Godol HaDor suspected by Romans of being a Christian

There has been a ongoing dispute amongst our commentators regarding the influence of Christianity on Judaism. One of the documented cases appears in the gemora regarding R'Eliezar HaGadol - the godol hador. A man who was the ultimate mesora man - who never said anything he hadn't heard from his rebbe. He was also certified by Heaven as knowing the correct halacha. Here are the relevent sources describing how great he was - plus the gemora in Avoda Zara regarding his arrest by the Romans because they suspected him of being a Christian. [I am aware that Rashi has a different explanation]

Sukkah(28a):Our Rabbis have taught: It happened that R. Eliezer passed the Sabbath in Upper Galilee, and they asked him for thirty decisions in the laws of Sukkah. Of twelve of these he said, ‘I heard them [from my teachers]’; of eighteen he said, ‘I have not heard’. R. Jose b. Judah said, Reverse the words: Of eighteen he said, ‘I have heard them’, of twelve he said, ‘I have not heard them’. They said to him,’Are all your words only reproductions of what you have heard?’ He answered them, ‘You wished to force me to say something which I have not heard from my teachers. During all my life [I may tell you] no man was earlier than myself in the college, I never slept or dozed in the college, nor did I ever leave a person in the college when I went out, nor did I ever utter profane speech, nor have I ever in my life said a thing which I did not hear from my teachers’.

Bava Metzia(59b): Concerning the Oven of Aknai… R’ Eliezer presented all possible explanations for his position but his colleagues did not accept them. He then said to them: If the halacha is in accord with my position then the carob tree will support me. Immediately the carob tree uprooted itself and moved either 100 amos or 400 amos. They said to him that the movement of the carob tree was not a relevant proof. He then said to them: If the halacha is in accord with my position than the river will support me. Immediately the river flowed backwards. They said to him that the river was not a relevant proof. Again he said: If the halacha is in accord with my position then the walls of the yeshiva will show support. Immediately the walls of the yeshiva started to fall down. R’ Yehoshua rebuked the walls: If Torah scholars are arguing with each other concerning halacha what is it your concern? Consequently the walls did not fall out of respect for R’ Yehoshua but they did not return to their original position out of respect for R’ Eliezer and they remain in this intermediary position. Again he said: If the halacha is in accord with my position then let Heaven offer support. A Heavenly Voice immediately called out: Why are you arguing with R’ Eliezer since the halacha is always in accord with his views? R’ Yehoshua stood up and said: Torah is not in Heaven! What did he mean by that? R’ Yermiyahu said: Since the Torah has already been given at Sinai we do not pay attention even to a Heavenly Voice concerning halacha—the Torah itself says that halacha is determined by the vote of the majority. R’ Nossan met Eliyahu later and asked him what was G‑d doing during this debate? Eliyahu replied: He smiled and said “My children have defeated Me, My children have defeated Me.” That day that R’ Eliezer was outvoted they brought all that R’ Eliezer had declared ritually and burned it. They also voted to ostracize him…

Avoda Zara(16b): Our Rabbis taught that when R’ Eliezer was arrested because he was suspected of being a Christian they took him to the court to be judged. The governor asked him, “How can a saged like yourself be involved in these worthless activities?” R’ Eliezer replied, “The Judge is right.” The governor thought that R’ Eliezer was referring to him when in fact R’ Eliezer was referring to his Father in Heaven. Because of the governor’s misunderstanding the governor said, “Because you have faith in my judgment I am pardoning you.” When he returned home his students came to console him but he refused to accept their consolation because he was upset that he had been accused of being a Christian. R’ Akiva said to him, “Will you give me permission to say one thing of that which you have taught me?” R’ Eliezer gave him permission. R’ Akiva then said, “Perhaps you were exposed to Chrisitian teachings and it gave you pleasure and that perhaps is the reason that you were arrested?” R’ Eliezer replied that R’ Akiva’s comment caused him to recall an incident. “Once I was walking in the upper market of Tzipori when I met one [of the students of Yeshu] by the name of Yaakov of Kfar Sekaniah. He said to me that it is written in your Torah (Devarim 23:19) that one should not bring money which had been paid to a prostitute into the Temple. Can it be used to build a bathroom for the High Priest? I did not answer him. He then told me that he had been taught by Yeshu that it says in Michah(1:7), For of the hire of a prostitute has she gathered them and unto the hire of a prostitute shall they return. That means that they came from a place of filth so let them go to a place o filth. Because I enjoyed these words I was arrested as a Christian. That is because I transgressed that which was said in the Torah. Mishlei(5:8) says to ‘Remove your way far from her’ – and that is a reference to heresy or Christianity while ‘come not close to the door of her house’ is referring to the ruling power.” Others interpret the end of this verse to be a warning to stay way from a prostitute rather than the ruling power.

