Jewish Star hat tip to RaP
Although some American Jewish leaders said this week that they will be entering upcoming negotiations over the proposed Israeli conversion bill free of preconceptions, a leader of Reform Jewry said there remains a “red line” for his movement.
“The critical point will be giving ultimate authority to the Chief Rabbinate, which is a fundamental violation of the status quo,” said Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism. “In my opinion, that is the red line.
“If you write in the law [as currently proposed] that the Chief Rabbinate has the ultimate authority over conversions, 30 years of legal decisions [by Israel’s High Court of Justice] are thrown out,” Rabbi Yoffie continued. “For us, that is the most significant issue; everything else should be negotiated.”[...]
Although some American Jewish leaders said this week that they will be entering upcoming negotiations over the proposed Israeli conversion bill free of preconceptions, a leader of Reform Jewry said there remains a “red line” for his movement.
“The critical point will be giving ultimate authority to the Chief Rabbinate, which is a fundamental violation of the status quo,” said Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism. “In my opinion, that is the red line.
“If you write in the law [as currently proposed] that the Chief Rabbinate has the ultimate authority over conversions, 30 years of legal decisions [by Israel’s High Court of Justice] are thrown out,” Rabbi Yoffie continued. “For us, that is the most significant issue; everything else should be negotiated.”[...]
WADR, MK Rotem's bill (as modified to get chareidi votes) more about R' Druckman's potential successor than the Baga"tz.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting to me that the RCA is not objecting as vociferously as the non-O movements are. I'm not sure what it means.
-micha
Micha,
ReplyDeleteAFAIK, the RCA is not objecting at all. Your post implied they are.
Can you clarify your point about R. Druckman?
BTW, the Chareidim (other than the Shas party) do NOT support the Rotem bill. The bill is designed to allow Russian shkotzim -- who have no intention of ever keeping a single Shabbos -- to make a false "conversion" as "Jews".
It did? I was commenting on their silence! Well, back to English Composition 101 for me!
ReplyDeleteR' Druckman is a major figure in the NRP / Mizrachi world. The religious standards of the members of his court were questioned by the dayanim of the Ashdod Rabbanut's court, which. This beis din happens to consist of chareidim, as the rabbanut increasingly is. By questioning a geirus as being so fundamentally wrong that the dayanim are declared non-shomerei Torah umitzvos, the Ashdod court was able to declare all of R' Druckman's beis din's converts as non-geirim. After all, a geirus requires a court of three observant men as part of the pro forma.
And so, the chareidim in the Rabbanut undid the state's own Conversion Authority. And many converts were left wondering whether or not they would be considered Jews.
The very kind of uncertainty that the 350,000 non-Jewish Russian Israelis want to avoid, and that motivates this bill.
The addendum to MK Rotem's proposed bill gives final authority on all conversions to the Rabbanut. Which would be the final nail in the coffin on any future conversion system not controlled by the (increasingly chareidi) rabbanut.
I therefore see this addition to the bill as being a volley in the Chareidi vs Dati Le'umi battles. The Chareidi parties were only comfortable supporting the bill once they ruled out any chance of it meaning datiim could convert people that they wouldn't consider geirim al pi halakhah.
I believe you're mistaken about it only being Shas supporting the bill among chareidim. UTJ too voiced its disappointment that the bill wasn't being read until next session (if ever). Although MK Maklev (UTJ - of the Degel haTorah
side), said that UTJ's support was more about pushing Reform back than their own contentment with the bill.
The bill is designed to not allow false conversions. It could well minimize the number of Russians who can convert. But at least we'll know that those who do won't be those who never keep a single Shabbos.
Side note: I find it an extreme lack of hakaras hatov to call people willing to risk their lives fighting for a primarily Jewish community "shkotzim"! They certainly deserve more gratitude than do my challos on Shabbos.
-micha
Sorry, I was trying to comment on their silence, and moreso that not only should the RCA be speaking up -- they should be doing so as loudly as the non-O movements. In fact, since Religious Zionism was on the radar of those who shaped this bill whereas Reform and Conservative are not (having insufficient population to have political power in Israel), it is more directly on attack on what RCA stands for.
ReplyDeleteIf that failed to come across in my previous comment, it just means I need to go back to English Composition 101.
