Wednesday, June 17, 2009

E. J.F. - "Saving" the Jewish people by proselytizng


Roni said:


I though the Tzadik joined Dt and other critics of RT for his attempt to encourage non jewish wives to convert! and surprisingly Dt does not challenge the Tzadik for his support to convet intermarried couple. But it should not surprise, if opposing views combine to a common enemy to badmouth him from both sides of their mouth.

-----------------
Roni you are really obnoxious. You like R' Tropper think that my sole concern is to bad mouth R' Tropper - and that it doesn't matter what the excuse. I assume you also share his paranoid delusions that I have tricked the Bedatz into attacking R' Tropper because I am the leading defender [sic] of R' Slifkin. 

You keep repeating over and over again that R' Tropper has come to save us because he proselytizes people and demands that they keep a high standard of observance. That his program will save us because it is different than R' Bomzer etc etc. Both programs stink.You can't seem to accept that there are people who sincerely think R' Tropper's program is sick and counterproductive for the Jewish people. It isn't only me but it is the view of the Bedatz and many rabbonim - who R' Tropper has intimidated - feel this way.

All R' Tropper has to do is produce a letter from Rav Eliashiv that says that he has changed his lifelong position of opposing proselytizing intermarried couples and that he now feels it is in the best interest of the Jewish people to spend millions of dollars to pressure non-Jews to convert - with a high standard of course. Enough of the nonsense that he doesn't have to say anything because since he supports R' Tropper he supports R' Tropper. Just produce a letter. While you are at it please have Rav Reuven Feinstein write the same letter - and claim that his father would agree with it (as R' Tropper has claimed). This despite that his father clearly states in the Igros Moshe that he doesn't approve of such a program.

Please produce letters from gedolim that the Jewish communities' greatest need is to have as many intermarried couples convert and that this will raised the quality of our community.  What good is wining and dining and throwing millions at nonJews and telling them they will be accepted as Jews in order that they promise to keep the mitzvos? By the way - what happened to R' Tropper's claim of univerally accepted conversion which he has stopped promising in his solicitation letters?

There is no disagreement that you can potentially manufacturer halachic Jews with R' Tropper's approach - but why do we need converts who are more concerned with lust and desire of man or woman than love of G-d.


52 comments :

  1. AS if RDT is not obnoxious!

    I'm not I wasn't even stating a motive for your obnoxious and irrational obsession with Tropper; I was just stating an obvious temiha: Why you do not challenge statements by others who attack Tropper with the argument that Tropper does not do enough to convert the intermarried. Similar to the temiha atzuma that you focus only on Tropper and on no one else in the fake and false conversion factories. Anyone can draw his own conclusions about this glaring temiha.

    You keep repeating(when challenged) that "both programs stink": 1) But you never write on your own about any of the other programs. You attempt to answer that you don't know about them! Well you know a bit about them (the one who threatened this blog is not an anomaly in the "other program"). 2) You do not even attempt to find out the obvious that is out there as i showed numerous times how Rav Moshe wrote about this problem in his times and things haven't changues much, except for people like Rt and his backers and some others who have RAILLED exactly at this problem (like for instance Cheif Rabbinate in Israel who made big strides in setting higher standards at the RCA).

    3) Moreover: I challenged you numerous times to *explain* (not only *state* as gospel) why the Equally "Stink". Even if you hold like the (few Rabbonim) who disagree with his approach, you cannot explain how one system that meets Halachik status of a GEr BEdiavad equals a system that renders most of his converts Goyim! It is just unbelievable how you your statements just gloss over this point. And if you think they are the same: expplain how you think that: 1) either Rt's gerut is not chal bediavad, 2) Or that Bomze'rs gerus is chal bediavad. The former atttempts and succeeds to have theminimal kabbalat hamitzvot; while the latter does not demand it (like the the wife of the person who was ...in this blog. and these types are rampant in his program).

    Rav Tropper has the ACTIVE SUPPORT of Rabbis like Rav REfven FEinstein, Rav Shmuel Kamentzky and many others. They go to his conferences and support the organization and Rt (despite knowing about the letter of Eyda Hacharedit).

    Maybe you can prodeuce a letter by Rav ELyashiv that he forbade what RT is doing! Why are you entitled for a letter more than RT is entitled for a letter? In addition: Rav Eisenstein who is known to be the right hand person of Rav Elyashiv in issues of Gerut (who is known to ask him questions and get answers from him) supports RT.

    Now: Reb Yid, there may be things that RAbbonim may endorse but not give a letter. There may be things that "halocho veen morin ken" and so on and so forth. There may be soemthing that rabonim may choose, for reasons of choosing "rah bemiutoh" to choose the least evil. It could be that Rav Elyashiv holds that since anyway so many convert intermarried couples that at least they should be halachikally gerim bediavad, so he will support them and yet not give a letter that endorses something that in essence is not the ideal.

    But in any event: You have not produced a LEtter by Rav ELyashiv that he himself forbids this, especially in cases when the jewish partner is a tinok shenishbah!

    But actual participation of Rabbonim speaks volunes about their support of this organization. You can see videos; you can see their attendance and their speeches and talks about the need and effect of this organization.

    And this is the crux of the matter that you just gloss over and raise your question as if your pooh poohing the other side that having goyim is better than non ideal gerim! That having halachik gerim despite them not being the gerrim completely leshem shamayim is better than having a jew married to a non a jew!

    If you qwould show that RT's approach would at the end bring *more* of those gerim than if he would not be around, I might hear better your position; ut Rt's is mostly taking the same people that would go other "rabbis" who would not request kabbalat hamitzvot, then i see it as mostly a win-win situation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In addition to what was said above, you also seem to repeat something you have said in the past and I challenged you and you did not relate to the issues and ignored it and now you repeat again even though you made a big mistake. I showed you then, how you quoted IGM EH 2/4 contrary to what REb Moshe actually wrote. Here you write again, "have Rav REuven write the same letter - and claim that his father would agree with it....despite that his FATHER WRITES IN THE IM THAT HE DOES NOT APPROVE OF SUCH APROGRAM...":

    Please, provide the source that states that "he does NOT approve of such a program"!

    In the past you have quoted IM EH 2/4 in support of an issur to convert leshem ishut even if it prevents from an issur chamur. I showed you that you erred. He states there so regarding converting a giyoret to marry a kohen! That is where he forbids even if it saves from an issur chamur, but when it relates to "gerut leshem ishut" he CLEARLY PERMITS IT!

    For the sake of brevity i'll only bring bekituzr the pssak there (but I can also show you how you erred in the reading of the intentions and kavana of Rav Msoeh in the general teshuva):


    "בענין לגייר נכרית שכבר נשואה לכהן בערכאות כדי שישאנה מצד שאומר דאם לא יתירו ישתמד ח"ו בעה"י ט"ו כסלו תשכ"ב..... ורק בישראל שמותר לישא גיורת יש להקל לב"ד לגייר אף שהוא לשם אישות משום שאין זה איסור ברור ...... ולכן כשיש לחוש שיעבור על איסור חמור יש להקל לקבל לגייר,

    In short RAv Moshe pernmits when the only issue is leshem ishut, but in the same teshuva he implies an issur to do so when kabbalat hamitzvot is lacking:


    והנה לבד זה הא אף שהמתגייר לשם אישות נפסק הלכה ביבמות דף כ"ד שהוא גר וכן הוא ברמב"ם וש"ע מ"מ ודאי בעינן שיקבל מצות דהא גר שלא קבל עליו איזה מצוה אף שקבל עליו שאר כל המצות אינו גר כדאיתא בבכורות דף ל' ואע"ג דאיתא שם רק אין מקבלין אותו וכן הוא ברמב"ם פי"ד ה"ח, מ"מ משמע דאף בדיעבד אינו גר

    And so it is in teshuvot of many other gedoyley yisrael (and in the very famous Achiezer where he finds a Teshuvot Horambam to allow and perhaps to go ahead and find a takanat hashavim! and between where there is no kabblat hamitzvot), so it's a milssa dtmiha that you can equate both programs, when one gropu makes something that is MUTAR AL PI HALACHA and the other makes something thatis ASSUR al pi halacha!

    Whether or not you find that it is worthwhile or not to spends so much money for this purpose, does not make the general approach OSSUR WHEN GEDOYLEY YISRAEL WERE MATIR to covnert leshem ishut if it will save them from inyonim chamurim whereas these gedoyley yisrael ASSERED doing so when there is no kabbalat hamitazvot.

    So, even if you feel that in your opinion it should be assur to spend so much money or other new issurim the BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU to produce an issur! Bring Rav Elyashiv HIMSELF THAT ASSERED OR RAV MOSHE and then we will discuss further. So far, we open teshuvas from gedoyley yisroel that were matir al derech zeh.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Recipients and PublicityJune 18, 2009 at 10:01 AM

    Why do we have to read Roni/Tropper's tirade as a double duplicate post in stereo?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Where iI show you that you erred in the reading of the IM.

    you claim here that Rav REuven's father would not permit Rt's organization. where is the written backing for this.

    You have erred in the past as saying that Rav Moshe forbids gerut leshem ishut in IM EH 2/4. There he forbids gerut giyoret to marry a kohen and THERE HE PERMITS GERUT LESHEM ISHUT!

    הנה בדבר אחד ממשפחה חשובה שנשא נכרית ויש לו כבר בנים ממנה ורחקוהו מהם ועתה בא ואמר שהיא רוצה להתגייר וגם לגייר את הילדים ואם לא יקרבוהו מפחיד אותם שהוא ישתמד והוא כהן שאסור בגיורת אם יש לגיירה כדי שלא ישתמד, לע"ד איני רואה בזה מקום להתיר..." and he applies over the klal of "Eyjh omrim issur chateh beishvil sheyizkeh", but regarding converting leshem ishut he says ". ורק בישראל שמותר לישא גיורת יש להקל לב"ד לגייר אף שהוא לשם אישות משום שאין זה איסור ברור שהרי ב"ד הדיוטות היו מקבלין ולכן כשיש לחוש שיעבור על איסור חמור יש להקל לקבל "'
    לגייר,

    where he clearly states it is permissible AND APPLIES THE HETER IN CASE WHERE THERE IS A CONCERN THAT HE WILL VIOLATE ISSUR CHAMUR!