Jerusalem mayor asks Supreme Court to halt offensive gay parade

Haaretz reports:

_{By Jonathan Lis, Haaretz Correspondent}

Jerusalem's mayor and city manager urged the High Court of Justice on Thursday to prevent the Gay Pride parade from taking place in the capital next Thursday, on the grounds that it would offend the public's sensibilities.

In a joint letter to the High Court, Mayor Uri Lupolianski and city manager Yair Ma'ayan wrote: "Past experience shows that the parade greatly offends, deliberately and unnecessarily, the feelings of Jews, Muslims and Christians, who view its sheer existence, and the blatant manner in which it takes place, as a desecration of the holy city and of the values with which they were raised."

The letter was sent in support of a petition on the matter filed by right-wing activists Baruch Marzel and Itamar Ben Gvir.

Ma'ayan and Lupolianski stressed that their request contradicts the position of the municipality's legal counsel, Yossi Havilio, who favors holding the parade.

Havilio, who sent a separate response to the court, argued that the parade's organizers are making every effort not to offend the city's Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox communities.
[...]

Messianic Jews - unwelcome missionaries in Israel

Haaretz reports:

[...]
Israel's tiny community of Messianic Jews, a mixed group of 10,000 people who include the California-based Jews for Jesus, complains of threats, harassment and police indifference.

The March 20 bombing was the worst incident so far. In October, a mysterious fire damaged a Jerusalem church used by Messianic Jews, and last month ultra-Orthodox Jews torched a stack of Christian holy books distributed by missionaries.

The Foreign Ministry and two chief rabbis were quick to condemn the burning, but the Ortiz family says vigorous police action is needed.
[...]
Proselytizing is strongly discouraged in Israel, a country whose population consists of a people that suffered centuries of persecution for not accepting Jesus and has little tolerance for missionary work.

At the same time, Israel has warm relations with U.S. evangelical groups, which strongly support its cause, but these generally refrain from proselytizing inside Israel. Even the Mormon church, which has mission work at its core worldwide, agreed when it opened a campus in Jerusalem to refrain from missionary activity.

[...]
Messianic Jews consider themselves Jewish, observing the holy days and reciting many of the same prayers. The Ortiz family lights candles on the Sabbath, shuns pork and eats matzoth on Passover.

Ami Ortiz, interviewed at the Tel Aviv hospital where he is being treated, comes across as no different from any Jewish Israeli his age. He's a sabra, or native-born Israeli, who speaks English with a Hebrew accent, has an older brother in an elite Israeli army unit and was hoping to join the youth squad of Maccabi Tel Aviv basketball team.

But his religion also holds that one can embrace Jesus - Ami calls him by his Hebrew name, Yeshua - as the Messiah and remain Jewish. Orthodox Jews, on the other hand, believe that the Messiah has yet to come, that he will do so only when he chooses, and that any attempt to pre-empt his coming is a grievous sin.

Rabbi Sholom Dov Lifschitz, head of the ultra-Orthodox Yad Leahim organization that campaigns against missionary activity in Israel, says Messianic Jews give him great pain.

"They are provoking... it's a miracle that worse things don't happen," he said.

Messianic activists appear to have had some success among couples with one non-Jewish spouse, as well as immigrants from Ethiopia and the former Soviet Union who have loose ties to Judaism.

Or Yehuda, a town in central Israel with many immigrants as well as ultra-Orthodox Jews including a deputy mayor, Uri Aharon, was the scene of the May 15 book-burning.

Ami Dahan, a local police official, says hundreds of Christian religious books were burned on May 15 in an empty lot in town. He said Deputy Mayor Uzi Aharon, has been questioned on suspicion that he instructed youths to collect the books from homes where they had been distributed and told them to burn them.

Aharon denies ordering the burning. He says the books were collected from a neighborhood of mostly Ethiopian immigrants who are easily persuaded by
missionaries.

"There are three missionaries who live and work in the town, and every Saturday they take people to worship and try to brainwash them," Aharon said.

Many Messianic Jews say they recognize the sensitivities involved and do not distribute religious material or conduct high-profile campaigns. But Aharon noted a recent Jews for Jesus campaign with signs on buses that equated two similar Hebrew words - Jesus and salvation. Public outrage quickly forced the bus company to remove the signs.

