Brain death & the intermarriage-conversion problem

I have been posting almost exclusively about conversion and the intermarriage problem. Today's posting about brain death is a change - but I want to use it to illustrate a problem in the halachic process that is relevant to intermarriage and conversion. What follows is not meant as an authoritative exposition of brain death.

As many of you know there is a major fight over the definition of death in Israel due to a law regarding organ transplants. To transplant organs the donor needs to be dead - but not so dead that the organs have deteriorated. Thus it is critical to know precisely when the donor is dead enough to donate but alive enough so that his organs are useful.

There are two basic approaches - 1) as long as the heart is beating the person is alive 2) as long as the person is breathing the person is alive

The second apporach has been complicated by brain death. There are basically two types of brain death. One is the person is unconscious and is unaware of his surroundings and will never recover consciousness. This can happen because of stroke or injury which destroys those parts of the brain dealing with awareness. A person can live for years in this vegatative state with both the heart and the breathing working. Halachically he is not dead. A problem arises however if the brainstem which controls breathing is damaged and therefore the person lacks the brain mechanism for spontaneous independent breathing. Or alternatively the brain flow to the brain as a whole is stopped and he is effectively decapitated.

In the above cases is he halachically dead?

Those who insist that cessation of blood flow to the brain means the person is dead - need to show that there is no flow. One of the standard non-invasive tests is the Doppler Test which uses ultrasound to test for blood flow. Another is the PET. While this sounds very scientific - the question is how accurate is the test? A recent item about a man declared dead and his organs assigned to others - was discovered to be fully alive - despite a PET test which showed there was no blood flow to the brain. Findings for the Doppler test typically indicate a 10% report that there is no blood flow when in fact there is. One study found a 25% error rate.

Thus we have four questions: 1) how is death defined - breathing or heart 2) what is the procedure that a doctor uses to ascertain the facts related to the halachic definition. 3) how accurate are these tests and procedures and 4) what percentage of people being falsely declared dead do we accept?

An illustration of these problems can be found on the following site which is devoted to halachically correct organ donations. Look at the video of the interview with Rav Dovid Feinstein It is clear that the poskim make rulings based upon the technical information they receive from others. To what degree is this information accurate?

In one of Rav Moshe Feinstein teshuvos regarding brain death, he states, "if it is true that there is a test which indicates that the blood flow to the brain has stopped then the person is dead." The problem is that the test mentioned - radiographic test - is generally not used and if it were used it might actually cause the death of the person be examined.

Another related problem is the awareness of the range of legitimate views.
In the case of brain death, the current campaign assumes that there is only one correct view - when in fact there are poskim on both sides.

To get back to the issue of conversion and intermarrige. There is a similar problem of whether the poskim are fully aware of also the range of legitimate halachic views. For example at the November EJF conference one of the horror stories used to illustrate the need for EJF setting the standards is that in the immersion of one ger - the rabbi did not inform her not to wear contact lenses. The conclusion was that the conversion was invalid. Bizarrely enough for an organization which is supposed to follow the rulings of R' Moshe Feinstein and is headed by his son R' Reuven Feinstein - no one mentioned that Rav Moshe does not regard contact lenses as invalidating the immersion. Obviously though it should be removed lechatchila. When one of rabbis of the organization was asked about this he acknowledged he wasn't aware of Rav Moshe's psak!

I have still not gotten confirmation that Rav Eliashiv approves of the proselytizing that EJF does. There is no confirmation from Rav Reuven Feinstein that his father approved the program of EJF.

The Achiezer withdrew his approval of conversion of itnermarriage, 22 years after he had approved by noting it just doesn't work. Rav Moshe Feinstein also refused to convert intermarried couples - even though he acknowledged that theoretically it was valid. He just noted the failure rate is so high he didn't want to be part of the enterprise.

There is concern with 1) what EJF and other kiruv organizations are doing 2) to what degree are the poskim they claim to rely on fully aware of what these organizations are doing

In the absence of clear documentation and open discussion about the consequences of these programs - there is clearly what to be concerned with.