UTJ voiced its disappointment that the bill was not read in this session of Keneset. MK Uri Maklev (of the Degel haTorah wing of UTJ) said it was more about needing to push back at Reform than actually being satisfied with the proposed bill as it stands. But they do support the bill.
As modified, the bill gives control to the increasingly chareidi Rabbanut, and the major Chareidi parties support it.
As for the R' Druckman connection... Conversion in Israel was always under an Orthodox court. Until a couple of years ago, that beis din was run by the state Conversion Authority, and was under R' Druckman, a major figure in the dati leumi / NRP / Mizrachi world.
Then, the chareidi rabbanim on the Rabbanut of Ashdod's beis din not only questioned one of their conversions, but said the standards were so non-halachic, the dayanim weren't shomerei Torah umitzvos. Thus there were no dayanim, no court, and the conversion ritual was thus missing a key piece for valid geirus -- for every convert R' Druckman's beis din ever made.
Leaving many gerim in doubt as to whether or not they would be considered Jews.
This doubt is the driving force behind Yisrael Betenu's bill. They want to know that a conversion will be considered valid by all, and no doubts raised years later.
This *eliminates* the alleged conversion of Russians who have no plans to ever keep a Shabbos. It is designed as part of a package that would provide security for those still willing to undergo geirus for real. More batei dinim performing conversion, but the
rules of the batei dinim all being under the Rabbanut, where fewer and fewer datiim leumiim will have say.
Side note: I cover my challah at the Shabbos table, in part out of a sense of gratitude. Moshe Rabbeinu also was expected to express gratitude toward the sea that saved him as an infant, and the sand into which he hid the Egptian taskmaster's body. Makkos that afflicted sea and sand were initiated by Aharon, not Moshe.
That's the level of hakaras hatov we have for inanimate obects, who provide benefit for us without having any say in the matter.
I am therefore troubled by someone referring to people who risk their lives for a primarily Jewish community as "shkotzim". I see you have Uncle Sam as your picture on blogger.com's profile. Can I take that to mean you are here in the US with me, not risking our own or our sons' lives for the safety of other Jews? So how can you belittle those who do -- regardless of what negative spin you might wish to place on their motives?
-micha
Sorry, I was trying to comment on their silence, and moreso that not only should the RCA be speaking up -- they should be doing so as loudly as the non-O movements. In fact, since Religious Zionism was on the radar of those who shaped this bill whereas Reform and Conservative are not (having insufficient population to have political power in Israel), it is more directly on attack on what RCA stands for.
ReplyDeleteIf that failed to come across in my previous comment, it just means I need to go back to English Composition 101.
UTJ voiced its disappointment that the bill was not read in this session of Keneset. MK Uri Maklev (of the Degel haTorah wing of UTJ) said it was more about needing to push back at Reform than actually being satisfied with the proposed bill as it stands. But they do support the bill.
As modified, the bill gives control to the increasingly chareidi Rabbanut, and the major Chareidi parties support it.
As for the R' Druckman connection... Conversion in Israel was always under an Orthodox court. Until a couple of years ago, that beis din was run by the state Conversion Authority, and was under R' Druckman, a major figure in the dati leumi / NRP / Mizrachi world.
Then, the chareidi rabbanim on the Rabbanut of Ashdod's beis din not only questioned one of their conversions, but said the standards were so non-halachic, the dayanim weren't shomerei Torah umitzvos. Thus there were no dayanim, no court, and the conversion ritual was thus missing a key piece for valid geirus -- for every convert R' Druckman's beis din ever made.
Leaving many gerim in doubt as to whether or not they would be considered Jews.
This doubt is the driving force behind Yisrael Betenu's bill. They want to know that a conversion will be considered valid by all, and no doubts raised years later.
This *eliminates* the alleged conversion of Russians who have no plans to ever keep a Shabbos. It is designed as part of a package that would provide security for those still willing to undergo geirus for real. More batei dinim performing conversion, but the
rules of the batei dinim all being under the Rabbanut, where fewer and fewer datiim leumiim will have say.
