The Rebbe and an Eruv in Crown Heights

The Rebbe's general writings about eruvin begin with a halachic principle: where an eruv can be instituted according to Din, it should be instituted. Crown Heights, however, has its own local history. When the question of a public neighborhood eruv is addressed specifically, the named testimony preserved from Rabbi Yehuda Leib Groner and the Chitrik family is that the Rebbe did not authorize such an eruv in Crown Heights.

The two principal accounts use different wording. Rabbi Groner wrote that the Rebbe "strongly opposed" making an eruv in Crown Heights and had reiterated that no one had permission to make one there. Rabbi Hirshel Chitrik's grandson later related that his grandfather had been told not to build one unless it would remain hidden. Those statements are not contradictory. The Rebbe's own city-eruv correspondence distinguishes explicitly between a public eruv on which people carry and a concealed eruv whose existence is not announced.

That distinction is central to the Crown Heights history.

Rabbi Yehuda Leib Groner's written statement

In May 2016, Rabbi Yehuda Leib Groner was asked directly about the Rebbe's position on constructing an eruv in Crown Heights. Rabbi Groner, who had served for decades as one of the Rebbe's mazkirim, gave a written answer:

"I was asked about the Rebbe's stance regarding constructing an Eiruv in our community of Crown Heights.

"The Rebbe strongly opposed making an Eiruv in our community, and he reiterated on several occasions that no one has permission to make an Eiruv here."

The statement did not present this as Rabbi Groner's own halachic analysis of Brooklyn streets. He was answering a narrower historical question: what was the Rebbe's position on making an eruv in the community of Crown Heights?

Rabbi Groner also referred to the earlier Melbourne episode. He wrote that when his brother, Rabbi Yitzchok Dovid Groner, and Rabbi Chaim Gutnick asked the Rebbe how to respond to a proposed eruv there, "the Rebbe's reply was that they should oppose it fiercely." The complete Melbourne file has its own circumstances, but Rabbi Groner included it because he understood it as consistent with what he was reporting about Crown Heights.

The wording of Rabbi Groner's Crown Heights statement was published in 2016 as written material he had sent for publication. A later bilingual reproduction preserves the same central passage with his typed name. The statement is therefore Rabbi Groner's written testimony. It is not a facsimile of a letter written by the Rebbe.

The Hirshel Chitrik family account

A second Crown Heights account comes from the family of Rabbi Hirshel Chitrik.

In a 2023 public discussion, a grandson of Rabbi Chitrik said that he had heard the story directly from his grandfather and had heard it "several times." He explained that Rabbi Chitrik's wife had small children and wanted to be able to go to shul. Rabbi Chitrik therefore asked the Rebbe about building an eruv in Crown Heights.

The grandson described what his grandfather had told him:

"The Rebbe told him that he should not build an eruv in Crown Heights unless it's going to be hidden."

He immediately explained the practical meaning as he had received it. A hidden eruv could not be announced to the neighborhood as permission to carry. According to the account, that defeated the purpose for which Rabbi Chitrik had raised the question, so he did not build it.

The grandson then related a later conversation with his grandmother, after Rabbi Hirshel Chitrik had passed away. When he told her that an eruv in Crown Heights was again being discussed, she responded that if one were built she would leave Crown Heights, because the Rebbe had told them not to build one. The grandson said that hearing this independently from his grandmother confirmed for him what he had heard from his grandfather.

This is later family testimony. The original conversation with the Rebbe was not recorded in the material presently available, and the exact date of the conversation is not established. The important point is therefore not to turn the grandson's wording into a verbatim transcript of the Rebbe. The testimony is that Rabbi Hirshel Chitrik repeatedly told his grandson that the Rebbe would not permit a Crown Heights eruv unless it remained hidden.

Why "hidden" does not mean a public Crown Heights eruv

The meaning of the Chitrik account becomes clearer from a direct letter the Rebbe wrote to Rabbi Eliyohu Jung in 5724.

