- This topic has 436 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 10 months, 2 weeks ago by .
-
Posts
-
youdontsay,
I found an old post of yours which states:
“You see an oral explanation cannot be in direct contradiction to a written teshuvah. The fact is Rav Moshe maintained that an eruv cannot be erected in any part of an area of 12 mil by 12 mil containing a population of approximately 3 million. Therefore, it is irrelevant (based on Rav Moshe’s teshuvos) if an area encompassing such a population consisted of individual neighborhoods, since an eruv cannot be erected in any part of this area. Sorry, Rav Moshe could not have made such a distinction.”Now, when you say that one can make in a subsection of Brooklyn, does that mean A) even when Brooklyn would meet the 12×12 mil criterion, or B) only when it would not (which you state it doesn’t – just like KGH doesn’t). If you’ll say A) then you’re contradicting what you wrote in the old post I referenced.
“Therefore, according to Rav Moshe there is no reason not to allow an eruv.”
And yet he didn’t.“If one can make a subsection of Queens then one can make in a subsection of Brooklyn.”
And yet he didn’t.“The Brooklyn Eruv is relying on mechitzos. With mechitzos there is no issue according to all”
And yet the posek hador was asser Brooklyn and nearly the entire yeshivish oilam agreed. Doesn’t seem so mutar “according to all.”You can keep lying about Reb Moshe’s stance all you want, we’re just going to keep calling you out on it.
I dont know nearly enough about eiruvin to say anything, I just thought it was interesting that i was walking with a freind in CH and he took off his hat and started walking with it when I reminded him theres no eiruv he blushed and replied that hes so used to being able to carry that he did it robotically.
Richmond Braun,
“B) only when it would not (which you state it doesn’t – just like KGH doesn’t).”
I did not want to get into it, but yes, any area that contains less than 600,000 can be encompassed by tzuras hapesachim according to Rav Moshe’s shitos. The main point is Rav Moshe believed at the time that a 12 mil by 12 mil section of Brooklyn contains a population of 3 million, and that each Boro Park and Flatbush contain a population greater than 600,000. Hence, he opposed an eruv for BP and Flatbush. This understanding is the only explanation as to why Rav Moshe allowed an eruv in Queens and Detroit, but did not allow in Brooklyn.Neville Chaim Berlin,
“Therefore, according to Rav Moshe there is no reason not to allow an eruv.”
“”And yet he didn’t.””
Correct. However, the metzious is not as he wrote. Oh, I forgot that is not possible, Rav Moshe opposed an eruv in Brooklyn, because he opposed, and the metzious that he based his teshuvah on are irrelevant.“If one can make a subsection of Queens then one can make in a subsection of Brooklyn.”
“”And yet he didn’t.””
Correct. However, the metzious is not as he wrote. Oh, I forgot that is not possible, Rav Moshe opposed an eruv in Brooklyn, because he opposed, and the metzious that he based his teshuvah on are irrelevant.“The Brooklyn Eruv is relying on mechitzos. With mechitzos there is no issue according to all”
“”And yet the posek hador was asser Brooklyn and nearly the entire yeshivish oilam agreed. Doesn’t seem so mutar “according to all.””
Correct. However, the metzious is not as he wrote. Oh, I forgot that is not possible, Rav Moshe opposed an eruv in Brooklyn, because he opposed, and the metzious that he based his teshuvah on are irrelevant. Oh, I would accept the “yeshivish oilam’s” opinion when they have an educated opinion. Rav Tuvia used to say, bring me the unused volume, when asking for the fourth chelek of the Mishnah Berurah (Eruvin). He would always say, its unused because its not a Yeshivish mesechta, and learning halachah is not their strong point.“”You can keep lying about Reb Moshe’s stance all you want, we’re just going to keep calling you out on it.””
