[Avodah] Court retroactively revokes conversions

[Arie Folger]

RRW wrote:
> When I learned the sugya of Giyyur with R. Parness one summer [circa 1973]
> he concluded that a prospective ger who is mekabel "ol mitzovs" - despite
> admitting that he might give in to temptation - is acceptable.  IOW he did
> not have to plege absolute compliance, just sincere acceptance.
>
> What more can one ask from any normal human?  can perfection ever be
> considered a prerequesite?

RRW's definition is likely correct. However, against those who would suggest 
that some require a level of perfection unheard of among humans who are not 
the gedolei hador, let me state that that, which RRW rejects is a straw man. 
Indeed, nobody is perfect. Ein tzaddiq ba'aretz asher ya'aseh tov velo 
ye'hta. Only people who want to use that straw man to argue in favor of a 
very limited qabalaot 'ol mitzvot mention this as a serious alternative.

No, maximalist qabalat 'ol mitzvot most likely means that the ger accepts the 
entire Torah as binding and has the intention to keep it. No ger is being 
disqualified retroactively for not knowing the details of borrer beShabbat. 
However, if the ger never intended to take the day off, or if he never 
intended to turn it into a day for the spirit, opting instead to celebrate it 
at the beach, making kiddush on a piña colada and being qove'ah se'udah on 
baby calamari, I don't think that we can call his qiddush hayom on Friday 
night, even if it includes motzi and birkat hamazon, a sincere desire to 
accept to keep the mitzvot.


RRW: the above is no disagreement with you, I just piggy backed onto your 
statement. (Is one allowed to *piggy* back a halakhic position? ;-))

Good Shabbos,
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com