Side note: I cover my challah at the Shabbos table, in part out of a sense of gratitude. Moshe Rabbeinu also was expected to express gratitude toward the sea that saved him as an infant, and the sand into which he hid the Egptian taskmaster's body. Makkos that afflicted sea and sand were initiated by Aharon, not Moshe.
That's the level of hakaras hatov we have for inanimate obects, who provide benefit for us without having any say in the matter.
I am therefore troubled by someone referring to people who risk their lives for a primarily Jewish community as "shkotzim". I see you have Uncle Sam as your picture on blogger.com's profile. Can I take that to mean you are here in the US with me, not risking our own or our sons' lives for the safety of other Jews? So how can you belittle those who do -- regardless of what negative spin you might wish to place on their motives?
-micha
Sorry, I was trying to comment on their silence, and moreso that not only should the RCA be speaking up -- they should be doing so as loudly as the non-O movements. In fact, since Religious Zionism was on the radar of those who shaped this bill whereas Reform and Conservative are not (having insufficient population to have political power in Israel), it is more directly on attack on what RCA stands for.
ReplyDeleteIf that failed to come across in my previous comment, it just means I need to go back to English Composition 101.
UTJ voiced its disappointment that the bill was not read in this session of Keneset. MK Uri Maklev (of the Degel haTorah wing of UTJ) said it was more about needing to push back at Reform than actually being satisfied with the proposed bill as it stands. But they do support the bill.
As modified, the bill gives control to the increasingly chareidi Rabbanut, and the major Chareidi parties support it.
As for the R' Druckman connection... Conversion in Israel was always under an Orthodox court. Until a couple of years ago, that beis din was run by the state Conversion Authority, and was under R' Druckman, a major figure in the dati leumi / NRP / Mizrachi world.
Then, the chareidi rabbanim on the Rabbanut of Ashdod's beis din not only questioned one of their conversions, but said the standards were so non-halachic, the dayanim weren't shomerei Torah umitzvos. Thus there were no dayanim, no court, and the conversion ritual was thus missing a key piece for valid geirus -- for every convert R' Druckman's beis din ever made.
Leaving many gerim in doubt as to whether or not they would be considered Jews.
This doubt is the driving force behind Yisrael Betenu's bill. They want to know that a conversion will be considered valid by all, and no doubts raised years later.
This *eliminates* the alleged conversion of Russians who have no plans to ever keep a Shabbos. It is designed as part of a package that would provide security for those still willing to undergo geirus for real. More batei dinim performing conversion, but the
rules of the batei dinim all being under the Rabbanut, where fewer and fewer datiim leumiim will have say.
Side note: I cover my challah at the Shabbos table, in part out of a sense of gratitude. Moshe Rabbeinu also was expected to express gratitude toward the sea that saved him as an infant, and the sand into which he hid the Egptian taskmaster's body. Makkos that afflicted sea and sand were initiated by Aharon, not Moshe.
That's the level of hakaras hatov we have for inanimate obects, who provide benefit for us without having any say in the matter.
I am therefore troubled by someone referring to people who risk their lives for a primarily Jewish community as "shkotzim". I see you have Uncle Sam as your picture on blogger.com's profile. Can I take that to mean you are here in the US with me, not risking our own or our sons' lives for the safety of other Jews? So how can you belittle those who do -- regardless of what negative spin you might wish to place on their motives?
-micha
Sorry, I was trying to comment on their silence, and moreso that not only should the RCA be speaking up -- they should be doing so as loudly as the non-O movements. In fact, since Religious Zionism was on the radar of those who shaped this bill whereas Reform and Conservative are not (having insufficient population to have political power in Israel), it is more directly on attack on what RCA stands for.
ReplyDeleteIf that failed to come across in my previous comment, it just means I need to go back to English Composition 101.
UTJ voiced its disappointment that the bill was not read in this session of Keneset. MK Uri Maklev (of the Degel haTorah wing of UTJ) said it was more about needing to push back at Reform than actually being satisfied with the proposed bill as it stands. But they do support the bill.
As modified, the bill gives control to the increasingly chareidi Rabbanut, and the major Chareidi parties support it.
As for the R' Druckman connection... Conversion in Israel was always under an Orthodox court. Until a couple of years ago, that beis din was run by the state Conversion Authority, and was under R' Druckman, a major figure in the dati leumi / NRP / Mizrachi world.
