it, that he fasted before issuing the psak.Da – check out most young israels in Brooklyn; they advertise when the eruv is “up.”
Most modern people definitely carry. Maybe people close to rabbi shechter don’t, but youre making it out to be as if all of Brooklyn MO people are black hat RW YU people, and the reality is that isn’t so.
Aveirah, I wouldn’t say “most”. I would say “some”. I think there are far more chassidim that carry than MO.
There are Rabbonim who hold it is ok, but I don’t think any of them are on the level to argue with R’ Moshe. One who may have been, R’ Tuvia Goldstein zt”l, actually held you could make an eruv, but did not pasken that way in public, out of respect to R’ Moshe.The Modern Orthodox built an Eruv in Flatbush, that only the MO used, during Rav Moshe’s lifetime. In the 1970s, about.
Da, i don’t think you’re familiar with Brooklyn demographics. Most fully modern people left to the 5 towns, Manhattan, and Teaneck. They used the eruv for the most part.
Talmidim of rabbi Shechter in Brooklyn(and I’ve met only a handful) aren’t sending their kids to the few remaining modern Brooklyn schools, i.e. yeshiva of Flatbush. They’re sending their kids to prospect park, kaminetz, etc.. Because they want an actual yeshiva, and not a coed Jewish public school.
As for chasidim, many, if not most at this point, carry. But mostly in boro park. The heimish Flatbush crowd is litvishe influenced and mostly does not carry.
But if you walk on shabbos in flatbush, you’ll see people carrying, and it’s identifiably modern people.
Aveirah, honestly, I’ve only ever seen one modern person carrying in Flatbush. I’ve seen many chassidim. Maybe not the type who wear a streimel and bekishe, but there are many I know personally, who daven nusach sfard, pronounce their Hebrew with the chassidish pronunciation, and told me they have heterim from a chassidishe Rav.
Dear Avira,
What you posted about Rav Belsky is completely true. But Rav Moshe still held that it would be omer muttar ant exempt from a korban chatos.
Dear Avira,
A good amount of these modern eruv carriers are runaways and were not originally MO. This can be confirmed by talking to them in yiddish.
Chassidim can be seen carrying in Flatbush. And sefardim. The MO in Flatbush of yore followed Rav Moshe more than any other posek. Including the Rav.
OK, so I looked into the new situation that the OP seemed to be referring to. The brand new Brooklyn eruv is a totally different situation than the old ones, as the OP pointed it. It is a WAY WORSE situation than the old ones.
The existing Flatbush and BP eruvin enclosed sub-communities of Brooklyn with fewer than 600k people, so they could claim to be comparable to the Queens eruv that Reb Moshe was matir (still not totally sure on why he was okay with it just for Queens). The new Brooklyn eruv surrounds the entirety of Brooklyn. Millions of people, and “excluding cars” won’t help you, live within it.
Sadly, I recognize the respect the names of some of the rabbis involved with this, but they aren’t exactly making it easy to understand their heter. 90% of the letters on their site simply talk about how great and halachically solid eruvin are in-general, which nobody is challenging. The issue of Brooklyn being a reshus harabim is beyond side-stepped. They say, and I quote:
“There is no need to elaborate on the topic of permissibility of setting up Eiruvin in big cities in general, and Brooklyn specifically, since this is something that has been discussed at great length by the Gedolei Haposkim.”
I respect these rabbis and don’t want to be throwing around accusations, but they need to explain their reasoning. The Crown Heights Badatz already made a scathing rebuke, and I assume others will follow. From my understanding, even the Manhattan eiruv claims that their heter is that it’s sectioned off into sub-compartments none of which exceed 600K people. Seeing as this new Brooklyn eiruv isn’t even claiming to have done that, this might be the single most halachically problematic eiruv ever built.
If it is only kosher according to the unique shittah of the Aruch Hashulchan (which they aren’t even claiming), then that still doesn’t help with my last statement. The precedent is not to hold by it. The OU has a page where they mention nobody allows us to hold by that l’kulah. The OU.
