Jewish Press editorial - Continuing Conversion Crisis

The Jewish Press just ran an editorial lamenting the current conversion crisis. While it does summarize the different views it offers no solution.

=======================

In a recent series of editorials spanning several months, this page has been drawing attention to an emerging crisis regarding conversions in Israel. The crisis has largely been caused by a government initiative intended to promote mass conversions of Russian immigrants to Judaism in order to increase the “Jewish” population of Israel.
This initiative was undertaken despite the halachic imperative that conversions are ordinarily to be discouraged and in any event subject to the exacting requirements of Jewish law. That is, if the procedures are not scrupulously followed, the ostensible converts are not Jewish, with all that brings with it.
This past week the issue emerged in full fury with a clash between the governmental agency – the so-called Conversion Authority – charged with increasing the number of Jews through conversions and the rabbinic court charged with implementing the exacting halachic standards for conversions. Israel’s Supreme Rabbinical Court voted to uphold an Ashdod bet din’s nullification of a woman’s conversion to Judaism on the grounds that at the conversion proceeding she was never asked whether she agreed to abide by all halachic requirements. Also, the court took judicial notice that the overwhelming majority of Russian immigrants converted under the auspices of the Conversion Authority were not observant – which the court said cast doubt on the procedures followed by the Conversion Authority. In addition, the conversions presided over by the rabbinic head of the Conversion Authority were held to be presumptively suspect because he had allegedly certified at least one conversion at which he had not been present.
[....]
(click on link for full article).

Read more >> Options >>

Knesset member against Supreme Rabbinical Court rejection of Rav Druckmans' conversions

Recipients and Publicity wrote:

Opposing view against Rav Sherman's ruling from a Knesset member published in Haaretz
(click on link for full article)
=============================
The opposition to the Supreme Rabbinical Court ruling is not just from the Religious Zionist/Modern Orthodox rabbis. It also comes from the Israeli/Zionist secular society.
May 10, 2008

A split from Israeli society

By MK Menachem Ben Sasson Kadima) is the chairman of the Knesset's Constitution, Law and Justice Committee.

The Supreme Rabbinic Court's ruling last week, which voided conversions carried out by the rabbinic courts of the Conversion Administration, only speeds up the collapse of rabbinic authority in the state judicial system.

The verdict may be framed in legalese, but it should not be misunderstood. Every one of its 49 pages may be headed "The State of Israel," but the pronouncement represents nothing less than a split from Israeli society, the state and the national justice system.

The rabbinic courts' opponents should be pleased with this verdict and wait patiently for a few others like it to topple the rabbinic court system altogether.

Institutional authority in modern society does not derive merely from an institution's official status, nor from its formal power. It is based mainly on public consensus and the understanding that without proper institutions, people would devour each other.

The Supreme Rabbinic Court's ruling does not only void a specific decision by the conversion court but stipulates that its judges, rabbis Haim Druckman and Yosef Avior, are unfit and all their conversions are null and void. The Rabbinic Court is invalidating a legal instance that derives its formal authority from the same source as the Rabbinic Court - an official state appointment. By so doing, it leads the way to having its own courts treated in a similar fashion.

[...]

The loss of confidence in religious institutions is being accelerated mainly because of the distress of non-Jewish immigrants. They were given a partial remedy in the form of the conversion courts. Now the Supreme Rabbinic Court is obstructing the only two ways some 400,000 Israeli citizens can integrate into Israeli society - marriage and conversion.

[...]

Pulling the rug out from under the feet of yesterday's converts and digging a hole in front of tomorrow's is unacceptable. It will shatter what's left of the public consensus that the Supreme Rabbinic Court is worthy of running family issues in Israel. The court's revoking past and future conversions is tantamount to destroying the house and everyone inside.

Canadian perspective on the conversion crisis

The Canadian Jewish News presents a survey of responses to the ruling of the Supreme Rabbinical Court against Rav Druckman's conversions.
=================================
Conversion controversy rears head in Israel

By PAUL LUNGEN, Staff Reporter

Thursday, 15 May 2008

A decision by a haredi rabbinic appeal court in Israel has called into question the legitimacy of thousands of conversions by a respected Israeli halachic authority and prompted a heated and strongly worded rebuke from an Orthodox rabbis’ group.