    I also posted earlier the sources of Achiezer. But let's get this posted again: where Rav Msohe states (congtrary to what you wrote) that in case where he might vilate an issur chamur it is PERMISIBLE TO CONVERT LESHEM ISHUT.

    and in the sequence Rav Moshe writes that this is only if there is kabbalat mitzvo, but if this is lacking then he is NOT A GER and obviously it is assur to accept such a fake non jew:

    והנה לבד זה הא אף שהמתגייר לשם אישות נפסק הלכה ביבמות דף כ"ד שהוא גר וכן הוא ברמב"ם וש"ע מ"מ ודאי בעינן שיקבל מצות דהא גר שלא קבל עליו איזה מצוה אף שקבל עליו שאר כל המצות אינו גר כדאיתא בבכורות דף ל' ואע"ג דאיתא שם רק אין מקבלין אותו וכן הוא ברמב"ם פי"ד ה"ח, מ"מ משמע דאף בדיעבד אינו גר כמו בחבר וכהן השנויין בברייתא זו ג"כ בלשון אין מקבלין והוא דין דבדיעבד

    He writes here that in usuch case it is not chal even bediavad. (Thus this explains how your statement "both programs stink" is incorrect).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Save us? Do you realize what a chillul Hashem Tropper has caused out in small and medium sized communities? His "bait and switch" method of luring in intermarried couples has merely confirmed, for communities with hundreds of Reform and Conservative Jewish families, every bad and evil thing they have been told about the ultra-orthodox.

    Not only is he making Torah observance look ridiculous and backward and medieval, he's giving not just himself but ALL Orthodox Rabbis a bad name. The carnage he leaves behind him has literally convinced a whole generation in these communities that Torah observance is undesirable and the "black hats" are a cult.

    Great job there, "Saving" Judaism. Mostly, he's driving people away from it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Roni,

    I will show you where you and Tropper continue to err, which is in thinking that humans somehow resemble chickens.

    Now if you want to make a chicken kosher higher standards are definitely the way to go. A better shchitta with better checking for treifot and you will in the end get a better product. Or better yet accept everyone's stringencies and slap thirty hescherim on a single bird.

    However, we are dealing with humans, not chayot, behemot or ofot. See while we can rip any of the above open to check for a treifa however you cannot rip a human apart to see if there is a Jewish soul in there. Nor can we know a person's true heart intentions.

    Add to this the manipulation implicit in what EJF is doing. Essentially seeking to convince women to convert for the sake of their husbands. Let's face it the line, "you would if you truly loved me" has been getting women to do what they really don't want since the dawn of time. Even despite being so cliche, it still works, that's the really scary part.

    So now we have that with these intermarried couples. Instead of encouraging the man to love HaShem and do what HaShem wants, aka marry a JEWISH woman, instead we are telling the woman if she loves her husband(and possibly the father of her children) she will convert to Judaism.

    Conversion by compulsion didn't work for the Samaritans and it doesn't work for people now. I don't care if the compulsion is lions eating the people, or coercing a person into deciding how "committed" they are to their spouse.

    No matter how much you dress it up, the majority of these people are not converting because of what they could possibly gain(i.e. Torah and Avodat HaShem), instead they are converting out of fear of what they might lose. All your vaunted higher standards succeed in doing is confusing the issue. I would rather have Bomzer, or Druckhman or... the list could go on, because at least there we have the ability to step back and see if any of these people(who are not under threat of having their conversion taken away and thus showing once again their lack of commitment to their spouse) we get to see if those people were sincere by whether or not they live Torah.

    We don't get that with Tropper's approach. We have people that were coerced and who are living in fear of reprisal if they do not toe the line.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mekubal:

    It's simply not true that most intermarried families are Jewish men that marry non-Jewish women. Or, if that's true in orthodox circles, it certainly isn't true elsewhere. And obviously, the men have nothing to "be coerced" about, since their status has nothing whatsoever to do with the children's status. These men convert Reform or Conservative because they WANT to, not because they have to - and then when they get deeper into Judaism they want a halachic conversion. So it's not fair to say they are not authentically dedicated to Judaism when they obviously are. There is no reason to deny them a conversion, because it would ONLY be for personal reasons and doesn't affect the kid's future at all.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Recipients and PublicityJune 19, 2009 at 2:41 AM

    EJF conference in Jerusalem concludes

    The recent EJF conference held in Israel has made the news in Haaretz, see Rabbinical judge: Most immigrants seeking conversion are misguided. Everything is great, but somehow why does the fact that EJF stands for an agenda to proselytize limitless numbers of gentiles never get caught in the camera? as they hide behind how they want to annul conversions via demanding "higher universal standards" when in fact they stand for INCREASING conversions. This is great for Tropper he can have it all ways, he can claim to be cracking down as much as he wants and he can claim to be a dispenser of conversions without limits. At some point the opposites must come apart at the seams. (Perhaps Rav Amar already knows this and that is why he did not show up, as the article notes.)

    Is what Jonathan Rosenblum says in his article Think Again: An unwanted hand on the halachic scale true? That Rav Eliashiv is now for mass conversions to Judaism? with EJF trying to have it both ways again, proselytizing to gentiles while preaching the gospel of higher "universal" standards. Seems he is now in bed with EJF and Tropper and has bought their hype without thinking.

    Seems that the rabbonim in attandence are blissfully not aware that the previous co-founder and funder of EJF and their concerts was married to a gentile woman who evetual got a highly controversial conversion while they knew nothing about it and that he is now launching rival programs to "save" the Jewish people from assimilation and intermarriage.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ahava Gayle:

    It's definitely true in Orthodox circles (that there are many more intermarried men than women) because of a particular double standard:

    When a Jewish woman marries a gentile man, she is considered an immoral woman and her children are banned from the Jewish schools as a regular practice, even though they are Jewish.

    But when a Jewish man marries a gentile woman, the concern is that children will be going around with Jewish surnames and therefore could easily pass for Jewish when they are gentiles, so in order to prevent a future accidental intermarriage with these children, many Orthodox Rabbis will convert the gentile woman. Additionally, as part of the conversion they will often have to commit to putting their children in Jewish schools all the way through, and this obliges the schools to accept them.

    In Reform and Conservative, being counted as a Jew is equally easy/difficult for both sexes. So the Reform/Conservative Jewish women who would be inclined to intermarry have a place to go to. Additionally, the previously Orthodox women who intermarried end up there as well, since they are shunned in Orthodox circles.

    The result is that you see a greater percentage of intermarried Jewish women as compared to intermarried Jewish men in Reform and Conservative circles because the Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox Jewish women who intermarried all end up there.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Recipients and PublicityJune 19, 2009 at 8:54 AM

    Something's brewing in the Knesset in response to the EJF conference.

    Haaretz just ran a newsflash on its top banner that read: "05:46 MKs demand apologies from `racist` rabbis who derided converts (Haaretz)" and yesterday Arutz Sheva pulled a story about the latest EJF concert.

    So something very nasty is resulting from these uncalled for meetings that only serve to inflame the religious-secular divide as Tropper creates platforms for rabbonim to speak out and set them up for the fury that he cares little about that invarioubly follows.

    What is the point of having firebrands like Tropper and Rav Nochum Eisenstein running around setting of bombs and explosions that then have to be put out by the rest of the world, all in the name of "universal standards" which is just a pseudonym and codeword for imposing tough religious coercion on people using the highest interpretations of Halacha that they will not accept, all for what, to create more hate between the secular and religious in Israel that accomplishes nothing.

    Cooler heads, finer hands and diplomatic minds are required at this delicate juncture and Tropper and Rav Eisenstein should be told to quit this deadly game that is only making things worse as they seek to fight their chosen enemies.

    If the gedolim have something to say, let them say it themselves and not use brutal surrogate troops who hit people below the belt with any number of dirty tricks to do their dirty work!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Recipients and PublicityJune 19, 2009 at 12:32 PM

    The Knesset is not the RCA as they fire back at EJF.

    Is total civil war in Israel what Tropper and Rav Eisenstein want?

    An all out war that could degenerate chas vesholom to who knows where between the religious and secular Jews brought on by gratuitous insults.

    The Knesset is not the conciliatory RCA nor are they a bunch of BTs or hat in hand prospective gerim. They are dangerous politicians with real police and state power and EJF is adding fuel to the flames. Advice to Tropper and Rav Esienstein, if the gedolim have anything to say, let them say it themselves, they will surely use lots more sechel and tact than Rav Sherman in talking to the secular Israelis when the advice of Pirkei Avos is paramount (Chapter 1:11): אבטלוין אומר חכמים הזהרו בדבריכם שמא תחובו חובת גלות ותגלו למקום מים הרעים וישתו התלמידים הבאים אחריכם וימותו ונמצא שם שמים מתחל

    "Fri., June 19, 2009 Sivan 27, 5769

    MKs demand apologies from 'racist' rabbis who derided converts

    By Yair Ettinger

    At a conference earlier this week, ultra-Orthodox rabbis employed by the state's Chief Rabbinate hurled insults at immigrants seeking to convert, calling them "cheaters" motivated solely by self-interest. Now the political system is responding furiously, with MKs demanding public apologies and/or dismissals and even threatening legal action.

    "The Chief Rabbinate is marred by racism and deep hatred for the immigrant community," said MK Marina Solodkin (Kadima), who wrote to Religious Services Minister Yaakov Margi (Shas) Thursday to demand that the rabbis apologize and threatened legal action if they did not.

    Yisrael Beiteinu termed the rabbis' remarks "wild, hallucinatory and utterly baseless," while MK Uri Orbach (Habayit Hayehudi) demanded on Wednesday that the offending rabbis be fired.

    The storm erupted over remarks made at an international conference of ultra-Orthodox rabbis in Jerusalem, where numerous speakers attacked both state-run conversion programs and the people they convert. The assault was led by Rabbi Avraham Sherman, head of the Chief Rabbinate's Rabbinical Court of Appeals, who leaped to fame last year when he invalidated all conversions ever performed by a special state-run conversion court.

    "There is no logic to telling tens of thousands of non-Jews who grew up on heresy, hatred of religion, liberalism, communism and socialism that suddenly they can undergo a revolution deep in their souls," he told the three-day conference, referring mainly to non-Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union.

    Ashdod's chief rabbi, Yosef Sheinin, said immigrants who sought to convert "should be assumed to be cheaters."

    Tzohar, an organization of religious Zionist rabbis, also condemned the remarks, saying it was particularly upset that Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger praised Sherman and expressed support for his views.

    "Instead of supporting the efforts of conversion court judges who operate under the Chief Rabbinate's auspices, the chief rabbi caved in to a group of extremist ultra-Orthodox hacks who have made it their goal to sabotage conversion," the group said in a statement."

