« Judgment day approaches... | Main | Teasers about Tenafly eruv battle »

November 23, 2005



not a big fan of the bechofer book. would be more aptly entitled "what to make yourself meshuga about when it comes to contemporary eruvin". R' Elimelekh Langa's book, which exists only in Hebrew, is the best single volume work on eruvin out there.


You missed the most authoritative link.


I believe that the post on Avodah is not R’ Micha Berger. Please link to the site http://eruvonline.blogspot.com/


AddeRabbi -- thanks for your recommendation. Kol tuv.

David -- The booklet is already linked at this text in the post: "Analysis supporting the eruv." I'll stand by the attribution to R. Micha Berger for now. Thanks for your comments,



Both R’ Bechhofer’s and R’ Lang’s books are fine. However, as R’ Bechhofer’s sefer is writen in English he is just following the English seforim trend to be machmer.

shiah director

Eruvonline. blogspot.com is a fine peice of work. However they omitted two main points.
1. There was an eruv in Manhattan in 1908 approved of by seven leading Torah sages, of blessed memory, in that generation. Any discussion on eruvin must start with citing their ruling. Published in Eruv Vhotzah, explaining in detail, reasons for establishing an eruv in Manhattan. Their ruling was never disproved or refuted. Their ruling applies to Brooklyn as well.
Eruv Vhotzah was out of print when issuer was issued against eruvin in Manhattan in the year 5724(or 5722). Had this book been available there never would have been an issuer against eruvin in Manhattan. After a detailed discussion on this subject in 1908 by leading Torah sages of the generation.
Eruv Vhotzah was reprinted in 1979: and is available by writing P.O.B. 786,
Woodbourne, N Y 12788 and enclosing $5.00. Published with this book is a discussion on eruv in Odessa, Russia, in 1900.
This information was not available until 1979. Therefore, there was an uncalled for fight, about eruvin in Brooklyn. Had this information been available, there never would have been various opinions about eruvin in Brooklyn. Because, this matter was ruled upon in 1908, by leading Torah sages.
2. Ruling of Chazon Ish, houses around all large cities, make this cirty a private domain.( Explaind in Eruvonline. blogspot.com). Was stated in aforementiond work concerning eruv in Odessa, Russia.Author(Rav Briskin) states: when he was in Holy City of Jerusalem, he showed his work to leading Torah sages there, of blessed memory, and to the great Gaon Reb Chiam Berlin, (Rabbi Of Moscow who went to live there in his later years), they all praised his work.
These two main points, completely desolve, any opposition to eruvin in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
WOE! Individuals go into an involved discussion about nothing: but, they forget the main point. They have sefer Eruv Vhotzah, I sold it to them, why didn't they read it before writing on this subject.This masterpeice of Torah scholarship deserves their comments.

shiah director

Present conroversy, about eruvin in Brooklyn, is also because those against eruvin don't study subject matter on this subject. They should carefully read Safer Eruv Vhotzah. If they have logical comments on this safer they can publish them. However, they never read this safer, or commented on it.
It seems, pro-eruv people also did not read it.Nor, did they read Rav Briskins sefer, concerning eruv in Odessa.Therefor, they write long, uncalled for, discussions on eruvin.
When they have information in front of them ruling an eruv can be made and leaves no room for further discussiuon on this matter.
However, in any case, THE ALMIGHTY rejoyces when Torah Law is discussed.

correction last line should read CASE

shiah director

Both those for and against the eruv in Brooklyn engage in long diatribes about view of Reb Moshe Feinstein, of blessed memory. However, he states openly in Igros Moshe(4:87), his opinion on this matter is against all poskim. In next letter(ibid) he states: his opinion concerning eruvin in Brooklyn, is against the Shulchan Aurach.This is not the first time in Jewish history where an opinion is stated against leading poskim. Bais Shami's opinion is stated in the Talmud even though we don't rule like them.Rabbi Eliezer Ha'Godel ruled against all sages of Israel and his opinion was not accepted. We see this often, in works of our sages, of blessed memory. Because, a godel b'Yisroel has an obligation to state his opinion, even if we don't rule like him.
Reb Moshe Feinstein, of blessed memory, never obligated anyone to follow his rulings. They are published for Torah scholars to study.
Therefore, when discussing eruvin in Brooklyn, for all practical purposes, it is no ones obligation to discuss an opinion against all poskim and the Shulchan Aurach.
Literature on eruvin, is availabe, and known. But not cited.Therin are absolute rulings fron holy Torah sages from past generations.


Shiah Director -- thanks for your comments and info. Please avoid multiple, duplicate comments.