At the same time, two rabbis associated with the Toronto Vaad Harabonim (Orthodox rabbinical council) say the Israeli decision will likely have no impact on conversions approved by the council’s beit din (rabbinical court).

In Montreal, meanwhile, the Israeli decision received the full support of the Orthodox Jewish Community Council, whose spokesperson, Rabbi Saul Emanuel, said “we will honour and respect this judgement.”

[Click on the link for the full article]

Jewish attitude towards gerim as manifested towards the Erev Rav

Recipients and Publicity has raised an important point regarding the nature of gerus. What are the lessons to be learned from the Erev Rav? He asserts in the following excerpt [from a longer comment] that we learn a postive attitude because Moshe accepted as converts those who would not meet modern standards - and he never apologized to G-d for this decision. His assertions involve a number of major concerns as to how we learn lessons from our Mesora - both written and oral. He also has expressed irritation about being misunderstood and therefore I want to allow him to clarify the issues here I am also including some of the comments related to this issue. While it is obvious that we are in serious disagreement - I think we have much to gain by focusing on his assertions. [Useful Kabbalistic source material is found on Mishpat Tzedek ]
==========================
Recipients and Publicity wrote
While the hysteria against accepting converts to Judaism gains steam bordering on irrational xenophobia, and while a number of very limited and parochial arguments may make some sense, and while no Orthodox rabbi or Jew in his right mind denies that the Halachah, meaning Kabolas ol mitzvas by the ger, must remain the only guidepost and criterian in this arena, YET, nevertheless one must also have in mind what the Torah, Tanach and the various eras of the Jewish history teach us.

[...]


Then it was Moshe Rabbeinu who took out the eruv rav (mixed multitude) from Egypt who the Jewish sages say were converted. The mixed multitude caused many problems but even at the worst time of the egel (golden calf) Moshe never apologised to G-d for taking them out of Egypt when G-d called them (the eruv rav) "your" (i.e. Moshe's) nation. Moshe's attitude to the eruv rav is puzzling and fascinating and why he saw fit to accept them is even more of a challenge to comprehend, but the fact remains that he accepted mixed types of non-Israelite people from Egypt who would not meet many of today's conversion standards ab initio if they were to be judged by Rav Shternbuch for example. Perhaps it was because Moshe understood the nature of TRUE geirei tzedek: He was rescued by the daughter of Paroh who came to be called Basya (duaghter of G-d) for her act of saving the infant baby in the Nile who would become the redeemer of the Jews from Egypt, or perhaps it was because Moshe married Tzipora who was a convert and that later Moshe's father-in-law Yitro became the first major convert after the giving of the Torah.


Recipients and Publicity also said...

I had no idea that what is recorded in the Torah and Tanach needs more sources.

I was also not endorsing and supporting the acceptance of any gentile who wishes to become a ger with a blank check.

My main point, in the eye of this storm of disputes and your for request sources of all sorts, is that one must NOT forget what the Torah and Tanach had the honesty and openess to retain and not hide for the record that from the times of Avraham and Sarah until the present time that Judaism is not a religion that is closed off to anyone

So it is strange you ask for sources because your sources are only SECONDARY SOURCES whereas the sources I cite are the core original PRIMARY SOURCES !!!!

===============
I objected to his analysis with the following


I think we finally have reached the basis of our disagreement on many issues.
I have never heard an Orthodox Jew describe Chazal or Rishonim or Achronim as secondary sources. You are presenting a fundamentalist literal reading of Tanach as superior to one that is viewed through the eyes of our Sages as well as Rishonim and Achronim.

While this is the understanding of some academics, maskillim and karaites - it is simply not acceptable to anyone I know who calls himself an Orthodox Jew.

"Keep your children from higayon" Rashi explains that you should not educate your children to understand Tanach independent of the explanation of our Sages.[Berachos 28b]

Recipients and Publicity responded to my criticism

To Daas Torah of May 13, 2008 11:14 PM:

As far as I know, this Blog is not a kindergarten nor is it a place to get lectured about where or how to start an intelliegent discussion(and all that these things on this Blog are is just discussions, for none of us are poskim).