    ReplyDelete
  12. the Monsey TzadikJune 21, 2009 at 12:20 AM

    ...Tropper and Rav Eisenstein should be told to quit this deadly game that is only making things worse as they seek to fight their chosen enemies.


    Halevai, but as long as Kaplan pump money into them they will go on and on. Kaplan’s motives to send Tropper around to cause machlokos anywhere he goes are mystery.

    It also makes one wonder why rav’ Elyashiv lets these two run around and behave like rascals. Is he informed ? Does rav Efrati keep some information from him ?

    Sherman/Sheinin/Tropper fight is not halachatic it is purely political. They tried in the the conference to kill two birds in one stone. First is to humiliate the hated Dati Leumi/Modern Orthodox and second to show their contempt to the Russians, reminiscence of times when the Litvish haredi called Sefardim ‘Franks’.

    The likely end result of the fire Tropper and r’ Eisenstein start will the establishment of civil marriage in Israel and lose of influence the rabbanut has.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Roni said

    In addition to what was said above, you also seem to repeat something you have said in the past and I challenged you and you did not relate to the issues and ignored it and now you repeat again even though you made a big mistake. I showed you then, how you quoted IGM EH 2/4 contrary to what REb Moshe actually wrote. Here you write again, "have Rav REuven write the same letter - and claim that his father would agree with it....despite that his FATHER WRITES IN THE IM THAT HE DOES NOT APPROVE OF SUCH APROGRAM...":

    Please, provide the source that states that "he does NOT approve of such a program"!
    =====================
    Roni it is embarrassing to see the way you misread the teshuva. Rav Moshe is not permitting proselytization in this teshuva. He does say that a person who comes to convert his spouse with the motivation of marriage is a valid conversion if she fully accepts mitzvos. That is the normative position.

    You have making exactly the same red herring claim that Tropper made to me awhile ago.

    I will repeat that both a program that doesn't require a full acceptance of mitzvos and one that proselytizes stink.

    Rav Moshe expressed his displeasure of conversion for the sake of marriage - though he did say it was valid bedieved. He never ever said that he approved of pursuing couples to convert. The same is true of Rav Eliashiv.

    Consequently when it is claimed in the name of both of these poskim that they allowed proselytization - the pursuit and selling of the value of conversion - some prove is needed.

    Tropper claimed at one time that he was not proselytizing. But when one reads the interviews he has given to explain his program and advertisements all over the internet which invite people who might be interested in Judaism to contact him - there is no doubt he is proselytizing and spending millions of dollars to do it.

    I will challenge you again - show me anywhere in the Igros Moshe where it states that Rav Moshe said he approved of proselytization. Since it has always been the normative position not to proselytize the burden is on you and Tropper to show that Rav Moshe changed his position. Tropper is proselytizing. Stop repeating the nonsense that Tropper is only involved in conversion leshem ishus.

    ReplyDelete
  14. hello are you there?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mekubal,

    While you tried hard I fail to see how you suceeded to show where I erred.

    You write: "I will show you where you and Tropper continue to err, which is in thinking that humans somehow resemble chickens.

    Now if you want to make a chicken kosher higher standards are definitely the way to go. A better shchitta with better checking for treifot and you will in the end get a better product. Or better yet accept everyone's stringencies and slap thirty hescherim on a single bird.

    However, we are dealing with humans, not chayot, behemot or ofot. See while we can rip any of the above open to check for a treifa however you cannot rip a human apart to see if there is a Jewish soul in there. Nor can we know a person's true heart intentions".

    I fail to see how you think that Halacha applies to only to chicken and to humans as well! If Halacha can tell us how to "judge" and rule if a chicken has met the standards of KAshrut then Torah and Halacha give us the tools to evaluate the Halachik process of Gerut which is the ONLY way to evaluate the "soul", ie. if a person performed a Halachik conversion then the Jewish soul (that was at Sinay as written in Pirkey DeRAbbi EliZer) enters the body of the individual; if it does not follow the halachik process then we are bound to claim that the JEiwsh Soul did not enter the body.

    This is more so since Gerut requires a Beit din and"mishpat" which main job of Beit Din is to offer judgment and decide in cases that requires shikul hadaat into the person's mindset and rule issues based on their shikul haddaat if they conform to a certain set of halachot that are given to us from sinay.

    In any event: I haven't been focused on the "higher standard" bit; I have been focused on a standard that Posskim state that the convert does not take effect bediavad! You guys all the time deal with everything under the sun but are unable to tackle the simple fact that lots of people walk around thinking they ar jewish according to Halacha when they are not (for they did not undergo kabbalat hamitzvot) whereas all your new concerns (which some of them I happen to share) despite how many acrobatic streches made by you will not result in the person being a non Jew and therefore the problem of forbidden marriages will not be there.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You also write: "Add to this the manipulation implicit in what EJF is doing. Essentially seeking to convince women to convert for the sake of their husbands. Let's face it the line, "you would if you truly loved me" has been getting women to do what they really don't want since the dawn of time. Even despite being so cliche, it still works, that's the really scary part".

    Can you please cite a reference that they are telling the converted women this line you just quoted? I do not see it in their WEbsite.

    Mekubal writes: "So now we have that with these intermarried couples. Instead of encouraging the man to love HaShem and do what HaShem wants, aka marry a JEWISH woman, instead we are telling the woman if she loves her husband(and possibly the father of her children) she will convert to Judaism....":

    As far as I know EJf is clearly not converting those who are not married; they only deal with those are (long) intermarriaed. They write this clearly in their website and it's clear that this is their policy. So, they are clearly telling the women that they will not be able to get married get converted; they would not not convert anyone to get married.

    NOw, you may have a point, that this is not the highest level how to Love Hashem and serve Him; but as you said "humans are not chicken"; there are some "humans" who are not on the level of serving Hashem on that level. Are you suggesting that these people should be completely deprived from the ability to serve Hashem by fllowing the dry Haalchik laws of not marrying a Gentile? Your answer may be yes, and you may have a point (that I sometimes hare it in my heart) but This is a *halachik* question where Rabbis have grappled for the past hundred years and more, and most of them have ruled that one should overlook the fact that the fellow is not in Love of G-d so that he does not vilate the severe violations of BOel Aramit and many other issues. Rav MOshe states so in the REsponsa I just repeated and wrote about it at length last year. Can you deal with this or oother responsa to show me that I "Erred". that would be fine, but until then, the owner of the blog and you and many other critics err in their level of condemnation where they write that there is room to be lenient (to borrow a known [phrase). In some places Rav MOshe and Rav chayim POyzer and many others allude and annoucne the famous Teshuvot HaRambam that it is in these matters that one should go ahead and eat "bossor temutot" (mesukkenet) and prevent from a much higher violation "bassar nevelot"). It is they who permit it or slightly encourage.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mekubal writes:" Conversion by compulsion didn't work for the Samaritans and it doesn't work for people now. I don't care if the compulsion is lions eating the people, or coercing a person into deciding how "committed" they are to their spouse."

    Where did you see that EJf "coerces" the person to decide how committed" they are?

    In any event: In Halacha there are some coercions that will give legitimacy to the conversion. "Agav Oness Gamar Umakni" *because* of conversion the person makes a commitment that renders the conversion valid from a Halachik standpoint. The phrase "geyrey arayot" "compulsed bylions" refers to compulsion where the fellow does NOT COMMIT HIMSELF TO REALLY PRACTICE! as happened to the Samaritans according to one opinion. In fact, Halacha rules that Samaritans are "geyrey Emet" for they DID COMMIT TO FOLLOW HALACHA "*due* to the "compulsion by lions"!

    Mekubal further writes: "No matter how much you dress it up, the majority of these people are not converting because of what they could possibly gain(i.e. Torah and Avodat HaShem), instead they are converting out of fear of what they might lose"

    But *halacha* gives them the title of a valid Ger BEdiavad!; whereas Bomzer gerim ARE GOYIM! iFyou will learn the sources you'll see that this is the exact distinction they make. Exactly this distinction is made by Rav Feinstein in the present responsa! (EH 2/4).

    .MEkubal" All your vaunted higher standards succeed in doing is confusing the issue."

    What do you mean? That *Halacha* that makes the distinction "confuses" the issue?1 Halacha states that in one case the fellow is a Ger and Jewish and in the other the fellow is a GOY! you are the one who is actually confusing it by not making this distinction! It is actually the controversy of the Tannaim whether or not Kutim were true GErim (despite by "compulsion") or fake gerim!

    Mekubal:" I would rather have Bomzer, or Druckhman or... the list could go on, because at least there we have the ability to step back and see if any of these people(who are not under threat of having their conversion taken away and thus showing once again their lack of commitment to their spouse) we get to see if those people were sincere by whether or not they live Torah".

    You may get to see it (perhaps); but for most people including those who shovew it under the rug, will say: "the man has a document from a respected rabbi, he is certainly JEwish" and they will marry him to a JEwish boy or girl!

    Mekubal:" We don't get that with Tropper's approach. We have people that were coerced and who are living in fear of reprisal":

    But NONETHELESS HALACHIKALLY JEWISH AND GERIM! as mentioned that Kutim Gerey Emet despite done by "compulsion"! and the difference between a jew and a goy is clear to me. It is those who fail to make the simple distinction that blur and confuse the havdalah ben yisrael laamim!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Roni said

    In addition to what was said above, you also seem to repeat something you have said in the past and I challenged you and you did not relate to the issues and ignored it and now you repeat again even though you made a big mistake. I showed you then, how you quoted IGM EH 2/4 contrary to what REb Moshe actually wrote. Here you write again, "have Rav REuven write the same letter - and claim that his father would agree with it....despite that his FATHER WRITES IN THE IM THAT HE DOES NOT APPROVE OF SUCH APROGRAM...":

    Please, provide the source that states that "he does NOT approve of such a program"!
    =====================
    Daat Torah writes: “Roni it is embarrassing to see the way you misread the teshuva. Rav Moshe is not permitting proselytization in this teshuva. He does say that a person who comes to convert his spouse with the motivation of marriage is a valid conversion if she fully accepts mitzvos. That is the normative position”.

