Times of Israel Nativ [Jewish Identity Education] is the army’s gateway to conversion.
It’s Judaism and Zionism 101, taught by civilian and army instructors on
a grassy campus, providing participants with reasonable food in a coed
setting on the army’s dime. The seven-week course, even if one does not
continue toward the conversion seminars that follow, counts toward time
served. In short, most soldiers know that if they are entitled to the
course, they might as well go.
It is – housed under the roof of the IDF, an
organization that is by definition kosher and Sabbath observant – the
only path in Israeli society that manages to skirt most of the
minefields surrounding the question of who is a Jew. [...]
Nativ was founded in 2001, the brainchild of reserves general Elazar
Stern, who, as chief education officer and head of IDF manpower, from
1999 to 2008, left an indelible mark on the military – pioneering the
army’s organized trips to the Nazi death camps, introducing a blood
marrow donor station at the IDF’s induction center, and, among many
other initiatives, launching a rewrite of the army’s code of ethics. [...]
The process is not perfect. From the
ultra-Orthodox perspective it is far too lenient. It does not even span
an entire calendar year – in fact it could be completed in the period
between the end of the Sukkot and the start of Passover – and the
devotion of each and every convert to full compliance with the
commandments has been questioned.
Secular Israelis have been outraged as well. In 2014, Noam Cohen, a newly discharged soldier, told Channel 10
that she was disqualified from the conversion track in the army because
she lives on a kibbutz. It did not matter that her hometown of Kibbutz
Yifat has a synagogue, or that there is a religious family living on the
kibbutz, or that her father was a veteran of Sayeret Matkal,
or that there is a plaque drilled into the synagogue wall with the
names of 22 fallen Israeli soldiers from the kibbutz: the fact of her
living on a secular kibbutz was grounds for disqualification, she said.[...]
Roughly 3,000 soldiers opt to start the Nativ
courses every year. The first seven weeks are a bit like college. The
classes are taught by religious, secular, Reform and Conservative
teachers. The dorms and classrooms are sprinkled with students from all
over the world – participants referred to it as “the Mondial” or World
Cup of soccer – but the clear majority are from Russian-speaking homes.
In a history class I sat in on, addressing the Roman rule over Judea,
there were 20 students from former Soviet Union states and two from the
US, both of whom were Jewish but eligible for the course as new
immigrants. One, a college graduate from New Rochelle, New York, was the
most active participant in class. The other doodled impressively. The
army allowed access to three of the Russian-speaking students.[....]
I just do not get one simple point in the whole conversion controversy. The halacha (S.A.268) is pretty clear that once converted, the person is a jew. Therefore, regardless if one agrees or not with a specific beit dins criteria, once it is done (and the members of the beit din are ksherim la edut), the person is a jew.
ReplyDeleteHow, then, can rabbis just refuse to accept converts from this or that beit din as a jew?
@Ricardo Gancz - there has always been a concern about converts who are not sincere or don't plan to keep the mitzvos. This is a major discussion but anyone who is aware of what go on with conversion understands that there is a problem. This is especially true when the ger doesn't keep shabbos after conversion. There is a problem of follow up - especially in lenient programs such as the army.
ReplyDeleteA person who converts but doesn't plan on keeping all the mitzvos - is not a valid convert.
Israeli Army converts are as Jewish as the Ayatollah of Iran. Neither keep the 613 nor ever intended to.
ReplyDeleteYou wrote:
ReplyDeleteA person who converts but doesn't plan on keeping ALL the mitzvos - is not a valid convert.
Your answer seems very weird to me. You would like to understand the following:
1 - The halacha states that we teach a little of the "light" and the "serious" mitzvot. That means, the convert will learn a big part afterwards. How does that equates with your saying that he must plan to keep all the mitzvot?
2 - If the convert told the beit din he is planning to fulfill all of the mitzvot, the beit din converted him and afterwards the person did not fulfill his planning. (For arguments sake, he came on Monday to the beit din, converted on Tuesday and 2 weeks later he is eating pig). Is his conversion invalid? If it is, can you point me sources from the Gemara, rishonim and acharonim (from bedore 1800)?