Then, the chareidi rabbanim on the Rabbanut of Ashdod's beis din not only questioned one of their conversions, but said the standards were so non-halachic, the dayanim weren't shomerei Torah umitzvos. Thus there were no dayanim, no court, and the conversion ritual was thus missing a key piece for valid geirus -- for every convert R' Druckman's beis din ever made.
Leaving many gerim in doubt as to whether or not they would be considered Jews.
This doubt is the driving force behind Yisrael Betenu's bill. They want to know that a conversion will be considered valid by all, and no doubts raised years later.
This *eliminates* the alleged conversion of Russians who have no plans to ever keep a Shabbos. It is designed as part of a package that would provide security for those still willing to undergo geirus for real. More batei dinim performing conversion, but the
rules of the batei dinim all being under the Rabbanut, where fewer and fewer datiim leumiim will have say.
Side note: I cover my challah at the Shabbos table, in part out of a sense of gratitude. Moshe Rabbeinu also was expected to express gratitude toward the sea that saved him as an infant, and the sand into which he hid the Egptian taskmaster's body. Makkos that afflicted sea and sand were initiated by Aharon, not Moshe.
That's the level of hakaras hatov we have for inanimate obects, who provide benefit for us without having any say in the matter.
I am therefore troubled by someone referring to people who risk their lives for a primarily Jewish community as "shkotzim". I see you have Uncle Sam as your picture on blogger.com's profile. (Actually, I only see the file name -- the picture itself isn't coming out.) Can I take that to mean you are here in the US with me, not risking our own or our sons' lives for the safety of other Jews? So how can you belittle those who do -- regardless of what negative spin you might wish to place on their motives?
-micha
Sorry, I was trying to comment on their silence, and moreso that not only should the RCA be speaking up -- they should be doing so as loudly as the non-O movements. In fact, since Religious Zionism was on the radar of those who shaped this bill whereas Reform and Conservative are not (having insufficient population to have political power in Israel), it is more directly on attack on what RCA stands for.
ReplyDeleteIf that failed to come across in my previous comment, it just means I need to go back to English Composition 101.
UTJ voiced its disappointment that the bill was not read in this session of Keneset. MK Uri Maklev (of the Degel haTorah wing of UTJ) said it was more about needing to push back at Reform than actually being satisfied with the proposed bill as it stands. But they do support the bill.
As modified, the bill gives control to the increasingly chareidi Rabbanut, and the major Chareidi parties support it.
As for the R' Druckman connection... Conversion in Israel was always under an Orthodox court. Until a couple of years ago, that beis din was run by the state Conversion Authority, and was under R' Druckman, a major figure in the dati leumi / NRP / Mizrachi world.
Then, the chareidi rabbanim on the Rabbanut of Ashdod's beis din not only questioned one of their conversions, but said the standards were so non-halachic, the dayanim weren't shomerei Torah umitzvos. Thus there were no dayanim, no court, and the conversion ritual was thus missing a key piece for valid geirus -- for every convert R' Druckman's beis din ever made.
Leaving many gerim in doubt as to whether or not they would be considered Jews.
This doubt is the driving force behind Yisrael Betenu's bill. They want to know that a conversion will be considered valid by all, and no doubts raised years later.
This *eliminates* the alleged conversion of Russians who have no plans to ever keep a Shabbos. It is designed as part of a package that would provide security for those still willing to undergo geirus for real. More batei dinim performing conversion, but the
rules of the batei dinim all being under the Rabbanut, where fewer and fewer datiim leumiim will have say.
Side note: I cover my challah at the Shabbos table, in part out of a sense of gratitude. Moshe Rabbeinu also was expected to express gratitude toward the sea that saved him as an infant, and the sand into which he hid the Egptian taskmaster's body. Makkos that afflicted sea and sand were initiated by Aharon, not Moshe.
That's the level of hakaras hatov we have for inanimate obects, who provide benefit for us without having any say in the matter.
I am therefore troubled by someone referring to people who risk their lives for a primarily Jewish community as "shkotzim". I see you have Uncle Sam as your picture on blogger.com's profile. Can I take that to mean you are here in the US with me, not risking our own or our sons' lives for the safety of other Jews? So how can you belittle those who do -- regardless of what negative spin you might wish to place on their motives?