    Roni : what is embarassing is seeing statements that lack any havchanh betweeen simple chilukim! Between “issur deorayto”' “issur derabbanan”' between “issur chamur” “issur kal”,

    I did not say that Rav Moshe supported proseltyzaion! On the contrary' I stated that your statmenet that he forbade carries no weight! You are the one who needs to bring proof for your rampage against a position. If you feel that Rav Moshe would forbid “proseltyzing” or even something less than that (encouraging intermarried couples to convert), even to prevent issurim chmurim! (as he does by permitting an “issur” that is mentioned in Shas and Halacha* you are the one to bring proof that you are right. I xite proof that bomzer's program not only stinks but his program brings GOYIM GMURIM! Your obnoxiousness to equate them both without any explnation (just by saying “i say so”) is embarassing and and beyond any Ben Torah's way to present his position (“daat torah”) cognetly!
    You state: “You have making exactly the same red herring claim that Tropper made to me awhile ago.
    I will repeat that both a program that doesn't require a full acceptance of mitzvos and one that proselytizes stink”, is unbeliavable and show an obsssesive irrational position that is unable to distinguish between FALSE GERUSS AND GOYIM AND BETWEEN A GREUT THAT IS CHAL ACCORDING TO SHULCHAN ORUCH! They cannot be equated! Not in their own nature and if one is obssessive against the later and ignores the former it speaks volumes about....

    ReplyDelete
  19. DT writes”: Rav Moshe expressed his displeasure of conversion for the sake of marriage - though he did say it was valid bedieved. He never ever said that he approved of pursuing couples to convert. The same is true of Rav Eliashiv.”

    roni: AND THEY NEVER SAID THAT IT IS FORBIDDEN! For taknnat Hashavim! (a concept brought by MANY POSSKIM on the issue of covnersion! Brought from Teshuvat HaRambam), you must bring proof that they would forbid even in such situations!

    Furthermore: The Teshuva I cited and it's rationale support Tropper's positions and NOT YOURS! For Rav moshe allow to be mekil if it will prevent issurim chamurim even though it goes against AN ISSUR MENTIONED IN TALMUD AND SHULCHAN ORUCH (“gerut leshemishut”). He reasons tha this is so because it is not an “issurbarrur”. How much more so the issur “proselytizing” (or better and more truthful the issue of encourgaing some intermarried couples who ARE INTERESTED IN IT!) that is not even mentioned in Shluchan Aruch, how are you convinced that he forbids? In fact, reasons states (that barring other c sources) he would PERMIT IT! At the very least it is you who needs a source for this!

    DT writes“Consequently when it is claimed in the name of both of these poskim that they allowed proselytization - the pursuit and selling of the value of conversion - some prove is needed”.

    Roni: When one igonres the body of posskim that cite permission to bend backwards (to the extent of permitting some issurim derabbnana (“leshem ishut”, “nitan al hanochrit”) to prevent issurim chmurim, and Taknat Hashavim it is not upon them the chov to provide proof; but upon you! Especially when Rav Eisenstein who is the right hand man of Rav Elyashiv on these matters sides with Tropper!

    ReplyDelete
  20. DT”Tropper claimed at one time that he was not proselytizing. But when one reads the interviews he has given to explain his program and advertisements all over the internet which invite people who might be interested in Judaism to contact him - there is no doubt he is proselytizing and spending millions of dollars to do it.”

    Roni: Despite your and RAP's ongoing efforts to exxagerate and take it out of proportions, he does NOT SPRINKLE WATERS ON MILLIONS OF PEOPLE! A more balnaced position would be to test the results! He does NOT accept a highe rnumber of converts than other Batey dinim! In fact all of his Batey dinim combined probably make LESS conversions that other Gerut Organization or bomzer's factories!

    DT:”I will challenge you again - show me anywhere in the Igros Moshe where it states that Rav Moshe said he approved of proselytization. Since it has always been the normative position not to proselytize the burden is on you and Tropper to show that Rav Moshe changed his position. Tropper is proselytizing. Stop repeating the nonsense that Tropper is only involved in conversion leshem ishus”.

    Roni: NO it's upon you the burden of proof that the permission Rav Moshe gave for ISSUR THATIS MENTIONED IN SHAS AND SHULCHAN ORUCH is waived to prevent issurim chamurim (BECAUSE IT IS NOT AN “ISSUR CHAMUR”) and he would not permit something that is NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN SHAS AS AN ISSUR AND IN SHULCHAN ARUCH!

    ReplyDelete
  21. the Monsey TzadikJune 21, 2009 at 11:23 AM

    Dear Rabbi Eidenshon,

    I know you are not happy to link to “failed messiah” but that recent comment I think is important because it shows that Tropper not only proselytizes people but actually used lies and threats to do so.

    http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2009/06/high-rabbinic-court-haredi-rabbi-converts-are-liars-123.html?cid=6a00d83451b71f69e2011570351a47970c#comment-6a00d83451b71f69e2011570351a47970c

    “To answer your question, I was raised completely secular. I didn't even find out about being Jewish until I was a teenager, and I didn't act on that knowledge until I was in my 20s. I "sound" good because I am now 41 and since my 20s have been studying and implementing Torah into my life, along with my husband's enthusiastic cooperation, though he has no Jewish lineage at all. A few years ago we went through Tropper's EJF program for a conversion for him - and Tropper's position and that of the Cheif Rabbinate was that since I was Reform, I had to have a "conversion," too. They DO NOT accept the geneologies of Reform or Conservative even if you do have maternal descent (which I have).

    EJF made a promotional video for their program featuring my family (among others) - I still have a copy. Our oldest son went to his Yeshiva for a year. We traveled (all six of us) to Monsey for yom tovim, we had partners in Torah on the phone, we studied book after book Tropper required of us. We did everything they asked and did it (and still do it) "right" (MO) but at the last minute Tropper decided modern orthodoxy wasn't enough - we had to drop everything and move to his hareidi community or forfeit the bet din. My husband, 56, could not give up his job and seniority, etc. and Tropper knew that FROM THE BEGINNING. His tactic to recruit us was to reassure me that moving would not be necessary. But with only a week and a half to go before the bet din was scheduled (and then we were supposed to fly straight to California to speak at an EJF event as a "success story," Tropper gave us an "offer we couldn't refuse" and then dumped us because we did refuse to move.

    And he also pulled this "bait and switch" on other members of our community (about 500 families now, a dozen or so were involved with EJF for the years required for the conversion process)- it wasn't just us. And, by the way, it was mostly MEN who were converting, not women. He told everyone here they were going to set up a new shul, etc., and a new miqvah and one of the young bochurim from his yeshiva who is from around here originally was supposedly going to come and be the new Rabbi. He told my husband that he was going to be president of the Shul. When he talked to me on the phone, he called me (affectionately, I presume) "rebbetzin," because I studied hard and learned everything I was taught.

    But when we started asking people questions about this when the whole thing blew up, we found out there never had been any plans or any fundraising for a new shul in our area at all - and they had arranged a marriage for the bochur and he was being sent to another NY community. He had never had any plans to return to this area. When we demanded explanations from "friends" in Monsey, we were told that, well, Tropper is an "idea" man and that sometimes he makes plans "with out telling" other people, and is a bit "flighty." Well, the people here aren't buying the "Tropper is an airhead" explanation. The general consensus is that the whole thing was a scam from the start.

    So, I know for a fact that under the new rules, having a Jewish mother or grandmother is NOT ENOUGH. I know for a fact that unless you agree to move to one of THEIR communities and be Chereidi or ultra-orthodox, they deny people conversions. They would rather have 8 kids (mine and my sisters) lost to Judaism than accept modern orthodox practice and academic education that will get kids market rate employment. Tropper is completely nuts and yes, I think in his community they ARE a cult. They toss people, even kids, away like garbage.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The last link mostly shows that Tropper does NOT proselytize! (While not having the benefit to hear Tropper's side to the accusations of the other side, one is thing is clear): He does not seek and push them to convert! IN this story you see how the couple went to Tropper and not once did she mention that he push her to convert. It is so pathetic how opposites attract to attck a common enemy with a fiery obssession.

    WRT to the accusations raised here by the tzadik: I know for a fact how he converted a person that lives in the south carolina and did not force them to move (and they observe until today after a few years of conversion).

    ReplyDelete
  23. Roni: NO it's upon you the burden of proof that the permission Rav Moshe gave for ISSUR THATIS MENTIONED IN SHAS AND SHULCHAN ORUCH is waived to prevent issurim chamurim (BECAUSE IT IS NOT AN “ISSUR CHAMUR”) and he would not permit something that is NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN SHAS AS AN ISSUR AND IN SHULCHAN ARUCH!
    ==============
    Rav Shmuel Fuerst of Chicago - a very close talmid of Rav Moshe - has said that Rav Moshe did not permit proselytizing.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Roni,

    First and foremost your biggest problem is that you are trying to make something B'diavad out to be L'chatchilla. Just to point out the difference, L'chatchilla is standard operating procedure, it is what we do day to day. Take tefillin, would you buy a pair of B'diavad tefillin. Look I am also a sofer, I will gladly sell you B'diavad tefillin written to the highest B'diavad standards... Or I know several high quality shochtim that would be willing to sell you B'diavad meat kashered to the highest B'diavad standards... Would you chose to eat in a restaurant if the hecsher said, "Eidis Chareids Kosher B'diavad"... Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? But that is what you propose for conversion.

    The very idea of B'diavad is that a serious mistake has been made in halachic practice, and the only question is, whether or not, despite this mistake, is the situation salvageable?

    I fail to see where any Gadol, anyshere says that we may intentionally violate the dictates of Torah because our actions will be acceptable B'Diavad.

    I happen to be in a Dayanus program where I am trained by R' Eisenstein(amongst others), so I think I probably have a better handle on the sources than you.

    The fact is that the Sh"A explicitly states that one cannot proselytize and that we should excommunicate(see E"H 16) a man who intermarries, until he divorces his wife.

    This is a standard that even the Modern Orthodox that Tropper so adamently opposes uphold, see R' Weinberg's statesments Teshuvot Seridei Eish 2:6. Or Rav Lichtenstein in his work "By His Light" chapter 1.

    Tropper claims to have the backing of Gedolim, yet he has never produced a single haskama. In Shiur I asked R' Eisenstein if he or R' Eliyashiv Shlit"a support Tropper and his approach, his answer, "When you see a haskama bearing my name or the name of MaRan, then you can assume support, not before, involvement wiht an individual does not insinuate endorsement" I must say that his tone was rather sharp.

    So where is your proof? Show me some statement, written with a signature by any Gadol, that Tropper's approach is kosher.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Fair enough!

    But:

    1) Let's first establish that "proselytizing" is *not* the tactic of r' Tropper! For he does not *push* anyone to convert. He stated to me clearly so in the past and I do not see that the information you provide about his activities show otherwise and neither does his website.

