Has anyone seen this website? http://www.eruvonline.blogspot.com/ . What do people make of his arguments? He tries to argue that Reb Moshe's opposition to Brookln eruvin was based on false data that was fed to him by an anti-eruv cabal. At the moment most of the website is dedicated to fighting the case for the NW London eruv. His main point is that the consensus of poskim maintain that a reshus harabbim needs 600,000 people to transverse a street everyday, so there's basically no reshus harabbim nowadays. He seems to know what he is talking about, and generally wins online debates (on his site and sites such as hirhurim). Does anyone know if its reliable?

They bring many sources. However it is clearly one sided. They try to make that point the Rav Moshe did not know the facts. They also try to say the Mishna Brura was NOT aware of all the sources. By doing this they brush off Rav Moshe and the Mishna Brura's opinion.

The Mishne Brura argues against the condition that you need 600,000 and proves his point quite well. They say that had he had some other sources he would of not held that way. The Rambam does NOT mention 600,000. The Talmud does not mention 600,000. It is true that most poskim today accept that so you can rely on it. But many are machmir on this as it is quite a problematic condition that does NOT make much sense.

I think one of them had an argument with me on this forum a year or so ago. He brushes off any major source you bring is non significant because of some other source which explains it.

Hmm... If you're a chiloni why would that make any difference? 

Besides, it is a fact that many of Rav Moshe's piskei halacha were politically motivated. Why would you doubt it in this case?

Look, if you want to be frum and you want to rely on the eiruv you have plenty of rabbis to rely on. 

True. However if you want to find out the truth then you should study the topic and know the facts.

The truth is that it's a machlokes haposkim. 

What is wrong with saying that Harav Moshe Feinstein zt”l was misled? Does anyone have a better explanation regarding why Harav Moshe stated that both Boro Park and Flatbush independently contain more than 600,000 people or why he declared that more than a million people come into Brooklyn to work daily? Clearly someone misled him. What is wrong with arguing that the Chofetz Chaim did not know all the Rishonim that were published after his Mishnah Berurah?

By the Mishnah Berurah’s own argument – since most Rishonim maintain that shishim ribo is not a criterion of a reshus harabbim, we should not l’chatchilah rely on it – if we were to tally the Rishonim today and confirm that most of them do recognize the criterion of shishim ribo, he would have to admit that we do accept shishim ribo l’chatchilah. There is no doubt that if one was to peruse the Rishonim that have been published to date, he would realize that the overwhelming majority of Rishonim do accept shishim ribo as a criterion. The fact that the Gemara does not mention this criterion is not an argument against those poskim who do allow for this fundament. This question could be asked on the overwhelming majority of Rishonim who do accept shishim ribo as a criterion. The Rambam is clearly in the minority regarding this issue. Who cares if you do or don’t understand the criterion of shishim ribo? What counts is that the Behag and Rashi and all the Rishonim who follow them do understand that shishim ribo is a criterion of a reshus harabbim.


Yes, but the overwhelming majority of poskim do accept shishim ribo as a fundament of a reshus harabbim, including Harav Moshe Feinstein zt"l.

There he goes again.
Notice how anyone who held differently was either misled or insignificant.



Gamara is of not significance.
Rambam is of no significance.
Shulchan Aruch is of no significance.
Mishna Brura did NOT know the facts.
Rav Moshe mislead.

WOW.


Mishne Brura makes many arguments but they are all non significant.
The Rambam happens to be one of the greatest poskim and probably had the most accurate sources available to him simply summarized the Talmud and did NOT mention it.

Most of halacha does not follow a tally of all the poskim. Some poskim had more influence on halacha than others.
I can give numerous examples .



Well you should care. The Chafetz Chaim did not understand it either and the RAMBAM did not know of it. Well for those of us who don't understand it we are in good company.



TRUE and this fact that should not be twisted. Whether they are in a minority or not they have a lot of weight and good arguements against shishim ribo.

Rambam eruv or not, Shishim Ribo is not the only issue, IMHO a City as large as brooklyn can never host a kosher eruv.

Even though i practically built monseys eruv, i wouldn't hold of it for many reasons, I.E. No Tsuras Hapesach, Multiple lechis in one spot, Sagging wires, and obstructed lechis.

The guy brings some very valid points to the table. - It's a shame that so many of the gedarim that were put in Place by the Talmud, Rishonim and even achronim are so blatantly stepped on and obliterated. The effects of yeridas hadoros i guess.

Does "practically built" mean you were thinking of building it but someone else got to it first, you gave most of the money, you did most of the work yourself, what?

No, the Gamara is very significant, but Rashi and the overwhelming majority of Rishonim obviously did have a mesorah for shishim ribo. The overwhelming majority of poskim clearly follow Rashi’s lead. Who are you to argue against them because you can’t find it in Shas?

No, the Rambam is very significant, and many Sefardim follow him regarding shishim ribo. However, the overwhelming majority of Rishonim from Ashkenaz accept the criterion of shishim ribo.

No, the Shulchan Arch is very significant, but most psokim maintain that the Shulchan Aruch allows for the criterion of shishim ribo.

No, the Mishnah Berurah did know the facts of his day. However, today we know of many more Rishonim that he was not privy too.

