The Supreme Court issued a ruling on Wednesday that conversions supervised by former national Conversion Court head Rabbi Haim Druckman are valid in the eyes of the State.
The ruling was in response to a 2009 decision to a panel of three judges on the Great Rabbinical Court which declared any conversion made by Rabbi Druckman was nullified.
As it turned out Rabbi Sherman who revoked the conversions was doing the bidding of Tropper, Sherman received a celebrity treatment in the EJF's last Jerusalem conversion. I also remember Jonathan Rosenblum, the former Tropper employee/ starry eyes BT / haredi apologist supporting Sherman and attacking rabbi Druckman.
ReplyDeleteGod bless rav Farber the rav Hagerim for defending converts against the likes of Tropper and Rosenblum.
BTW, Does anyone know what Tropper is up too these days ? did he pursue a career in the adult entertainment industry ?
"God bless rav Farber the rav Hagerim for defending converts against the likes of Tropper and Rosenblum. "
DeleteAmen!!
It is rather odd that "mamzerim" is touted when MO/Z Rabbis take action, however when a rash action taken by Haredim such as the case of Geirim, might create thousands of mamzerim, nobody in the Haredi world seems to worry about the consequences..
ReplyDeleteCorrect me if I'm wrong, but I believe cancelling conversions would not cause mamzerim. When a Jew and a non-Jew have children, the children are not mamzerim (unless the Jew was not properly divorced, I suppose). That said, I'm with you on the conversions issue. Cancelling conversions of a certain rabbi is completely unprecedented. If someone comes to believe that a certain convert had an invalid conversion, then this is a matter to be handled on a case-by-case basis. If anyone is concerned about it, whether at the time of marriage or whatever, the convert can do a gerus l'chumra.
DeleteLets sat Robert converts and marries Leah. Leah marries shimon. The marriage to shimon is declared invalid becayse Leah is already married. Robert divorces leah. Leah marries levi and has children. Robert's geirus is nullified. This means Leah really did marry shimon and her children from levi are mamzerim
DeleteGood one, none (though I'd be surprised if that has ever happened). I guess the lesson is to give a get, in an abundance of caution, even if you've been told the marriage was invalid?
DeleteTL... Lets see u make a shidduch with one of these gerim...
ReplyDeleteIt is actually funny to see the Israeli Supreme Court, including judges who are irreligious, issue an "opinion" on a halachic matter. I wonder if those fools actually think their judgement has even the slightest halachic relevance.
ReplyDeleteThey weren't. They discussed whether the law provided for R' Sherman's court to disqualify the Gitin court's decisions.
Delete@ dov,
ReplyDeleteThe same thing happened during R' Goren's annulment of the controversial giur in the 70s. Except that time round, R Elyashiv was advising R' Weinman to pursue the matter through the same secular courts. Except now, the roles are reversed.
Not sure what he's up to, but he apparently has a blog.
ReplyDeletehttp://rabbileibtropper.wordpress.com/
Rav Shternbuch holds like Rav Sherman!
ReplyDeleteIf we are going to invalidate the GERUS of anyone who was not frum, we are two klal Yisroels. That is why I heard that Reb Moshe in the name of his father negates such conversions as insincere, but that he pulled back from making a war about it, because it is too late, there are thousands of people born from these conversions and how can you turn back the clock, so perhaps in such a case we rely on the matirim.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I see in tanach that there were generations of Jews who were pagans and married pagan women. We are their progeny. Did they convert leshaim shomayim? Obviously, the key is to convert to be part of the Jewish people, even if not frum and that is enough. This is proved by those who hold that the son of Achav was a Jew even though his mother with Izevel, the worst pagan daughter of a pagan. But I am not mentioning this to make trouble.
Rav Eidensohn, I agree with your above statement. If we put politics aside , cancelling geirut on a mass scale is highly problematic. In particular I respect that in this case you make reference to Tenach rather than the Posek HaDor.
DeleteMy "controversial" view on Achav is that his wife was not Jewish or convertible, since she was from a forbidden nation.
In Tenach terms, "patrilineal" descent may have been less problematic than it is today. I had similar discussion with your esteemed brother, who of course said I am nuts. But you probably would not eat in King David's house, because his Kashrut was also different from today's.
RM did not say that perhaps in this case we rely on the matirim. He actually wrote himself that his opinion was like his fathers! He writes various teshuvot even asserting that when the conversion was for marriage and the spouse did not fulfill torah and mitzvot that it seem clear that the conversion was insincere and lacks validity.
DeleteAnd how do you write on this issue against the Possek HaDor HaRav Elyashiv who holds that these kind of gerus are meaningless and void? And so is the opinion of HaRav Shternbuch and poskey hador.
R. Dovid Eidensohn:
ReplyDeleteThe Chareidi Gedolim today and of past generations pasken a ger that intended to not keep the 613 at the time of his purported conversion, remains a gentile.
really not clear. While in general this is true - there are a lot of fuzzy areas.
DeleteRav Moshe writes about a woman who promised to keep the mitzvos but had in mind to keep only that which her non-observant friends/family kept. Rav Moshe says she is still a kosher ger.
How long do we require that a ger be observant before we say his non-observance shows that he was not sincere in the first place.
I have to say, I am a bit surprised that R' Dovid Eidensohn takes such a lenient position on gerus. The normative halachah today, I believe, is that the ger not only intend to follow all the mitzvot at the time of conversion, but also actually do so afterward (as evidence that they really intended to accept the mitzvot). This may be far different than how things happened historically, but basically all but the far left of Modern Orthodoxy today follow the modern strict position. This almost puts R' Dovid Eidensohn in the same boat as people like Rabbi Marc Angel and Joseph Telushkin, who have both advocated for accepting former Chief Rabbi Uziel's view that a ger need not accept all the mitzvot.
DeleteExcuse me, that's *Rabbi* Joseph Telushkin.
DeleteR' Daniel Eidensohn raises a good question of how long must a ger be observant after completing the gerus to ensure we believe he was sincere at the time of gerus. I would say, not very long. If a ger is seen openly violating the mitzvot several months after conversion, I don't see how that would invalidate the conversion, because what if he was totally observant for the first few months afterward? Also, what is the difference between not being observant and just committing a sin (as everyone does now and then)? For example, what if a ger is observant in every way but is seen briefly carrying a toddler on Shabbos without an eruv? Maybe she accepted the mitzvah and usually follows it but gave into temptation and committed a sin because the toddler refused to walk by himself? We can't expect gerim to be perfect tzaddikim or else they're no longer Jewish.
If they violate the first Shabbos after their alleged conversion, that is pretty damning evidence it was a sham conversion.
ReplyDeleteTwo hakira articles worth reading (IMHO). The first is from R Yehuda Henkin who specifically takes apart R Sherman's teshuva invalidating R Druckman's conversions. The second is more general.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.hakirah.org/Vol%207%20Henkin.pdf
http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%207%20Angel.pdf
I wouldn't put much stock in this R Henkin jr.
Deleteis that san or stan?
DeleteIt is actually an impressive critique of r Sherman, but doesn't go far enough.
DeleteStan, Stan, Stan.
DeleteWhy wouldn't you put much stock in R' Henkin? Can you learn as well as him? Do you sit all day and learn like him? Did you have Shimuch from his Grandfather. You just don't like the fact that he paskens as he sees it and therefore isn't a card carrying member of the submissive right.
This is san, not Stan. This junior Henkin is a disgrace to his illustrious grandfather whom he stomps on with his many utterances in defiance of his grandfather. With his Zionism and many other stances that were anathema to his grandfather.
Delete