    2) What is being discussed is helping/semi encouraging a couple that *comes to them*! And at the same time the process is one that cuts through the prospects who are not serious to commit themselves to observe. Iow, not only does he not engage in going out to push and to look for individual intermarried families but he does not even *push* or *beg* that they convert. what he organization does is encourage once they came to him the avenue of conversion if they brought it up to to his organization.

    3) furthermore: R' tropper asserts that this main way of operation is to deal with Kiruv Organizations who already work with those intermarried couples whose partners would like to get closer to yiddishkeyt and they would like to explore the possibility for conversion, this is when his organization get's involved.
    4) Now that you do *not* have a source from Rav MOshe *himself* and his works it is a word against a word!

    I have heard many times from talking to rabbonim that Rav Moshe held that one should help couples that are already long intermarried and were not aware of the serioussness of the violations to intermarry.

    And most importantly: Rav REuven Feinstein has no obligation whatsoever to respond to to Rav Fuerst when he understands that his support and endorsement of EJf' activities is not in contradiction to what he knows about his father's pssokim. And so it remains that Rav REuven's endorsement goes against Rav Fuerst assertions and as long as you can;t show black on white from Rav Moshe it will remain a word against a word.

    This is especially so, since Rav Moshe's rationale of permitting leshem ishut (which is an issur mentioned in shulchan aruch). just because it is not an "issur barur" would create a kal vechomer about something that is not even mentioned in shulchan oruch!

    I could refute my Kal Vechomer but in any event we'll go back and forth and the main thing is: *you* have no written statment of Rav Moshe to claim against Rav FEinstein (that you asked on your head post for him to provide you with a letter that he is not gonig against his father) for *you* and neither Rav fuerst (who is younger than Rav Reuven if i'm not mistaking) have no clear statement by Rav Moshe that he would assur.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Mekubal wrote:

    " Roni,

    First and foremost your biggest problem is that you are trying to make something B'diavad out to be L'chatchilla. Just to point out the difference, L'chatchilla is standard operating procedure, it is what we do day to day. Take tefillin, would you buy a pair of B'diavad tefillin. Look I am also a sofer, I will gladly sell you B'diavad tefillin written to the highest B'diavad standards... Or I know several high quality shochtim that would be willing to sell you B'diavad meat kashered to the highest B'diavad standards... Would you chose to eat in a restaurant if the hecsher said, "Eidis Chareids Kosher B'diavad"... Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? But that is what you propose for conversion".

    ROni: MEkubal, if you would look at the sources I cited (IM EH 2/4 Achiezer 3/26) and many many more you would see that this issue has lots of shades of gray! and while some posskim are stringent on this issue, MANY MANY (look in some Teshvuat of Yabia Omer! he brings them all!) are leneint on this issue.

    your point of the "ridiculousness" of the lenient position is acknowledged by the above teshuvot! IF you'll learn *them* you might see that your analogy is not a good one!

    Yes, i would not choose to eat in a bedievad restaruant in a million years (and I almost do not go to any restaurant). But we are talking about providing an avenue to soemone to do "Teshuva", as Rambam (who writes in Teshuvat PEer Hador) writes that we should allow to open the door for teshuva to give "rotev veloy shuman atzmoy" or a similar language, meaning that for teshuva and their takanah we allow even the violation of some issur (in cases where there was no peshia and in restricted areas that is prescribed by posskim etc,) to protect the fellow and allow to do some teshuva. This is especially so when the person was not even a "poshea" he was like an "onness" a "tinok shenishbah" there there can room (and according to some should be room) for leniency!


    A "oness" which is certainly no less than "shaat hadchak" and "diavad" or perhaps it is even better than "shaat hadchak" for he was "annuss" ("coerced") and a tinok shenishbah is regarded by halacha to a certain degree like an "oness", should certainly be allowed the latitudeof "diavad"!

    MEkubal writes:" I fail to see where any Gadol, anyshere says that we may intentionally violate the dictates of Torah because our actions will be acceptable B'Diavad".


    Roni: AS i say, "shaat hadchak" islike diavad. Further a tinok shenishbah can be viewed as the ultimate "diavad" much stronger than a regular "shaat "hadchak". In "shaat hadchak we intentionally follow the leneint practices of "diavad"!
    to be continued

    ReplyDelete
  27. I wrote a response to this; don't know why it did not appear....(not the first time)

    Mekubal wrote:"The fact is that the Sh"A explicitly states that one cannot proselytize and that we should excommunicate(see E"H 16) a man who intermarries, until he divorces his wife."

    I have looked at EH 16. A0 where does hemention there that the fellow be excommunicated? b) most importantly: where does it discuss the fellow that was a tinok shenishbah and intermarried?

    Same with Seridey Eish. Actually Seridey Eish 2/75 permits to convert someone leshem ishut and the prohibition of "nitan al hanochrit" after she is married to the fellow in order to prevent an issur chamur:

    שו"ת שרידי אש חלק ב סימן עה עמוד תקנה

    והנה האיסור לכנוס הוא מדרבנן והוא עובר רק פעם אחת, ולכן אם אנו יודעים שאפילו אם לא נגייר אותה יחזיקנה לאשתו, וא"כ יעבור כל ימי חייו על בעילת נכרית, א"כ מוטב שנתיר לו איסור דרבנן, שלא יכנוס, כדי שלא יעבור כל ימיו.


    And so we have numerous posskim that dealth with similar issues and permitted bediavad based on Teshuvot Harambam for Takanat Hashavim. Look at Yabia Omer of Rav Ovadaya and you'll see him brining lots and lots of posskim who permit similar issurim derabanan on this matter.

    but there is thing where they do not compromise and that is:: LACK OF BASIC KABBALAT MITZVOT IE. if there is no commitment to keep shabbat, taharat hamsihpacha and kashrut on the basic level these Posskim would give their hands on it and they would highly forbid it and condemnt it!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Roni said...

    I wrote a response to this; don't know why it did not appear....(not the first time)
    ================
    I don't either. When a comment is posted it is stored in the comments section of the blog and also is sent to my email account. Your lost postings seem to not make it to either place. If you want - you can send it directly to me and I'll cut and paste them into the blog.
    yadmoshe@yahoo.com

    ReplyDelete
  29. I probably lost them (and they were b not short). But i'll try to repeat in short:

    Mekubal: 1) You wrote "Sh"A explicitly states that one cannot proselytize ". where is this "rxplicitly"?

    2) Rav Eisenstein: Whatver he tells you, the meaning of what he told you cannot contradict what he *does publicly*: hE GOES TO ALMOST EVERY CONVENTION OF TROPPER (TWICE A Year). Even if he disagrees with his approach (and he probably is not a Fan of that part of the organization); he does not think it reaches a point where he should codment or even make a machaa! Her actually goes to suppoert the man. Ewhereas Bomzer he condemns his program and the person as a dayan strongly!

    ReplyDelete
  30. I probably lost them (and they were b not short). But i'll try to repeat in short:

    Mekubal: 1) You wrote "Sh"A explicitly states that one cannot proselytize ". where is this "rxplicitly"?

    2) Rav Eisenstein: Whatver he tells you, the meaning of what he told you cannot contradict what he *does publicly*: hE GOES TO ALMOST EVERY CONVENTION OF TROPPER (TWICE A Year). Even if he disagrees with his approach (and he probably is not a Fan of that part of the organization); he does not think it reaches a point where he should codment or even make a machaa! Her actually goes to suppoert the man. Ewhereas Bomzer he condemns his program and the person as a dayan strongly!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Fair enough!

    But:

    1) Let's first establish that "proselytizing" is *not* the tactic of r' Tropper! For he does not *push* anyone to convert. He stated to me clearly so in the past and I do not see that the information you provide about his activities show otherwise and neither does his website.

    2) What is being discussed is helping/semi encouraging a couple that *comes to them*! And at the same time the process is one that cuts through the prospects who are not serious to commit themselves to observe. Iow, not only does he not engage in going out to push and to look for individual intermarried families but he does not even *push* or *beg* that they convert. what he organization does is encourage once they came to him the avenue of conversion if they brought it up to to his organization.

    3) furthermore: R' tropper asserts that this main way of operation is to deal with Kiruv Organizations who already work with those intermarried couples whose partners would like to get closer to yiddishkeyt and they would like to explore the possibility for conversion, this is when his organization get's involved.
    4) Now that you do *not* have a source from Rav MOshe *himself* and his works it is a word against a word!

    ========================
    Now that the air has cleared and the dust settled it seems obvious what is going on.

    We obviously have a different understanding of proselytization. To me someone who sends out notices on the internet and newspapers asking for those curious about Judaism or mixed couples or intermarried couples to contact his organization or to sign up for a program of high power speakers - and as Jonathan Rosenblum stated that Tropper is spending millions of dollars in Israel alone to encourage these non-Jews to convert - that is called proselytization. In contrast in the cases in the literature it seems that the couple came to the rav and asked that the non-Jewish spouse be converted.
    Thus Rav Moshe is not addressing Tropper's program.

    Thus you are right that it is the word of Rav Fuerst that Rav Moshe never approved of what R' Tropper is doing versus R' Tropper. However as you should noticed - your insistance that the bodily participation of rabbonim indicates that they approve of R' Tropper's program - has been clearly disproved by the words of R' Eisenstein himself. He is quoted as saying:
    "Tropper claims to have the backing of Gedolim, yet he has never produced a single haskama. In Shiur I asked R' Eisenstein if he or R' Eliyashiv Shlit"a support Tropper and his approach, his answer, "When you see a haskama bearing my name or the name of MaRan, then you can assume support, not before, involvement wiht an individual does not insinuate endorsement" I must say that his tone was rather sharp."

    Thus we see that Rav Sternbuch's request from the very beginning for haskamos - is validated by Rav Eisenstein and Rav Eliashiv that Tropper claims are his biggest supporters.

    R' Tropper is demanding that we accept his unsupported word that he has the approval of gedolim in all that he does. It would not take more than 15 minutes for these gedolim to write a letter. Until they do R' Tropper has no convincing evidence and the longer he goes without the letters the more questionable his program becomes.

    As a postscript - it is important to note that R' Tropper's main supporter recently lost the first half of his lawsuit in Florida and that his opponent now has many millions of dollars to dispense that might have gone to him

    ReplyDelete
  32. Roni,

    You are confusing the issues. First read the Siderei Eish that I presented and see what he says there.


