- This topic has 76 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Perhaps if there is a public apology regarding the conversion issue (in which Rabbi Druckman was villified) there will be some progress. 🙂
I guess R. Druckman is always welcome to apologize for the faux conversions he did. But one should read the story about him on crosscurrents to understand the nature of the damage he caused to real geirus.
gavra, perhaps if you apologize for your chutzpa towards a huge talmud chacham, you will make some progress.
gavra, without the levush, the bnei brak address, the political expediency, and the opposition to the State, he’ll always be just another MO or Dati Zioni hack who doesn’t rate the time of day nor the respect of lomdus from posters such as you just received a response from.
In the R’Mintz/R’Margoliyus feud hundreds of years ago over inyonim regarding marriage and divorce – no less critical to the status of the Jewish people than conversion, it was the Rabonim themselves who leveled their criticisms. No tom, dick or chayim had the chutzpah to put down a learned Rov, privately or publicly. Apparently, masseh ovos isn’t a simon levonim anymore.
R’ Druckman and Rav Avior who but the beis din for giyur together ( I’ve met Rav Druckman and I know Rav Avior) are not my personal cup of tea, either politically or religiously. But their Torah knowledge is evident and well known, and their decisions were founded on halachic bases which you or I may or may not agree with, but which nonetheless exist.
R’ Druckman’s allies in America are Rabbi Marc Angel and the International Rabbinic Fellowship, Rabbi Manny Vinas, Rabbi Aharon Ziegler, and in Israel, Rabbi Haim Amsalem, Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, and Rabbi Yisrael Rosen.
R’ Druckman is a talmid chacham par excellence and a rosh yeshiva (Ohr Etzion). I am glad to see that his kavod is no longer being impugned.
The second courageous virtue Netanyahu spoke of was Rabbi Druckman’s successful conversion of 50,000 people into Judaism, in the time when he headed the Conversion Authority.
Living In CIS, (11/3/13)
How many of those 50,000 observe Torah and mitzvos? Those I know who took the tests and passed do not keep anything. It was just “wish me luck on the test!” and then nothing. Being m’ga’er the Russian immigrants who believe in another religion does not stop anti-semitism, and just makes a Fifth Column within Judaism,!
The secular Zionists brought the goyim from Russia and elsewhere in to counteract the growing Chareidi population. So now that the secular Zionists were oved the baal pe’or, the Rabbanut has to wipe up the mess? Why does the rabanut have to be mah-yafisniks, dancing to the whims of the Secular Zionists? It’s the Secular Zionists calling the halachic tune, and the modern Rabbanut “Mah-Yafis”niks dancing to the tune. (Note: Many rabbanim of the rabbanut do follow Gedolim, and do not deserve to be lumped in here. I am hereby excluding those.) Absolute authority rests with those who know halacha and spend their lives studying it, not with the secular Zionists. No matter how flexible you want to be, you cant make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear.
Yevamos 24B, Tosfos there, Yevamos 47a-b, 76A.
Rambam hilchos isurei biah, located in Sefer Kedusha), perek 13, halachas 14,15,16,17. ( hebrewbooks.org rambam browser makes this convenient)
Tur and shulchan Aruch Yoreh deah siman 268, especially the end. I didn’t see the Shulchan Aruch yet, but in the tur it’s sif 4 and 12. I have a Tur set at home but not a shulchan Aruch set.