Reply to Baruch's objection to blanket criticism of conversion organizations

Baruch wrote:

" I do feel that blanket statements, be they about baeti din or organizations, should not be made, as they cause people to look with unneeded suspicion towards true geirim,"

I share your concern. However I need you to clarify the target of your comment. Who were you concerned about - that motivated your comment to my blog? Are you referring to my postings and those of other commentators who have criticized Eternal Jewish Family or were you concerned primarily about Eternal Jewish Family's blanket criticism of those rabbis and batei dinim who are not under their supervision? If you have read through the material on this blog or elsewhere on the internet you are aware that it was stated in the Washington EJF conference that that rabbis who believe the world is more than 6000 years old can not perform conversions. This assertion - which has not been challenged or rejected by EJF - threatens the validity of the geirus of those who have utilized Modern Orthodox rabbis.

In fact Rav Sternbuch told me that Eternal Jewish Family believes that I have manipulated the Bedatz against them because they are convinced that I want to destroy them because of their delegitimizing Modern Orthodox rabbis with this rule.

Perhaps you were expressing your ire with the Bedatz who issued a public condemnation of EJF? Or perhaps you are concerned with the Israeli rabbinate which publicly rejects the validity of those rabbis who don't meet their standards?

Please clarify what your concern is.

Criticizing conversion organizations - debases all gerim?

Baruch has left a new comment on your post "A Deeper Look at the current EJF Website and Troub...":

As someone who studied for seven years for geirus, beginning at the age of 14, I am very involved with the controversies surrounding the issue. It should be noted that none of the batei din on this list are, to my knowledge, officially associated with EJF. Instead, the organization simply lists them as acceptable batei din organizations and run by those with deep knowledge of the issues and upstanding members who have studied under and/or gained the trust of rabbonim such as Harav Eliyashiv shlit"a, Harav Amar shlit"a, Harav Feinstein shlit"a, and Rav Eisenstein shlit"a. I was mentored and tutored under one of the batei din listed on the EJF list and never heard anything about EJF from them. Also, my geirus was done by a beis din listed on the list, who also never made any mention of the EJF organization. Please remember that whenever you cast doubts of batei din being able to carry out geirus as a whole, you cast doubts on people like me, who studied for years, adjusted to, adapted with, and completely became part of the Torah world and have complete committment to halacha without any "motivation" by a spouse or partner. I am not saying that geirus shouldn't be more closely watched, and that there shouldn't be more assurance that gerim are truly Torah-practicing people; in fact, it would make it better for people like me. However, I do feel that blanket statements, be they about baeti din or organizations, should not be made, as they cause people to look with unneeded suspicion towards true geirim, which only reminds us over and over that we weren't born Jews, something that is expressly forbidden time and time again by the Torah.

Lakewood baal teshuva marrano is Christian? III

Yeshiva World News

has some important updates to the story

Lakewood baal teshuva marrano is Christian? II

The Ger Tzedek who is a Levi, The Conservative Jew who is an Orthodox Rabbi, and The Christian College professor ordained by the Rabbinate of Israel -- an American Story

We are all familiar with the recent news story out of Lakewood NJ where Natan Levy was arrested as a fugitive from the FBI. It turned out that Mr. Levy was actually Ted Floyd, a Kansas gentile.

When the story first broke, Floyd was described by the Lakewood Rabbis as a Marrano who was a Baal Teshuvah and a Levi. This alone should raise questions since it is well known that Marranos are not Jewish. In their zest to collect a "frum" Jew, the Rabbis in Lakewood fully accepted that this man, who by his own admission wasn't raised Jewish, and they accepted him as both a full Jew and as a Levi.

After the story broke, a Rabbi Pinchas Aloof of Wichita Kansas was tracked down and he claimed that Floyd was a goy, but that he converted him and his wife. Aloof claimed he is an Orthodox Rabbi and it was an Orthodox conversion. The blog vosizneias reported "VIN News has now learned that the man in question, currently being held by the authorities for attempted passport fraud and identity theft, did in fact undergo a conversion by an Orthodox rabbi together with his wife in 2002.

VIN has located and contacted Rabbi Pinchas Aloof, who was serving the synagogue Congregation Ahavat Achim in Wichita, Kansas at the time Mr. and Mrs. Floyd underwent conversion—and who has vouched in a telephone conversation with VIN from his Texas home for the Floyds' authentic Jewish status and kosher conversion. "It was 100% kosher with a Beis Din, I was there; they both went trough the whole process 'al pi halacha'" says Rabbi Aloof."