You made up your mind and do not want to be mixed up with facts. Go learn the inyan prior to pontificating.TunaFish
Would you please elaborate on your story? I mean, what do you mean he was used to carry; to carry where? In CH? After they made an eruv? So there is an eruv. Or is he used to it from elsewhere? Anyway I’m not sure what you’re trying to get across.Dear Youdont,
The CJLS understands Eruv as a neighborhood marker. They considered entire regions to be enclosed by eruvin. They allowed driving to shul in 1950. By the sixties, the laymen were driving everywhere.
Which sentence is outlandish and needs a source?
Dear Youdont,
Modern American Cities are set up very differently than cities in prewar Europe. The suburb was just coming into existence. This is a major key to reading all the teshuvos from that era.
Dear Youdont,
So to be clear, Rav Moshe’s opinion was against eruvin in Brooklyn. You don’t have to agree with it. Or even know why it fits with what he writes, but that was without a doubt his actual opinion.
Dear Youdont,
The issues of proper construction and frequently checked, are even greater factors in the year 2023.
I have no idea what the debate at hand is. It is hard for me to isolate your posts to a single point.
Dear Youdont,
Eruvin is one of the most learned mesechtos by kolleliet today.
There was much more to Rav Moshe’s stance than population by area. Your entire knowledge of Rav Moshe’s teshuva seems to come down to just the parts where the word ‘chiddush’ is included. It’s like learning the whole Shulchan Aruch in the old print, but just where the pointing finger was inserted.
Rav Moshe published how he understood the sugya. He paskened according to how the public would treat the issue. Puk chazi how Hilchos Eruvin is slowly unraveling.
n0mesorah:
“The CJLS understands Eruv as a neighborhood marker. They considered entire regions to be enclosed by eruvin. They allowed driving to shul in 1950. By the sixties, the laymen were driving everywhere. Which sentence is outlandish and needs a source?”
Huh, that’s proof to what? You don’t get it. The Reform and to some extent the Conservative movements (today) were embarrassed of the concept of eruvin, and considered them loopholes. The other part of the Conservative movement, did away with much of the halachic issues at hand. In other words, those people who argue against eruvin today are closer to these movements than those who establish eruvin.n0mesorah,
“Modern American Cities are set up very differently than cities in prewar Europe. The suburb was just coming into existence. This is a major key to reading all the teshuvos from that era.”
Revisionism. Rav Moshe would disagree with you. He maintained that because eruvin where established in cities containing shishim ribo, we cannot today say that cities encompassing such a population cannot erect an eruv. Furthermore, Warsaw, Lodz, Oddesa, and Paris, are no different than todays modern cities. If anything, as Rashi states in Eruvin 59b, the reshus harabbim of the city in the times of Chazal, does not pertain to the way cities are currently laid out (similar to the the Aruch HaShulchan’s argument).n0mesorah,
“So to be clear, Rav Moshe’s opinion was against eruvin in Brooklyn. You don’t have to agree with it. Or even know why it fits with what he writes, but that was without a doubt his actual opinion.”
No that’s your ill informed opinion projected into Rav Moshe. Rav Moshe was not a rebbe, he was a baal halachah, who wrote his decisions based on the facts as told to him. If the facts are not correct, or have changed, there is no reason to follow his psak. Moreover, Rav Moshe never gave a psak di barrur regarding Brooklyn. Learn the inyan prior to pontificating.n0mesorah,
“The issues of proper construction and frequently checked, are even greater factors in the year 2023.
I have no idea what the debate at hand is. It is hard for me to isolate your posts to a single point.”
No, this is a modern day argument. In order to allow some eruvin, begrudgingly, they have come up with chumros in the construction of eruvin in order to sow doubt in peoples eyes regarding all of them. In fact no one accepted all the modern day chumros previously.Dear Youdont,
Your position is not that far off of theirs. The difference is that Conservative was honest enough to eventually say what the theory behind their approach was.
There are a whole bunch of disputes with Rav Moshe that come down to the other side having Conservative opinions but being too scared to really say them. This is because Conservative was very much legitimized in Europe. Every Orthodox group got the message and hid their underlying approach to Torah and Mitzvos for decades. Until Rabbi Avi Weiss was stupid enough to go public with his theories.