    Same with Seridey Eish. Actually Seridey Eish 2/75 permits to convert someone leshem ishut and the prohibition of "nitan al hanochrit" after she is married to the fellow in order to prevent an issur chamur:

    שו"ת שרידי אש חלק ב סימן עה עמוד תקנה

    והנה האיסור לכנוס הוא מדרבנן והוא עובר רק פעם אחת, ולכן אם אנו יודעים שאפילו אם לא נגייר אותה יחזיקנה לאשתו, וא"כ יעבור כל ימי חייו על בעילת נכרית, א"כ מוטב שנתיר לו איסור דרבנן, שלא יכנוס, כדי שלא יעבור כל ימיו.


    And so we have numerous posskim that dealth with similar issues and permitted bediavad based on Teshuvot Harambam for Takanat Hashavim. Look at Yabia Omer of Rav Ovadaya and you'll see him brining lots and lots of posskim who permit similar issurim derabanan on this matter.


    This is a completely different issue. We are not dealing with people who are married, but rather who have had relations b'issur. So if the woman is willing to convert, b'diavad we let her, so as to prevent the need to excomunicate the man. What this does mean in practicality is that they will not have relations or live together during the duration of her conversion process(which usually takes several years). If Tropper is telling these intermarried couples that they must seperate until they have a halachic marriage, then I will gladly drop my objection. Yet I don't think that is the case.

    Yes R' Ovadiah and Rabbinut allow b'diavad conversions of goyim in non-married relationships with Jews. However, when it comes down to the separation issue, that usually puts a stop to it. I have seen 9 couples enter this process in the last two years. One is still in it, the others have broken up and the women gone back to their respective countries except in one other case, where the woman(despite the ending of her relationship) stayed on with the conversion process.

    Secondly flinging out Tinok HaNishba is a non-starter. To apply that to the entire generation was a chiddush of the Hazon Ish, and he only applied that chiddush in certain circumstances, inter-marriage not being one of them.

    As far as R' Eisenstein's words, they were quite public. Considering that the question was asked in front of Shiur of around 100 perspective Dayyanim, I would call that public. In fact I would call it potentially rather damaging considering that there are not 100 future dayyanim that have had doubts cast upon Tropper's approach.

    Sorry Roni, I simply don't have time or energy to continue to go around this tree with you. Especially as long as you intentionally twist sources to fit your views while ignoring those that specifically condemn them.

    ReplyDelete
  33. mekubal,

    I too don't have the time and energy, but you come off as the know it all, but you simply don't read the sources. I at least quoted to you a parts of the teshuva and since you seem familar with the author I thought you would l0ok it up inside. I don't own the seridey eish and in the Bar Illan copy didn't havw 2/6 relating to the teshuva you cited. So I could not check it up. I checked it up and yes, he writes that a person who itnermarries has the halchik status of a menudah regarding the halacha of not giving him aliyah and not counting him as part of the minyan. (howefver, the source for the niduy is not inEH 16 that you mentioned).

    AND DESPITE THE ABOVE THE SAME SERIDEY EISH IN THE SIMAN I QUOTED (IN YOUR TESHVUVOT IT WOULD PROBABLY BE IN 2/50) STATES AND PERMITS TO CONVERT THAT A PERSON WHO IS MARRIED TO A GOYA CONTRARY TO YOUR OWN MISREADINGS OF HIS WORDS! (Part of your point was that if they were already married and worthy for excommunication we should not convert. This is clearly CONTRARY TO WHAT HE SAYS THERE CLEARLY).

    "על דרך השאלה באיש אחד שנשא נכרית בערכעותיהם ועכשיו היא מעוברת ורוצה להתגייר והיא מקבלת על עצמה שתתנהג כדת לשמור שבת כשרות וטהרת המשפחה...מכיון שהם נשואים ע"פ הערכעות....שהיא נשואה לו ע"י ערכעות יש אומדנא שכוונתה לש"ש ולכן שתשמור דיני יהדות שבת כשרות וטהרת המשפחה יש התיר כמו שהורו הגר"A קלוגער והגרח"ע...":אם תקבל באמת בע"פ הכתב

    So, the Seridey Eish obviously knew of his own teshuva and yet permitted to convert in order to prevent from issur chamur and in order to allow takanat hashavim as ruled by Rambam.

    If you want I'll explain to you later the chiluk hapashut that the tshuvot are not contradictory! But relating to our discussion Rav Weinbers permits to convert even when are already MARRIED!


    Regarding r' tROPPER'S POSITION WITH SEPARATION, i BLEEIVE THAT r" tROPPER bATEY dINIM WILL NOT CONVERT UNLESS THEY SEPARATE!

    REgarding R' Eisenstein I can only go by what he DOES AND SAYS PUBLICLY AND IS RECORDED AND PRINTED IN THE PAPER IN HIS NAME! in Yerushalayim's ocnference he PRAISED strongly EJF as a benefeit to the Generation! I ihghly doubt it that if shared your negative feelnigs about them that he would praise the organization as a salvation for generation!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Mekubal,

    Regarding your point arding "tinok shenishbah" and that he didn't apply regarding intermarriage that he didn't apply to intermarriage:

    1) I used it regarding your point of difference between "lechatchila" and "diavad" and I stated that "oness" should be no worse than "shaat hadchak" that is like "diavad". I don't know why this would be a chiddush regarding this point.

    2) Do you mean that Chazon Ish ruled that we should not use "tnok shenishbah" regarding converting someone who didn't know that he is not allowed to intermarry. If so, please cite your source.

    Actually, here it is much easier and not a chidush at all to apply "itnok shenishbah" since we have the posskim using Teshuvot Harambam fo be leninet in tghese conversions (when they have kabalat mitzvot) for the REASON OF TAKANAT HASHAVIM. Here it is no chidush to apply "Takanat hashavim" to TINOK SHENISBAH? there is no greater need for "Takanat hashavim" for this people who were not knowledgable and were not educated at all about any judaism or at least the importance and what it means.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I'm having again problems in making this posts. I'll try it by splitting them: Roni: "Fair enough!

    But:

    1) Let's first establish that "proselytizing" is *not* the tactic of r' Tropper! For he does not *push* anyone to convert. He stated to me clearly so in the past and I do not see that the information you provide about his activities show otherwise and neither does his website.

    2) What is being discussed is helping/semi encouraging a couple that *comes to them*! And at the same time the process is one that cuts through the prospects who are not serious to commit themselves to observe. Iow, not only does he not engage in going out to push and to look for individual intermarried families but he does not even *push* or *beg* that they convert. what he organization does is encourage once they came to him the avenue of conversion if they brought it up to to his organization.

    3) furthermore: R' tropper asserts that this main way of operation is to deal with Kiruv Organizations who already work with those intermarried couples whose partners would like to get closer to yiddishkeyt and they would like to explore the possibility for conversion, this is when his organization get's involved.
    4) Now that you do *not* have a source from Rav MOshe *himself* and his works it is a word against a word!"

    ========================
    This is what I wrote earleir, In other words the first point which important in it's own right and I differ with you is still not sufficient even *leshitatcha*. Let's have this clear before we get entagled thinking that given your position Rav REuven would be obliged to give a letter. On the contrary, on the end of the day *you* and Rav Feurst would have to have something stronger to prove to the public that you guys have greater knowledge than the Rosh HaYeshiva Harav Reuven Feinstein as to what would be Rav Moshe's position in this case! SO after all the "dust has not settled" anywhere at the public arena!

    NOw let's talk a bit the other point:: DT writes "Now that the air has cleared and the dust settled it seems obvious what is going on.

    We obviously have a different understanding of proselytization. To me someone who sends out notices on the internet and newspapers asking for those curious about Judaism or mixed couples or intermarried couples to contact his organization or to sign up for a program of high power speakers - and as Jonathan Rosenblum stated that Tropper is spending millions of dollars in Israel alone to encourage these non-Jews to convert - that is called proselytization. In contrast in the cases in the literature it seems that the couple came to the rav and asked that the non-Jewish spouse be converted.
    Thus Rav Moshe is not addressing Tropper's program".

    Roni: Before we go on, remember *RAv Moshe does NOT address* and state a prohibtion of what Rav Tropper does.

    ReplyDelete
  36. As to the definition of Proseltyzation:

    1) For the fun of it...I am not sure that this necessarily pertains to someone who does not address a *particular individual*,

    2) Most importatnly: Has guideliness where for the most part, most of theose who are to be proseltyzed will reject their participation nad moreover: His organization (EJF) will turn them away! So, even if you are correct about the tecnical term he does act mostly in THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION! for those who slightly do not fit the criteria of kabbalat hamitzvot are rejected and are advised that they are not candidates.

    3) You make it sound as if this is the whole and only operation of R' tropper: when the truth is that at the very end he probably mAkes less or at most the same amount of covnerts made by other batey dinim, so he cannot be "prosetyziiing" in the objective term of the word, in a way that he attempts to have a very large amount of convert when actually his activities do not reach those levels.

    4) and after all his acitivites entails: LEss GOYIM AND SHIKSSAS IKLAL YISREOL AND LESS sale and corruption of yiddishkeyt by selling it to entrance of goyim into klal yisroel. so his organization as an organization that is defined by proseltyzing is incorrect.

    This is regarding the meaning of the word and it's concept. Now regarding whether or not this is assur al pi halacha is another matter. After all even "proseltyzation" in the most liberal of it's terms is not mentioned in *Shulchan *Oruch* let alone an exact definition of it.

    So, therefore, even if one might say that there is an issur in (less than sheynoh barur) to engage in it, the terms of the issur is clearly not defined as to whether it entails precisely to : inducing a certain person to become a Ger and calling and working with him/her in that regard, or it is a little more wider. How much and far does the "inducing" have to go for it be assur: Is it active brainwashing, or even begging, or even convincing or even finding ways that he comes to you?

    all of the above are not dixcsussed at all in *halachik terms*.

    now: Even if it would be prohibited, but it would be an "issur sheynoh barur", then according to Rav Moshe it would very likely be included in his permission to violate this "issur sheynoh barur" for the sake of preventing issurim chamurim of staying married to a goy! as he writes so regarding the issur sheynoh barur of converting leshem ishut!

    to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  37. Conitnued: DT writes:"Thus you are right that it is the word of Rav Fuerst that Rav Moshe never approved of what R' Tropper is doing versus R' Tropper".

    Bemchilas kvodcho: It is not Rav Furst versus Rav Troper; it is Rav Feurst versus HARAV REUVEN FEINSTEIN! Rav REuven obviously holds that his father never asserred something R/ Tropper is doing; for obviously he would not go against his father had he known that his father holds the opposite!

    and AFAIK Rav REuven is older, a Talmid chachom of a higher caliber than, forgive me, with begging of mechila from Rav fuerst, than Rav furst!