Many visitors to that blog expressed fantastic relief that the truth was finally out! Of course, nobody seemed terribly troubled about the fact that this "Ger Tzedek" may have had ulterior motives (as a fugitive from justice) nor was anyone troubled that he arrived in Lakewood using the identity of a DEAD man and posed as a Levi. Nope, all the bloggers were glad that the Loshon Hora was being put to a stop and that this man's Jewishness was affirmed!

If anyone bothered to look a step further and do some basic internet searching, one would find that Aloof is NOT an Orthodox Rabbi, and there is no Beit Din in Wichita that could have done a proper conversion. Aloof has led more than one Conservative congregation, teaches at a Christian college, and his synagogue, which lacks a Mechitsa, is described as welcoming to people of all faiths. Some evidence is mounting that he might even be intermarried himself. Orthodox?

VIN claims further: "VIN News has confirmed that Rabbi Aloof received his semicha from the Rabbinate of Israel, and is a Talmud of Yeshivas Chofitz Chaim of Baltimore." From this we of course infer that the Rabbinate fully supports Rabbi Aloof and would of course accept the conversion of this man who converted while escaping the law and then later posed as a Marrano and Levi in Lakewood. I would love to see the Rabbinate make a statement either saying "this is our guy and we stand by him and this conversion" or "we made a mistake giving him Smicha and hereby revoke it" or "we never heard of him."

Time and time again we see Jewish Americans go to extreme lengths to find a way to accept any possible excuse to label Gentiles as the true Jews. Of course, the big question is "why?"

The answer may come from an unlikely source: Woody Allen, who said "I wouldn't want to be a member of any club who would have a person like ME as a member." American Jews feel great and empowered when a goy chooses to be Jewish. All of their dissatisfaction and insecurity about being Jewish evaporates when a goy wants to be part of the club. This is so important that the American Jews, and their Rabbis, truly do not care about the quality of the conversion, nor do they care even IF a conversion was done, in most cases. As long as we fill more seats and get more donations and bigger population numbers everything is good. Because Woody Allen is correct in his assessment of the American Jewish psyche, the logical cure to assimilation is to welcome the gentiles to our fold (their thinking, not mine).

That's one explanation. Of course the other explanation could just be that we have let so much Christian thought into our communities that now their value system is replacing ours.

Posted by: Bright Eyes

An unintentional intermarriage - Jewish Action Magazine

There is a good article on unintentional intermarriage in Jewish Action
concerning a woman who discovered that despite being raised as a Jew - she was not a Jew according to halacha.

Eternal Jewish Family conference in Argentina - canceled!

I was informed that the conference in Argentina has been canceled.

Lakewood baal teshuva marrano is Christian? I

http://www.vosizneias.com/

http://www.vosizneias.com/2008/03/lakewood-nj-shock-con-man-faking-as.html#links


http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=16018

Update - he is now reported to be a genuine ger
ynet disagrees

Eternal Jewish Family Conference in Argentina

The EJF will soon be having a conference in Argentina. I would appreciate receiving reports from those who attend as to what is said and decided there.

I would also like feedback as to the impact the ruling of the Bedatz against participlation in EJf has had.

Valid conversions are not always good for the Jewish people - Rabbeinu Bachye

[translated by R' Eliyahu Munk]