The gemara quite clearly states that they didn’t accept geirim in the days of Dovid and Shlomo because they geirim had ulterior motives. The Gemara does say that there were 150k geirim then. The Rambam says that they were converted by batei din of hedyotos. The Hagohos Mordechai (Yevamos siman 110)says that if we know they have ulterior motives, we do not accept them. the Rambam does say that if they were accepted by others and had mila and tevila, bedieved (as in, not lechatchila), they are full geirim and we watch them to see if they accepted the mitzvos. The Tur is quite clear ( by siman 4) that kabalas ol mitzvos is me’akev, even though a simple reading of the Rambam doesn’t say it. Kabalas ol mitzvos is me’aekev even if it wasn’t in front of 3, kol shekein if it was neevr done at all. That is why we can go lemafrea. However, even the Rambam is mode that we don’t accept geirim lechatchila for ulterior motives. I only put in an hour into this, and didn’t have time to read through the shulchan aruch nosei keilim and later poskim yet, but it does seem quite clear that 1. kabalas ol mitzvos is me’akev, at least according to the Tur, 2. There are those who say the Beis Yosef agrees with the Tur, and the only heter is if they didn’t inform him of the mitzvos, assuming he meant to accept all the mitzvos, not that he didn’t fully accept all the mitzvos, and 3. According to all opinions, we do not lechatchila accept geirim converting for ulterior motives. Geirim who accept all the mitzvos for ulterior motives are geirim bedeieved, but lechatchila we do not accept them. Geirim who do not accept mitzvos are not geirim (based on tur 4 who says even kabbalos ol mitzvos in front of less than 3 or at night is bad). So to lechatchila make geirim out of goyim for no good reason, and who don’t want to accept mitzvos, is AGAINST normative halacha. The only question is bedieved, if a beis din of hedyotos (a good name as nay for abeis din that goes against the lechatchila of normative halacha) if the Rambam is in fact arguing on the tur and holds that bedieved kabaalas ol mitzvos is not me’akev. However, the beis yosef holds like the Tur and has a different girsa in that part of the Rambam. This wasn’t some chumra made by Rav Eliashiv .
?????
??????? ????”? ????-? ??????.
??? ????? ???”? ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? ????
?? ???? ??, ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??????
??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????”? ???? ?????
???????? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???
?????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ???”? ??’
??”? ???’ ?’. ??? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??
??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ????. ???
????? ??? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??????
??? ???? ??,? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ?? ???
??? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????. ????? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ??? ?????? ??”?
???? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ‘???? ???????
???? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????”? ???? ?????
??????? ??? 6 ???? ??????. ?????? ???? ???? ??
?? ???.
?????,
??? ?????????
There are discussions about this on other threads, you can seek them out.
Short rebuttal: Assuming that kabbolas mitzvos is needed and is m’akev: If there was a kabbolas mitzvos without an anan sehadi, AT THAT TIME, then EVERYONE agrees that the person is now a full fledged Ger and therefore a full fledged Jew.
You cannot be mevatel Geirus retroactively. If there was a proper Bais Din we assume that there was proper kabbolas mitzvos. Even if the Ger was deliberately fooling the rabbanim it will still be a good Geirus if he verbally was mekabel mitzvos (if they went along with it, then clearly there was no “anan sehadi”), because “d’varim sh’b’lev ainum d’varim.”
Rabbi Chaim Druckman and his Bais Din were undoubtedly a proper bais din of talmidei chachamim. Therefore, all the people they were m’gayer are full fledged Jews. Speaking askance of them will violate numerous lavim in the Torah.
Google “A New Conversion Scandal Jewish Media Resources” for an article describing these conversions. To summarize, Ariel Sharon set quotas for Russian immigrants to convert, in order to maintain the state’s “Jewish” identity. The Russians’ motivation for going along with it was for citizenship and army purposes. Their “kabalas ol mitzvos” was a complete formality and a sham. Their insincerity was evident from the outset, and they were completely nonobservant from the moment their “conversions” were done.
” I am glad to see that his kavod is no longer being impugned. “
No, his geirim that are no longer keeping anything, are the ones who are impugning his kavod.
His beis din is a farce. He signed thousands of conversion certificates certifying he was on the beis din in EY while he was traveling in Europe those dates.
benigmuman has the last word on all this: you cannot retroactively cancel geirus. That, for sure, is the halacha and is supported by the vast majority of teshovus (R”Moshe’s teshuvo nothwithstanding). Regardless whether the ger- at that time- lied- as long as he went through the actual process (milah utevilah) he is a ger. even About Time accetps this!
