Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
n0m:
I think I would have to read more of this thread to know what specifically you are addressing. I’m not sure what you mean by “the four,” but don’t worry about it. I’m not particularly interested in this thread anyway; sorry for the distraction.
“An explicit pasuk! what does that mean?”
Again, is this a real question? Do you really need me to cite it for you?
“The people outside of Europe who actually had access to chalav temayah did not have the same approach.”
Elaborate. If you’re claiming that people outside Europe ate cholov akum then just say so.As much as I want to keep fighting due to my masculine rage, let me offer this up:
-You define the kulah, stam halacha, chumra spectrum statistically: what most people do is the stam halacha, the meikel minority is the kulah, and the meikel minority is the chumrah.-I define it historically/chronologically: Whatever halachah came earlier is the stam halachah. If we go below that now, it’s a kulah, above is a chumrah.
I don’t actually have that much of a problem with your approach; I’m just kind of arguing because I’m bored. Do you really have that much of a problem with my approach, or should we just call it?
“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.“No tefillin on Chol Hamoed is a tosafos.”
The idea is in a tosfos in menachos, yes, but they don’t seem to actually be talking l’maaseh.
Anyway, I still don’t get your point. You seem to want this to be a Chabad vs. everyone else issue, but it’s so not. Rov ashkenazim don’t wrap on chol hamoed either nowadays.
“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.
“Also, quoting the Shulchan Aruch haRav to defend Chabad is like painting a target around an arrow. I don’t know of anyone other than Chabadniks that actually uses it to pasken halachos.”
It’s a respected sefer halachah in all circles. The Mishnah Berurah, Kitzur, and Piskei Teshuvos all use it. I’m not signing on to defend whatever you were arguing against wholesale, but this particular statement was just untrue.
“What is stam halacha decided by other than precedent?”
In the case of Chodosh, an explicit pasuk. In the case of cholov yisroal, a gezeiras chazal. Was this even a serious question?
“And your incorrect about what chalav yisroel meant throughout history. There were many different ways of going about it. The Gemara wasn’t invented in Europe.”
I literally have no idea what you even mean by this. Are you actually trying to suggest that people outside of Europe had cholov akum and ignored the issur? Cholov yisroel is not an Ashkenazi minhag; it’s a halacha. If you’re talking about the heter of the Pri Chadash, then fine, but I’m just going to call that a kulah as well because that’s what it is.
“Chodosh is a kula in some sense. But I think the term should not be applied when there is so much precedent.”
My point is that it does not matter how many people rely on something; it’s still a kulah. Chodosh is the best example because the overwhelming majority do rely on it, nonetheless it’s a leniency. The stam halacha is that chodosh is assur m’doraisa.
“Chalav hacompanies is not a kula at all. It just happens to be that there is another (possibly better) option.”
Absolute nonsense. For thousands the years, the halachah was you could only drink Cholov Yisroel. There now exists a heter not to in a way that’s still mutar, but that is 100%, definitively, unequivocally a kulah. Nobody is challenging the validity. Just stop moving the goalposts because your too insecure to admit that you rely on kulos every now and then.
“The fourth one was Tefillen on chol hamoed. It’s funny that nobody here has a problem with that.”
Doing it, or not doing it? The Shulchan Aruch HaRav paskens that one should wrap them without a bracha, but admits that the regional custom (of Belarus) was to indeed make a bracha. Chabad now clearly does not go like this.
Neither shittah in that machlokes is controversial though, so I don’t know why you would even think anyone would have a problem with that (whichever you’re referring to).
“So you get to label who is Zionist and who is anti Zionist when that in itself is a metaphor for Authentic Jewishness?”
Did I do that here? I usually only bring Zionism into it when I’m purposely trying to derail a thread; it seems far to on point on this thread to be worth doing that here.
“Yoshon was not kept for centuries in Europe. It is not clear why they didn’t, but such a precedent is not called a kulah.”
Sure it is. The only reason to argue otherwise is if you’re insecure in your frumliness. I don’t keep yoshon. I rely on kulos and so does everyone else. And, by the way, when the Rema and Bach talk about possible heterim for chadash, they seem to be explicitly talking about them as kulos. They would be the last people to be offended by the use of that term.
You’re hung up the the idea that “kulah” is an insult. Adaraba, it takes a much greater posek to be able to find [legitimate] kulos than to find chumros. With this overly sensitive notion you guys are arguing for, nothing could ever be called a kulah under any circumstances.
“Huju they tried this through the 1950s. The results were disastrous.”
I have a feeling CT Lawyer will have a thing for two to say about this.
“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.