Rabbeinu Bachye[1](Devarim 21:14):. The sequences of our passages in this chapter are reminiscent of Isaiah 24,18 where the prophet tells us that when one has managed to escape one kind of terror, one will find oneself entrapped by a different kind of trap. The sum total of the moral/ethical teaching of these verses is that even marriages which are permitted by the Torah are not necessarily suitable union;. The marriages to prisoners of war are a prime example of such unions. Even though the women in question have converted to Judaism! This is not considered a complete (ideal) conversion. It is assumed that the woman in question converted out of fear, i.e. physical fear of otherwise being executed. Even when someone volunteers to become a proselyte with no pressure from any cases which we can detect, the sages (Yevamot 47) have instructed the judges performing the conversion to carefully examine the prospective proselyte’s background to determine if he or she is converting for ulterior motives, i.e. Not because of genuine religious conviction. Money, position, etc., may an be reasons which attract a Gentile to become Jewish. In the case of males more likely than not they have their eyes on a Jewish girl whom they wish to marry. Judiasm is different from other religions which are soul snatchers, missionary by definition. The reason is that we are a rational religion, not one which wishes to embrace all of mankind. Some of the other religions, Islam in particular, are imbued with th fervor to ram their beliefs down the throats of people whom they perceive to be pagans. Sometimes all kinds of enticements, both material and spiritual, are offered to the potential convert in order to get him to embrace a particular new fath. This is what Daniel already prophesied about (Daniel 7,20) “and a mouth speaking haughty words.” Daniel 7,25 also deals with the same phenomenon describing efforts at converting others to one’s belief being made my leaders of religious cults. In Daniel 11,36 Daniel harps on the same subject once more. Once the prospective convert to Judaism has been checked out and no ulterior motives have been discovered which would make us doubt his sincerity, he is advised of the yoke of Torah legislation and what is implied by joining the Jewish people. (Maimonides Hilchat Issurey Bi-ah 13,14). All of this is designed to make the prospective convert reconsider his plans to become Jewish. During the reign of David prospective converts were rejected as it was suspected that these converts were inspired by fear of the growing power of the Jewish state. In Solomon’s time they wele also not accepted as it was suspected that they were motivated by the affluence and security offered by King Solomon’s empire. (compare Maimonides Hilchot Issurey Bi-ah 13,14-15) Despite these rulings, there were many converts during the reign of David and Solomon, and once local courts had conducted such conversions and the converts had undergone ritual immersion the higher courts did not revoke these conversions. Although Solomon who married numerous women of pagan ancestry converted all them of.them prior to marrying them, and Shimshon too did not marry until after the lady had been converted, seeing these conversions were due to ulterior motives, scripture continues to describe the women in question as if they had remained Gentiles and sleeping with them was forbidden. The outcome of these “marriages.. testifies to the fact that they were flawed from the beginning. The Book of Kings accuses Solomon of building altars for the former deities his various foreign-born wives served, although he personally did nothing of the sort. The fact that he did not interfere with such goings on is placed at his doorstep. (compare Kings I chapter 11) our sages in Yevamot 47 that converts are as serious a plague for our sages in Yevamot 47 that converts are as serious a plague for the Jewih people as is the dreaded skin disease tzoraaat. The reason for this attitude is that experience has shown that the majority of converts abandoned their former religion only because of material advantages to be attained by becoming Jewish. Not only that, these converts have a habit of leading natural born Jews astray. Once these people have become legal converts. The first time such converts led the natural born Jews astray was during the episode of the golden calf, whereas a short time later the same thing occurred in Numbers 11,4 when.a group of peop\e described by Ihe Torah as asafsaf instigated the craving for meat which resulted in misearble death. Sifri Behaalotcha 86 attributes all this to these converts. Time and again such fair-weather converts have become the bane of our people. Just as we learned from the order in which these last few paragraphs have been arranged that one sin brings in its wake another sin, we can learn from another sequence of paragraphs that one commandment meticulously observed will bring in its wake the fulfillment of other commandments.

---

[1] רבנו בחיי (דברים כא:יד): ונסמכה לפרשה זו של יפת תואר פרשת כי תהיין לאיש שתי נשים האחת אהובה והאחת שנואה, ללמדך שאשת יפת תואר זו לא התירה התורה אלא בקושי גדול, ולא דיברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע, שהרי לסוף הוא שונא אותה, ואם יש לו בן ממנה יהיה בן סורר ומורה, לכך סמך לה כי יהיה לאיש בן סורר ומורה, וכן מצינו בדוד שלקח את מעכה בתו של תלמי מלך גשור בצאתו למלחמה יצא ממנו אבשלום שבקש להרגו, ושכב עם נשיו לעיני כל ישראל, ועשה כמה מחלוקת בישראל ונהרגו על ידו אלפים ורבבות מישראל. ועוד היה בזה מדה כנגד מדה, הוא חטא בבת שבע ונענש באבשלום בנו שהוא בנו של בת אל נכר, הוא שכתוב (שמואל ב יב, יא) הנני מקים עליך רעה מביתך. וסמיך ליה עוד פרשת וכי יהיה באיש חטא משפט מות והומת, ללמדך שאם ינצל מן הפחד ילכד בפח:

ולמדנו מתוך סמיכות פרשיות אלו שעבירה גוררת עבירה, שהרי נישואין הללו אינן ראוין, ואף על פי שנתגיירה אין זה גירות שלמה שלא עשתה כן אלא מיראה ומפחד החרב, שאפילו מי שבא להתגייר מעצמו אמרו חז"ל (יבמות מז.) שבודקין אחריו שמא בשביל ממון הוא מתגייר או בשביל שררה שיזכה בו או בשביל הפחד או בשביל חשק, ואם הוא איש שמא נתן עיניו באשה יהודית ואם היא אשה שמא עיניה נתנה בבחור מבחורי ישראל, זה דרך תורתנו, לא כשאר התורות שמחזרין אחר האומות ורוצים להרחיב אמונתם בהם, זו באה לנצח ולהתגבר בכח החרב לכל מי שימאן להאמין, וזו באה לנצח בכח הדברים ודברי חלקות ופתויין ויחפאו על ה' דברים אשר לא כן, והוא שהתנבא עליהם דניאל ופם ממלל רברבן (דניאל ז, ח), וכתיב (שם, כה) ומלין לצד עלאה ימלל וגו', ויסבר להשניה זמנין ודת, כלומר שיחשוב לשנות המועדים והתורה שלנו ולא יעלה בידו, זהו לשון ויסבר, וכתיב עוד (שם יא, לו) ועל אל אלים ידבר נפלאות. ואחר שבודקין אחריו ואין מוציאין לו עילה, מודיעין אותו עול המצוות והטורח שיש בעשייתן כדי שיפרוש:

ולפיכך לא קבלו גרים בימי דוד ושלמה, בימי דוד שמא מן הפחד חזרו, בימי שלמה שמא מחמת המלכות והטובה שהיו בה ישראל חזרו, שכל החוזר מן האומות בשביל דבר מהבלי העולם אינו מגרי הצדק, ואף על פי כן היו הגרים בימי דוד ושלמה הרבה, והיו בית דין הגדול חוששים להם, לא דוחין אותן אחר שטבלו מכל מקום, ולא מקבלין אותן עד שתראה אחריתן. ולפי שגייר שלמה נשים ונשאן, וכן שמשון גייר ונשא, והדבר ידוע שלא חזרו אלא בשביל תליית דבר ולא על פי בית דין גיירום, חשבן הכתוב כאילו הן נכריות ובאיסורן עומדות. ועוד שהוכיח סופן על תחילתן שהן היו עובדות העבודה זרה שלהן ובנו להן במות, והעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו הוא בנאן, שנאמר (מלכים א יא, ז) אז יבנה שלמה במה. ולכך דרשו חז"ל (יבמות מז ע"ב) קשים גרים לישראל כנגע צרעת, שרובן חוזרין בשביל דבר ומטעין את ישראל, וקשה הדבר לפרוש מהן אחר שנתגיירו, ובכל מקום מצינו שהיו הגרים לישראל סיבה למכשולות ונזקים, במדבר במעשה העגל ערב רב היו סיבה, וכן בשאלת הבשר והאספסוף אשר בקרבו (במדבר יא, ד), אלו הגרים, הם היו תחילה לכל הרעות וראשית מדון:

Where is the letter from HaRav Amar shlita that converts for the sake of marriage will be accepted in Israel?

Jersey Girl said...

[amicusEJf (the defender of Eternal Jewish Family) asked:]

"Are you suggesting that - ex post facto - the Bedatz would not accept the gerus of an intermarried spouse that had been performed under the auspices of R' Smuel Eliezer Stern, for example, of R' Wosner's Beis Din? Has this actually ever happened?"

A number of young men and women from our community who are the children of women who were converted for marriage have gone to learn in Israeli yeshivas and seminaries. From what I have personally seen, none were eligible to marry a Jew in Israel and were explicitly told so.

The only shidduchim I have seen among these families have been with others in the same boat. There are very few observant Jewish men who would marry a woman who is not accepted as a Jew in Israel.

