[Avodah] Court retroactively revokes conversions

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 07:54:45PM +0300, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:
: Rav Uziel said that there is no need to require acceptance of mitzvos - 
: and he didn't limit this to Israel while Rav Goren did.

I didn't see either of the acharonim cited the way you did.

The MU speaks about "ameikh ami"... That in chu"l this could only be done
through qabbalas ol mitzvos, but with a Jewish civilization, one could
join the nation without QOM. That QOM was merely the only avenue left
in the golah. I don't see how that sevara dismisses the long history
of requiring QOM, as much as locking it into a corner that excludes a
Jewish society.

: >Also related is R' ChO Gradzensky (Achiezer 3:26, already cited in this
: >thread) which says a geir who converts with the intent of being a mumar
: >letei'avon bedavar achas is bedi'eved mequbal as a geir.

: Achiezer however says that as a minimum the ger must keep Shabbos and 
: kashrus

I read his words the way RMM did -- that a ger who doesn't keep shabbos
and kashrus is presumed not to accept ol malkhus Shamayim. The effect
is the same; he must keep them. But not mishum ol mitzvos. Also, if it
is a birur, what if we were mevareir another way (and didn't need to
presume)?

As for the MU, I have my own problem following his argument. Someone
who joins EY now proved less passion to join the Jewish people than
would someone who was giving up life as a nachri in Eastern Europe
to move into shtetl life and accepting the authority of the vaad 4
aratzos, the inferior lifestyle, the Yiddish language, different dress,
separate culture.... That was a major sacrifice for the sake of joining
the community. Life in Israel for people from many countries is a step
*up* in standard of living. And yet we don't see a history of poseqim
not requiring QOM for the East European. Do we?

...
: >Not sure what either have to do with a BD that doesn't sufficiently screen
: >qabalas ol mitzvos for people who are simply *beshitah* "meqabeil ...
: >chutz midavar echad" (to quote Bekhoros 30b).

: Don't understand why you insist that being certified by a kosher beis 
: din gives a person a clean pass...

I don't. I'm saying that if the BD is kosher and all the other pro forma
were followed, one has to apply the Rambam, Issurei Bi'ah 13:14. He
is a geir, but "vechosheshin lo ad sheyisba'eir tzidqaso". Sounds like
the guy is presumed a geir with a question mark, and stays in that state
until we can prove his geirus was with proper intent.

If this cheshash is real (and not a long shot of one woman who was
questioned in order to avoid her childrens' mamzeirus), then I think
the halakhah wouldn't allow blanket acceptance or blanket annulment.
Rather each case would need to be checked, and until they're checked,
the presumption is Jewish.

I have no idea what "geir ... vechosheshin" means lemaaseh. Count them
toward a minyan but don't marry them? But that's a question in the
Rambam. Anulling all sight unseen seems to be exactly the opposite of
the Rambam's pesaq.

And it uncomfortably feels like another case where halakhah is weilded
without regard to whom it is being weilded against. We all know well
other cases where a rav tried to bring someone else to ruin without
asking questions of them (or actually reading their book).

Prof Sperber's article was recently cited on list. He says this
phenomenon is both real, and a product of a shift from getting pesaq
from rabbanim to getting it from rashei yeshiva, who will be closer to
ivory tower academics than would rabbanim of communities.

: *Igros Moshe 
: <http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2008/04/r-moshe-feinstein-ztl-invalidating.html#_ftn1>(Even 
: ha-Ezer 4:78): *Concerning a woman who was married by a Conservative rabbi 
: - in Houston who is known to openly violate Shabbos - to a man who was born 
: in San Salvador to a non???Jewish woman. The Conservative rabbi there 
: claimed that he converted her together with two local men who were open 
: Shabbos violators because he said that no one observes Shabbos in El 
: Salvador...

Not sure what this has to do with the case at hand. I assume no one is
claiming R' Drukman's BD includes mechalelei Shabbos befarhesia.

On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 05:18:44PM +0300, Michael Makovi wrote:
: In other words, the only thing remarkable is that he is admitting his
: frailty, and yet his gerut is kosher. It is b'vadai that had he NOT
: admitted his frailty, and then violated, he'd be a kosher ger.

I dunno.

Someone who admits frailty at the conversion court sounds more like "I'm
not even going to try at this one" than the usual accepting in the passion
of the moment of conversion to try, but failing when the situation arises.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 22nd day, which is
micha at aishdas.org        3 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Netzach: Do I take control of the
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 situation for the benefit of others?