Lawyer Dan Yakir of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel says the law allows missionaries to preach provided they don't offer gifts or money or go after minors.

"It is their right according to freedom of religion to maintain their religious lifestyle and disseminate their beliefs, including through literature," he said.

But the obstacles are evident, raised not just from religious activists but by the state.

Calev Myers, a lawyer who represents Messianic Jews, said he has fought 200 legal cases in the past two years. Most involve authorities' attempts to close down houses of worship, revoke the citizenship of believers or refuse to register their children as Israelis. In one case, Israel has accused a German religion student of missionary activity and has tried - so far unsuccessfully - to deport her.

"In incidents of violence, police are reluctant to press charges," Myers said.

The book-burning caused shock among U.S. evangelicals.

[...]

The Ortiz family moved from the United States to Israel in 1985, qualifying as immigrants under Israel's Law of Return because Leah, the mother, is Jewish. In 1989 they moved into Ariel, a Jewish settlement in the West Bank, and established a small Messianic group which now numbers 60, most of them immigrants from the former Soviet Union, according to David Ortiz, the pastor and Ami's father.

He said that he built the community through conversations with friends and neighbors, but did not actually go door-to-door distributing religious material to strangers in the traditional sense of missionary work. David Ortiz says he has also proselytized in the Palestinian areas - prompting Islamic leaders there to warn against contact with him. Ortiz said he had no problem if Messianic Jews discuss their religious views with others and persuade them to believe in Jesus.

When the family began holding study sessions, a rabbi warned Ortiz not to speak about Jesus outside the home.

[...]

Meanwhile, the Messianic Jewish believers are taking no chances. These days they worship under the protection of an armed guard.

Religioius leaders demand cancellation of offensive gay parade

Letter written by religious MKs, rabbis asks ministers to cancel parade or move it from Jerusalem's center to outskirts of city, far from religious centers, holy sites, eyes of children. 'Freedom of speech doesn't include abominable acts,' they say

by Neta Sela YNET

The Shas Party and its chairman Eli Yishai, MK Uri Ariel (National Union-NRP), United Torah Judaism, and the leaders of the Rabbinate demanded on Thursday that the Pride Parade scheduled to take place in the capital next week be cancelled or transferred to an enclosed space on the city's outskirts.

A letter sent by Attorney Doron Shmueli to a number of government ministers said, "You are asked to order and act towards the cancellation of the 'Pride Parade' in the city of Jerusalem, or alternately you are asked to qualify its sexual content and not to allow the organizers of the event to do whatever they please. You are also asked to limit the parade to an enclosed area, to which entry will be prohibited to anyone under the age of 18."

The rabbis and religious MKs explained that "the acceptance of the parade as part of our lives does not oblige us not to defend ourselves against it or to defend those that require protection against it, especially children. The easy access to the sexual content of the parade exposes children to negative influences. The public interest is to defend the children." The letter further stated that "the unusual sights of the parade can do harm to the public order." Regarding freedom of speech, they claimed this right does not include "abominable acts".

Problematic location
The religious leaders also deemed the parade's location problematic. "The place designed to hold the parade is within close proximity of the Old City's walls and on the path leading to the Western Wall and the sites sacred to Christianity and the Islam.

Aside from this, the parade is scheduled to be held on a weekend, during which the ultra-Orthodox community tends to visit the Western Wall, a remnant of our holy temple. The holding of the parade as it has previously been seen on the path designated for it constitutes a heavy blow to public sensitivities, especially those of the Jewish (religious-Orthodox), Christian, and Muslim public residing within close proximity of the Old City."

The letter also dictates that the parade is to be banned from taking place "near religious neighborhoods, while exhibiting a lack of modesty harmful to religious sensitivities and beyond the limits of tolerance required for the remanding of freedom of expression and demonstration in our legal system."

The religious parties requested that the parade be moved to "a different place on the outskirts of the city and far from religious centers and underage bystanders, who are liable to be exposed to this wrongful content, and especially not to make use of public parks to which the public flocks during its free time."

Last year, despite last-minute efforts at cancellation, the Pride Parade was held in the center of Jerusalem with the participation of thousands of people. Meanwhile, the ultra-Orthodox community held a rally in which elegies were read. In November of 2006, the ultra-Orthodox community succeeded in its efforts and the parade was held inside a Jerusalem stadium.

Religion as foundation of democracy - Israel is not unique

Jun. 18, 2008
Haviv Rettig , Jerusalem Post

"The Jewish-Israeli case is often said to be unique," begins an article by Dr. Alexander Yakobson, a senior lecturer in Roman history at Hebrew University, in the summer 2008 edition of Israel Studies, an academic journal on Israeli society.