I have also been told by my own Rav in Israel that I may not make shidduchim for people who are offspring of women converted for marriage, even with others in the same situation.

Do you know if any of the children of women converted for marriage by Rav Wosner or Rav Stern have been able to marry in Israel?

I personally think that it is very misleading if American Rabbis will perform conversions that will not be accepted in Israel. If you are not a Jew in Israel, what good is the conversion?

amicus EJF's defense of Eternal Jewish Family II

amicusEJF wrote:


Dear R' Eidensohn, shlita,

It's late and I am accompanying a close relative to surgery tomorrow morning, but let me try to hit a couple points now.

1) You wrote about the importance of sampling the visceral substrate in limited quantities.

I think you are right, as long as it is clearly labeled as such, which is indeed what you did with the original carmella corleone post. I think, however, that there was a week in which you presented RaP posts that stretched or violated this standard. We must remember that this blog does not exist in a vacuum; it exists in the blogosphere, which is a pretty foul place. Too much of that visceral substrate and this becomes a blog like any other blog. I can't imagine that Rav Moshe Shternbuch would sanction that under any circumstances.

2) Speaking of Rav Shternbuch, shlita: There are two parts of your list that I studiously avoided mentioning. One was the quote from Rav Shternbuch and the other was R' Tropper's criticism of you on the Abarbanel. I didn't feel and I don't feel that a public forum such as this blog is the place for these kind of things. Bemechilas kevodcha haram, I don't feel that publishing the quote from RMS is ultimately bekovodig towards him. As far as R' Tropper and RMS, I have to do some further checking. As far as his criticism of you on the Abarbanel, I have already taken that up with him directly.

I will say, though, that I disagree with the way you presented the Abarbanel's view. It's been a while since I went through it, but I do remember seeing a significant inaccuracy in that post. But that will have to wait for another time.

3) Burden of proof. I stand by what I wrote. It seems to make a lot of sense to me.

But you added something interesting: "The Bedatz represents an important group – whether you agree with them or not – whose acceptance or rejection clearly impacts the degree that the slogan “universal acceptance” is true. EJF can’t claim universal standards and then say to any part of the Jewish world - “I don’t have to justify myself to you because I really don’t care what you think – and I don’t care if you accept my conversions.” Universal standards which are only accepted by a part of the Orthodox world – are not universal standards! Isn’t that obvious?"

Are you suggesting that - ex post facto - the Bedatz would not accept the gerus of an intermarried spouse that had been performed under the auspices of R' Smuel Eliezer Stern, for example, of R' Wosner's Beis Din? Has this actually ever happened?
---------------------

amicusEJF added...

Sorry, I pushed the Publish button before I was done [and before I could proofread what I wrote]. Perhaps, though, I should stop here and carry on tomorrow.

March 13, 2008 7:07 AM

Eternal Jewish family's anonymous and unofficial defender promises to answer my criticism

Responding in the calm, respectful and intelligent manner which has characterized all of his correspondence, the anonymous unofficial defender of Eternal Jewish Family - amicusEJF - promises to reply to my criticism of Eternal Jewish Family.

This was received yesterday - March 10, 2008

amicusEJF said...

Dear R' Eidensohn, shlita,
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I apologize that I cannot reply in a timely fashion since there are several other matters demanding my attention right now. I hope to do so later today.

I really don't understand why their champion has to be anonymous and unofficial. It certainly conveys the message that they have something to hide. Alternatively it implies that they view criticism as a sign that the critic is deviant or at least motivated by the dark forces and therefore they are afraid of contamination.

Much of my criticism is related to the lack of transparency of EJF's operation. Given the high power public relations people they have access to it is astounding that they are doing such a poor job of public relations. Their web site is a prime example of ineffective and misleading information. I appreciate that they took it down and have tried to fix it - but they still are missing the point of a web site. It has improved in one major issue. They took down the incredible videos which justified conversion as a step to greater psychological family health or providing a basis for the non-Jewish father to share the experience of going to shul with his daughter or reducing the tension from a disapproving mother-in-law who doesn't want a non-Jewish daughter-in-law. These videos clearly conveyed the unfortunately message that conversion is a pragmatic psychological and sociological alternative and has little to do with sincere interest in Judaism and keeping mitzvos.