-micha
Sorry, I was trying to comment on their silence, and moreso that not only should the RCA be speaking up -- they should be doing so as loudly as the non-O movements. In fact, since Religious Zionism was on the radar of those who shaped this bill whereas Reform and Conservative are not (having insufficient population to have political power in Israel), it is more directly on attack on what RCA stands for.
ReplyDeleteIf that failed to come across in my previous comment, it just means I need to go back to English Composition 101.
UTJ voiced its disappointment that the bill was not read in this session of Keneset. MK Uri Maklev (of the Degel haTorah wing of UTJ) said it was more about needing to push back at Reform than actually being satisfied with the proposed bill as it stands. But they do support the bill.
As modified, the bill gives control to the increasingly chareidi Rabbanut, and the major Chareidi parties support it.
As for the R' Druckman connection... Conversion in Israel was always under an Orthodox court. Until a couple of years ago, that beis din was run by the state Conversion Authority, and was under R' Druckman, a major figure in the dati leumi / NRP / Mizrachi world.
Then, the chareidi rabbanim on the Rabbanut of Ashdod's beis din not only questioned one of their conversions, but said the standards were so non-halachic, the dayanim weren't shomerei Torah umitzvos. Thus there were no dayanim, no court, and the conversion ritual was thus missing a key piece for valid geirus -- for every convert R' Druckman's beis din ever made.
Leaving many gerim in doubt as to whether or not they would be considered Jews.
This doubt is the driving force behind Yisrael Betenu's bill. They want to know that a conversion will be considered valid by all, and no doubts raised years later.
This *eliminates* the alleged conversion of Russians who have no plans to ever keep a Shabbos. It is designed as part of a package that would provide security for those still willing to undergo geirus for real. More batei dinim performing conversion, but the
rules of the batei dinim all being under the Rabbanut, where fewer and fewer datiim leumiim will have say.
Side note: I cover my challah at the Shabbos table, in part out of a sense of gratitude. Moshe Rabbeinu also was expected to express gratitude toward the sea that saved him as an infant, and the sand into which he hid the Egptian taskmaster's body. Makkos that afflicted sea and sand were initiated by Aharon, not Moshe.
That's the level of hakaras hatov we have for inanimate obects, who provide benefit for us without having any say in the matter.
I am therefore troubled by someone referring to people who risk their lives for a primarily Jewish community as "shkotzim". I see you have Uncle Sam as your picture on blogger.com's profile. Can I take that to mean you are here in the US with me, not risking our own or our sons' lives for the safety of other Jews? So how can you belittle those who do -- regardless of what negative spin you might wish to place on their motives?
-micha
Sorry, I was trying to comment on their silence, and moreso that not only should the RCA be speaking up -- they should be doing so as loudly as the non-O movements. In fact, since Religious Zionism was on the radar of those who shaped this bill whereas Reform and Conservative are not (having insufficient population to have political power in Israel), it is more directly on attack on what RCA stands for.
ReplyDeleteIf that failed to come across in my previous comment, it just means I need to go back to English Composition 101.
UTJ voiced its disappointment that the bill was not read in this session of Keneset. MK Uri Maklev (of the Degel haTorah wing of UTJ) said it was more about needing to push back at Reform than actually being satisfied with the proposed bill as it stands. But they do support the bill.
As modified, the bill gives control to the increasingly chareidi Rabbanut, and the major Chareidi parties support it.
As for the R' Druckman connection... Conversion in Israel was always under an Orthodox court. Until a couple of years ago, that beis din was run by the state Conversion Authority, and was under R' Druckman, a major figure in the dati leumi / NRP / Mizrachi world.
Then, the chareidi rabbanim on the Rabbanut of Ashdod's beis din not only questioned one of their conversions, but said the standards were so non-halachic, the dayanim weren't shomerei Torah umitzvos. Thus there were no dayanim, no court, and the conversion ritual was thus missing a key piece for valid geirus -- for every convert R' Druckman's beis din ever made.
Leaving many gerim in doubt as to whether or not they would be considered Jews.
This doubt is the driving force behind Yisrael Betenu's bill. They want to know that a conversion will be considered valid by all, and no doubts raised years later.