And obviously you are way out because Reform and Conservative didn’t care much for observance. They wanted communal affiliation. (And social mobility.)
n0mesorah,
“Eruvin is one of the most learned mesechtos by kolleliet today.”
Rav Tuvia mentioned this years ago. In any case, much of eruvin is learnt lekanter.“There was much more to Rav Moshe’s stance than population by area. Your entire knowledge of Rav Moshe’s teshuva seems to come down to just the parts where the word ‘chiddush’ is included. It’s like learning the whole Shulchan Aruch in the old print, but just where the pointing finger was inserted.”
First of all, why don’t you demonstrate your bekeious in Rav Moshe’s teshuvos. From your writing it is clear you have a limited knowledge of his shitos. Second, these are the reasons why Rav Moshe objected to an eruv in Brooklyn, because he was led to believe that a 12 mil by 12 mil section of Brooklyn contains a population of 3 million, and that both Boro Park and Flatbush, each contain a population greater than 600,000. Additionally, he was informed that Brooklyn is not encompassed with mechitzos. These are factually incorrect. All the other reasons for which he could have possibly objected (which I am sure you do not know, but will go scrambling to figure out) fall away once the above reasons are shown to have been superseded. Please lean the inyan prior to answering.“Rav Moshe published how he understood the sugya. He paskened according to how the public would treat the issue. Puk chazi how Hilchos Eruvin is slowly unraveling.”
Exactly. However, to require the world to follow an opinion of one who notwithstanding his stature made arguments that are so mechudash, that they should have been at the minimum mentioned in the Rishonim, is absurd. Eruvin is unraveling by lamdanim who never learnt halachah, and never were meshamish rabbanim. Otherwise it is just fine.Dear Youdont,
Rav Moshe was a Rav in Russia and a Rosh Yeshiva in Manhattan. You can take all your useless halacha and throw into the any of the bodies of water in between. None of this works that way. There was a Vaad for Eruvin that met constantly. And Rav Moshe kept repeating that Brooklyn can’t have an Eruv.
Dear Youdont,
You still didn’t post your point.
There were some rabbonim in Europe who were hesitant about all eruvin. They kept it to themselves and didn’t build or forbid eruvin. I agree that it is weird how some want to be machmir and have an eiruv. Proper construction and regular inspection is not a new concept.
I am getting the feeling that you are trying to defend a certain figure who was disgraced by the mattirim of the Boro Park Eruv.
“No that’s your ill informed opinion projected into Rav Moshe.”
No, it’s how he paskened and everyone knows it. You need to stop, because you are seriously embarrassing yourself.
As I personally asserted earlier, if there were a change in metzius then it could be worth reevaluating and maybe Reb Moshe’s psak would no longer apply. Hundreds of posts in and not one person has given any evidence or even theory of a change in metzius. You, not unlike Richmond, keep alluding to some mysterious device without naming it.
In short, if there was a change in metzius between Reb Moshe’s psak and now, tell us what it was. If not, we’re going to continue to assume you’re just making stuff up and have no real answer.
n0mesorah’
“Rav Moshe was a Rav in Russia and a Rosh Yeshiva in Manhattan. You can take all your useless halacha and throw into the any of the bodies of water in between. None of this works that way. There was a Vaad for Eruvin that met constantly. And Rav Moshe kept repeating that Brooklyn can’t have an Eruv.”
Of course you are going to make statements such as, “You can take all your useless halacha and throw into the any of the bodies of water in between.” You are after all an eino modeh beruv, and Chazal had choice words for such people. People making arguments such as yours are really not part of our mesorah. Regarding your claim that there was a Vaad for Eruvin that met constantly for Brooklyn, you can’t back it up, because its fiction. By the way, eruvin is no different than any other halachic issue. Every rav large or small has a right to express his opinion.n0mesorah,
“You still didn’t post your point.”