ROB, if it is absolutely obvious that no kabolas ha’mitzvos was intended, the geirus never took place.
mdd- how is it obvious? short of the prospective ger coming to the bet din with a ham sandwich in his/her hands, how would you know that he/she does not accept the torah? even if he/she afterwards weakens and does not keep most of the halochos, what doeas it prove? maybe he/she is doing it ‘leteovon” but still accept the mitzvas!kabblos mitzvahs does not mean keeping them- just accepting them!
MDD and rabbiofberlin,
First of all, I don’t think that R’Moshe argues on what I wrote. And MDD is correct that it is possible to have a case where it is absolutely clear (“anan sehadi”) that the kabbolas mitzvos does not have actual intent. However, it is hard to imagine an Orthodox Rabbi performing the conversion in such a case.
So for example, if a man is converting for marriage and he says to his fiancee and the rabbi, “I don’t mind going through the whole ritual and stuff but I am not binding myself to any sort of code of conduct for the future.” That would be pretty clear that later kabbolas mitzvos is not valid (absent a retraction of his earlier statement). Similarly, I could hear an argument that if he crossed his fingers as he dunked in the mikvah, it would not be valid.
The point is that for there to be an anan sehadi, the purported ger must have done some maaseh or made some statement that made it absolutely clear that he did not mean to be mekabal the ol of the mitzvos.
We can safely assume, however, that if talmidei chachamim oversaw the conversion, there was no such anan sehadi and the conversion is completely valid.
benignuman: you encapsulated exactly what i wrote and I think you are right. The problem does not arise with the piskei halocho about gerus but with the (virtual) sickness of making chumros with everything. For ex.- I heard (true,only a shmuah with no actual knowledge) that a certain european bes din asks whether the woman candidate for gerus will “oover her hair” when she converts. Now, that is a wonderful way of living as a jew, but what does it have to do with “kabbolos ol mitzvos”? does the ger have to accept every chumro ? from the story of hillel, we clarly see that this is not the case.Every story about gerim in the torah or gemoro does not insist that the ger has to accept doing every mitzah with every chumro. He/she has to accept the “ol”- the burden, of mitzvos, the rest, he wil learn! ( see the actual language of the rambam)
“kabblos mitzvahs does not mean keeping them- just accepting them!”
Yeah, but you have to accept to do them. That does not mean that a Ger who speaks one word of loshon hara is a goy, but s/he does have to be willing to honestly try to keep everything.
kanoi next door: i agree with you and i think that rav druckman shelita and his bet din did everything they could to have the gerim accept the mitzvos. I bet you that a large part of their gerim are still religious!
RabbiofBerlin: hair-covering is technically required by halacha, and is not just a chumra. However, it is a special case, since many Orthodox communities historically and today don’t practice it. For that reason, as mentioned on a thread in which this issue was discussed extensively, some rabbis have expressed the intention that a failure to cover one’s hair (in a community where this is uncommon) does not indicate a lack of acceptance of the mitzvas.
More generally, I think you’re right that increasing stringencies are a problem. It makes it harder to argue convincingly to the non-frum that Orthodox Judaism is the only valid form of Judaism, because they see all the recent stringencies and mistakenly conclude that Orthodoxy is something new and extreme, rather than the continuation of traditional Judaism.
There needs to be moderation and balance in halacha: Devarim 4:2 says not only can we not subtract from the mitzvos (as the heterodox do), but we can’t add to them either. It’s a good thing Orthodoxy has many varieties and is not controlled by a single hierarchy or pope. This way moderates and even lenient authorities (even people like R’ Abadi on Kashrus issues) can have a following and influence.
TKNY,
You wrote “Yeah, but you have to accept to do them. That does not mean that a Ger who speaks one word of loshon hara is a goy, but s/he does have to be willing to honestly try to keep everything.”