I challenge you: How can anyone claim to be an learned Orthodox Jew if they do not accept the Torah and Tanach as the devar H-shem?

Can you point out where I am being too "literalist" for you? Were Avraham and Sarah not geirim and called by the sages (not by the Torah) techila legerim? Does not Rashi (not the Torah) say, quoting Chazal that Batya was coming down to the Nile to convert when she spotted Moshe? Were not Tzipora and her father gerim and does not Rashi and the Ramban discuss at what point did Yisro come to Moshe and convert? The conversion of Ruth and the principle that allowed it of "moavi velo mo'aviya" is not in the Tanach, it is the chazal who teach about it. The sages and kabbalists themselves struggle to understand why the soul of mashiach has to come from "sparks" hidden in alien people like Ruth who is the one to be the mother of royalty and not a "meyucheses from a Chasidic dynasty" and it is not in the Tanach. Why Shlomo did what he did is just as good a question as asking why Rav Druckma did what he did, if not better. I had no idea that Yiddishkeit prohibted questions of this kind, unless you have an aganda of course to destroy other Jews who hold by Religious Zionism that was not founded by me (and I do not support Mizrachi for the record) but by gedolim like Rav Reines and Rav Kook and Rav JB Soloveichik, even though they were a minorty they matter because Yiddishkeit does not crush genuine opposing views. It is not the Tanach that says that Nevuzaradan converted but it is in the Gemora, and it is also the Gemora that says that Nero went off to become a ger as did many others who were like the famous Rebbe Meir in the mishna as far as I heard it explained. Is all this too much for you that you must resort to lines like "While this is the understanding of some academics, maskillim and karaites - it is simply not acceptable to anyone I know who calls himself an Orthodox Jew."? What a great pity!

I had no idea that "Chazal or Rishonim or Achronim" rejected the Torah and the Tanach, and nowhere is what I stated solely based on either the Torah or the Tanach alone -- I have striven mightily to combine the words of the Torah SheBichtav with the Torah SheBeal Peh -- and you can go ahead and read for yourself again very carefully that I have included Chazal (from multiple Midrashim) or Rishonim (many Rashis and at least one Rambam) or Achronim (Kabbalists) and even relying on modern day gedolim, such as Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky, Rav Hutner, and others who URGE and ENCOURAGE the learning of Tanach, as well quoting Tannoim and Amoroim from the Gemora and the Talmud.

While for the sake of keeping the flow of my presentation moving I may not have specifically mentioned the names of Rashi's and other Gemoras, they are very present and evident to the knowledgeable reader and they are plentiful in my above comments and you can see that for yourself, so that you are being too DISMISSIVE (a bad habit, even for one claiming to talk for Daas Torah) and much too rough and abrupt in your rejection of my words (similar to your description of my words as "paranoid" when you disliked some earlier comments) rather than showing me word for word that what I have said is not true which is not the case.

Recipients and Publicity wrote to Bright Eyes

Your points about the eruv rav are off the mark. I was not saying and the chumash does not say that they asked to be part of the Israelites or that they should or shouldn't be counted as Israelites. That was not my point in this regard.

What I was saying was that nowhere in the Chumash did Moshe apologise to H-shem for his decision to take the eruv rav out of Egypt with the Bani Yisrael (and it was a jailbreak for EVERYONE by the way because Paroh fought against the Jews' leaving Egypt and even pursued them... do you even understand basic Chumash?) and at no point is there a command to kill them. They remain as the eruv rav, and there are midrashim that say that the eruv rav converted, regardles of how you wish to understand or misunderstand that.

No one says that they were tsadikim either, that is also not the point, just that they were not as bad as Amelek that needed to be killed out as the Torah commanded.

Supreme Rabbinical Court ruling - English summary

Rebbitzen's Husband has posted an extensive English summary of the 55 page Hebrew ruling of the Rabbinical Supreme Court. From the parts I have read it seems to be an excellent job. For part I click here

Judaism as a missionary religion?