“We have reached the stage of מחלוקת במציאות”
Yeah, I would be fine just leaving it. I’ve already said things more disparaging than I mean to. This place just really lets the subconscious anger flow through a person.
blaming the messenger?
youdont:
Saying that an area with over 600K people is a reshus harabim is definitively not a chiddish. The shittah of the Aruch HaShulchan doesn’t seem to have ever been accepted by anyone; he’s just choosing his wording wisely when talking about a previous posek hador.
We went through this same issue with Richmond: you can’t claim that Reb Moshe “would have” been matir a Brooklyn eruv. He was explicitly asser it. We don’t need to guess how he would have held based on other teshuvos.
He isn’t saying anything that is misrepresentative. It seems like he’s just having kashehs on things the Rebbe actually said. They allow through a full thread of people having kashehs on Reb Moshe’s stance regarding the Brooklyn eruv. Why shouldn’t people be able to ask questions on your Rebbe?
👍🏻
Richmond:
The reason it comes across as n0m is saying is because you keep telling us there are these mysterious sources out there that we would all obviously know about if we weren’t so clueless. Then, when we bring actual sources (even ones that assist the meikel stance), you just double down with the same stuff without getting any more specific.In the time you’ve taken to countlessly allude to these “halachic mechanisms” without ever naming sources or explaining them, or even making any attempt to reasonably prove their existence, you could have easily just told us over the information that you allegedly think we’re all lacking.
People here are either going to conclude–as you wish–that there is some secret halachic mechanism that is suspiciously left out of all publications discussing modern city eruvin that you are suspiciously unwilling to explain, yet somehow expect all frum yidden who have “done their homework” to know about.
Or, we could conclude that there is no rabbit in the hat, and that you have no idea what the new eruv is relying upon, and that you’re simply talking in circles with no real answers.
If we must be dan l’chaf zchus for anonymous forum posters, then maybe we’ll go with the first conclusion. Otherwise, we’ll go with Occum’s Razor: the simple conclusion is probably the correct one.
“or “misnagdim” if referring to someone who is attacking Chabad.”
Do you convince yourselves that everyone is attacking Chabad to be matir using this term indiscriminately? Lubavitchers throw around the word “misnaged” regardless of whether they’ve been attacked or not. We’ve all met Lubavitchers, so stop trying to lie.
“The average Chabad adult who doesn’t hang out online or with bochurim”
I dispute the existence of such a group.
Avira,
OK, I looked into it, and it definitely is problematic.Nonetheless, Simcha was using him l’chumra. You’re saying his machmir stance of lifnei iver by heter mechira is invalid because he’s problematically meikel elsewhere? If anything, doesn’t it kind of drive the point home that someone who is all too willing to be carelessly meikel still concedes that the halacha is stringent in this type of case?
“If you look at that sefer al hatorah veal hatemurah”
Do you mean Al HaGeulah v’al HaTemurah, by the Satmar Ruv?Sechel:
Can you present a good argument with sources that Yoshke cannot be moshiach without that same argument also excluding the Rebbe?
“Simcha, eliezer melamed has disqualified himself from being a posek by believing that all a “ger” has to do to be jewish is be as observant as a traditional chiloni Israeli.”
Not saying we should hold like this today, but the gemara explicitly talks about gerim getting through the process and still having no knowledge of hilchos Shabbos. I would have to see the context of this guy’s teshuva to know if it’s really as controversial as you present it.
DaMoshe:
Don’t ask me to explain why, because I don’t know, but it seems like the accepted thing is for people to be meikel on dishes, but machmir on actual food-items in a case of machlokes.Simcha:
I think we’re basically in agreement that we understand both sides of this.Also, I don’t think the mods are in the game of deciding which rabbis are reputable, so I wouldn’t use that as a proof. I’m not siding with Avira, just saying I wouldn’t make the blanket assumption that the mods agree with all shittos/hashkafos that are allowed though.
“I read enough of those to the point where some breaking news on the shidduch crisis would seem more relevant.”
Not to derail this awesome Chabad war that you started, but I’ve always been confused on your stance with the shidduch crisis. You generally seem presented as a modern, presumably college-educated guy. The shidduch crisis only requires the most remedial understanding of exponential growth to be able to understand its proof. Nobody with a genuine secular education should be questioning the reality of the shidduch crisis. People who can barely write full sentences maybe get a pass.
“Why do Chabanicks call people from the Yeshiva world “snags”?
Isn’t that meant as a derogetory name?”There are 2 reasons: 1) because they are openly a hate group. 2) because many of the baal teshuvish Lubavitchers unfortunately now think those are the official terms for non-Chassidim. The old guard in Chabad is very strict to never use terms like “Litvisher” or “yeshivish,” or anything non-offensive, so they simply aren’t aware of them.