This *eliminates* the alleged conversion of Russians who have no plans to ever keep a Shabbos. It is designed as part of a package that would provide security for those still willing to undergo geirus for real. More batei dinim performing conversion, but the
rules of the batei dinim all being under the Rabbanut, where fewer and fewer datiim leumiim will have say.
Side note: I cover my challah at the Shabbos table, in part out of a sense of gratitude. Moshe Rabbeinu also was expected to express gratitude toward the sea that saved him as an infant, and the sand into which he hid the Egptian taskmaster's body. Makkos that afflicted sea and sand were initiated by Aharon, not Moshe.
That's the level of hakaras hatov we have for inanimate obects, who provide benefit for us without having any say in the matter.
I am therefore troubled by someone referring to people who risk their lives for a primarily Jewish community as "shkotzim". I see you have Uncle Sam as your picture on blogger.com's profile. Can I take that to mean you are here in the US with me, not risking our own or our sons' lives for the safety of other Jews? So how can you belittle those who do -- regardless of what negative spin you might wish to place on their motives?
-micha
Risking your life for the Jewish
ReplyDeletecommunity does not confer halachic Jewish status.
Muammar al-Gaddafi is a Jew because his mother was born Jewish.
Raoul Wallenberg was a Gentile because his mother was not born Jewish.
There is no merit system in deciding upon "who is a Jew". A person is either born Jewish or they can become a Ger/Giyoret Tzeddek/et k'halacha. And IDF service does not replace the acceptance of the yoke of Torah and Mitzvot for a Ger Tzedek.
I didn't need 2 versions of the response, 4 times to get your point. :)
ReplyDeleteI believe your analysis of the bill to be wrong. The bill will allow any sheigitz to shop around to any rabbanut rabbi in any municipality in Israel -- i.e. they can all shop their "conversion" by the most lax "rabbi" who is the first to stamp is rabbunut seal of their conversion certificate, regardless of the so-called "convert"'s lack of commitment to keep Shabbos or Kashrus.
That is why Avigdor Lieberman's anti-religious Yisroel Betanyu party proposed this legislation in the Kenneset.
"Muammar al-Gaddafi is a Jew because his mother was born Jewish."
ReplyDeleteIs this a new version of the claims you made some months ago, i.e. that the moroccan kings are jewish? When you stated that on your blog, I did some research on the subject and came to the conclusion that it was wrong. (The moroccan kings might have had jewish wives, but they were not the mothers of the subsequent kings)...
So were do you take your claim from, as far as ghadaffi is concerned.
Jersey Girl has a blog1? address?
ReplyDeletemicha: you didn't see the part of the rotem bill that allows the russians to use the most lenient rabbi i israel who is most willing to convert them without much hassle or halachic conditions required?
ReplyDelete(currently they must use the rabbi of their municipality, not find the easiest, least halachic, one. this is why lieberman's russian party proposed this legislation.)
But Dan... the core of the bill is to raise the floor on what the lowest acceptable standard is -- defined by the chareidi-dominated rabbanut.
ReplyDelete-micha
Micha -
ReplyDeleteDid you read the Rotem Bill?
What part of the bill "raises the floor" and how does it do so?
ReplyDeleteRSR:
ReplyDeleteTo answer both your questions...
See the bill, see which section of the law is being amended, and change 2, item b on the list. The national rabbanut has control of who can serve as dayan. Actually, it's all over the bill, as I wrote, the assumption that the rabbanut owns conversion standards is the bill's core point.
-micha
Reb Micha,
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, all currently existing rabbanut rabbis will become empowered under this proposed legislation to initiate conversions of anyone throughout the state, whereas they are currently limited to persons within their jurisdictions.
The net effect of this change is that, say, someone like Rabbi Riskin who is a rabbanut rabbi with conversion standards that may be considered unacceptable to many, but is currently limited to officiating conversions in Efrat whereas under the new law - should it come into force - would be able to apply his looser standards to anyone in the state, including those who otherwise would have been subject to a "higher" standard required of potential converts.