I believe that many hold that the ger must only be mekabel the “ol” of the mitzvos. Meaning he must accept that the mitzvos are binding on himself, even if he knows that it is too hard for him to give up some of his tayvos and that he will be an avaryon.
benignuman- yup= this is exactly how the Rambam interprets the halocho (see his loshon). It is also evident from the story of Hilell that this is exactly what happend – although it is not clear whether the gentlie became a ger right away.
YYTZ- i reraize that covering one’s hair (for a woman) may be a d’oraisa (there are conflicting views on that) but ,as you write, it would be very unusual to maintasin that this is what one has to accept to become a ger.
A New Conversion Scandal
by Jonathan Rosenblum
Yated Ne’eman
May 17, 2006
In order to protect themselves from being pressured to perform questionable conversions, some rabbis have a blanket rule that they will not participate in any beis din for the purpose of geirus, and will only refer would geirim to other batei dinim. For the past quarter century, various proposals to create standing batei dinim to handle conversion matters have been mooted in the United States. A series of recent conferences of rabbonim sponsored by the Eternal Jewish Family program under the title “Universally accepted conversions in intermarriage” has given new impetus to the idea.
Despite the inherent contradiction involved in setting numerical targets for conversion, there have always been rabbis within religious Zionism prepared to play along for there own ideological/theological reasons. For religious Zionists, who attribute theological significance to the State of Israel, no less than for old time Zionists, like Sharon, the importation of hundreds of thousands of gentiles into Israel, under the Law of Return, constitutes a stain on the State of Israel.
Another pressure acting upon national religious rabbis is the fear that if they fail to do the bidding of the political echelons and dramatically increase the number of converts, the State will turn to the Conservative and Reform movements to pick up the slack, and they will have opened the door all the way for official recognition of the heterodox movements.
That fear explains, for instance, the willingness of the Chief Rabbinate to consider a joint conversion panel plan, advanced by leading figures at Yeshiva University, nearly two decades ago. The plan called for panels made up of Conservative, Reform, and Orthodox members who would then recommend candidates for conversion before a beit din made up of those possessing semichah from Orthodox institutions.
When confronted by Attorney-General Mani Mazuz with the discrepancy between the certificate and the facts, Rabbi Druckman explained that he had cancelled at the last minute his flight to Warsaw, but since he had promised the prospective converts (i.e., more than one) that he would convert them, he signed the certificates anyway.
In a subsequent court proceeding, the party mentioned in the falsified certificate testified that she wanted to convert in order to marry and make aliyah. Both the financial incentive and the desire to marry would have rendered her conversion halachically invalid. And given her own express admission as to her reasons for seeking to convert, it appears unlikely in the extreme that there was ever any kabolas mitzvos.
In his letter to Mazuz, attorney Shimon Yaakobi, the legal advisor to the rabbinical court system, mentioned that there were at least ten other cases in his files of affidavits signed by Rabbi Druckman that raised suspicions similar to those in the case under discussion. (In a subsequent letter from Mazuz to Rabbi Druckman, he mentions these other files.)
R’ Druckman’s allies in America are Rabbi Marc Angel and the International Rabbinic Fellowship, Rabbi Manny Vinas, Rabbi Aharon Ziegler, and in Israel, Rabbi Haim Amsalem, Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, and Rabbi Yisrael Rosen.
==
Al eileh ani boichiyo….why isn’t Avi Weiss on that list??
I learned hilkhot giyur be iyun and I see the Haredim complaining about politics more than any actual halakhic concerns.
R’ Druckman isn’t a kal. He is the rosh yeshiva of Yeshivat Or Etzion and is a gadol within the Religious Zionist world.
Rd, Rav Elyashiv zt”l was a posek, not a politician.
I don’t know how someone can defend conversions done to fill quotas.
DY, +1.
“hair-covering is technically required by halacha, and is not just a chumra.”
While that is indeed the overwhelming majority opinion, there do exist a few opinions that it is not required.
‘ Rav Elyashiv zt”l was a posek, not a politician.”‘
He also intervened in many political issues on the side of one particular faction, which does make him a politician as well.
