[Avodah] . Re: R' Angel & Geirus Redux (Michael Makovi)

[Chana Luntz]

RMB writes:.
> 
> Not only incomprehensible, but digarded by halachic process. Yes, ol
> malkhus Shamayim, milah and tevilah is codified -- that /is/ geirus.

And then write:


> Sort of. As RYBS writes, the binding nature of shas is because it was
> accepted across kelal Yisrael. And thus, in his day, it was safe to say
> that shas was the last book with such authority. However, the SA too
> was accepted across kelal Yisrael. As RARakeffet put it -- why do you
> study SA for semichah and not the Rambam, Rif or Tur? 

I agree with this, which is why I think it worth while to just list out the
Shulchan Aruch on Hilchos Gerim  - because I think the problem is that the
Shulchan Aruch is not as clear cut as you would like it to be - it rather
has a bit for everyone:

So here is hilchos gerim - Yoreh Deah siman 268 (I am only doing a full
translation where it seems to bear on our question):

Si'if 1: a ger needs mila first, and if already mulled the requirement for
dam bris, and if his gid is cut off, it doesn't prevent him from converting,
tevila is enough. Rema, if he toyveled before he mulled, bideved it is a
tevila.

Si'if 2: When he comes to convert they say to him, what did you see that
brought you to convert do you not know that Yisroel at this time are
afflicted and oppressed and troubles come upon them and if he says I know
but I am unworthy to mix with them they accept him immediately and they make
known to him the essence of the religion is the unity of Hashem and the
issur of worshipping idols and they speak at length with him with regard to
this and they make known to him a few of the mitzvos kalos and the mitzvos
chamuros and they make know to him a few of the punishments for the mitzvos
and they say to him, before you came to this learning if you ate chelev you
would not be deserving of the punishment of kares if you were mechallel
shabbas you would not have been deserving of the punishment of skila and now
if you eat chelev, you will be punishable with kares and if you are mechalel
shabbas, you will be chayav skila.  But they do not speak at great length on
this and they do not go into great detail and just as they tell him the
punishments of the mitzvos, so they tell to him the rewards of the mitzvos
and they make known to him that if he performs the mitzvos he will inherit
the world to come and that there is no complete tzadik unless he is a master
of wisdom who performs these mitzvos and they make known and say to him
behold know that the world to come isn't established except for the
righteous and these are Yisroel and this that you see that Yisroel is in
pain in this world it is good that is done for them that they are not able
to receive the majority of good in this world like the ovdei cochavim lest
it be enough for them and they lose the reward of the world to come and HKBH
does not bring on them too much punishment so they should be destroyed
rather all the ovdei cochavim will be destroyed and they stand and they
expound on this matter so as to endear them to him and if he accepts they
mul him immediately and they wait until he is fully healed and after that
they toyvel him ... and three stand by him and make known o him  a few of
the mizvos kalos and the mitzvos chumros a second time and he is standing in
the water ...

Si'if 3:  All the matters of a ger between making known to him the mitzvos
to accept them between the mila between the tevila needs to be with 3 kosher
to judge and during the day and this is davka l'chatchila but bideved if he
was mulled or toyveled before 2, at night, or even if he was not toyveled
l'shem gerus except a man toyveled for keri or a woman for nidah he is a ger
and permitted to a Jewish woman except for the kabalas mitzvos that prevents
if it isn't during the day and before three and the Rif and the Rambam say
even bideved if he toyveled or mulled before two or at night it prevents and
he is assur to a Jewish woman ...

Si'if 7: A non jewish minor if he has a father he is able to convert him and
if he does not have a father and he comes to convert or his mother brings
him to convert beis din will convert him as it is a zechus for him v'zakin
adam shelo befanav and in both the case in which the minor is converted by
his father or the minor is converted by beis din he is able to protest when
he reaches adulthood and his din is not like a Yisroel mumar but like a non
Jew

Si'f 8: In what respect are we talking that he does not go according to
minhag yisroel from the time the reaches adulthood but if he goes according
to minhag yisroel when he reaches adulthood after that he is unable to
protest.