Because you don’t understand does not mean that I didn’t post my point. But you know what, tell which point you are seeking, and I will answer directly.“There were some rabbonim in Europe who were hesitant about all eruvin. They kept it to themselves and didn’t build or forbid eruvin. I agree that it is weird how some want to be machmir and have an eiruv. Proper construction and regular inspection is not a new concept.”
A lot of gibberish. Which rabbanim kept to themselves, and did not forbid? The Mishkenous Yaakov? Did you read his teshuvos on the matter? He clearly forbid eruvin. However, his own city had an eruv. You probably are making things up as you go along. To claim that most eruvin are not properly constructed is a modern day krankhayt, and is banged around to sow doubt.“I am getting the feeling that you are trying to defend a certain figure who was disgraced by the mattirim of the Boro Park Eruv.”
No one was disgraced by the mattirim. This argument sounds like the claim that both sides act as terrorist. My rejoinder, when is the last time you saw someone chasing someone in the street and screaming, why are you not carrying. This never happens and there is only screaming from the other side.Neville,
Since you do seem to be clear yourself about Rav Moshe’s shittah, let me ask you a few questions or riddles and we’ll see if you can answer them without looking them up first (we’ll take your word for that):
1) Which Volume and Siman is the teshuva about Flatbush and which about Boro Park?
2) What are the facts and statistics that Rav Moshe states and upon which he bases his prohibition?
3) What did Rav Dovid ben Rav Moshe pasken regarding West Rogers Park (I wonder if you know where that is without searching)?
4) In what respect is West Rogers Park equal or different than Brooklyn?
5) In what respect is Kew Gardens Hills equal or different than Brooklyn?
6) How can there be even the neighborhood eruvin in Lakewood today, if according to Rav Aharon (as well as Rav Moshe Weissman, Rav Bick, Rav Soloveitchik x2, and on and on) most of them are reshus harabim?
7) How can some chasidim who emigrated from Boro Park (where they don’t use the eruv) to Linden and its environs suddenly be able to establish an eruv which wouldn’t work according to all the poskim in question 6?
8) Why are people when they’re in Flatbush they wouldn’t use the eruv yet when they’re, say, in Baltimore they’re happy to use one – being that practically the only posek that would distinguish between them is Rav Moshe?Neville Chaim Berlin,
“No, it’s how he paskened and everyone knows it. You need to stop, because you are seriously embarrassing yourself.”
No and his psak was based on facts that are incorrect or have changed. Funny I am embarrassing myself, when you have waded into an inyan, which you know nothing about. Please learn the inyan prior to telling others what to do.“As I personally asserted earlier, if there were a change in metzius then it could be worth reevaluating and maybe Reb Moshe’s psak would no longer apply. Hundreds of posts in and not one person has given any evidence or even theory of a change in metzius. You, not unlike Richmond, keep alluding to some mysterious device without naming it.”
First of all, you are not capable of evaluating an inyan that you know nothing about. Second, I wrote many times what has changed. 1) The fact is over an area of 12 mil by 12 mil in Brooklyn the population is much less than 3 million. 2) Rav Moshe stated that both BP and Flatbush contain a population greater than 600,000. This is demonstrably incorrect. 3) Rav Moshe declared that Brooklyn is not encompassed by mechitzos. The issue is not if Brooklyn is omed merubeh al haparutz, but only if the mechitzos are 99% or 99.95% omed. Anyone denying this fact is either an am haaretz or blind. In fact there is more than one set of mechitzos encompassing Brooklyn today.“In short, if there was a change in metzius between Reb Moshe’s psak and now, tell us what it was. If not, we’re going to continue to assume you’re just making stuff up and have no real answer.”
See above. It is clear that you wouldn’t know which particular teshuvos I am referring to in Igros Moshe, and that you are going to scramble to figure out what I am referring to.n0mesorah,
“Rav Moshe was a Rav in Russia and a Rosh Yeshiva in Manhattan. You can take all your useless halacha and throw into the any of the bodies of water in between. None of this works that way.”