Response to AmicusEJF's criticisms of my blog and defense of EJF

AmicusEJF wrote:

”… I disagree with your decision to allow the carmella corleone post. I was also very disappointed with your decision to post that negative piece on Dr. Kaplan. I was very turned off from that and you may have noticed that I have barely commented since then. I believe that once you allow such supermarket tabloid style discussion, you have lowered the level of the blog to where many Jewish blogs are: in the gutter.”

I am sorry that the comments on this blog offend you. As I have alluded to before – there are basically two types of posting – one which records facts or opinions which purport to describe reality. As you yourself note this is an accurate description of most of what is posted on this blog. On the other hand there are postings here which convey the emotional reality or visceral substrate. I think that this has to be sampled also – though in only in limited quantities. This point is relevant to your subsequent comments.

You say: Why does EJF rely on anonymous spokesmen? ... In other words are these individuals actual spokesmen who are in fact representing Rabbi Tropper - but he doesn't want their identity revealed?

Speaking for myself, while I am a friend of EJF, and a volunteer who tries to help out with some things, R' Tropper has not sent me as a spokesman. Quite the opposite, he has questioned the usefulness of commenting on blogs and trying to correct errors and misimpressions on a blog. Since I have followed your [R' Eidensohn's] work over some years [Yad Moshe, Yad Yisroel, Daas Torah, many Avodah forum postings], I have a great respect for you. I thought that, even though this is a blog, it is different: It is R' Eidensohn's blog. It may be a house in a slummy neighborhood, but it is a talmid chacham's house. But then I saw that long innuendo-filled post against Dr. Kaplan, and I said to myself: Maybe, R' Tropper was right. And as I type these words in the "Leave your comment" box just to the left of carmella corleone's miasmic jeers, I don't know if I will comment here too much longer. And that is a shame, because I think there is value in answering sincere questions about EJF and in learning from valid criticisms.

While you seem to debate by the Marquis of Queensbury’s rules – Rabbi Tropper does not. While you speak in righteous indignation about the mud being slung at Rabbi Tropper and company – you don’t seem to be bothered by the mud he slings. Your defensive reading of his slur against me regarding my citation of the Abarbanel in my sefer Daas Torah – was a creative reading – but patently missed the point. I also sent you a copy of the correspondence I had with him. It was surely cut of the same cloth as those posts you found offensive when directed at Eternal Jewish Family. Yet you haven’t expressed any concern about them. You might also note in the correspondence that I informed Rabbi Tropper that he had written an inappropriate letter to Rav Sternbuch. He said he would send an apology. Last time I checked Rav Sternbuch had not received it. Perhaps you might remind him. Or are you saying that slinging mud is permitted in emails but not on blogs?

In sum – Rabbi Tropper is a tough political fighter and sometimes the offense he causes can best be dealt with by responses in kind. I personally do not question his motivation and sincerity – but other sincere individuals clearly do.

So let's return, in the meantime, to your post. You write: Or are they self-appointed representatives because Rabbi Tropper doesn't feel the need to explain the true nature of his operations... why doesn't Rabbi Tropper want to clarify and justify what he is doing? Well, clarify and justify to whom? To this blog? As explained above, he questions the utility of that, and with carmella on my screen, I can't say he's wrong. To the Bedatz? There I think you have a good point. If he were seeking the Bedatz's haskomah, then it would be incumbent upon him to clarify and justify his operations to their satisfaction. [I have no idea if that was ever attempted, but judging from what you have written, I would assume not.] On the other hand, if the Bedatz wants to publish an opinion on the EJF, I would suggest that, as part of their derishah and chakira, they or their people would call up talmidei chachamim who are heavily involved with EJF's operations, such as Rav Reuven Feinstein or Rav Shmiel Eliezer Stern of Rav Wosner's Beis Din, to understand what the clarifications and justifications are. This may have happened, I don't know. They may have not been satisfied with these and decided to oppose EJF. That is their prerogative.