“I heard from some anashim peshutim from there that they had hard time adjusting to American kashrut.”
Nobody says that the cholov stam heter applies in Iraq; that’s why I used it as a non-controversial example. Your Iraqi friends simply didn’t keep kosher.Simcha:
I was given this psak as well regarding shmitah i.e. that if I end up with heter mechira produce somehow, I’m not even allowed to pawn it off on someone who holds by the heter due to lifnei iver. I’m not noheg like this with cholov yisroel, but it would be totally understandable if someone were. I’m not sure why this is so hard for people to understand.“I’m not accusing but you can’t call something that Rav Moshe is Matir that it’s treif.”
Treif wouldn’t be the proper word, but if people hold l’halachah not by the cholov stam heter, then they hold that it is assur and giving it to another Jew would be lifnei iver by them.
This same differentiation would be present between one who holds R”T Tzeis l’chumra vs. l’halachah for motzei Shabbos, or Shabbos generators in Israel, or shmitta produce, etc. If you hold something l’halachah, you can’t facilitate or benefit from other people transgressing it.
“You compared it to giving pork to Refor, I presume that was just a figure of speech.”
Correct. The point was that it’s lifnei iver if you pasken that way.“As well as calling chalav hacompanies chalav akum”
No, you misunderstood. I wasn’t calling chalav stam chalav akum. I was talking about actual chalav akum (eg. milk you purchase in Iraq or something). It was a side point about issurei hanaah.“who cares who the rebbe’s classmates were, where the rebetzin worked, if they printed a picture with the rebbe and changed his suit color,”
If you admit that these things are falsified, then why keep spreading them? Why not stop going around telling everyone that he learned with Einstein? Why not use the undoctored versions of the photos? The silly ones in this argument are the ones lying seemingly indiscriminately, not the guy pointing them out. YOU are the ones who clearly care very deeply about keeping these lies going.“There is apparently ONE shul called “Anshei Liozna” but doesn’t seem to have attracted a significant number of chabadniks to break away from 770.”
Because there’s no market for non-meshichist Chabad. People who don’t believe the Chabad Rebbe is moshiach will just be something else entirely.“One general observation that comes from reading pro and anti Chabad books about the rebbe is that no one really knew him.”
The one we’re discussing on this thread speaks extensively about friends and acquaintances he had prior to being the Rebbe, particularly in Berlin. It could be that the later volumes talk about post-Rebbe friends, but I don’t have access.“There’s no issue hanaah by chalav stam.”
There’s no issur hanaah by mamash cholov akum either, but you still can’t feed it to a fellow Jew.“The point is that eating chalav stam is not assur, but baal tashchis is.”
Lifnei iver is. Would you criticize him for not giving pork to his Reform friend?“This guy put his chumrah over an actual halachah.”
Again, it’s not a chumrah no matter how many times you repeat it. Some people might keep it “l’chumrah,” this guy clearly keeps it l’halachah. People are not required to hold by Reb Moshe’s kulah. This is 100% about you wanting everyone to hold exactly like you, then you accuse us of being guilty of exactly what you’re doing.“The vast majority of Chabad are not meshechists.”
All frum yidden know this isn’t true; I don’t know who you think you’re fooling.When we say “meshechist” we mean anyone who believes that when the moshiach comes, it’s going to be the Rebbe in some for or another. Chabad has internally narrowed the definition of “meshichist” so that many of them can claim not to be while still pretending they aren’t lying.
Mentsch:
You started out by saying they keep minimally kosher and don’t wear tzitzis, then later you end up saying they changed from black to colored yarmulkes. One of these is a much bigger departure than the other.“I even know of one person who threw out a Reese’s bar rather than give it to someone who eats chalav stam.”
Suddenly everyone has to hold like Reb Moshe? How do you justify all the times the MO differs from him, then? Do you believe it’s only okay to disagree with Reb Moshe in the direction of being meikel?Cholov Yisroel is a stam halacha for which there is a heter than gets you around it. Same is true for kemach yoshon. Popularity of a heter doesn’t make it any less so. The majority of klal yisroel relies on the yoshon heter, yet it would be silly to say that somebody keeping the chiyuv doraisa of avoiding chadash is doing a “chumrah.” The other 90% of us are doing a kulah, and some of us have enough self-awareness to admit it rather than pretending everyone not like us is crazy.
“accepts the city eruv as a concept in general, then they shouldn’t make a fuss about Brooklyn eruvs either.”
