[Avodah] R' Angel & Geirus Redux

[Daniel Eidensohn]

chana at kolsassoon.org.uk wrote:
> RDE writes:
>
>   
>> If I understand you properly, R' Berkovitz argues that whenever the 
>> Torah laws become difficult to keep they should be simply abrogated 
>> because of ais la'asos. According to this if we are prepared to have 
>> Israel populated by "make believe" Jews for the sake of "Jewish 
>>     
> unity" 
>   
>> we should also do away with the problem of aguna and mamzerim by 
>>     
> saying 
>   
>> these halachos are no longer of concern because it interferes with 
>> Jewish unity. Shabbos is also a problem. Hilchos nidda and kashrus 
>>     
> are  
>   
>> also divisive laws. 
>>     
>
> I think you are being a little unfair here.  You yourself have brought 
> that there are two sides to the question vis a vis accepting gerim, and 
> in particular brought what could be considered to be "public policy" 
> reasons against taking the lenient view - including the bad experiences 
> of poskim with products of such geirus (Rav Moshe et al).
>   
This is perhaps the first time I don't really understand what your point 
is. Could you elaborate on what do you mean that I am "being a little 
unfair here"? Do you agree with R' Berkovitz's approach?  I don't and 
therefore don't feel a need for finding circumstances where it might be 
more legitimate to apply.

The well known fact that many issues can have a variety of solutions - 
doesn't change the fact that not every solution is acceptable. R' 
Berkovitz's solutions seem unacceptable. I still don't see how R' 
Berkowitz's approach differs from Reform or Conservative.

Bottom line - do you find R' Berkovitz's understanding of halacha to be  
acceptable?

Daniel Eidensohn