I don’t get into fights about the boro park eruv. That’s because rav pam said not to; he was very sad to hear that almost half of boro park carries, “uber machlokes is erger,” were his words.
But he didn’t defend the flatbush or definitely not the Brooklyn -wide idea, as far as i know. I don’t think it was even a hava amina in his time
On that, i don’t mind getting into arguments
Dear Neville,
Wow! You are really out of place here. What is wrong with you that you looked something up?
Some posters will take this to mean ehat your argument must have been logically unsound. Why else would someone resort to the facts?
If I recall Conservative Judaism built such Eruvin back when the lay people kept Shabbos. How is that for normative precedent?
Though you understand that the OP did not come here for psak. The important thing is to remember that we shouldn’t bother him/her anymore, because… because just because.
Dear Avira,
I think Rav Pam’s passing was what allowed the Flatbush Eruv to move forward. You should know about this.
N0m: The old Flatbush eiruv from the 1970s was built by the MO and the MO were the only ones that used it. Rav Moshe was opposed to it.
Dear Ujm,
Before my time. But I know of several MO Flatbush families that tell their out of town relatives there is no eruv in Flatbush. Maybe you don’t realize that they are MO because they approve of kollel.
Reasonably non-controversial eruvim are available in EY and many “OOT” cities in US. So, it seems that the most “in townies” consist of either people, whose wives can’t walk to shul or park with a stroller on shabbos like everyone else or those who use possibly invalid eruvim? This is not worth the large selection of restaurants …
Dear Always,
What Shul and what park?
😂
But it might be worth the large selection of Yeshivos.
Point taken, though. If everything else were equal in terms of frum resources, it would make no sense for a huge part of the frum world to congregate in one of the world’s only doraysadik reshusei harabim.
Hatzad Hashava of these zealots here, especialy AviraDeaarah, is that they NEVER learnt Rav Moshe’s teshuvos, let alone the other gedolei acharonim. They don’t even know the metzius. They don’t even realize that according to their arguments it would be equally unacceptable to make in any (large) city say for example chicago. Yet, reb david finestine allowed it. Hence, don’t open your mouth on others especially when there are great talmidei chachamim and experts in the issue who’s ankles you don’t even reach.
“They don’t even realize that according to their arguments it would be equally unacceptable to make in any (large) city say for example chicago.”
No, it wouldn’t. As we’ve said several times on this very thread, Reb Moshe was matir the Queens eruv. He did not asser city eruvin on the basis of the machmir definition of a reshus harabim. He asser’d the Manhattan and Brooklyn eruvin on the basis that they are a R”HR even according the the meikel definition.
I explicitly said a few posts up “I respect these rabbis and don’t want to be throwing around accusations, but they need to explain their reasoning.” If that sounds disrespectful enough that you need to be throwing a hissy fit, then maybe you aren’t cut out for the CR. Personally, I didn’t see Avira say anything disrespectful either.
NY is huge not because it is so great that everyone from US moves there. To the opposite, maybe hundred millions arrived there from the other countries, and eighty millions left, the remaining 20 are temporarily stuck on an island before they can afford to buy a car, pay the tolls and cross a bridge to America proper. .. Jews had good historical reasons and fear of assimilation to be stuck in NY for longer, of course, so we move gradually to Elizabeth, Monsey, Stamford, and Lakewood …
Thanx. I have no patience to write here the nitty gritty but but R’ Moshe aside, according to the others quoted to asser, namely Rabbis Bick Belsky Kotler zatzal and more, according to all of them what I wrote is correct. Even if it would work according to Rav Moshe, where did the d’oraysa disappear to if it is one according to the rabbis I mentioned? Oh, because you rely on Rav Moshe? Well those Brooklyn have many great rabbanim of this generation to rely on, as well as many gedolei acharonim of yesteryear.
As for RAv Moshe Feinstein, I implore you to learn his own words and tell me a coherent heter for Queens. In short, did anyone ever sit down with a map and city records as to whether KGH isn’t part of a 12×12 mil area of 3,000,000?lakewhut, I don’t know what you mean when you say Elizabeth isn’t a thing, but they do have an Eruv, overseen by R’ Teitz.