The country's strangeness comes from the "'extra-territorial' character of the Jewish people, Israel's ties with the Jewish Diaspora and the strong connection between the Jewish religion and the prevalent notion of Jewish peoplehood," explains the author. Some celebrate this uniqueness, "pointing to the uniqueness of Jewish history and culture," and some are critical of it as "inconsistent with modern civic democracy," but rarely is the "underlining premise of uniqueness" questioned, Yakobson believes.

Now he's out to change that, with an argument that examines the constitutions of other democracies to show that Israel is neither officially nor in practice alone in its, well, uniqueness.

"There are numerous other cases where national identity and religion are officially connected in some way, and where there are official bonds between a nation-state and an ethnocultural Diaspora," he writes.

The Greek constitution, for example, makes some surprising provisions. Though it promises, to quote from article 13, that "every known religion is free and the forms of worship thereof shall be practiced without any hindrance by the State and under protection of the law," its preamble nevertheless begins with: "In the name of the Holy and Consubstantial and Indivisible Trinity." In the constitution itself, article 3 asserts that "the prevailing religion in Greece is that of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ" and takes pains to note that this church, "acknowledging as its head Our Lord Jesus Christ is indissolubly united in doctrine with the Great Church of Constantinople and every other Church of Christ of the same doctrine."

Yakobson's article, titled "Jewish Peoplehood and the Jewish State, How Unique? - A Comparative Survey," summarizes more extensive findings of a book he co-authored with Israeli constitutional thinker Amnon Rubinstein titled Israel Among the Nations. The idea presented in the book, and the newly-published article, is an important contribution to the international discussion surrounding the Jewish state.

It isn't merely that an Israeli scholar has located another freakish case - Greece - among contemporary democracies, but that religion-based ethnocultural identity is the social glue of a broad swath of the free West.

The preamble to the Irish constitution begins: "In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred." Norway's constitution decrees that "the Evangelical-Lutheran religion shall remain the official religion of the State," that "more than half the number of the Members of the Council of State shall profess the official religion of the State," and even that "the inhabitants professing it are bound to bring up their children in the same." Poland, Bulgaria, Armenia, Georgia and much of Scandinavia, but also the United States and Britain, all are revealed to be more committed to their cultural uniqueness - through religion - than one might think.

But the most fascinating and unexpected example cited in Yakobson's argument is not, in fact, Western: "The Tibetan Constitution adopted by the Assembly of Tibetan People's Deputies in 1991 begins, 'Whereas His Holiness the Dalai lama has offered a democratic system to Tibetans, in order that the Tibetan People in-Exile be able to preserve their ancient traditions of spiritual and temporal life, unique to the Tibetans…' It states that the '…future Tibetan polity shall uphold the principle of non-violence and shall endeavor to
be a Free Social Welfare State with its politics guided by the Dharma, a Federal Democratic Republic…' At the same time, the Dalai Lama is proclaimed as 'chief executive of the Tibetan people' and given considerable powers," Yakobson writes.

[...]

These examples, Yakobson notes, are hardly outmoded anachronisms, but real, resonant questions in the modern politics of living societies. The Greek state doesn't view Orthodox Christianity as an artifact of its past, but as an education program that serves to define national identity. When a Muslim parent in Italy petitioned a court in 2002 against the obligatory crucifixes present in every classroom in the largely secular country, he briefly won the court's agreement. But the decision was quickly overturned, and the episode solicited an outcry from Italy's public figures. In the words of the country's president, "the crucifix has always been considered not only as a distinctive sign of a particular religious credo, but above all as a symbol of the values that are at the base of our Italian identity."

What does his study mean for Israel? Yakobson explains: "There is nothing extraordinary about a nation-state of a people whose history and culture strongly connect it to a certain religion. This connection, apart from being a fact of cultural and social life, can also be enshrined in a country's constitution and embodied in its national symbols" - even, he adds, if the people who describe themselves by that identity do not, in fact, follow the
religion.

He relates the story of a visiting foreign professor who was asked, "Do you think that the Jewish people are unique?"

"Of course you are unique," he replied, "but you are not unique in being unique."

