This letter is from last week's Jewish Press, but its still worth sharing. It should be noted that in this week's issue, there was one letter in response, and it was not in favor:
Let me state at the outset that I am not a halachic authority and hence have no expertise to determine if any of the eruvim recently constructed in the various sections of Brooklyn are appropriately designed so that carrying on Shabbos is permitted. However, I do feel competent to respond in part to Dovid Gelb`s May 14 letter to The Jewish Press in which he writes, "If anyone can let me know what the `kosher`difference is among these three eruvim, I would greatly appreciate it."The issue behind the silliness is that this is indeed the direction things flow in today's Orthodox world. Rather than the more stringent people recognizing that the reliers on the Eruvim certainly have what and who to rely on, the request is that everyone, regardless of the actual halakha, conform to prevent the machloqes that is only bitter because they are so intolerant of the what and who to begin with. Posted by Avraham at June 3, 2004 09:35 AM
All of these eruvim share one thing in common — their erection has caused much unneeded divisiveness (machlokos) in Brooklyn. They have pitted neighbor against neighbor, shul against shul, and rabbi against rabbi. This is most certainly something that we do not need. Our community has limited resources and many needs. The efforts and energy expended in the various eruv "fights" should be channeled into positive actions that will benefit the many unfortunate people in our midst.
Is it too much to suggest that those who built the various Eruvim dismantle them in the interest of fostering shalom? I know that this will cause inconvenience to those who have been using an eruv for years and to those who may now feel that they can begin using the new eruv in Flatbush. However, isn`t it worth being inconvenienced if the result is a decrease in divisiveness?
I would hope to see those rabbonim who were involved in erecting the various eruvim issue proclamations stating that they have taken down these eruvim, not because they have retracted on their piskei halacha, but because they feel that achdus should take precedence. Such actions would certainly send a much needed message about what is really important in the Orthodox community.
Isaac Levy
Brooklyn, NY
i like his sentiment
Posted by: dani at June 3, 2004 12:34 PMi'd like to point out that *one* of totally read this wrong.
Posted by: dani at June 3, 2004 03:52 PMIt will come as no surprise that I agree with you, Avraham. I also agree with Dani, though. The letter writer's heart is in the right place, but it would set a terrible precedent if everyone bent over backward to accomodate the most machmir position. (Not that his proposal has the slightest chance of being carried out.) No one is stopping those who don't hold by the eruvim from observing Shabbat as they see fit. Sometimes it's necessary to agree to disagree on halakhic matters.
Mazal tov in advance, btw.
Posted by: elf at June 3, 2004 04:38 PMThe issue isn't only whether to conform or not. If you assume as the author does that we should all conform, which way should everyone go? I would argue that the sacrifice of eruv-users to give up the eruv is much greater than the sacrifice of eruv opponents to just stop bitching about it. No one is forcing them to use it.
The fallacy of the whole thing is the claim that eruvin cause machloket. Eruvin don't cause machloket; people cause machloket.
Posted by: Ben at June 3, 2004 06:06 PMi'd hate to advise conformity, ever. but i like achdus. : ) yes, yes, i'm a dreamer, i know.
thanks elf!
Posted by: dani at June 7, 2004 03:55 PMI would ordinarily agree that a majority of the community should not be asked to adopt a chumra on a minor issue so as to conform with a small minority within the community. However in Flatbush I would venture that those who are machmir are at least a sizeable minority, if not the majority (they are definitely the majority of the community that didn't hold from the pre-existing eruv). This isn't a chumra/kula on a minor issue either, but rather is seen as an issue of public chillul shabbos. (cf. with chodosh, pas yisroel or chalav yisroel, which are relatively private chumros/kulos).
Posted by: Black Hatted Sheep at June 8, 2004 05:47 PMIN A LETTER TO RABBONIM OF FLATBUSH. CONCERNING THE ERUV THEY WANT TO CONSTRUCT, PUBLISHED IN IGROS MOSHE PART 4:87, REB MOSHE FEINSTEIN, OF BLESSED MEMORY, GAVE THEM PERMISSION TO MAKE AN ERUV THERE. HE DID NOT PROTEST AGAINST IT. IN LETTER 88 THERE HE STATES:IF ONE WANTS TO FOLLOW RULING OF SHULCHAN AURACH AND MAKE AN ERUV HE CAN. OBVIOUSLY, THOSE PROTESTING AGAINST ERUVIN IN BROOKLYN, ARE GOING AGAINST THE ABSOLUTE RULING OF THE GREAT SAGE OF THE PAST GENERATION.
OTHERS AGAINST THE ERUV HAVE THE GALL TO PROCLAIM A PROHABITION IN THE NAME OF REB MOSHE, TO HOODWINK THE PUBLIC, WHEN HE IN FACT DID NOT PROTEST, AND SANCTONED IT. THESE LIES ARE DUNBFOUNDING
In reality, those against eruvin in Brooklyn, don't know what they are talking about.Because Brooklyn is a walled city. Anyone driving around Brooklyn can see them.
Also, most poskim rule, rivers and the ocean, are walls. Anyone looking at map of Brooklyn sees it's surrounded by water on more than three sides.Fourth side has fences along the highway.
In reality, because of these walls, an eruv is not needed in Brooklyn. Nevertheless, it was made.
Brooklyn is a city surrounded by walls. Therefore, an eruv is not needed there. Nevertheless, it was made. Obviously, those against eruvin there, are not aware of this fact.
Posted by: shiah director at August 17, 2005 03:06 PMMore, so, vile advertizements in newspapers, posters in the street, and leaflets distributed against eruvin, many with Reb Moshe's name, but never approved of by him, are completly against his ruling never to protest against those making eruvin. This literature, distributed by degenerates, to fool the public, because of a mental imbalance, is unheard of in the history of the Jewish People. Many in Eretz Yisroel, don't use eruvin for various reasons, but you don't see posters in the street against them. However, in the walled city of Brooklyn there is no reason at all not to use an eruv. Our eruv is better than the one in the Holy City of Jerusalem, may it be rebuilt in our days, that has no walls around it.
Posted by: shiah director at August 17, 2005 09:56 PM Eruvin don't make fights (machlokes). Stupid people make fights. Those making eruvin are not fighting against anyone: and, have no obligation to listen to stupid people.
Fact remains. Eruvin in Brooklyn were approved of by leading poskim in out generation, including Reb Moshe Feinstein, of blessed memory.
Reb Moshe, in his letters on this subject, printed in Igros Moshe (4:87-88-89}, only explains why he wants to be machmer. But, he was never against those who follow rulings of the Shulchan Aurach and all poskim and make an eruv.
Reb Tuvah Goldstein, of blessed memory, who learnd with Reb Moshe bchavrusa, for 4 hours each day for 20 years, and is reliable and honest, told me, he asked him about eruvin in Brooklin. He replied: he is not against those who follow rulings of the Shulchan Aurach and all poskim and make eruvin.
All publicity against eruvin, in his name, and without his name, are outright lies. No one has any obligation to listen to liars. King David, in many places in tehilim, prayed to the ALMIGHTY that liars be obliterated from the earth.
The Hftorah we read Tisha Bav cries out against liers. It is read then to awaken the public to speak the truth: and, in it's meret the final redemption will come. Hopefully in our day, if those against the eruv stop lying.
May the ALMIGHTY have mercy on His holy people,and save them from falshood.
more informaton and documents about eruvin in brooklyn can be obtained from Eruv Society of Boro Park fax no. 718-4387411
Posted by: shiah director at September 4, 2005 02:12 AM