So effectively whichever rabbanut rabbi in the state has the lowest common denominator standards to convert, will now be able to offer that "lowest" standard throughout the state. And obviously any potential convert throughout the state will be able to utilize those rabbis conversion services, where previously it would not have been available to them, as they were subject to a more demanding standard of conversion (which many insist is the true halachic minimum) insisted upon by the their local rabbanut.
ReplyDeleteAs I already noted, Shas, Degel haTorah and Agudah (the latter two, through the UTJ) all back this new bill. So why do you think its results would be nefarious?
ReplyDeleteGeirus standards, as I also already noted, would be set at a national level, and judges that don't conform to it can be fired by the national rabbanut.
-micha
Micha, whilst you are correct about the Shas support, I believe not about Agudah and Degel. Whilst I saw a quote of an individual MK from Degel saying to the effect, "hey, if the Reform are against it I guess we should be for it", neither Agudah nor Degel have taken a position on the bill.
ReplyDeleteSo I believe the concerns expressed are indeed valid. Additionally, local rabbanut chief rabbis are locally elected. I dont think national rabbanut can fire the local chief rabbis who will be nationally empowered under this legislation. And even if they could, I dont think it would be tenable to do so even if they utilize looser standards of conversions.
Dan,
ReplyDelete1- They promised to vote for the bill. That's more than "anything R doesn't like..." The whole point of the last-minute change was to secure those votes.
2- The bill explicitly says, and I pointed you to where already, that it gives the National CR the power to fire dayanim who do not conform to their conversion standards. So why are you replying with "I don't think"? Look it up yourself!
-micha
Micha, would you be so kind to show me your source that UTJ has agreed to vote for this bill.
ReplyDeleteAlso, unless I overlooked it, the bill doesn't grant the national CR the power to fire the locally elected CR's (who become nationally empowered under the legislation).
I mean the locally elected CR's, not the dayanim you are referring to.
ReplyDeleteWhat a thick irony here!
ReplyDeleteThe head of reform movement bemoans the throwing out of 30 years of legal decisions!
How about when the reform came and threw out about 2000 years of legal decisions?
Only difference is, these so-called "legal decisions" of the reform movement are only "legal" decisions in their own fantasy world because they exist OUTSIDE the legal system of Judaism as their movement "threw off the yoke" of the Talmud. So I have a hard time accepting the idea of calling reform decisions "legal" decisions. What legal system? Reform-worship?
Agree with Samuel Roth and Dan. This is a band bill for Torah Judaism and authentic geirus.
ReplyDeleteUTJ (or even Agudah/Degel individually) does not support this bill as a party.
Wild. They say they'll vote for it. I point you to the specific sections of the bill that say the opposite or your claim, but it doesn't make a difference -- the chareidi parties are against because the bill promotes iffy or even non-halachic conversions.
ReplyDeleteSince there is no way to argue if facts don't matter, I won't.
-micha
Hi Micha,
ReplyDeleteOther than your assertions to that effect, I have nowhere seen UTJ decided as a party to support this bill. Since it doesn't make sense that they would vote for it, can you please cite/link to your source - should you have any other than an assumption?
The following article by R. Avi Shafran, of Agudah
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2010/08/06/abuse-of-power/
with his opening observation:
"The Jewish world reportedly has six months before the Rotem Bill (or some facsimile thereof) returns to the Knesset for further consideration. That should allow us all to more leisurely – and hopefully more reasonably – not only assess the bill’s strengths and weaknesses but ponder a troubling issue peripheral to the legislation, but which was engendered by it.
The bill’s essential aim is to allow non-Jewish Israelis a greater choice of religious courts than presently. The bill, further, formalized the decades-old religious status quo placement of conversion in Israel under the auspices of the country’s official Chief Rabbinate.
bears out the problem discussed by several posters above.
And yet, Ben Torah, says exactly what I did -- this is a shift from the "status quo" Orthodox ownership of geirus to specifically the rabbanut being in control.
ReplyDeleteThat step wasn't in Rotem's original proposal -- it was added in order to get the chareidi vote. It is a proposal not only approved by UTJ, but DEMANDED by them. See for example this post mortem.
UTJ objected to the bill being frozen out of the current Kenesset session.
A news story covering the forcing of the rabbanut's control into the original bill. Lemaaseh, UTJ felt locked out, therefore they ended up getting on board late. But they did end up backing the bill.
-micha