Charlie, his piskei halacha were not based on politics, his politics were completely based on halacha.
I don’t need the dati; I don’t need the MO; I don’t need any of them.
If you want to be part of the community, you ought to clean out your house. I can’t trust any of you when you tolerate the clowns in your midst.
To call a rosh yeshiva a clown is a shonda and shows how tolerance is limited to those who think the way you do.
How true. It is a shame to call druckman a clown. One of the two is a honest and skilled worker who brings smiles to people, be that on the street, at the circus, or R”L in the cancer ward. The other is a deceptive ignoramus that creates countless heartaches for his “converts” and their descendants for generations to come.
If he is a gadol in the religious zionist world, good luck to the religious zionist world.
To accuse the Gedolei HaDor of putting politics before Halcha is a shonda and shows how tolerance is limited to those who think the way you do.
Oh, and I would assume that PBA was referring to true clowns like Avi Weiss, not R’ Druckman. But this is PBA we’re talking about, so I could be wrong.
You really think politics never played a role in a psak?
The psak of R’ Elyashiv? No.
(Of those who are machshir geirus to fill quotas, not so sure.)
I have to be modeh that there is information here about R’ Druckman that if accurate may change my perspective on his conversions.
But for those who condemn R’ Druckman while holding up the clean hands of the ehrliche community, I must remind you of the “work” of the EJF, of a particular (former) Rosh Yeshiva in Monsey and his issues with giyur, and the significant support he received for a long time from many authorities in the community.
As I’ve said with regard to many issues here – no one is perfect, and we all have our hishtadlus to do, from great to small.
With the comments here and treament of Dati-Leumi Rabbis in Israel its not shocking that the leadership is turning a deaf ear to the pleas of the Charedi community.
You cannot insult and defame a community and then expect them to come to your aid when your chips are down.
Perhaps if more civility and respect had occured the current result would never have happend and Bayit HaYudi would have teamed up with Shas and UTJ and not Yesh Atid
Yichusdik,
It’s even much worse. 1) why can’t the name be posted? That means something.
2) big name rabbis were on the take for millions of dollars do that they didn’t condemn him. And worst of all, he’s making a comeback and even was a guest speaker at a big name rabbis school. That’s pretty disgusting
Truthsharer, I wasn’t edited. I chose not to post his name, because the issue is bigger than one Rabbi on this side or on that side. The issue to me is the attitude of our oilem – too often criticiszing those deemed inferior in their yiddishkeit when the same or even worse problems are at our own doorstep.
It is this expressed attitude by too many among the “ehrliche”
community that turns those presumed to be allies away from partnership with chareidim.
That particular rabbi and the entire ejf system was heavily criticized by the Eida Chareidis long prior to the entire scandal. You can find online the harshly worded letters by Rav Shternbuch against ejf that were written long before what later transpired.
Why can’t a Psak have political motivations? The Gemara is full of cases where politics were used to help decide Halacha (Mipnei She’einam B’nei Torah, for example). That doesn’t inavildate a Psak. That means that there are Tzdadim both ways and that the situation in the world helps be Machria.
My rav considered working with the unnamed EJF ex-RY from Monsey who had snookered much of the Charedi world into giving him authority over conversions. He smelled two rats, one that EJF was going to try to convince the non-Jewish spouse of intermarried couples to convert, and that the idea of a single conversion authority was unprecedented. I also personally know someone who DID work with the EJF who had to quit in part because they were converting people who were not ready to keep mitzvot. It is the height of chutzpah for the people who endorsed EJF to complain about Rabbi Druckman!
“true clowns like Avi Weiss”
First, he is Rabbi Avi Weiss.
No less a figure than Rabbi Druckman himself has been quoted as complaining that the charedi world doesn’t refer to DL rabbis by the appropriate title. One can disagree with him, but don’t disrespect him.