Si'if 12: when a convert comes to convert check after him whether it because
of money he will be given or because of a high position that he will inherit
or because of fear that he comes to enter the religion and if it is a man
check after him maybe he has set his eyes on a Jewish woman and if a woman
check after her that maybe she has set her eyes on a Jewish man if none of
these things are found on them, make known to them the weight of the yoke of
the Torah and the trouble that is imposed upon the amei ha'aretz so that
they will desist, but if they accept and do not desist and you see that they
return with love, accept them and if they are not checked after or they do
not make known to them the reward of the mitzvos or their punishment and
they are mulled and toyveled before three hedyotos behold they are a ger and
even if you know that because of this matter they converted since they were
mulled and toyvelled they go out of the category of ovdei cochavim and we
are choshesh them until they reveal their righteousness and even if they
return and serve idols behold they are like a Yisroel mumar whose kiddushin
is a kiddushin.

And the Shach says there on si'if 12: When he comes to convert: And it is
written in tosphos that this is from perek kama of shabbas that he came
before Hillel and said to him convert me on condition that I will be cohen
gadol and in the end he did it l'shem shamayim .. and from here one can
learn that it is all according to what the eyes of the beis din see and so
writes the drisha.

So you see it is not just REB saying we should act like Chazal and roll back
the clock on conversion back past the Shulchan Aruch.  At least as far down
as the Shach, basing himself on tosphos and in explaining the Shulchan
Aruch, there is an understanding that a beis din can look at the situation
and decide to convert somebody who not only does not accept the full yoke of
the mitzvos, but who rejects some essential ones (like a ger cannot be cohen
gadol) and who does it out of ulterior motive.

And even from si'if 2, the matter does not seem so clear - the key as
articulated there is about wanting to join in with the Jewish people and if
that is clearly there, beis din seem to be authorised to accept him as a
convert even before any discussion of mitzvos occurs.  Yes it is clear they
then need to have a discussion about mitzvos and the need for a formal
"making known the mitzvos for acceptance" in si'3- but the plain reading of
the text is not as clear cut as your opinion would necessarily have it.

It is into this gap that people like REB and Rav Uzziel step when they talk
about loosening up the requirements for conversion for the general benefit.

And that is why in general I feel you are being unfair to REB.  I don't
believe he is talking about "rolling back" the Shulchan Aruch. Rather, as I
understand it, he is talking about utilising creative solutions within the
halacha as we have it today, ie as codified by the Shulchan Aruch, by
utilising the kinds of methods that Chazal used vis a vis the Oral Torah vis
a vis the Shulchan Aruch.  

The example I was always given of a R' Berkowitz "solution"
was - we have a need in a Jewish state for policemen.  We can't and
shouldn't delegate that to the goyim on Shabbas.  But that means we
need to have policemen out there "on the beat" policing - even in
circumstances where there is no clear cut pikuach nefesh scenario to
justify being mechalel shabbas.  So we need to be creative - we should
put policemen on bicycles!

Now bicycles are another example of a somewhat modern day machlokus,
where the consensus is that we don't use them.  But the Ben Ish Chai
says they are mutar l'hatchila.  In the face of the need for Jewish
policing, even on Shabbas, R' Berkowitz's approach is that we should
rely on what is somewhat a minority opinion.  I however do see a
significant difference between that and R'Berkowitz saying - well we
need Jewish policing, so therefore it is mutar to let them drive cars
on shabbas, even if there is no classic pikuach nefesh scenario.  The
latter it seems to me is the Conservative position, but neither does
that seem to me to involve anything at all creative.

Another example of this is the use of grama, as in grama switches, to
enable wheelchairs and such to be operated.  In the case of wheelchairs
etc, those in favour argue for kovod habrios and similar principles but
I gather there is increasing hostility within certain segments of the
charedi world to such applications.  The preference is rather to hire a
non Jew (perhaps because there seems to be a lot of historical precedent for
extreme laxity in amira l'akum).

But R' Berkowitz would almost certainly extend the situations in which
he would allow the use of grama switches not just to avoiding hiring
non Jewish labor for chollim and the like but to situations of enabling the
running of the State without relying on non Jewish labor (eg in the
electrical generators).

The argument is not, as I understand it, that we should roll back the clock
in terms of decided halacha, but that we should go back to Chazal and try
and internalise their thinking processes - that our thinking has become
rigidified along with the codifications and it is that aspect that is the
most unfortunate part about it.  Now you can legitimately counter that we
are not Chazal, and it is not appropriate for donkeys to think like angels.
But on the other hand, if we cannot learn from Chazal how to think, then
arguably we all ought to close our gemora and go home.  After all, we know
what happens to donkeys - they get left behind at the Akeida.

And I think that is REB's belief, is that if we were to think more like
Chazal, creative solutions would and are available.  That the problem is,
that we haven't internalised Chazal's values enough to try.

> :-)BBii!
> -Micha

Regards

Chana