While there is heated debate within Orthodox circles regarding the standards of conversion - there are others who would accept anyone who wants to be Jewish or thinks they are Jewish. In addition they want to actively proselytize. This is an excerpt of an article in Haaretz. The director Dr. Tobin is also associated with Rabbi Vinas

==============================================

U.S. think-tank aims to infuse Jewish life with dashes of color

_{By Rebecca Spence, The Forward Correspondent}

SAN FRANSISCO - Go to almost any Jewish conference and you'll likely find the ethnic makeup to be largely, and unsurprisingly, white.

But at a recent plenum in San Francisco, a group championing ethnic diversity in Jewish life turned that situation on its head, as scores of black, Latino and Asian Jews from around the world came together to grapple with the challenges they face gaining acceptance in the mainstream Jewish world.

The group of 80 Jewish leaders from 31 different countries - including Uganda, South Africa and Portugal - who gathered the first weekend this month for the Be'Chol Lashon International Think Tank had one clear message for the Jewish community: Open your doors to diversity. The sixth annual event, organized by Be'Chol Lashon - a Bay Area initiative dedicated to fostering diversity in Jewish life - and fittingly held at the Hotel Kabuki in the heart of San Francisco's Japantown, centered this year on questions of conversion and whether Judaism might take a more proactive role in gaining adherents.


As demographic studies in recent years have shown a shrinking American Jewish population, the organized Jewish community has poured millions of dollars into strengthening identity in young Jews. But the mainstream response to the so-called population crisis, which has resulted in a slew of identity-building projects - among them, Birthright Israel, a program that takes tens of thousands of American Jews in their teens and 20s on free trips to the Jewish state - is not the solution, according to Diane and Gary Tobin, co-founders of Be'Chol Lashon. The organization, whose name is Hebrew for "in every tongue," was established eight years ago in the wake of the Tobins' 1997 adoption of an African American boy.

Gary Tobin, a Jewish researcher who is president of San Francisco's Institute for Jewish & Community Research, contends that only through welcoming converts of all ethnicities and breaking down the barriers to conversion will the Jewish people be able to reverse the trend of dwindling population numbers. Tobin is referring not just to welcoming converts who are married to Jews, but also to reaching out to non-Jews generally.

"If we think that going to Jewish day school or trips to Israel are going to save the Jewish people, it's just silly," Tobin said. "The response of the organized Jewish community has been to circle the wagons, and what this room represents is the possibility of expansion, not constriction,? he said, referring to the conference participants.

The driving philosophy behind Be'Chol Lashon, Tobin added, is that Jews should, in fact, "be competing in the marketplace of world religion." If Jews began reaching out across color lines, the number of Jews in America alone could increase, over the next quarter of a century, to 12 million from 6 million, he said.

Due to Chief Rabbi Amar's silence - rabbis delay converts' marriages

The following appeared in the Jerusalem Post. Clink on the link for the full article.

Rabbis delay converts' marriages

by Matthew Wagner , THE JERUSALEM POST May. 11, 2008

Rabbis responsible for registering Jewish Israelis for marriage said Sunday they would not register converts for marriage until Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar issues a definitive rejection of a High Rabbinical Court decision that cast doubt on the validity of thousands of conversions.

"Before I can register a convert for marriage as a full-fledged Jew, I'll have to consult with Chief Rabbi Amar," said Rabbi Ratzon Arussi, chairman of the Rabbinate's Marriage Council.

Rabbis in Ramat Gan and Jerusalem concurred with Arussi's call.

"Rabbi Amar has to voice his opinion on this issue," said Ramat Gan Chief Rabbi Ya'acov Ariel. "He is the final authority on conversions."

[...]

Several days after the decision was published, Amar issued a general statement that all conversion would be recognized. But Amar did not directly address the accusations raised by Sherman against Druckman.

Rabbis want Amar to issue a clear halachic decision on the status of conversions carried out by Druckman.

Amar's spokesman said the chief rabbi intends to convene the Chief Rabbinate's governing council to discuss the issue and reach a definitive decision. But before the council can be convened new elections must be called.

[...]

Eternal Jewish Family supports Supreme Rabbinical Court ruling against Rabbi Druckman's conversions

Eternal Jewish Family issued a statement strongly supporting the ruling of the Supreme Rabbincal Court against Rabbi Druckman's conversions. Click on links for full article and comments.