By the way, my argument stands. The Ramban (and other Rishonim) asked on shitos Behag/Rashi that such a chiddush should have been mentioned by Chazal. But we can’t argue that at the minimum the Rishonim should have mentioned Rav Moshe’s chiddush that shishim ribo is conditional of five times the number of people over an area of 12 mil by 12 mil. Furthermore, Rav Moshe would not issue a psak din barur, because he agreed that even the poskim did not mention his chiddush. This absurdness comes from those who never learnt the inyan.Neville,
” if there was a change in metzius between Reb Moshe’s psak and now, tell us what it was”
Well, there actually wasn’t. It’s just that the metzius was actually kosher to begin with but Rav Moshe worked with a superimposed one.Richmond Braun,
I agree with all that you wrote, besides for something in number 6.
Only according to Rav Aharon, and Rav Soloveitchik x2, are all the Lakewood eruvin problematic. I believe that RMB subscribes to shitas Rashi, and Lakewood does not have shishim ribo in the city.
In any case, lets see Neville scramble.Richmond Braun,
“Well, there actually wasn’t. It’s just that the metzius was actually kosher to begin with but Rav Moshe worked with a superimposed one.”
As Rav Blumenkrantz mentioned to me, in 2000, that when he established an eruv for FR he asked RMF his rebbe, if he can do so. RMF said of course. When he announced that the eruv was a fact, he received a phone call from the rav who was the one who fed RMF all the information regarding the facts on the ground in Brooklyn. This Rav asked Rav Blumenkrantz who gave him permission to establish an eruv. RB answered that he is a rav and he issues hechsherim on many items, so why should eruvin be different. This rav then argued that eruvin is different and he needs a consensus. RB ran back to his rebbe and asked for his approval in writing. To which, RMF answered, that he cannot give a written statement, as this rav will start to scream, and he does not have the koach to argue.
It is absurd that people argue that the metzius is irrelevant, because RMF issued a psak. A teshuvah is written to demonstrate the underlying reasoning of the psak. Absent of correct metzius the teshuvah cannot be used as a argument either way.“Well, there actually wasn’t. It’s just that the metzius was actually kosher to begin with but Rav Moshe worked with a superimposed one.”
Ah, ok. So, it’s just that you guys feel qualified to “correct” the posek hador. I guess I can go ahead and trust all eruvin unconditionally now that random CR posters have stated that Reb Moshe didn’t know what he was talking about.
n0m:
Sadly, this discussion transcends the YWN coffeeroom. There is this whole website dedicated to making exactly the types of arguments we’re seeing here that I came across. There is a major constituency of people who want to argue all eruvin are inherently kosher and twist Reb Moshe’s words to sound like even he would agree. Rest assured, you haven’t gone insane; all the things you are saying are the normative shittah.youdontsay,
Thank you.
As for #6, I meant it for good measure.
Especially since Ocean County has more than 600,000 and who knows how RMB would reckon Lakewood limits? He might have said that since one can continue through streets from Lakewood to Howell and so on perhaps throughout the whole county then it’s all one. Besides, being that Rt 9 runs through the city, and it surely “services” 600000, he might deem all streets mfulashim to rt 9 from one side and to some other highway from the other and all become public domain. However, all I wrote about RMB is my own surmising as I have not studied his shitah properly as of late. So if I’m wrong than I repent.Dear Youdont,
You made a lot of assumption about my opinions.
I make a point of using local eruvin. I was never advocating against all or most or even some eruvin. The problem today, is rabbonim who put their names on eruvin without consulting a topological map and walking the perimeter. The rav did not even know first hand that the eruv was constructed.
I want to know what your point was that made you post here originally. I see that you think Rav Moshe’s opinion was that Brooklyn has the same population problems as Manhattan did. This isn’t true. And you keep insisting it is, because you insist it is so. As I have posted above, other rabbonim are entitled to their opinion and may disagree with Rav Moshe’s psak. Yet even the mattirim didn’t think that applied to a rav that didn’t even kn ow mishnayos eruvin. Even if he had photographic memory of the teshuvos.