R' Shmuel Leibovitz, defends Rav Druckman against my criticism

Maybe I don't get it like you claim, Reb Shmuel. However this posting reminds me of the story of the 5 year old child who one day decides to run away from home because he is tired of being told what to do all the time. An hour later his mother meets him standing at the corner of their block and asks him what he is doing there. He replies defiantly, "I ran away from home because you are always telling me what to do.!"So why are you standing on our corner," asks his mother? "Because you don't let me cross the street by myself."
===================================================
R' Shmuel Leibovitz, Lod (Garin Torani near Tel-Aviv), Israel has left a new comment on your post "Conversion crisis - what are world wide consequenc...":

Daas Torah said: You can't have a major conversion program in Israel based on views that are rejected and then cry - but I am also a posek. If you are dealing with a single case then it might be relevant to pull out these views. But a massive in your face program which has been protested against from the beginning? Rav Druckman can not claim that he was unaware of the opposition to his program. He is saying - I already created the facts on the ground. I knew from the beginning what I am doing is not acceptable to most poskim. But I figured if I created enough of these gerim they would have to be accepted because of their sheer numbers.

DT, I really don't think you get it at all!

Yes, you can have such a program (it has been around for a long time). And the opposition was always well known to all of us and to Rav Druckman shlit"a and to the dozens of fine dayanim involved.

Nobody is "crying" that "I am also a posek." Rather, we at Tzohar are stating this truth with dignity and kavod hatorah.

Nobody is saying that our gerim SHOULD be accepted because they are "facts on the ground" in "massive numbers." Nobody is saying that our gerim SHOULD be accepted at all, because we don't expect the charedim to accept them. Ever. Nor do we care all that much. The numbers of charedim who would want to "intermarry" with the poeple we convert are next to zero anyhow.

Rather, we are saying that these gerim WILL be accepted, period. Because our Torah outlook and our Torah scholars and our poskei halacha all confirm that we are doing what is right according to the Torah. WE WILL accept our gerim and we WILL perform their weddings, period. We will marry them ourselves when be'ezrat hashem the zug works out, period. It WILL happen, period.

If it takes fighting within the Rabbanut to achieve this, then so be it. If it takes abolishing the rabbanut and setting up our own independent beis din to achieve this, then so be it. It WILL happen.

Nobody here is "crying" for your recognition. What is really happening is Torah people fighting for their rights to live and apply Torah truth as they see it in Israel. They WILL achieve those rights, period, whether you recognize it or not.

Shmuel Leibovitz, Lod (Garin Torani near Tel-Aviv), Israel

Non-Orthodox men less connected than women to Judaism

Matthew Wagner , THE JERUSALEM POST

After decades of women feeling disenfranchised from a male-dominated Jewish tradition, the tides are turning, with non-Orthodox men today becoming less and less connected to Judaism, according to a new study released Sunday by Brandeis University.

Non-Orthodox Jewish males, from school-age to adult, have fewer connections with Jews and Judaism than their female counterparts, the study showed.

"Men invest less of their human capital into Jewishness," said study co-author Sylvia Barack Fishman, a professor of contemporary Jewish life in the Near Eastern and Judaic Studies Department at Brandeis. "This is a matter of deep concern, because minority groups with high amounts of ethnic capital are much more successful at transmitting their culture to the next generation."

The study, entitled "Matrilineal Ascent/Patrilineal Descent: Gender Imbalance in American Jewish Life" and released by the Hadassah-Brandeis Institute and the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies, found that women have been taking an increasingly more dominant role in Jewish rites. As a result, the phenomenon of "Ima on the bima" (mom on the podium) has become the rule rather than the exception in liberal Jewish settings.

"When it comes to gender equality or gender balance, contemporary American Jewish life is caught between a rock and a hard place," said co-author Daniel Parmer, a Brandeis graduate student. "Boys and men as a group are not attracted to feminized Jewish activities and environments."

In contrast, Orthodox Judaism, which has not integrated women into traditionally male roles such as rabbinical ordination and leading prayers, has managed to maintain the masculine connection to religious devotion.

In their conclusion, Fishman and Parmer suggested that the increasingly dominant role played by women in Jewish activities might be turning boys and men off. The authors suggested that initiatives more geared toward Jewish men and boys could help strengthen the frayed masculine Judaic connection.

"Without advocating single-sex education, it is critical to recognize that programs geared to Jewish boys and men - and to Jewish girls and women - create positive connections to Jews and Jewishness, beginning with the preschool years and extending over the life cycle of the individual," they wrote.

"Excellent coed and single sex programs and activities may be particularly important in the middle school and teen years, when boys in liberal Jewish settings often grow most impatient with female religious and educational leadership," they went on. "Ironically the women's movement - responding to great gaps in Jewish life - has often created successful materials and programming for female teens, while teenage boys have often been left behind."