The Rebbe wrote that, as a matter of principle, an eruv should be instituted where the Din permits it. He then addressed the reality of a modern city. Once the existence of an eruv becomes common knowledge, people become accustomed to carrying. If the eruv later becomes invalid, news of that failure will not necessarily reach everyone who relied on it, and some may continue carrying even after hearing that it is down.

His conclusion was explicit:

"the Eiruv, if one is feasable at all according to Din, should be carried out in the utmost secrecy."

The Rebbe then explained that such an eruv would not be intended to enable a Jew to carry a tallis to shul. Its purpose would be only to reduce the issur for those who were already carrying regardless.

That is almost exactly the distinction described in the Chitrik family account. Rabbi Chitrik's question arose from a desire to allow his wife to go to shul with the children. A hidden eruv could not be publicized for that use. The account therefore does not describe permission for the kind of public Crown Heights eruv that residents can be told to rely upon. It describes the opposite: an eruv that could exist only if its existence remained concealed.

The Rebbe's broader city-eruv principles also apply to the question

The Crown Heights testimony does not stand alone. The Rebbe's direct writings establish several principles that govern a large-city eruv before the question of public carrying is reached.

In 5722, responding to a question about an eruv in a city, the Rebbe wrote that because many halachos are involved, it should not be undertaken without the participation of a Rav particularly expert in those halachos.

In the 5724 Jung letter, he added that the general principle favoring an eruv where permitted says nothing by itself about whether a particular place actually qualifies. That, he wrote, must be decided by Rabbinical authorities who have thoroughly investigated the relevant local details according to Hilchos Eruvin.

And in a recorded sicha on Yud-Beis Tammuz 5745, the Rebbe used the case of a city in which 600,000 people were actually counted to make a broader point: halacha must be applied to the factual reality as it exists now. An older factual assumption cannot be used to deny a present reality.

These are separate issues from the Crown Heights testimony. Whether the neighborhood's streets can be enclosed according to halacha is a technical halachic question. Whether a public eruv should be established and advertised is another question. The Rebbe addressed both kinds of issue in his city-eruv material.

How the Crown Heights Rabbonim understood the Rebbe's position

The Crown Heights Rabbonim who addressed the issue in 5776 treated Rabbi Groner's testimony as confirming the Rebbe's opposition to establishing an eruv in the neighborhood.

On 8 Iyar 5776, Rabbi Avrohom Osdoba wrote that he had received a detailed letter from Rabbi Groner conveying the Rebbe's words on the matter. He reproduced the reported Yiddish wording as:

"איך וועל ניט דערלאזן אז דא אין שכונה זאל זיין א עירוב"

In sense: "I will not allow there to be an eruv here in the neighborhood."

That sentence comes to us through Rabbi Osdoba's letter reporting what Rabbi Groner had conveyed. It is not an independently preserved recording or handwritten note of the Rebbe. Its importance is that it shows how the neighborhood Rav understood Rabbi Groner's firsthand testimony.

A later joint ruling of Rabbis Osdoba and Shlomo Segal likewise referred to the Rebbe's explicit position against establishing an eruv in Crown Heights. The halachic ruling itself rests with the Crown Heights Beis Din; the testimony concerning the Rebbe forms one part of the local history surrounding it.

How the Crown Heights testimony was preserved

The Rebbe's general city-eruv position is documented in direct letters and, on some relevant halachic points, in recorded public talks. The Crown Heights-specific position is preserved differently.

Rabbi Groner's 2016 statement is written testimony by a longtime mazkir who says the Rebbe expressed the position on several occasions. The Hirshel Chitrik account is later family testimony from a grandson who says he heard the story repeatedly from his grandfather and later heard a confirming recollection from his grandmother. Rabbi Osdoba's 5776 letter records what he understood from a more detailed communication from Rabbi Groner.

Those categories should remain distinct. A later witness's quotation is not the same as a recording of the Rebbe, and a typeset reproduction is not an original autograph. At the same time, the substance of the Crown Heights testimony is direct and consistent: it does not describe the Rebbe authorizing a public neighborhood eruv for Crown Heights.