Eruvin are the responsibility of the local rav. No rav equals no eruv. This is an old criteria. And it is close to the core of the Brooklyn Eruv as can be demonstrated by the original need for the Boro Park Eruv. I first heard of the eruvin vaad from Rav Tuvya’s talmidim. Rav Moshe was very serious about Brooklyn and all his contemporaries admitted that is what he held. Nobody is impressed that you can read a loophole into his shittah. It’s not Rav Moshe’s way to force an issue, yet he did that with Brooklyn <strentgh>more<strentgh> than Manhattan.
I’m not starting with Rav Moshe’s teshuvah. I don’t have an agenda here other than pointing out that the OP wanted to throw out eruvin and gain approval of the YV at the same time.
He is in la la land.
Dear Richmond,
When I was in Alabama, I didn’t use the eruv. Even though nobody would ever call that mobile park a reshus harrabim. You know why? Because there wasn’t one. Even though it was mostly enclosed. An eruv having never been put up, or put up by those who don’t know eruvin well, is an absolute deal breaker to almost all yeshivaliet. I don’t why the chassidim have a problem with this concept.
Put up a good eruv with clearly defined boundaries that is regularly checked. Start with checking your bungalow colony’s eruv annually.
Neville Chaim Berlin,
“Ah, ok. So, it’s just that you guys feel qualified to “correct” the posek hador. I guess I can go ahead and trust all eruvin unconditionally now that random CR posters have stated that Reb Moshe didn’t know what he was talking about.”
No, stop making Rav Moshe into a rebbe. His psak is predicated on the metzius, period. It is not that Rav Moshe c”v didn’t know what he was talking about, but only that the metzius was not as he was led to believe.“n0m:
Sadly, this discussion transcends the YWN coffeeroom. There is this whole website dedicated to making exactly the types of arguments we’re seeing here that I came across. There is a major constituency of people who want to argue all eruvin are inherently kosher and twist Reb Moshe’s words to sound like even he would agree. Rest assured, you haven’t gone insane; all the things you are saying are the normative shittah.”
Excuses. You simply do not know the inyan, and can’t debate the issues. My arguments were made after carefully learning through all of RMF’s teshuvos on the inyan.“Richmond Braun
Participant
youdontsay,
Thank you.
As for #6, I meant it for good measure,”
In truth he would have found a reason to osser, so maybe your right. I won’t spend more time on his shitos, because I was never impressed. For more on his opinions see Kerm Beyavne.n0mesorah,
“I want to know what your point was that made you post here originally. I see that you think Rav Moshe’s opinion was that Brooklyn has the same population problems as Manhattan did. This isn’t true. And you keep insisting it is, because you insist it is so.”
Huh. Absolutely incorrect. Never said so, because Rav Moshe’s issues with Manhattan were somewhat different than Brooklyn. Then again I am not going to explain it to one who does not know the basics. Just the fact that you accuse me of this demonstrates that you do not understand what I am referring to.“As I have posted above, other rabbonim are entitled to their opinion and may disagree with Rav Moshe’s psak. Yet even the mattirim didn’t think that applied to a rav that didn’t even kn ow mishnayos eruvin. Even if he had photographic memory of the teshuvos.”
RMMK knew more than just teshuvos, stop this silliness. In fact he was supported by most rabbanim in Manhattan. You simply do not know what you are talking about.n0mesorah,
“Eruvin are the responsibility of the local rav. No rav equals no eruv. This is an old criteria.”
Just like all hechsherim if there is no rav then there is no hechsher. What are you adding.“And it is close to the core of the Brooklyn Eruv as can be demonstrated by the original need for the Boro Park Eruv.”
Gibberish“I first heard of the eruvin vaad from Rav Tuvya’s talmidim.”