Eruv lineman: "as R’ Bechhofer’s sefer is writen in English he is just following the English seforim trend to be machmer."

I think this is an astute comment. It is my sense that halakhic nuances, exceptions and pilpul tend to be reserved for insiders, the literati. This tendency fits the halakhah principle that halakhic subtleties need not, or should not, be communicated to the less educated (rabbinically) masses. Halakhah v'ein morin ken. ("Thus is the halakhah but we do not teach it so.") For halakhic works written in English, the presumption may be that the audience is less educated so the author needs to be more "machmer", i.e. more strict, leaving out subtleties and potential leniencies.


Signatures on posters against eruvin have no value. Because, they don't state reasons for their stand:and, are against all HOLY SAGES OF ISRAEL. While pro-eruv people have published many books explaining their view. Noteworthy, are books republished by this writer, from HOLY PROMENENT TORAH SAGES FROM A HUNDRED YEARS AGO. Who ruled eruvin can be made in all large cities.(All, three volumes, are available by writing p.o.b.786, Woodbournr, N Y 12788 and enclosing $25.00.)
Reb Moshe Feinstein's ruling against all promenent sages from past generations(see previous posts) is not a matter for discussion.His views against all Torah sages of Israel cannot be entered into any discussion about eruvin in Brooklyn.
Why those discussing eruvin in Brooklyn feel an obligation to cite his views against all poskim is dumbfounding.
If they want to cite his views. Quote exactly what he says, nothing added, nothing subtracted.Namely, his ruling is against the Shulchan Aurach and all poskim. Therefore, no one has any obligation to follow his ruling. This is stated openly by him in his many letters about eruvin. Discussions about a ruling against all poskim and the Shulchan Aurach are uncalled for:and, have no place in a discussion concerning practical application of eruvin in Brooklyn. Which he never protested against. In view of aformentioned FACTS.

shiah director

Yesterday Eruvonline Blogspot.com/ wrote about Manhattan Eruv in 1908. Good work. It's about time you discussed it. However they failed to cite rulings from ten prominent sages, published in 1900, about eruv in Odessa, Russia. They ruled Odessa has a wall on side that's on the Black Sea.Their rulins, and discussions, were printed in Sefer Tikun Shabbos, in 1900, and reprinted in 1980. Also Rav Graubart, Rov of Toronto, Canada, made an eruv there, approved of by leadind sages in his generation. They all ruled. Toronto, which is on rivers, has walls.(Sefer Chavalim Bnemim)
Mabe next time. Keep up the good work.

shiah director

Sefer Eruv Vhotzah about Manhattan Eruv in 1908. Is available by writing P.O.B. 786, Woodbourne, N Y 12788, and enclosing $5.00.
Sefer Tikun Shabbos, about Odessa Eruv in 1900, is available at above address, and enclosing $5.00.

shiah director

Sefer Chavalim Bnemim, a two volume work by Rav Graubart, Rov of Toronto, Canada, was republished about 25 years ago, by Feldheim Publishers: and, should be available in seforim stores. Therein is a detailed discussion about every aspect of eruvin. Also, letters of approval from leading scholars in his generation for the eruv he made in Toronto.
Population of Toronto shifted. After Rav Graubart's passing Jews no longer lived where he made the eruv.
Rav Price, then Rov of Toronto, made an eruv. Before making the eruv, he published an essay explaining reasons for establishing this eruv: and, printed it in the Torah Journal Hapardas. Asking for comments from Rabbonim on what he wrote.
In 1979, I wrote him a letter asking him if anyone commented on what he wrote. He answered: the two cheif Rabbonim in Eretz Yisroel( Ashkanazi and Sefardi) wrote him, and agreed with his ruling.
This is how laws of eruvin were discussed by prominent rabbonim in past generations. Torah on this subject was printed and discussed between rabbonim.
No posters, or leaflets, were distributed. There were no advertisments in newspapers. Rabbonim wrote, and discussed the subject.
Things have changed in Brooklyn in the past 25 years. A new Torah of leaflets, posters,and advertisments, was established. Not Torah from the ALMIGHTY discussed by Torah scholars in our generation.

viagra online

my family is Jewish and I have this tradition many years but did not know the meaning of an eruv its symbolism and its practice

viagra online

Given the huge interest in this topic I`ll be cranking up some more pointers on how to tackle this issue. I will certainly post links to my recent work for you to see what I am up to I will also post links to relevant articles by other authors, like the one.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

March 2007

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Blog cosmos

  • Jewish Blogging

  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online

  • Listed on 

  • <<List
    Jewish Bloggers
Blog powered by Typepad

Google and Newswire

  • Google
    %(domain)s %(domain)s