Fishman and Parmer noted in their introduction to the study, which was based on 300 interviews, that outside the Orthodox world men are becoming less and less engaged in every aspect of Jewish life, from the home to the synagogue to communal organizations.

"In Fall 2005, women outnumbered men two to one in the entering rabbinical class in the Reform movement's Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion (HUC-JIR). Nationally, girls and women outnumber men in weekly non-Orthodox worship services, in adult education classes, in volunteer leadership positions, and in Jewish cultural events," they said.[...]

Conversion crisis - what are world wide consequences?

Bartley Kulp has left a new comment on your post "Conversion crisis - because Modern Orthodox are w...":

This is a request to Daas Torah. There should be a post on how the findings of Rav Sherman's committee will effect converts globally. Particularly in North America. I mean his usage as to what pasul's a dayan or beit din. Can these issues be used to torpedo any agreement between the RCA and the Israeli rabbinate? Also will there be a lot of controversy regarding passed conversions(I mean where the convert is observant) by Rabbanim and betei dinim that Rav Sherman's criterea would pasul the individuals and institutions thereof.

Also the fact that Rav Sherman has applied a precedent in which a beit din can look over another beit din's shoulder even when no new information has come to light on the issue or when there is not a question on the latter beit din's experties? Does this not turn the whole concept of chazaka on its head? Also will any converts or their descendants be able to feel safe from Judicial review even to the point of post mortem of the individuals who converted them?

This is the truly big story out of all of this. I am truly suprised that the RCA has not delt with this issue comprehensively outside of posting a letter of protest filled with rhetoric. These issues need to be discussed and nobody is talking about them. This is not just about the thousand or so conversions that are under question here. These psakim have global ramifications both for past, present and future issues of personal status. The Jewish community today is global by nature and Israel is its most significant location.

Ethiopian-Israeli MK calls for end of immigration of non-Jewish Ethiopians

_{By Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz Correspondent}

Shas MK Mazor Bahyna has claimed that over 300,000 people remain in Ethiopia who are eligible to immigrate to Israel due to the forced conversion of Ethiopian Jews in the past.

"We have historical evidence and letters of Kessim [Ethiopian Jewish religious leaders] on the fact that forty years ago, there were more than 50,000 converts who were forced to change their religion," said Bahyna, an Ethiopian Israeli himself.

Another MK of Ethiopian origin, however, has called for an end to immigration of the Falashmura, the descendents of Jews who converted to Christianity in the past.

Ethiopian-born MK Shlomo Molla (Kadima) said this should occur in accordance with a 2005 government decision which ruled that the last of the community would come to Israel in the coming weeks.

"Because of mistakes made in the Interior Ministry, there are still 5,000 people in Ethiopia whose eligibility need to be checked - but after this, we need to finish the issue," Molla said.

The dispute between the two lawmakers reflects deep divisions of opinion within the Ethiopian Israeli community as a whole. While some call for the bringing to Israel of anyone who declares a connection to the Jewish people, others say that many of those in Ethiopia seeking to immigrate are simply lying about their origins.

"This is a political decision that the government needs to make. If we continue to drag our feet on the issue, the breach will be grow and limitless numbers of Ethiopians without any connection to the Jewish people will be able to come here," Molla added.

Conversion crisis - because Modern Orthodox are wimps! I

I have been meaning to post on this issue – of the awesome chasm separating the Chareidi world and that of the Modern Orthodox/Religious Zionist – on one particular issue - compromising the truth to avoid hurt feelings. To use a broad but accurate brush, Chareidim ask the question – what is the halacha? while MO ask – how can we modify the halacha in order to avoid hurt feelings? Or to use the infamous words of Blu Greenberg – the MO hold by the doctrine – “Where there is a halachic will there is a halachic way” - but the Chareidim don’t.

Rabbi Adlerstein described the dichotomy in his recent article on the geirus crisis which I reported on this blog.

“Rabbi Druckman’s supporters have not responded to a single one of Rabbi Sherman’s charges in halachic language. They have thus added fuel to the fire of those who believe that the DL camp is incapable of dealing responsibly with sophisticated Torah thinking. Rabbi Sherman may or may not be right, but he raises important issues. Rav Druckman, to the best of my knowledge, is a fine gentleman, but not one of the halachic luminaries of the DL world. Professional politicians and MK’s – of any religious party – rarely are. The DL world suffers from no shortage of real bnei Torah and a group of authentic poskim who could and should be dealing with Rabbi Sherman’s point in halachic language.”