3 - If the beit din converted someone which had some other reason to convert (let us say, for marriage purposes) and the convert turned out not keeping all mitzvot. Is the conversion invalid? If yes, can you give the sources? How do you read S.A. Y.D. 268:12?
Thanks
Pre-conversion he must intend to keep all 613 post-conversion. If he intends to not keep even 1 mitzvah, the conversion was never valid, even if he went through the ritual conversion procedures.
ReplyDeletethe true concern isn't about the converts per se but there being a beit din not under the control of certain elements.
ReplyDelete@Ricardo Gancz - please explain something of who you are? This topic has been discussed extensively in the past. The simple answer to your question is the gemora
ReplyDeleteBechoros (30b): A non-Jew who comes to convert and he accepts all obligations except for one thing – he is not to be accepted as a convert. R’ Yose said that he is not accepted even if he refuses to accept any details of even the rabbinic decrees
It would be helpful if you understood how this gemora is understood as well as the understanding of the rabbis through out the ages.
Rabbi Eidensohn,
ReplyDeleteYour first answer says:
"A person who converts but doesn't plan on keeping all the mitzvos - is not a valid convert".
I undertood it as if saying that someone converted [meaning he accepted in front of the 3 hediotot he will have an obligation as a jew to keep all the mitzvot] but at the end of the day did not plan to fulfill his obligation. And it seemed to me as if you were stating that in this case, after we see the person just keeping some of the mitzvot, even though he acknowledges that as a jew he should keep all of them, is not a real convert.
Yet, your second answer seems to imply something different.
You repeated what the halacha states that we must teach a little of the mitzvot kalot and a little of the chamurot. And bediavad, even if we didn't the conversion is still valid. (as per Rambam Is.B. 13:14; 13:17. HaRav HaMagid clearly says זה פשוט שאין הודעת המצוות מעכבת דעבד).
You seem to imply that even though the convert learned only a little of the mitzvot (lekatchila) or even none of it (bediavad) he must have beforehand accept his obligation to fulfill all of the mitzvot. (meaning, he must accept his obligation to keep all he have already learned and all the rest he still will have to learn about)
If I am reading you correctly, then, if after accepting the obligation to fulfill all the mitzvot before the beit din, the convert does not fulfill his obligation, he is still a convert as the halacha clearly states. Am I reading you correctly?
The 7 [orthodox] batei dinim that do conversions here in Israel (Rabanut, Rav Karelitz, Tzohar and others less known) that I know of clearly ask the converts if they accept their obligation to fulfill all the mitzvot.
The key factor in determining whether the purported conversion was ever valid, is the prospective convert's intent, at the time of the ritual conversion, to keep the 613 mitzvos. If he mouthed the words as a formality that he intends and commits to keep the 613, even though in his heart he knows he will not keep Shabbos fully according to halacha or he know he will not keep kashrus or he knows he will not keep taharas hamishpacha, the conversion was never valid and he remained a gentile all along despite his completing the ritual conversion process and even stating that he intends to keep all the Jewish laws.
ReplyDeleteMoe,
ReplyDeletePlease, could you give me sources based on gemara, rishonim, S.A. to back what you affirming?
@Ricardo Gancz - you are the one who is going against the view of the poskim - so the burden is on you to bring proof to your allegations.
ReplyDeleteYour allegations are refuted in a post from 2008 citing Rav Chaim Ozer and Rav Moshe Feinstein
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/search?q=ger+accept+mitzvos
Ricardo, there are many sources to back up what Moe is saying, but it all goes back to the original source; the Covenant at Sinai. The whole point of geirus is to enter that covenant, and the details of how geirus is done reflects what was done then by the Jewish people.
ReplyDeleteAt the time, Hashem told them a few halakhos (that is what the Ten Commandments were), but as every cheder child knows, they agreed to accept it all, without hearing it first -- Naaseh v' Nishmah. Whatever God would later command them to do (through Moshe), they would do. That is the paradigm for acceptance of mitzvos required of a convert.