י׳ אדר ה׳תשפ״ו | February 27, 2026
Flatbush Rov Exposes ‘Brooklyn Eruv’ Scandal
After months of research and conversations, Rabbi Daniel Osher Kleinman, a rov in Flatbush, revealed how, beyond the many halachic questions, the “Brooklyn Eruv” is physically faulty and how organizers kept changing the story.
In a recent shiur, Rabbi Daniel Osher Kleinman, Rov of K’hal Nachlas Dovid in Brooklyn and author of many seforim, revealed how, beyond the many halachic questions, the “Brooklyn Eruv” is faulty and fraudulent.
Many leading poskim, including Rav Moshe Feinstein, as well as R’ Zalman Shimon Dworkin and other Lubavitch rabbonim, held that an eruv in Brooklyn could not possibly be established since the area is a reshus harabbim d’oraisa. Yet, Rabbi Kleinman acknowledged, there were rabbonim who held it was possible. Regardless, the “Brooklyn Eruv” is problematic according to all.
Unlike other places, where the eruv is checked weekly under competent rabbinic supervision, he said, Brooklyn has no consistent oversight by rabbonim. Rabbi Kleinman recounted firsthand investigations showing that many sections of the Brooklyn eruv were discovered to be broken and fundamentally flawed.
The “Brooklyn Eruv” relies in many places on silicone caulk to form tzuras hapesach, often connecting to a kaneh al gabeihem with an imaginary gud asik, but in numerous locations, ledges, protrusions, or other obstacles block the proper connection entirely.
Other sections depend on natural features, such as beaches that slope gradually into the water, which do not meet halachic requirements for depth, or on permanent infrastructure whose stability cannot be guaranteed.
Wires spanning poles across streets sometimes leave sidewalks completely uncovered. Rabbi Kleinman documented “around forty-five different places which were questionable at best and pasul l’halacha at worst,” demonstrating that large portions of the eruv fail to meet the standards necessary for reliable Shabbos observance.
When one of the rabbonim associated with the “Brooklyn Eruv” was presented with photographic evidence, the rov admitted, “I told them for this reason that I can’t be involved anymore.” Yet, for some reason, his position was not made known.
Rabbi Kleinman stressed that halacha requires chezkas kashrus – a reliable continuity that people can trust – but in Brooklyn, “the goalposts keep moving,” and even those tasked with oversight often don’t know the true borders of the eruv.
“Something that the story keeps changing … you wouldn’t invest with such a person. And that’s the bottom line with the eruv,” he said, while calling out those sending weekly emails declaring the eruv kosher despite its fundamentally flawed infrastructure, amounting to misrepresentation or outright fraud.
WATCH
COMMENTS
I suspected it all along. How could it be that it’s kosher every week and it’s never down?
The Rebbe was adamantly against an Eruv in Brooklyn, and so was R’ Moshe Feinstein. End of story. We didn’t need Rabbi Kleinman to tell us this, but it’s good someone is finally saying the truth out loud instead of bowing to political correctness. The people pushing for an Eruv in CH and Flatbush just want convenience.
It’s worth noting that the Crown Heights Eruv is a seperate Eruv, with rabann who take responsibility and individuals who check it weekly.
Who are the reputable Rabbonim behind this Crown Heights Eruv, that one can rely upon?
It is all about transparency. We’ve heard all of this this before. We’ve heard the same about the Flatbush ERUV.
What are the borders? Who is the one that checks it? Which Rabbi from the community supports it? We’ve never received answers to those questions.
Never mind that all the rabbonim leading the community are unanimous in their opposition.
Thank you Anash.org for putting out this important information out. Other’s have not only not protested the Eruv, but have promoted it!!
It is worth quoting Rav Moshe’s own framing directly. In O.C. 4:87 he wrote explicitly that he had not wished to involve himself in the Flatbush eruv matter at all, since the relevant seforim were available for anyone to consult. He was compelled to write only after being informed that people were publicly claiming he supported the eruv., an his teshuva was a correction of that misrepresentation.
the rebbe allowed the kfar chabad eruv. i don’t see the differences
If you can’t see the difference between an eruv in a village in Israel with no connection to a reshus harabim
and Brooklyn or Crown Heights, then you obviously lack the fundamental knowledge of what an eruv needs.
So because YOU don’t see the difference, therefore it doesn’t exist?! The Rebbe is the only דעה, I really don’t understand any other perspective.
The Rebbe was concerned about this and wrote this response:
“My view is well known, that in this generation, if a person or organization that people respect makes an Eruv, and he knows that in the end it will become public knowledge – it is a terrible stumbling block.
“It is impossible that it won’t happen on at least one Shabbos that the Eruv will become invalid. Once people become accustomed to carrying outdoors on Shabbos, no kind of proclamation or announcement that the Eruv has been invalidated and it is forbidden to carry will help to cause them to stop carrying.”
And in another response the Rebbe wrote:
“Oftentimes the eruv breaks, and we see clearly that an announcement about this (a) nowadays only reaches a minority of the community, and (b) few of those will abstain from carrying because of this, after having gotten used to carrying for many Shabbosos.”
For Lubavitcher chassidim, this doesn’t come as a shock. The Rebbe reiterated many times the unreliability of an eruv and the concern of changes that would invalidate the eruv, causing people to transgress Shabbos unknowingly, or even after they are told.