Yes, Rav Moshe zt”l was mislead. However, you should have noted that he does accept shishim ribo l’chatchilah.

Obviously, you can’t read. It was the Mishnah Berurah who argued that the tally of Rishonim is stacked against shishim ribo. The Mishnah Berurah (following the Mishkenos Yaakov) is the one who is working with a majority. Therefore, by his own argument, since today the fact is otherwise, he would have to admit that we can rely on the criterion l’chatchilah. Actually, the Bais Ephraim is the one who disagreed and argued that we do not follow a majority only the minhag. Now that we know that the majority of Rishonim do accept shishim ribo, and that clearly the minhag is that shishim ribo is a criterion of shishim ribo, it’s no doubt that according to all, we can rely on it l’chatchilah.

Well, I think that we are in good company. As I mentioned, the Behag, Rashi and the overwhelming majority of Rishonim obviously did have a source for shishim ribo. The overwhelming majority of poskim clearly follow Rashi’s lead, and I don’t have to answer for them (although there is possibly a source in Shas).



I beg to differ. Warsaw was a huge city, and had an eruv where most people carried. I would challenge you to find one issue with Boro Park’s tzuras hapesachim.

I did alot of the work. I Drilled Screws, Operetaed Boom/Bucket Trucks, Flagged Traffic and stared back at chassidish kids.

Its not me arguing, its many great Rabbis greater than me and you.



I am glad you are aknowledging that Sefaradim don' follow this. which allready makes it a problem in cities which have a very high spharadic population.



actually most poskim maitain did he mentions the opinion but did not hold by that.



I can read very wel. You like to read only the parts you like.
He argues against shishim ribo claiming it does not make sense. (which it really doesn't)



which makes it a machloket poskim. In many cases the halacha does not follow the majority according to the tally of all rishonim. some held more weight and had more incluence than others. We can start changing many halachot according to your logic.

No source in Shas that the Rambam found. And it is well known that had many ancient manuscripts of the Talmud which were quite accurate.

But you can’t argue that we can’t follow the overwhelming majority of Rishonim because there is no mekor in Shas since these Rishonim obviously had a mesorah.


It is not a problem at all since they ask their poskim. In any case, there are Spharadic poskim who do allow the criterion of shishim ribo (see Yabia Omer, 9:33). I have already told you that there are alternative criteria, besides for shishim ribo, that would allow an eruv even for Sefardim.


You are mistaken. A good place to start is the Bais Ephraim who argues that the Shulchan Aruch would allow for shishim ribo. In any case, there is only a machlokas regarding the opinion of the Bais Yosef, but almost all agree that the Rema does accept shishim ribo as a criteria.


You stated, “The Mishne Brura argues against the condition that you need 600,000 and proves his point quite well. They say that had he had some other sources he would of not held that way.” and then you argued that, “Most of halacha does not follow a tally of all the poskim. Some poskim had more influence on halacha than others.” To this diatribe, I answered that by the Mishnah Beruah’s own argument (that the majority of Rishonim do not accept shishim ribo), he would have to agree that today we do accept shishim ribo as a criterion (since we now know that most Rishonim do accept shishim ribo). You clearly did not follow this argument. Now you are arguing that the Mishnah Berurah had additional reasons why he would not accept the criterion of shishim ribo. [To begin with, these are not the Mishnah Berurah’s arguments, but the Mishkenos Yaakov’s.] Anyone who reads through the Mishnah Berurah will discern that the only reason that he did not accept the criterion of shishim ribo is because he was under the impression that the majority of Rishonim do not accept it. The other arguments were just added to buttress his conclusion. The proof is that the Mishnah Berurah initiated this argument by stating that the Magen Avraham and Taz are incorrect when they claim that the majority of Rishonim do accept shishim ribo. Therefore, the Mishnah Berurah enumerated the Rishonim to prove that most do not accept shishim ribo as a criterion. However, as I argued, since we now know otherwise, the Mishnah Berurah would need to accept the p’sak of the Magen Avraham and Taz. Moreover, the Mishnah Berurah was just following the Mishkenos Yaakov’s arguments, and the Mishkenos Yaakov’s main piont was that the majority of Rishonim do not accept shishim ribo. The Mishkenos Yaakov clearly only mentioned these ancillary issues to buttress his argument. Furthermore, the poskim have mentioned that the Mishnah Berurah did not see the Bais Ephraim, whom the world follows regarding this inyan (Toldos Shmuel, 3:81:7, 3:86:8; Bais Av, 2:5:2; Divrei Yatziv 2:173:1, and Even Yisroel, 8:36). The fact is the Mishnah Berurah’s chumrah was not accepted since most cities had eruvin.


As I mentioned previously, you can’t read. It is not my logic, only the Mishnah Berurah’s. Who are you to assess the standing of the Rishonim? It is obvious that you do not know the overwhelming majority of Rishonim to who I am referring.


It is obvious that the Askanazic Rishonim did have a mesorah that the Rambam did not have. Moreover, the Bahag is considered a mesorah (see Shach, Y.D. 25:2), and the only reason why the Mishkenos Yaakov and the Mishnah Berurah did not follow him is because they did not have the Bahag that mentions shishim ribo. We now have this Bahag and have to follow him.