    DT writes:" However as you should noticed - your insistence that the bodily participation of rabbonim indicates that they approve of R' Tropper's program - has been clearly disproved by the words of R' Eisenstein himself. He is quoted as saying:
    "Tropper claims to have the backing of Gedolim, yet he has never produced a single haskama. In Shiur I asked R' Eisenstein if he or R' Eliyashiv Shlit"a support Tropper and his approach, his answer, "When you see a haskama bearing my name or the name of MaRan, then you can assume support, not before, involvement wiht an individual does not insinuate endorsement" I must say that his tone was rather sharp.":

    Dear Dt: He is quoted by one individual this way...and he is quoted by newspaper ANOTHER WAY! He is quoted as PRAISING EJF recently! for their very important activities in saving the standards of gerut in our generation!

    furthermore: it is possible that he personally feels that he would *actively participate* in the methods of R' Tropper, and therfore he would not give *Haskama* but were he to consider EJF as doing something that is ASSUR TO the extent that you perceive it to be he would not only NOT GO THERE; HE WOULD ATTACK IT AS HE ATTACKS PUBLICLY OTHER PROGRAMS OR FAKERS ( AS RHB!).

    Therefore: it is not correct to say that "Thus we see that Rav Sternbuch's request from the very beginning for haskamos - is validated by Rav Eisenstein and Rav Eliashiv that Tropper claims are his biggest supporters"' because you cannot ignore the fact that he goes to conventions and he PRAISES HIS ACTIVITIES! .

    At the end: Rav Eisenstein goes to his conventions; Rav HErshel Shechter did not condemn the idea (had he held as Rav furst or you, he would not go to their convention; he would not state "the need for this organization is long over due" (as I heard it in my ears). and his renouncing of the person R' Tropper does not mean that he renounced the idea. He never stated that so in public the way that he stated his endorsement of the idea in public. and likewise we have the active SUPPORT AND PARTNERSHIP OF RAV REVUEN IN THIS ORGANIZATION.

    Dear DT: Your wishes for a letter notwithstanding, does not mean that a lack of written letter signifies that youu have a rejection of the idea or a machaa or protest thereof! I can venture some reasons in mind that even if they agree with the idea and especially if they support it, they not put into writing the way you would like. They prefer to support it the way they support and at the very least they do not protest against it.

    In fact, your requests notwithsanding: The more R' Tropper makes his conventions and gather Rabbonim, and Roshey Yeshviot and respected members of REbbe's courtyards and yet there is no protest against his organization by respected individual's the more it shows that he earns the respect of GEdoyley Yisroel and certainly that he does NOT earn the wrath of condemnation that is on this blog!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Wrt to your postscript: If it is true, then it makes R' Tropper the great Tzadik as he rejected lies and the entrance of a goya and the sellout of judaism for money! and certainly brings up a few notches his organization! and certainly goes counter to the allegations that his main interest is "proseltyzation"!

    On the other hand, it becomes a bigger nossoyon for all those who sold their skin for the soup of lentils that they would be enticed again (and so others) to the nissayon of not succumpbing to the temptation of money to sell out judaism by giving a stamp of approval that goya is jewish!

    All of the above is if it is accurate and true and the stroy over...but if....then....

    ReplyDelete
  39. Also like to add: THat Rav REuven was poshut closer (n so many respects especially that he was his SON) to Rav MOshe than Rav furst that he would be a better judge to know what his held on a certain position than Rav Furst.

    ReplyDelete
  40. While i would not look out of my way to spend time and energy....Mekubal and Daas Torah, I just bumped in a Teshuvaof (none other than) HaRav MOshe Shternbuch, chelek 2/207 which has a slight connection to some of our discussion as to the paramters of when/if wwe apply that possibility of violating an issur derabbnan to prevent someone else from an issur chamur. Rav Sternbuch there distinguishes between preventing the person when he was "poshea" ie. negligent and between a case where he was an oness (where he would be permitted). He there states "אבל בתינוק שנשבה שקרוב לאונס מותר לעבור איסור קל דמלאכה על ידי נכרי להציל חבירו מאיסור חמור...שהבן יכול לצוות נכרי להציל אביו אם הוא כתינוק שנשבה"

    He permits there to vilate a certain issur derbanan in order to prevent the person to vilate chilul shabbat deorayta. And he uses the "tinok shenishba" card there to merit it (otherwise the fellow would be aposhea and it would be forbidden!).

    ReplyDelete
  41. Recipients and PublicityJune 23, 2009 at 9:14 AM

    The Conversion Wars: Rav Sherman continues to stir the pot surrounding conversion controversies:

    As reported from a secular perspective in Haaretz:

    Rabbinical Court proves subservience to ultra-Orthodox (Tue., June 23, 2009 Tamuz 1, 5769)

    ReplyDelete
  42. Roni, all your defense of R' Tropper might have some value if R' Tropper's sincerity could be trusted. However, it is obvious from his recent posting on his blog that his word is not reliable nor are his motivations.

    http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2009/06/ejf-rabbi-tropper-responds-to-criticism.html

    ReplyDelete
  43. Two things:

    1) They are highly valuable being that we are dealing with *HaRav Reuven Feinstein* who is a permament and active member of the Organization, (and also for all those Gedoyley Haposskim and Yisroel who come to the convention and support him and his activities especially those who speak in those conventions and praise the activities of the organization (including in the valuable contribution of the organization in minimizing the fake conversions that exist outside),

    2) Even regarding R' Tropper I don't see it his posting affecting his creidbility (especially motivations that it is so difficult to judge from outside, like when you get edgy when people judge your motivation).

    ReplyDelete
  44. Recipients and PublicityJune 24, 2009 at 8:22 AM

    Part One: Conversion Wars shock-waves continues to boil in Israel

    As reported in The Jerusalem Post: "Rabbinate demands haredi control over conversion

    Jun. 23, 2009
    Matthew Wagner, THE JERUSALEM POST

    Since conversion to Judaism can have a negative impact on the spiritual purity of the Jewish people, only the greatest halachic authorities of the haredi rabbinical establishment can decide on this, the Chief Rabbinate's High Rabbinical Court ruled recently.

    "Any decisions by Rabbinical Conversion Courts or rabbinic marriage registrars that are not in accordance with the opinion of the greatest halachic authorities of the generation hurt the purity of Jewish people," wrote Rabbi Avraham Sherman, head of the High Rabbinical Court.

    "There is a real danger that gentiles will be allowed to enter the Jewish community. Anyone who did not embrace an Orthodox lifestyle at the time of conversion is a gentile and if this person is female all of her children are gentiles as well," Sherman continued.

    The High Court also ruled that the high proportion of potential converts to Judaism who are not sincere about embracing Orthodoxy was an insurmountable challenge that made it impossible to rely on any rabbinical conversion court - haredi or modern Orthodox - to perform a kosher conversion.

    Sherman stated explicitly that a conversion has no validity unless the convert proves he or she has embraced an Orthodox lifestyle. Anything less is unacceptable.

    According to the decision, the Jewishness of converts can in theory be revoked at any time, no matter how long ago the conversion took place and no matter which Rabbinical Conversion Court performed the conversion.

    Conversions can and must be revoked if, for instance, after the conversion process the convert admits that he or she did not adhere to the Orthodox halachic restrictions governing Shabbat, kashrut or other Jewish laws.

    To preserve the purity of the Jewish people, every convert must be scrutinized on an individual basis by rabbinic marriage registrars and rabbinic courts before he or she is permitted to marry or divorce, Sherman wrote in a 34-page rabbinical opinion handed down within the framework of an appeal case on May 10.

    Rabbi David Stav, a senior member of Tzohar Rabbis, an organization of moderate Orthodox Zionist rabbis, called Sherman's comments scandalous.

    "Sherman is committing the biblical sin of insulting the convert," Stav, who is chief rabbi of Shoham, said on Tuesday. "A group of haredi functionaries are willing to place under suspicion thousands of converts just because they want to wage a political power struggle.

    "When [former Chief Ashkenazi] Rabbi Shlomo Goren wanted to annul a conversion the haredi community attacked him, claiming it was impossible. Now they have changed their minds according to political interests."

    Stav was referring to the Langer case in which Goren annulled the conversion of a woman's husband to prevent her children from being considered mamzerim (the result of an illicit sexual act which bars them from marrying a Jew).

    Stav said haredi activists were using the conversion issue to shore up their rabbinical clout vis-à-vis the Orthodox Zionist establishment.

    Stav, who serves as the Chief Rabbinate's marriage registrar in his town, said he accepts all converts converted by a legitimate Rabbinical Conversion Court.

    "I do so whether the conversion was performed by the Chief Rabbinate or by a haredi conversion court, although I must say that converts who come out of haredi conversion courts are usually less serious than those converted by the Chief Rabbinate," he said.

    A three-man panel of rabbinical judges made up of Sherman, Rabbi Hagai Izerer and Rabbi Zion Algrabli rejected the halachic principle that a rabbinic court decision, once handed down, was irreversible..."

    ReplyDelete
  45. Recipients and PublicityJune 24, 2009 at 8:24 AM

    Part Two:

    "...
    Sherman was responding to a Tel Aviv Rabbinical Court ruling in a divorce case that involved a woman who had converted to Judaism.

    The Tel Aviv Rabbinical Court refused to accept claims by the husband that his wife's conversion was invalid, because, he claimed, the wife had paid a NIS 10,000 bribe to the court that performed her conversion.

    The Tel Aviv court ruled instead that it did not have the power to overturn a decision - in this case a conversion - by another court since the underlying assumption is that rabbinical courts know what they are doing.

    However, Sherman rejected the Tel Aviv court's argument despite the fact that it was based on an accepted halachic principle. He ruled that the Jewish status of the woman and her children must be lifted until the Tel Aviv court could ascertain whether the claims against the validity of her conversion could be refuted.

    Sherman said in a telephone interview with The Jerusalem Post that there was nothing new in his decision and that he was basing himself on the opinions of this generation's greatest halachic scholars, both living and deceased.

    Sherman quoted from declarations published in recent decades by leading haredi halachic authorities such as Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, considered to be the single most important living halachic decisor for haredi Ashkenazi Jewry. Sherman also quoted deceased authorities such as Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Ohrbach, Rabbi Ya'acov Yisrael Kanyevsky and Rabbi Elazar Menachem Man Shach.