Second, Rabbi Avi Weiss is someone who has personally brought many Jews to mitzvah observance, and who has constantly spoken out against anti-Semites and others who oppress us, all over the world. Few if any of us can stand in his shoes. If that makes him a clown, may we have many more such clowns.
“his piskei halacha were not based on politics, his politics were completely based on halacha.”
I never implied otherwise.
Zahavasdad
it is obvious there are fundamental disagreements. True, I think no one should support a person who signs or stamp an official paperwork (even one with no particular significance attached, say, a school exam? a university commission?) while being elsewhere – thus opening the door to avoidable problems in the future. Someone is very busy? We understand it. The schedule can’t accommodate an event even though it was arranged a long time ago? too bad, candidates will be rescheduled. But could you imagine your degree being questioned because those who signed it were somewhere else that day? Hey, that’s nothing, compared to a giyur. And does not affect anyone’s children.
But there is no question the issue is much deeper than that. There is no question that our disagreements are irreconciliable.
However, may I remark you write “Perhaps if more civility and respect had occured the current result would never have happend and Bayit HaYudi would have teamed up with Shas and UTJ and not Yesh Atid”. Then I have to point out to you that Shas and UTJ are not “The Haredim”. They are a fraction of a fraction of haredim: are those who both chose to live in EY and hold an Israeli passport, and to participate in elections. Many Israeli haredim do not vote at all, and of course, other haredim do not live in EY and have no intention of making aliyah anytime before Moshiach shows up. We are not even talking of those who think the Medinat to be a misfortune. The fact that Shas and UTJ have been pushed to their current position is a huge change with respect to the past.
One of the reasons I stay away from Israel is that I can discuss with people like you, debate, disagree, but keep basic respect and basic friendship, which I try to do with all human beings that life brings me to meet, jewish or not. What breaks basic respect and basic friendship is when my life starts being affected: if my son gets a draft notice, then disagreements can no longer be ignored, I have to fight. Moreover, while I can expect having to deal with a draft in other countries (most have gotten rid of draft now, but 40 years ago, one conceivably would have had to deal with it and find some way out), in EY it is hard to ignore it’s my own brother who is trying to mold and assimilate our children.
I can’t understand why the arrangements the Arabs enjoy can’t be extended to all citizens of the state. Those who do want to serve, kol hakavod + money + benefits, and if they are not enough, let us increase such benefits. Those who qualify for elite units and receive appropriate security clearance (some Muslim Arabs did too) kol ha kavod and lots of money and benefits, as of course, they are seriously risking their life and this has to be rewarded, or else, no sane person will enroll. Everyone else, let them find a profession they are satisfied with, whatever that is, Torah or secular, and contribute to society. You want to cut down the pittance of support which is given to some? I don’t object. That’s it, those who want to study Torah will do, those who enroll in a secular university will be supported by the taxpayer but I would accept that. Why is that not enough, why nothing short of assimilation and disappearance of the old ghetto jews will do? I can’t understand.
Charlie, you may not have meant that, and I will certainly take your word for it, but I think it is demeaning (although it wasn’t your intention) to call him a politician.
The venom just keeps pouring out from the mouths of these posters.
In honor of this group, I will be donating $36 to the IRF, $36 to Rabbi Marc Angel’s Discretionary Fund, and $36 to ITIM.
The psak of R’Elyashiv, that kabolas “ol mitzvos” is required is not novel, but nor is it in contradiction of R’Druckman’s conversions. “Ol mitzvos” means accepting that the yoke or the burden of mitzvos, meaning accepting that they BINDING. It is not equivalent to being m’kabel to DO all the mitzvos. One can be m’kabel the “ol mitvos” without expecting to keep them or even knowing what they are.
I am sure the author meant well, but he was clearly getting his information from only one side on this issue.
The accepted practice in klal yisroel for centuries has been that if the Bais Din was a proper Bais Din, if the Rav was a proper Orthodox Rav, the kabolas mitzvos is presumed valid and the convert is a full fledged Jew!
- The topic ‘Rabbi Chaim Druckman’ is closed to new replies.