The International Committee on Giyur, founded by the late Rabbi Chaim Kreiswirth, Chief Rabbi of Antwerp, has issued a strong letter of support for the decision by the Rabbinical Supreme Court of the Chief Rabbinate invalidating all conversions performed since 1999 by Rabbi Chaim Drukman, the head of the Conversion Authority. The Committee, which is headed by Rabbi Nachum Eisenstein, said that only converts that “accept mitzvos at the time of giyur” may be considered halachacially converted. It noted that “even if it becomes clear that the ger did not accept mitzvos at the time of giyur and subsequently did observe mitzvos, the conversion is invalid.”
[...]
The Eternal Jewish Family (EJF) in a statement said that the large number of conversions that were recently ruled invalid by the Rabbinical Supreme Court is “further proof of the urgency of adopting universal conversion standards that are based on the opinions of major halachic authorities.” EJF is the leading international organization that has been in the forefront of promulgating universal conversion standards in intermarriage under the guidance of leading Gedolei Hatorah in the US and Israel.

Rabbi Marc Angel defends Rabbi Druckman and elucidates his agenda

We read with horror that the High Rabbinical Court of Israel has upheld a lower court decision which declared invalid all conversions performed since 1999 by Rabbi Haim Drukman, head of the Conversion Authority of Israel.

As Orthodox rabbis, we believe that this decision is motivated by political interests rather than by the search for Halachic integrity and religious truth. The outcome is morally repugnant, and is an outrage to Rabbi Drukman and his colleagues who are attempting, within the confines of Halacha, to resolve a fundamental challenge to the social and religious well-being of the Jewish State - the religious integration into the Jewish People of hundreds of thousands of Russian non-Jews living in Israel as full citizens, loyal to the State and to the People of Israel.

This decision is an abuse of rabbinic power, highly detrimental to the well-being of the Jewish people.

We affirm that all those who have converted under the aegis of R. Drukman and the Conversion Authority of Israel, are Jewish without question. To oppress them by casting doubt on their Jewish status is a sin of the first magnitude, an express violation of multiple Biblical commandments.

We urge the State of Israel, the worldwide Orthodox Rabbinate and the Jewish people at large to repudiate this decision of the High Rabbinical Court of Israel; to affirm the Jewishness of all Halachic converts; to treat all converts with the love and respect to which they are entitled according to the laws of Torah.

Rabbi Avraham Weiss and Rabbi Marc D. Angel, Co-Chairmen, International Rabbinic Fellowship

Rabbi Saul Berman, Chairman, International Rabbinic Fellowship Geirut Committee

Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, Chief Rabbi of Efrat

--
Rabbi Marc D. Angel, Founder and Director
Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals
8 West 70th Street
New York, NY 10023
212 362 4764

Significant objections to Rabbi Druckman's conversions are not new

One gets the impression reading many of the comments about the current conversion crisis - that it is simply politics - with Rabbi Druckman the victim because he is not chareidi.

Unfortunately this is not the case. There have been serious objections to Rabbi Druckman's conversions for many years - on the basis of halachic concerns as well as legal ones.

De'ah veDibur (a.k.a Yated) reported the following in 2006

De'ah veDibur reported the following in 2007

De'ah veDibur reported the following in 2000

De'ah veDibur reported the following in 1999

Jonathan Rosenblum Yated 2006

Haaretz 2004 complained he wasn't being allowed to liberalize conversion

RCA condemns psak of Supreme Rabbinical Court invalidating Rabbi Druckman's conversions

[The following was just posted on the RCA web site.]

May 6, 2008 -- Leviticus 19:33 : "You (plural) shall not oppress the convert in your land."
Commentary of the Netziv: "The plural form of the verse teaches us that a third party who sees the oppression of a convert and does not protest is also guilty of oppression."