Elizabeth doesn’t exist. It’s all a giant conspiracy. Think about it, have you ever seen Elizabeth and yourself in the same room at the same time?
Dear Richmond,
Something doesn’t sound write about your approach. Are you capable of building city eruvin? I am not.
Rav Belsky and Rav Bick definitely did approve of the city eruv in concept. It is very difficult to decipher Rav Aaron’s stance. But the Toronto and Baltimore eruvin were from two of his talmidim. I really can’t make sense of your post. What is your point?“As for RAv Moshe Feinstein, I implore you to learn his own words and tell me a coherent heter for Queens.”
Go to the KGH Eiruv’s website. There’s a hand-written letter of approval on there from Reb Moshe. I wasn’t really able to read his hand writing, but you’re welcome to give it a shot.In any case, the fact that you don’t personally understand why he differentiated between Queens and the other boroughs does not mean there is no real reason. He was matir Kew Garden Hills and asser Brooklyn. Those are the facts.
N0m:
“I really can’t make sense of your post.”
Having a little trouble also, but I think he’s trying to make the argument binary, meaning there are those who hold by the machmir definition of a R”HR like the sphardi rishonim and the stam halacha in the S”A which would disallow all city eiruvin, and there are those that hold like Rashi and the yesh omrim in the S”A (as we almost all do today). This isn’t really the case with this who debate. We’re all operating within Rashi’s definition otherwise there would be nothing to talk about. The claim is that Brooklyn and Manhattan are reshusei harabim according even to the meikel shittos.Rich…rav belsky was against many large scale eruvin, for different reasons. Us talmidim did not carry in Yerushalayim, for instance.
As regards to the matirim, besides rav yechezkel roth and rav menasheh klein, which over high profile poskim were provably matir it?
But even they did not request an eruv, but rather endorsed it after it was made.
They’re also not infallible, and benechilas kovod torasam, it is questionable to undermine the accepted minhag based on a psak from the gedolei hador of a generation preceding them.
“They’re also not infallible, and benechilas kovod torasam, it is questionable to undermine the accepted minhag based on a psak from the gedolei hador of a generation preceding them.”
Don’t agree with you here. They’re from a different group. I don’t think Satmars should be expected to be fine with Reb Moshe’s definition of a mechitzah just because he was the “posek hador,” nor should Chassidim necessarily have to go like him in this case. Feels like kind of Litvish imperialism to say that everyone should have to follow our poskim just because there are more of us.
Again, I don’t know the heter for the 2022 all-of-Brooklyn eruv because their site very explicitly does not contain it. This does bother me, but not solely for the reason that they are paskening differently than Reb Moshe. The issue is that they aren’t really “pakening” at all. They just built the thing with no public justification.
Neville, it wasn’t just the litvishe poskim, it was most chasidishe poskim and rebbes of the time as well.
Avira:
Are you talking about the new, 2022 Brooklyn eruv, or even the BP eiruv?Even by your own admission on this thread, there were poskim who were Reb Moshe’s contemporaries who would approve of the BP eruv, albeit they might have outlived him. They surely always held it was mutar and just didn’t put it into action until later. As I remarked earlier, it does seem icky to wait until a gadol dies and then immediately start ignoring his psak, but I was told the same thing happened with the Forest Hills eruv. There was apparently a respected, European rabbi who kept blocking it as long as he lived.
My point being, maybe you could say it was disrespectful to build it, but at this point those rabbonim who hold it’s mutar will say so, and those who hold like them have on what to rely now. I don’t see any reason their shittah should be inherently pasul.
Dear Avira,
Two more: Rav Tuvia Goldstein and Dayan Fishel.
Dear Neville,
My problem with his post is that there doesn’t seem to be an option of enclosing a public domain or of separating an enclosed street.
And the nitty gritty of the teshuva is not the twelve by twelve. It’s the one street at a time factor like every other teshuva on the topic.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.