[Avodah] 15 Av

[Micha Berger]

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 02:09:16AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
>> And further ... if a woman converts for marriage, and the
>> marriage is assur, is there any way to say the conversion was
>> valid? I mean, there are pretty loose definitions of qabbalas
>> ol malkhus Shamayim compared to what a beis din would hope for.
>> But converting for the sake of being able to do an issur???

> These are great questions, and their answers are far above my level. But
> I'll say this: It is not at all unusual to come across a gemara that says,
> "You're not allowed to convert in this manner, but if you did, then it is
> valid." And some of those leniencies raise the exact question that RMB is
> asking, because if the gerus was done is a forbidden manner, where is the
> qabbalas ol malkhus Shamayim?

There is a significant break in the parallel you're proposing.

Someone whose geirus was done wrongly but kosher bedi'eved was converted
by a beis din who did something wrong. It doesn't necessarily disprove
the geir's qabbalas ol mitzvos, because (1) they're relying on people
who are comparatively subject matter experts, not acting on their own;
and (2) they aren't necessarily converting for the sake of being able to
sin. And if (3) it's about wondering about the convert's QOM vs ulterier
motive (like the Rambam's discussion of Shimshon's and Shelomo haMelekh's
wifes), the convert him/herself isn't wondering.

Here, you have someone converting just for the purpose of sinning. It isn't
about the conversion, where the ball or sin is in the beis din't court.

(It doesn't involve any questions of the kashrus of the geirus being
valid by circular or paradoxical reasoning -- the sin doesn't have the
self-reference nature of being in the conversion itself.)

> By the way, where did they find a Beis Din in Moav? Yes, that was a
> rhetorical question, intended to point out that if Rus and Orpah did have a
> valid conversion at the beginning of the story, the procedure must have
> involved some pretty serious leniencies.

Well, if two famous people went to where there was food, out of the whole
Jewish and Israelish peoples, there must have been at least 3 others. That
doesn't surprise me.

> Hmmm... Actually, if Rus converted at the end of the story, that is pretty
> problematic too, because even if there isn't any "conversion for the sake
> of marriage" to worry about, the Beis Din is even more surprising. (Someone
> *might* make a case that two brothers could be a Beis Din for gerus, but
> when Naami and Rus were alone they didn't have any Jewish men around at

Or again, anonymous and unmentioned bit players. Who said they were all
alone on the road? Maybe the road was better traveled than that?

Chodesh Tov!
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 We are great, and our foibles are great,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   and therefore our troubles are great --
Author: Widen Your Tent      but our consolations will also be great.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                      - Rabbi AY Kook