The Rabbinical Council of America, having taken note of the recent ruling of the Bet Din Elyon (Rabbinic Court of Appeals) of Israel, nullifying certain conversions performed by the State Conversion Authority led by Rabbi Chaim Druckman, has today issued the following statement:

Having reviewed the ruling of the Bet Din Elyon in detail, and being fully mindful of the respect due the rulings of duly constituted rabbinical courts in their respective jurisdictions, the RCA finds it necessary to state for the record that in our view the ruling itself, as well as the language and tone thereof, are entirely beyond the pale of acceptable halachic practice, violate numerous Torah laws regarding converts and their families, create a massive desecration of God's name, insult outstanding rabbinic leaders and halachic scholars in Israel, and are a reprehensible cause of widespread conflict and animosity within the Jewish people in Israel and beyond. The RCA is appalled that such a ruling has been issued by that court.

We have been assured by Israel's Chief Rabbi Rav Shlomo Moshe Amar, who is also the President of the Rabbinical Courts System of Israel, that in releasing this ruling the court in question directly countermanded his instructions and policies. He has confirmed that the ruling has no legal standing at this time. We commend Rav Amar for his positive role in this matter since its very inception in the Ashdod regional court.

We add our rabbinic voice to those of others who have called for a thorough review and repudiation of the actions of a select few of the Bet Din Elyon, who in this ruling as in other previous instances, have sought to undermine the Conversion Authority.

For this reason, and others, it is more important than ever that the Conversion Authority be strengthened in its important work in bringing about halachicly proper conversions to our faith and to the Jewish people.

Given the very public nature of the challenge posed by the ruling in question, we call on the Chief Rabbis of Israel to reaffirm their support of the Conversion Authority and its leadership in clear and unambiguous terms at the earliest possible time. Until that will happen, each passing day will cause reprehensible anguish to halachic converts, irreparable harm to the fabric of the Jewish people, and a considerable debasement of the good name of Torah, halachah, and tradition.

The controversy is about values - not about being part of the modern society per se

Itamar Ross wrote:

For once, I agree with your blog. Though it is not just a clash between charedim and Zionists per se, but also between charedim and modern society in general.

I quote the following from the excellent blog of Rabbi Prof. Jeffrey Woolf of Bar-Ilan University, a talmid of Rav Soloveitchik zt"l (http://myobiterdicta.blogspot.com/):


=======================
I am not sure what there is to agree or disagree with my blog. Since I am mainly trying to present and clarify issues. I don't claim that I know THE answer. If there are legitimate viewpoints that you think I have left out - feel free to present them. The impetus for this blog came because I could not get a simple answer from EJF as to what the halachic basis of their activies is.

In addition it is not a clash between chareidim and modern society per se. As if somehow the chareidim are primitives who would rather remain in their caves. This is a clash of values. Zionism versus the traditional understanding of conversion. It doesn't help the situation to question the integrity and competence of chareidi gedolim.


I found the comments of Prof. Woolf to be rather problematic and intemperate - at least on this issue. I generally find him to be very erudite and balanced on other issues. In fact I deleted his comments which occurred in the Jerusalem Post article because aside from expressing rage and moral indignation they didn't express much insight into what is actually going on. The rest of the JPost article was right on the money.

Instead of heaping scorn on the many rabbis who disagree with Rabbi Druckman and his concept of gerus - it would be more valuable to acknowledge that there are in fact strongly held and incompatible fundamental differences in values between the Religious Zionists and the Chareidi world.

The Balkanization of the religious groups might be the obvious solution to you but it would spell the end of the concept of one Jewish people - henceforth it would be multiple Jewish peoples.

Israel is too small and the world is too interconnected for your solution to be viable.

Supreme Rabbinical Court ruling - full text

Failedmessiah has a link to the High Court's Ruling

A more realistic understanding of the conversion crisis

Bright Eyes responds to RaP:

RaP makes a very interesting case.

The Supreme Rabbinical Court in Israel has concluded in what is certainly a thoroughly analyzed decision (50 pages worth) that Rabbi Druckman's conversions were performed illegally.

RaP says that if we do not accept these illegal conversions, then bad physical things will likely happen to the Jewish people (such as Civil War), and specifically to the people who are responsible for making and supporting these rulings, "the life you save, may be your own."

Put another way, the goal of RaPs argument is to cause Jews to accept illegal conversions (aka goyim) for the sake of their own protection.

This way of thinking is the basis of strong arm organized crime globally. This is the whole logic behind "protection money."

I am in the U.S. and have intentionally stayed ignorant of Israeli politics for my entire adult life because I have observed that the more one knows about it, the more one argues and gets upset.