    In one declaration, signed by Shach, Kanyevsky, Ohrbach and Elyashiv and dating from the summer of 1984, the rabbis warned that "since there has been a rise in the number of converts who have been accepted as Jews and that it has become known that a large percentage of them had no intention of accepting upon themselves the burden of the commandments at the time of conversion... We are warning that there is a prohibition to accept converts without first being sure that they are interested in accepting upon themselves all the commandments."

    Sherman and the other rabbinical judges in May concluded from this declaration and others that every conversion must be considered suspect, "whether it was performed by the Edah Haredit or some other rabbinic court that is recognized more or recognized less, when a person presents a conversion certificate issued by a rabbinic court and that person's appearance is far from the appearance of an observant Jew or that person comes from a place that has no observant community."

    Sherman said this was especially true in the case that came before the Tel Aviv Rabbinic Court, which dealt with the Jewishness of the wife and her children."

    ReplyDelete
  46. Roni/Tropper says "The sellout of Judaism for money..."

    That's very funny. Exactly where in Torah is there a commandment to go on welfare in order to be Jewish? That is exactly the point of this whole conversion controversy and is leading to a severe crisis in the entire UO community - the refusal of the majority of Chereidi men to fulfill their obligation to work and provide a living for their family, a total violation of pirkei avot, at the very least.

    YNet Online
    Haredi employment rates in J'lem spike
    Tani Goldstein
    Published: 5.20.09, 12:39 / Israel Money

    ...According to the data, Israeli industries employ 20,000 haredim nationwide, 11,000 of whom are women. Traditional industries, however, remain a fraction of the sector's employment sources, as the majority joins the education system, the precious stones industry and various trades.


    "The reasons for this change are varied," Itzhak Reif, head of MAI's Jerusalem branch, told Ynet. "I assume the main reason is population growth, which combined with low income rates led to the conclusion that they can't go on sustaining themselves like that.


    "The change emanated from the (community's) public opinion, but eventually even the rabbis understood that it is both unnecessary and unreasonable to expect everyone to no nothing but study…. Also, budget cuts and the financial crisis have increased the (monetary) crunch.


    "Overall, this is a very positive change. A person should be responsible for himself."

    ..."The ultra-Orthodox community is also contributing – they have special aid funds which help those undergoing job training… I hope the heads of the haredi community will allow more yeshiva students to seek professional training the join the workforce." [end]

    He can hope all he wants - the men who quit kollel to actually find gainful market rate employment are shunned and vilified by the muckrackers that be. While having the couple's parents support them has been the preferred method of surviving in the past, today many parents (who are, ironically, actually employed) simply no longer have the resources to support able-bodied adult children.

    So what are most couples doing? Dumping the kids in herds to be raised by strangers while the wife goes to try and eke out a living for them. Of course, we all know that women have to take maternity leave and have to care for sick children and sick elderly relatives, too - so they only make about 3/4 of what a man can make, for the most part. But the Chereidi don't really care about that. They will justify any neglect of children and elderly relatives in order to keep up the pretense that having men do nothing but study in kollel all day every day is a benefit to the nation and to Jews everywhere.

    This, however, is not what Pirkei Avot says.

    PA 1:10 Love work, despise lordliness, and do not become overly familiar with the government.

    Oops - the Chereidi consider work beneath them, despise honest labour, lord it over other sects of Judaism, and thanks to their welfare and assistance, are very familiar with the government. Grade: FAIL.

    Continued next post...

    ReplyDelete
  47. Part II

    PA 2:2 ...All Torah study that is not joined with work will cease in the end, and leads to sin.

    Or, as others put it, "Idle hands are the devil's workshop." Not only do most young men aspire to be burdens on society and do nothing productive for the community economy, many if not most young Bait Yaakov educated women have been trained to only consider marriage with such an unemployable disgrace. Grade: FAIL.

    PA 2:13 ...Got out and discern which is the good path to which a man should cling...Rabbi Shimon says, One who considers the outcome of a deed.

    Obviously, both their Rabbis and the young bochurim themselves are not thinking clearly about the end result of having entire communities lacking the essential arts, crafts and skills for self-sufficiency, and have not thought through to the outcome of being so dependent upon charity and government largess to prevent their families from starving. No one can guarantee that charities will receive sufficient funds to provide for able-bodied adults, and government benefits invariable come with strings attached. Grade: FAIL.

    PA 3:21 ...If there is no Torah, there is no worldly occupation. If there is no worldly occupation, there is no Torah...

    Without a decent secular education and market rate employment, a person is unable to fulfill every requirement of Torah. A decent academic education is required in order to have the economic, historical, geo-political and civic knowledge necessary to govern even Chereidi communities and vote in larger regional, state and national issues. And, of course, in real life, keeping Torah is expensive - one who relies on welfare or charity must skimp on their observance, either in public or in secret. Grade: FAIL.

    PA 5:25 ...a 20 year old begins pursuit [of a livelihood]...

    And, of course, in order to begin pursuing a livelihood one must have studied and apprenticed in his chosen profession for some years to make a reasonable living at it, which today's 20 year olds obviously have not done. Grade: FAIL.

    And, finally and most famously, we have these words known to just about everyone:

    Rabbi Judah says: Anyone who fails to teach his son a trade teaches him to steal.

    An able bodied man who has learned no marketable skills or who simply refuses to work for a living or purposefully causes his family to be on welfare steals from all the hardworking people who have taxes confiscated from their income to pay for these useless slugs to survive. They take food and education and goods away from the children of hard-working decent people because they have some delusion that they are too good for honest labour. This is stealing, pure and simple. The working men and women don't want their taxes continually increased to cover the rising costs of luggards who won't work, pure and simple. The money is taken from them by the government on threat of force - it's stolen from them because Chereidi men won't step up to the plate and support their own families.

    Grade: FAIL.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Ahavah Gayle said...

    Roni/Tropper says "The sellout of Judaism for money..."

    That's very funny. Exactly where in Torah is there a commandment to go on welfare in order to be Jewish? That is exactly the point of this whole conversion controversy and is leading to a severe crisis in the entire UO community - the refusal of the majority of Chereidi men to fulfill their obligation to work and provide a living for their family, a total violation of pirkei avot, at the very least.
    ================
    1). Could you please clarify why you think that the whole conversion controversy is caused by the refusal majority of Chareidi men to ... work..?

    2) Pirkei Avos is not a halacha sefer but rather moral teachings and advice. Therefore you need to cite halachic sources to buttress your thesis. I am not saying these halachic sources don't exist - but simply that you haven't cited them.

    3) your letter is very angry - why?
    4) While I am not sure of the connection of this topic to the conversion crisis - I would make it a separate post if you can add some halachic sources

    ReplyDelete
  49. I know you probably haven't read my blog, but it's pretty much all about economics, especially as the subject relates to the current crisis and Jewish communities. I have also posted some related analyses on UOJ's blogs.

    People like Tropper are in the process of destroying the economic viability of the Jewish communities with their insistence that people give up their jobs or never get one in the first place to be full time "learners." No community can survive with vast percentages of the able-bodied men refusing to contribute to the economic well being of the community.

    The tuition crisis is a small sample of what is coming - people have mortgaged themselves to their eyeballs and taken out more credit card debt than they will EVER be able to pay off to keep their kids in dayschools - but the reason tuitions keep going up and up is that fewer and fewer are actually paying at all due to the "hardship" of women/mother having to be the sole breadwinner (and perhaps mooching off her parents) while the man contributes nothing.

    It's a simple math problem - not enough income being earned in the communities to support the schools. The results are getting ugly - teachers that haven't been paid in MONTHS, kids having to drop out and go to public school because their parents have no other choice, people losing their homes due to bankruptcy, schools unable to pay their basic bills...need I go on? Read the "Orthonomics" blog sometime and you'll see some awful truths. The system is fast collapsing and there isn't going to be any money falling from the sky to fix it.

    Charity is another problem - people can't give what they don't have, and with more and more families living hand to mouth there isn't going to be any great increases in charity to feed the kids of these men who should be supporting their own families. If they didn't intend to, they shouldn't have gotten married.

    And yes, I was married once to one of those "allergic to employment" types. It made me angry then and it still makes me angry now, long after the fact. That doesn't make me wrong, as you noted - like all bloggers I have my own "hot button" topics that really get on my nerves. That's one of them. We are going to have to become WAY more fiscally responsible as a group, and that means NOT encouraging economically suicidal behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Oops, I left out a thought from the last post - on what this has to do with conversion. One, the example listed above. Two, intelligent educated people are not going to choose Orthodoxy if it means their kids are going to be raised as ignorant as Tropper is - I believe he actually BRAGS he only has an 8th grade education. All that does is show me that he's not fit to govern his own household, much less anybody else's. If it wasn't for Tom Kaplan's money Tropper would be a charity case himself. And I'm betting Kaplan didn't earn his money with only an 8th grade education.

    Why is there so much welfare fraud, insurance fraud, misuse of government grants, etc. in orthodoxy? Because a sadly large percentage of them CAN'T earn a living with the inadequate secular/academic education they have. The dayschools are turning out kids who can barely read and write English - how can they ever get good jobs outside of the community to bring in much needed cash from the outside? And on top of that, even Jewish employers are hiring arabs and mexicans (Israel and the US respectively) - where are they going to find living wages IN the community?

    The whole thing is insane.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Daas Torah said...

    Mekubal wrote:

    Once again Roni, you can read things anyway you like, but that is not what this says. This says, "And that there is to take hold of the understanding that it is permitted to teach Torah to a Goy if his mind is to convert." I am convinced that either you do not know Hebrew or that you are intentionally misreading these statements.

    Your rejection of R' Efrati's letter of clarification is ridiculous. He is R' Eliashiv's right hand man. Is he lying? Is he woefully misinformed?

    At the request of R' Eidensohn I asked R' Eisenstein about R' Efrati's clarification. His statement was that he understood R' Eliashiv's position the same way.
    ==================
    With the confirmation from both Rav Efrati and Rav Eisenstein that Rav Eliashiv's teshuva 3:140 is not talking about proselytizing or inspiring a nonJew to convert - I think it is time to end this thread.

    Roni - any more repetition of your distorted and abusive ad hominem comments will simply be rejected. Whether it is your problematic readings of Rav Eliashiv and other poskim or whether it is your reflex denunciation of R' Bomzer. Enough is enough. However you have served the valuable service of confirming for us the tenuous and problematic nature of R' Tropper's authority to do what he is doing.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.