Characteristic of the non-halachic response of the MO/RZ is that of Rav Lichtenstein:

"How much hatred, grudge and demonization there is in this awful and terrible psak... The Conversion Authority has God-fearing and scholarly judges who have devoted their energy and their lives to the Torah. They cannot be pushed away and thrown into the street. We must be strong on this point: There is no giving into this kind of language and attitude... Where did we ever hear or see that someone who relies on a minority opinion against the commonly held one is considered a willing apikorus? Woe to the ears that hear such a thing and woe to the biased court that has expressed itself in such a way!"

Similarly Rabbi Vinas has responded to criticism by in essence saying – you are hateful not nice people because you keep challenging my sincere efforts to help the Jewish people – and I am not going to talk to you anymore.

This was brought to a head on this blog by one of the intelligent and sensitive representatives of the MO/RZ world who has taken the time – up until now – to present his view and understanding on these issues. However he too has folded his tent and departed while firing these parting shots:

Itamar Ross has left a new comment on your post "Rabbi Vinas' reply - discussed and rejected I":

In response to this post, I too have decided no longer to post here. Rav Eidensohn writes: "As we see in the Talmud, understanding Torah requires making inquiries of our rabbis – even if they sometimes cause discomfort." When necessary and true, and when there is no alternative, of course. But when "inquiries" are made because of preconceived notions of "Daas Torah" (a non-Jewish idea itself) with no regard whatsoever to the harm they cause, that is using the quest for truth as a lame excuse for bashing ideological rivals. Given the current conversion controversy, you are in good company Rabbi Vinas. Take it as a badge of pride. You have been publically reviled along with the greatest dati-leumi Torah scholars in Israel. Many poskim, of whom I have no doubt Rav Eidensohn is fully aware, recognize the concept of "zera yisrael". The concept is accepted halachah le-maaseh today among most Torah scholars and dayanim today (at least outside the Ashkenazic charedi world). Rabbi Eidensohn and his rebbe are free to reject or accept this concept according to their Torah understanding, but not to bash those who do accept it. No Rav Eidensohn, you cannot claim that the burden of proof is on those who do accept it, who may then be reviled and shamed in public as you have done here to Rabbi Vidas. "Daas Torah" is no mandate for doing evil, though many of its proponents see it as exactly such. Along with Rabbi Vinas, my participation at this blog is has now ended.

Totally ignoring the fact that the concept of zera Yisroel does not justify what Rabbi Vinas is doing since not a single posek says it does.

One cannot work through the hard truth when people keep replying to sincere and realistic questions by saying “because you are not nice I won’t speak with you again.”

Realistically the world requires the right hand and the left hand working together. It is time for the MO/RZ to stop being such wimps when they are challenged by halachic questions. To use a Talmudic illustration, the first Mishna in Bava Metzia describes the halacha when two people both claim the same object. Two people found a talis and each one claims it is theirs. The halacha is that it is divided. What if each one claims the talis but one is a nice guy and says – “o.k. you can have half and I’ll have half.” The logic of the MO/RZ is that they are being a nice guy who is sensitive to the feelings of the other – by acknowledging that the talis should be divided. However the halacha is that the one who concedes that half belongs to the other person, ends up getting only a quarter of the talis while the guy who asserts that all it is his – gets three quarters! The halacha is simply that whatever is disputed is divided.

Similarly the MO have tried for years to educate students in moderation. Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm has insightfully lamented that the MO have succeeded in creating students who are moderate in their passion instead of passionate about their moderation.

The Chazon Ish writes about this.

Letters (3:61): Just as the unvarnished facts and truth are synonymous so are uncompromising perfectionism and greatness. Perfectionism means to develop something to the ultimate degree. One who advocates moderation and despises perfectionism—his lot is with the frauds or with those lacking understanding. Without perfectionism, there can be no completion and if there is no perfection, there is no beginning. The beginning is with constant questions and replies. The perfecter is the brilliant respondent who orders everything in its rightful place. We regularly hear announcements from well‑known groups that they have nothing to do with uncompromising perfectionists. They nevertheless describe themselves as being the true Jews with appropriate faith to Torah. We simply note, however, that just as there is no such thing amongst lovers of wisdom as love for minimum knowledge and hate for the very wise there is similarly no such thing as loving Torah and mitzvos moderately and hating the uncompromising perfectionists. All the foundations of emuna—the 13 principles and their derivatives—are inherently incompatible with the lightweight wisdom and superficial life that exists in this world. In contrast clear recognition, energetic involvement; high precision in emuna is the hallmark of the perfectionist. Those who proudly testify on themselves that they have not tasted the sweetness of uncompromising perfection are simultaneously testifying that they are missing emuna in the foundation of religion both intellectually and emotionally. Their attachment is only lukewarm. The perfectionists—who despite their genuine wish to have pity on these doctrinaire moderates—do not honor and respect their opponents. The yawning abyss that separates them is naturally only widened as the result of the disputes that occur when they interact with each other. The only true moderation that can exist is that which results naturally to those who love the perfection and strive towards it and educate their children to strive for the peak. In contrast how unfortunate are those “moderates” who cast aspersions on the perfectionists. The obligation of our education is to perfection. The only genuine protection of the educational system is to be contemptuous and to ridicule those who denigrate perfection. However given the burning spirit of youth it is not appropriate to strongly condemn specific individuals amongst the unfortunates. Instead, the youth should be developed to have true love of Torah that requires personal effort and heavenly pleasantness and they should not have obstacles placed on this road. Those schools that are labeled as moderate schools—they are not successful because of the fraud that is inherent in moderation…