However, one cannot avoid hearing the well informed argue, and from what I gather Bedatz, the Rabbanut, and the RCA can all be described as opposite corners of a triangle, and that neither Bedatz nor the Rabbanut accept the other as an authority.

So, the notion that the Supreme Religious Court's ruling of last week was somehow orchestrated by people at Bedatz seems absurd.

Also, I don't think that Rabbi Eidensohn posted the Syrian Takana in order to endorse it. Throughout these last few months, Rabbi Eidensohn has posted various aspects to the question of how conversion is viewed and handled and opened the topic to discussion. The Syrian Takana was one of many viewpoints posted.

There were so many viewpoints presented, it is clearly impossible for any one human being to embrace them all.

RaPs general thrust seems to be that of the Religious Humanist, which is that popular sentiment should be the decisor of religious law and practice.

While he makes a nice defense of Rabbi Druckman as a "mainstream" Rabbi, this does not exempt Rabbi Druckman from needing to follow Halacha. If a court comprised of properly competent judges has determined that his Conversion proceedings have not followed the law, Rabbi Druckman's public standing and reputation is not a factor in the difference between legal and illegal.

In the Christian world, senior clergy, such as the Pope, are "infallible" and above reproach. Not so in Judaism.

It alarms me to see RaP judging entire segments of the Jewish people using Christian standards of "good and evil."

He has made it quite clear that anyone who he sees as not being open enough, such as the "Haredim", Syrians, and various Hasidic groups, are all defined as bad because of this characteristic. He also labels them as such based on false information.

Again and again he accuses the Syrians in particular of not accepting converts even though he is repeatedly presented evidence that they do indeed accepts genuine converts.

RaP makes it appear as though Rabbi Eidensohn and Bedatz (whose Rabbonim are really just easily controlled puppets of Rabbi Eidensohn) has done a bad thing by not publicizing the list of Rabbis who received private mail from Bedatz. In other words, because Rabbi Eidensohn would not smear many Rabbis who have done nothing wrong (remember, the letters spoke as warnings against future behavior, and were not judgments against past behavior), he is one of the bad guys!

His argument makes it clear that he considers nobody to be a religious authority. He likes the RCA and says they would never accept Bedatz's standards, yet ignores the fact that the RCA has already accepted those standards by agreeing to the newly published standards of the Rabbanut (who in this case appears to be in agreement with Bedatz).

Regarding the RCA, he says that they "would not accept the standards of the BADATZ and it would drive a wedge with the American communities where the real problems of intermarriages and fuzzy conversions exists." In other words, he feels that the RCA will not accept any ruling that disqualifies intermarriages and "fuzzy" conversions. If I were an RCA Rabbi, I would be highly offended!

People who support Halacha and disqualify fraudulent conversions are now like Nazi's to him! That's quite a viewpoint. Since when is "breach of contract" a racial issue? All Jewish communities accept converts. RaP would have us believe otherwise.

RaP has made it clear that in his view what Judiasm today really needs is a moratorium on practicing and enforcing Jewish law.

Ethereal concepts such as subjective individual ideas of right and wrong for him take precedence over Halacha.

I have spent many years fighting missionaries from other religions. They try to cause ordinary Jews to think like RaP does. I have heard no fewer than ten known missionaries disguised as Orthodox Rabbis say "You can wear the black coat and grow a big beard, but if you don't have love in your heart you aren't practicing Judaism" in order to cause ordinary people to disregard everything that legitimate religious authorities rule on. He's saying those same words in a different way. Instead of discussion/debating the Halachic sources and logic of decisions which make him uncomfortable, he just erases the credibility of everything with broad brushstrokes. Somehow he speaks for all Mizrachim, Hassidim, Ashkenazim, Sephardim etc....are each of us really just cookie-cutter clones of other who share our religious and culinary culture as RaPs would have us believe? I don't think so. I know Ashenazi Rabbis who say that the Syrian Takana is the only way to save the Jewish people, and I know Syrians who say the Takana is the most repulsive thing any Jewish group has ever done.

We're all individuals.

From my point of view, RaP is preaching rather than debating, and his message is dangerous.