Fiction. There was no such vaad, and you never heard it from anyone.“Rav Moshe was very serious about Brooklyn and all his contemporaries admitted that is what he held. Nobody is impressed that you can read a loophole into his shittah.”
It is not a loophole. Rav Moshe, was mechudash, hence if we can find an avenue why he would allow, no one has a right to object. Do not add to his chiddushim to osser eruvin, you definitely do not have a right to do so.
No one has a right to force the world to follow a self admitted mechudash shita, no matter how great the posek is. How much more so that it was based on misinformation. Moreover, he never issues a psak din barrur for Brooklyn.” It’s not Rav Moshe’s way to force an issue, yet he did that with Brooklyn <strentgh>more<strentgh> than Manhattan.”
Gibberish, you have not learnt many of his teshuvos.“I’m not starting with Rav Moshe’s teshuvah.”
Because you do not know them.n0mesorah,
“An eruv having never been put up, or put up by those who don’t know eruvin well, is an absolute deal breaker to almost all yeshivaliet.”
As if the average Yeshivaman knows the difference between a kosher eruv and not. Stop this narishkeit.Dear Youdont,
Chas v’shalom that any Rav would not want to associate with RMMK! Where did you get that from?
n0mesorah,
“Your position is not that far off of theirs. The difference is that Conservative was honest enough to eventually say what the theory behind their approach was.”
To call the position of those who actually learnt hilchos eruvin, as not being far off from the Conservative’s movement, is proof of how far the ant-eruv group has come. There is no doubt that you are a eino modeh beruv, or eino modeh bshitufei mavaaos. The fact that you are selective in what you allow, dose not change this fact, but only your arguments.Dear Youdont,
“As if the average Yeshivaman knows the difference between a kosher eruv and not.”
Do you even realize what you just posted?!? I caught you with your pants down!
That was your response to why an Eruv needs to actually be constructed by one who is knowledgeable in eruvin. So your saying, that it doesn’t matter if the eruv is kosher or even if it exists, just just trust the rav hamachshir and that’s it. This is exactly what Rav Moshe had on his mind. That some piously cultured individuals would come along and drag the whole community into an eruv debate without ever bothering to prove that they actually constructed the eruv. There are dozens of his rabbonim that can attest to this. Some of them who support putting up an eruv in Brooklyn. Your method is crucial to the existence of Conservative Judaism. Just let the rabbi decide. Nobody else knows enough to contradict him. If the rabbi says it then so it is. But the yeshiva world will always insist that we have a Torah. No rav will ever be good enough to convince us that we don’t.
Dear Youdont,
So I am still missing your point. So then what is your point?
Because I think I’m doing an excellent job putting words in your mouth.
n0mesorah,
“And obviously you are way out because Reform and Conservative didn’t care much for observance. They wanted communal affiliation. (And social mobility.)”
Huh. So the concept of eruvin cited in Chazal, to be mearev, or shituf, c”v has underpinnings in the Conservative movement. Do you even realize what you are arguing? Such hevel“Excuses. You simply do not know the inyan”
Wasn’t meant as an excuse, just a reminder to n0m and any passerbys that we are the normal ones here and you guys are the cooky ones, as I’m sure you are fully aware if you’ve ever gone off on these unhinged rants in front of normal frum people before. One doesn’t have to be an expert on eruvin to know that Reb Moshe was asser Brooklyn. You just have to not be a crazy person. And before you start whining that I’m not arguing in good faith by saying all of this, let me just remind you that you have concluded almost every single paragraph with an insult to the intelligence of whomever you were addressing.
““And it is close to the core of the Brooklyn Eruv as can be demonstrated by the original need for the Boro Park Eruv.”
Gibberish”I think his point was that the need for a BP eruv (and even Flatbush) proves that one could not put one all the way around Brooklyn, as they did last year. As stated earlier several times, we don’t have a problem with the BP eruv; it has its rabbonim with their reasons. The discussion is of the new, all-Brooklyn eruv. There’s no way you can apply your “comparable to KGH” logic to it.