Highly recommend you read an article published by the OU called “Major Cities and Their Eruv Status.” Eruvin in highly populated cities is not a “general concept” where if you accept one you accept them all. Each one seems to have a unique heter for its situation, and all the cities listed have more than 600K people.Sadly, they don’t say why Reb Moshe was ok with considering KGH its own reshus separate from the rest of Queens. They do mention that he forbade the inclusion of the highways, which means the new connector between KGH and Forest Hills does not have the backing of Reb Moshe. The author of the OU piece agrees with you that this would allow for eruvin in sub-sections of Chicago.
There are plenty of extremely meikel shittos on the books, but the new Brooklyn eruv needs to detail which one(s) they are utilizing, otherwise no frum yid should be using it and signing on to blindly trust a mystery heter. Again, not talking about the BP or Flatbush eruvin, talking about the new one that goes all the way around Brooklyn.
RSo, if you google the book, it should come up. They don’t allow links, but it’s on internet archive.
Common: He presents a signed statement from the library in the book stating that she never worked there. He also provides transcripts from the Barry Gurary trial where she herself needed a translator, so obviously she wasn’t fit to work as one herself. The false claim made was not that she was a librarian, but a translator.
“(which I oppose, and for non-Jews are a way to pay for whites to attend private schools that are defacto segregated)”
So what? It should be more important to you that people can afford to send their kids to yeshiva if you’re actually a frum yid.
Had not heard of this guy, but ended up reading for hours after looking into him.
I really hope this thread continues, and I highly recommend people look into R. Shaul Shimon Deutsch’s “Larger Than Life.” The second volume of it is viewable as a pdf if you search for it. He is a Lubavitcher and most of the biography still reads like someone really into the rebbe, but he is also committed to correcting some of the outright lies often repeated. Examples include: the Rebbe having studied at the Sorbonne, the Rebbe having learned with/known Einstein, the Rebbitzin having been a translator for the NY Public Library.
“And is possible that you aren’t actually aware of the off the derech problem in the yeshivish community?”
When did I ever deny this? Seemed like I was confirming the issue rather than denying it.“I take issue with you calling them “off the derech” and it’s the same issue I have with Da labeling things as “chumros””
Call it whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy. If someone significantly steps down from how they were raised, I think that’s going off the derech. I think if a super chassidishe person shaved and became the same level of frum that I am, that would be going off the derech for him relative to his upbringing. It has nothing to do with my approval of communities or lack thereof.“By no means are these kids off the derech”
The way you described them earlier certainly sounded like it. You now seem to be backpedaling a bit on just how off these people are.“The problem with your approach is that you make Rav Moshe as a gzeiras hakasuv”
In other words, you didn’t even read my post, or you’re potentially confusing me with other posters.“Well, I believe they do require as such – and they’re right there to whoever wants to learns his teshuvos objectively.”
Clearly you aren’t one of these people. I told you earlier, you can find his letter about the KGH eruv easily; I’m guessing you didn’t, and there’s nothing objective about your approach. You are strangely obsessed with wanting this to come out l’kulah.“I believe his heter would apply to sections of Brooklyn just as to KGH.”
Is this a joke? We don’t need to guess or theorize how Reb Moshe would have paskened for a Brooklyn eruv based on his psak regarding KGH. We KNOW how Reb Moshe paskened regarding Brooklyn.Your entire contribution to this discussion has been one big embarrassing lack of understanding causing you to believe that being matir one city means being matir all cities. There are plenty of resources out there for you to educate yourself on why you’re wrong.
If you really want to be “objective,” go back to the elu v’elu approach. There are respectable rabbis who were matir eruvin in Brooklyn, specifically Boro Park. That should be end of story. Everyone goes like their rav and doesn’t try to convert the other side. Why can’t you be satisfied with that? Two posts ago it seemed like you were.
“It bothers me when Chanadniks try and justify their Minhagim to the Litvish world. I think they should be firm in their customs and not worry what other communities think.”
The problem is that this would require them to think are mesoras are equally valid, which they don’t. They aren’t trying to “justify” their minhagim, they are trying to prove their supremacy.“No one ever makes a big stink when certain communities daven Shachris on Shabbos at 11am because their rebbe is “beyond time”.”
Sure we do. It might not be as noticeable to you since those communities aren’t also on the mission to convert the universe to their way.“It should be noted that the stereotypical the-entire-world-should-be-just-like-Chabad-there-is-a-great-answer-for-everything-because-the-Rebbe-was-so-great is a minority in Chabad.”
Are you kidding? This is the standard shittah of Chabad. It is the primary focus of their being. It’s beyond just the majority; I don’t think there is a single Lubavitcher on the planet who does not think this way.
