Search
Close this search box.

Rabbi Stav: The Chief Rabbinate’s Opposition to Giyur Bill is based on Politics & Not Halacha


stavAccording to the head of Tzohar Rabbonim Rabbi David Stav, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel’s refusal to back the Stern Bill seeking to introduce less stringent giyur stems from political and not halachic concerns.

Rabbi Stav explains that he heard concerns expressed that three Reform rabbis would form a beis din and convert someone, calling such a notion absurd. Rabbi Stav explains the bill does not permit establishing new batei din without approval of the Chief Rabbinate so the scenario mentioned is not one that can occur under the bill. The rabbonim sitting on a beis din he insists are Yirei Shomayim and as such, he does not understand how the opponents to the bill can continue feeding the tzibur at large untruths.

Rabbi Stav explains the bill simply returns the authority to the civil service rabbonim serving as chief rabbis of cities, in essence returning the situation to what it has been throughout Jewish history. “There is not a rabbi of a kehilla throughout history that did not address giyur” he points out. He questions the fears of the chief rabbis amid the realization that rabbonim serving as chief rabbis of cities have been tested and certified by the Chief Rabbinate. Therefore he feels that they are indeed worthy and certified to address issues of giyur. Rabbi Stav feels that to limit giyur to a small number of rabbonim who were appointed by politicians is absurd both from a historic and halachic perspective.

The rabbi points out “We are in a generation in which considerations that lead us are not necessarily halachic but political at times. Many rabbonim from other communities understand the problem but they do not address it for one reason or another. Most of the rabbonim who signed the declaration against the bill are not aware of its details and have never engaged in giyur and remain clueless to the realities at hand. 70% of the signatories are not actively rabbonim at all and 90% never dealt with giyur. It is somewhat peculiar that persons who never dealt with giyur now speak out against the bill”.

Rabbi Stav states clearly that he understands the fears, seeking to assure the tzibur explaining there will not be any giyur that does not meet the approval of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, and no one will be converted who does not undertake a religious lifestyle. He stresses the bill simply permits candidates for giyur to address the matter in their local community, making it more convenient. The bill he insists in no way lowers the standards of giyur in Israel.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)



9 Responses

  1. An article, published several years ago in the Star-K’s Kashrus Kurrents, noted that the weakness of Rabbanut kashrus is that all local Rabbanuts must accept all other local Rabbanuts. Therefore the whole is only as strong as the weakest link in the chain. The same would be true here if giyur would be in the hands of the local Rabbanut.

  2. Rav Stav is of course 100% correct here.

    Shauli #1, conversions have been in the hands of local rabbis and only local rabbis for thousands of years. Are you implying Chas v’Shalom that what HaShem and Chazal set up is “weak”?

  3. There is no “historic” perspective for this situation…unless one would consider the erev rav at yitzias Mitzraim..I don’t think we have rabbis today of the stature of Moshe Rabbenu and even he may have made a mistake.

    The reason this is political not not halachic is because upon failure to win the election for chief rabbi(who share the official State sponsored responsibility for determining halacha in the State of Israel), the supporters of Rav Stav have gone to the Knesset to determine halacha.(sic)

  4. Pray ,being pliable to secular demands isn’t politics?!

    To quote the original mafda”l party leader Maimon-Fishman “Talmud chacham she’ein bo da’as, neveilah tovah hei’mena”

  5. 6/13

    “Rav Simcha HaKohen Kook spoke of the fact that if Rav Kook ZT”L could ever imagine a day when the Rabbanut could reach a level, a level that some get up and announce one does not need kabolas mitzvos to convert to Judaism, adding such a person denies Har Sinai…”

  6. charliehall says:

    First,that’s false.

    Sure any’ bar bei rav chad yoma’ was entitled

    At the minimum ,(in the days before fast communication)the provincial Rav had jurisdiction

    Second ,are you now loudly belately admitting that Heichal Shlomo declared by mizrachi for world jurisdiction was a bloody farce ?

Leave a Reply


Popular Posts