I find it rather strange that EJF feels the burden of proof is on those who question them. When a major innovation is introduced into a mesora based society – the obligation is on the innovator to justify it. Why is it only necessary to respectfully communicate when seeking a haskomah? EJF’s widely trumpeted goal is universally accepted conversion.” The Bedatz represents an important group – whether you agree with them or not – whose acceptance or rejection clearly impacts the degree that the slogan “universal acceptance” is true. EJF can’t claim universal standards and then say to any part of the Jewish world - “I don’t have to justify myself to you because I really don’t care what you think – and I don’t care if you accept my conversions.” Universal standards which are only accepted by a part of the Orthodox world – are not universal standards! Isn’t that obvious?

To clarify and justify to the public at large? Well, that's exactly what I am trying to do here unofficially. Officially, they have printed a two-page spread in Hamodia and reprinted it in the Jewish Press. Also, they are working on redoing their website. My hope is that, one day, you should be able to find the clarifications and justifications you seek over there. But that two page spread was important. I suggest that you make a pdf file of it and make it available here.

Why is a public relations campaign in the Jewish Press considered a desirable part of EJF’s public relations – but satisfying the Bedatz’s legitimate concerns is not? If you have a pdf of the ad I would like to see it and maybe would even put it on this blog – but I would like it even more if there was a delegation sent to the Bedatz to calmly discuss what is going on.

You write about: to pursue or activiely persuade someone to convert and spending millions of dollars to persuade the nonJewish spouse to convert.

This is old ground. I have already written that these are moot points since EJF is not the first contact for gerus candidates. EJF deals only with referrals. Call them up and pretend to be a goy wishing to convert. They will send you to a local Rav. It is the local Rav or kiruv worker who must deal with the issues of rebuffing, admitting or pursuing a candidate for gerus. There is a lot to be said on that, but it's all moot as far as EJF's own programs.

This is indeed old ground and unfortunately your answers have not satisfactorily answered these questions. As has been pointed out there is an significant dissonance between what Rabbi Tropper claims he is doing and what other evidence describes.

On that point, I must add that although you write I was also given the astonishing response of "Why is it prohibited", you wrote above that you agreed that there was no prohibition!

Here it is:

In a recent intensive exchange of e-mails, I asked Rav Tropper the halachic rulings of Rav Moshe Feinstein he claims as the basis for EJF’s activities. His response was, “Why do you think it is prohibited?” This is an astounding justification for a radical break with the past. While in fact it is not explicitly prohibited – this radical innovation of spending millions of dollars to convince non‑Jews to convert presents serious dangers to the Jewish people. It requires acceptance or rejection through scholarly discussion in peer-reviewed responsa - as innovations have been justified in the past.

Daniel Eidensohn Ph.D.

Now, I agree with your point that those who reach out to gentiles in intermarriages spouses [not EJF, not EJF] need to explain what seems to be a radical innovation. But you yourself admit that they are not doing away with an explicit prohibition. That is a valid subject for discussion. Is an intermarried gentile better than a stam goy in this respect, or perhaps worse, as I suspect the Bedatz holds. Please call Rav Reuven Feinstein to discuss this [and other matters] with him. Please don't answer that you demand a written teshuvah and until he sends one out, you will not go to him. Please don't let it be a situation of "Hatziree ein biGilad, im rofei ein sham."

I can’t believe a yeshiva educated Orthodox Jew would be making the above statement. Since when are major changes in conversion so lightly justified? I cited Rav Chaim Ozer and Rav Moshe Feinstein and Rav Menashe Klein strongly disapproving of this procedure – even though there is no explicit issur. Similarly there are other poskim such as the Tzitz Eliezar who object to it. Again your insistence that EJF is not proselytizing is belied by the material I have collected on my blog as well as the interview Rabbi Tropper gave to Mishpacha magazine. I don’t see that it is appropriate for me to be the intermediate between Rav Reuven Feinstein and the Bedatz. Why can’t Rav Reuven Feinstein – who is the official director of EJF – simply write a response and send it to the Bedatz?

Now, you have an excellent point in that quote in Hebrew Mishpocha. Could you please provide the Hebrew original before I pursue that further? I have covered several points here, directly or indirectly, and I hope that helps you and others understand EJF's stance, at least to the degree that I understand it.

Kol tuv, amicusEJF

I am surprised that you can’t get a copy from Rabbi Tropper. Again I do not find your explanation – and it is just your explanation not that of Rabbi Tropper – satisfactory. If R’ Tropper can’t provide the text I will – bli neder- scan the material.