It used to bother me, now I can just kind of laugh it off as silliness, but to close your eyes and pretend not to notice it is absurd.
“Additionally, why, for heaven’s sake, must one follow his fellow’s rav if he has his own?”
I agree, like I said before to Avira. The thing bothering me here with the new eruv is their lack of willingness to explain their halachic justification. You’re correct that other big cities in the past have had eruvin, yet they generally have had very specific reasoning. Even the Manhattan eruv has an official justification, albeit I don’t personally hold of it.“There was and is no “minhag” in this issue. Why didn’t this “minhag” disrupt the KGH eruv?”
Not sure what this is in response to; when did I mention minhagim?“Additionally, what’s this fabricated “waiting till the gadol dies” which you repeat (but didn’t invent)”
I could be wrong about this being an example of it. My chronology of the events might be off, as you pointed out. The general idea is certainly not fabricated, however (eg. the OU reversed some kashrus stances after Rav Belsky was niftar).Avira:
Obviously you’re going to say Reb Moshe is way more chushuv than Chassidishe rabbonim, and obviously chassidim will disagree. There’s really no purpose in bringing those types of points into this discussion. Even if they really were lower tier than Reb Moshe, they’re paskening for their people, he did for his. Not everybody has to hold like Litvish Ashkenazim on everything.DaMoshe:
Everything you said is just nonsense MO propaganda that they say about the chareidi would to console themselves. It’s kind of sad that that’s the primary reason anyone would continue to identify as modern.“But the yeshivish world believes in a cookie cutter system, where everyone must fit the same shape.”
The yeshivish world contains learning guys, balhabatim, and various people trying to do a combination of both. The modern world contains ONLY people deeply entrenched in the secular, working world. Any community is going to have this “cookie cutter” problem, but I actually think it’s way worse for the MO. If you don’t believe me, try fitting into an MO community while making under a six-figure salary.N0m:
“Relatively – MO is starting with a lower halachic standard. If the law people go beyond that standard out of a personal commitment, that is worth noting.”
Lol, okay then I would like to take this moment to make note of the fact that the Reform Jews are the holiest and frummest yidden because they fully make good on the level of halacha to which they commit, which is nothing at all. They often even go above and beyond by actually doing something.“The form of Anti Zionism by Mizrachi is that the government seeks it’s own power and justifications beyond advocating Mizrachi ideals.”
That’s not anti-zionism, that’s just disliking the government running Israel. Radical Zionists probably hate the government more than anyone, just like how far right patriots in America hate the government more than anyone.Mentsch:
“Ideologically they aren’t “MO” Perhaps subconsciously they have deeper guilt feelings . But from what I can tell there are minimal differences.”
What you’re describing is yeshivish people who are going off the derech. You’ve accidentally made a good point, which is that when yeshivish people go off the derech, they still just wind up basically being MO Jews.“Liquor sales have been restricted since at least the Middle Ages.”
So what?“The swaths of the South I’ve been through don’t fully overlap yours, so perhaps it’s a regional thing.”
Avram is being very polite. I too have been all around the south and I’m going to go a step further: I think you’re flat out lying. There simply are not tablets with the ten commandments in anyone’s yards. You might have seen one and extrapolated it to the entire south.Lakewhut:
He’s helping your side of this debate. Don’t get greedy. The right wing MO crowd absolutely could name the top yeshivas in America and might even send their kids to them. Many of them are fine with their kids growing up yeshivish even if they themselves are MO.This faction of the MO world, for whatever reason, choses to keep identifying as Modern even though they would probably be a lot happier and comfortable if they just crossed the isle; maybe it’s a matter of pride. Anyway, as EE correctly pointed out, they are a tiny, tiny minority of the MO and it would be dishonest to pretend they represent the whole thing just like it’s dishonest when people claim the 1% of Chabad that’s still old-school-Chassidishe is the authoritative representation of Chabad.
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.
“If the commitment is relatively higher by the MO, than that should be applauded and used as an example.”
It isn’t though, assuming you mean commitment to halachah. Is anyone even claiming that to be the case?“Applies to every group. Otherwise there wouldn’t be different groups.”
No, we had this similar discussion in another thread, and in fact, you were the one pointing out that different groups exist even without halachic differences.“You’ll find Anti Zionism even by the militant Mizrachi.”
This is categorically untrue. You need to brush up on what Mizrachi means as a movement/hashkafa. They are, by definition, Zionist. If someone is Anti Zionist, then they can’t claim to be Mizrachi. We don’t mean Mizrachi as in Middle Eastern mesora if that’s what the confusion is.“So leave it out of this discussion.”
No thanks. This is the YWN Coffeeroom.“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.