“It is not that Rav Moshe c”v didn’t know what he was talking about, but only that the metzius was not as he was led to believe.”
He obviously had easy access to census data. This is an example of an “excuse,” if there ever was one. Any time people don’t like a Rav’s psak, but still want to respect the Rav, they come up with a wild conspiracy that he was purposely lied to about the facts or some such nonsense.
Dear Youdont,
On Conservative and Reform.
This has nothing to do with eruvin.
It is about making rabbinical prerogatives out of the Torah. No matter what your opinion is about Rav Moshe’s opinions, a proper eiruv still needs to be constructed.
I really can’t tell what you understand form my posts and what you don’t. Conveniently, you don’t seem to get my references to any of the recent scandalous eiruvin. But I’m glad that you remembered that an eiruv needs shituf.
Dear Youdont,
I’m not anti Eruv. The problem is that you are assuming what I am from an online post. Just like you assume Rav Moshe’s entire rational from Rav Dovid’s letter. Where in his teshuva on Williamsburg (I 138) Flatbush (IV 87-8) or Boro Park (V 28) does he write that Brooklyn contains three million people?
This is okay for the coffee room. But it is not allowed in bais midrash.
Dear Youdont,
It’s not about how much halacha you know. It’s your unwillingness to insist that the eruv be up to the the standards that you know are required. The ‘shrug’ = it’s a good eiruv I’ll see it whenever but until then go ahead and carry – is the crux of the problem. It is not a Torah approach to Shmiras haMitzvos. And it is what caused the downfall of Conservative Judaism.
I know that after a rav actually sees the eruv he is bombarded with issues by many who do not know what they are talking about. But that comes with the territory of being a rav. If your not interested, one (Or two!) can become a high end driver and drive the rav. That way when the rav is not around, the driver can play the role himself.
n0mesorah,
“Chas v’shalom that any Rav would not want to associate with RMMK! Where did you get that from?”
As Rav Tuvia used to say, there were more rabbanim who supported an eruv in Manhattan then not.n0mesorah,
“So I am still missing your point. So then what is your point?
Because I think I’m doing an excellent job putting words in your mouth.”
You wouldn’t know what I am talking about if I hit you over the head with it.n0mesorah,
“Do you even realize what you just posted?!? I caught you with your pants down!”
Reading comprehension alert!“That was your response to why an Eruv needs to actually be constructed by one who is knowledgeable in eruvin. So your saying, that it doesn’t matter if the eruv is kosher or even if it exists, just just trust the rav hamachshir and that’s it.”
Were did I say that you don’t need a rav hamachshir? What does the fact that the average Yeshivaman does not know the difference between a kosher eruv or not, have to do with rav hamachshir? Does the average Yeshivaman know much about hechsherim at all? Does he go into plants to observe their kashurs. Why should eruvin be any different?“This is exactly what Rav Moshe had on his mind. That some piously cultured individuals would come along and drag the whole community into an eruv debate without ever bothering to prove that they actually constructed the eruv. There are dozens of his rabbonim that can attest to this. Some of them who support putting up an eruv in Brooklyn.”
Fiction alert. Please stop making statements as if you know what you are talking about. These claims are being made up on the spot. Rav Moshe never said anything like this. We do not see this in any of his teshuvos.“Your method is crucial to the existence of Conservative Judaism. Just let the rabbi decide. Nobody else knows enough to contradict him. If the rabbi says it then so it is. But the yeshiva world will always insist that we have a Torah. No rav will ever be good enough to convince us that we don’t.”
Gibberish alert. The problem with Conservative Judaism is that the rabbis rewrite halachah as the please. Rov of the Yeshivah world simply does not know halachah, and would not know what they are looking at. They have nothing to add to the kashrus of the eruv, and they do not involve themselves with any other issue requiring kashrus.
Stop trying to convince us that you actually know the inyan.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.