Rabbi Vinas' reply - discussed and rejected I

This is a response to Rabbi Vinas' answer to my first question. If there is interest I will reply also to his other answers. Rabbi Vinas's statement is in italics.

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

In this post I will attempt to respond one more time to your questions in an attempt to clarify my positions and to educate your readers regarding the return of the anusim to Judaism and the nature of my work with my synagogue community of Lincoln Park Jewish Center in Yonkers and with the Hispanic/Latino Anusim community.

I was unable to answer your posts earlier due to the fact that my mother was niftar the day before LagLaOmer (Baomer for the rest of you) and I was in Shiva and shloshim for her. I'm surprised that my "fan club" (stalkers) who purport to know me personally, did not notify you of this fact and the fact that she was buried by a large number of Rabbanim Hashuvim who lauded her as a true tzadeket. […]

I am truly sorry to hear about your mother’s passing. And I am also sorry that you view questions regarding your public activities as an act of hostility and hate. As we see in the Talmud, understanding Torah requires making inquiries of our rabbis – even if they sometimes cause discomfort.

Berachos (62a): It has been taught: R. Akiba said: Once I went in after R. Joshua to a privy, and I learnt from him three things. I learnt that one does not sit east and west but north and south; I learnt that one evacuates not standing but sitting; and I learnt that it is proper to wipe with the left hand and not with the right. Said Ben Azzai to him: Did you dare to take such liberties with your master? He replied: It was a matter of Torah, and I required to learn. It has been taught: Ben ‘Azzai said: Once I went in after R. Akiba to a privy, and I learnt from him three things. I learnt that one does not evacuate east and west but north and south. I also learnt that one evacuates sitting and not standing. I also learnt it is proper to wipe with the left hand and not with the right. Said R. Judah to him: Did you dare to take such liberties with your master? — He replied: It was a matter of Torah, and I required to learn. R. Kahana once went in and hid under Rab's bed. He heard him chatting [with his wife] and joking and doing what he required. He said to him: One would think that Abba's mouth had never sipped the dish before! He said to him: Kahana, are you here? Go out, because it is rude.1 He replied: It is a matter of Torah, and I require to learn.

Normally, I would not be posting questions and criticisms at such a time – however you yourself have taken the initiative – with great mesiras nefesh – to bring up these issues and therefore I will respond with my respectful disagreement.

Since you say you will not be posting again, I will try to summarize the issues and express how you defend your activities and reject the criticism. I will also say at the outset – that you have in fact not really answered any of my questions – except the issue of how a ger can be a rav of a shul – something which is clearly stated in the Igros Moshe and in the teshuvos of Rav Moshe Sternbuch, shlita.

[Regarding the criticism of Jersey Girl…] Those who know me and attend my shul would know right away that there are cases of giur that I have treated as exactly that Giur not anusim. Not all Latinos who have converted either through my auspices or others are claiming that they are anusim and I don’t treat all of them as such… Let me clarify to all of you what people who do know me already know. Not all gerim are anusim this includes Latinos or Hispanic Jews. All who seek giur are not treated as anusim. Stop the lies! This is an opportunity to clarify the fact that as I have explained before based on the teshuva of Rav Aharon Soloveitchik and Rav Mordechai Eliahu that anusim require some form of halachic “return” ceremony. Soloveitchik calls it a giur lechumra Rav Moredchai Eliahu calls it a return ceremony. Both require mila, tevila and kabbalat hamitzvot. Geneology, DNA or other pseudo scientific proofs are not sufficient. I have always recommended the process of return or giur for anusim in order to ensure that their Jewish status does not remain questionable and that they are fully living lives of Jewish content and status according to Orthodox halacha. Having giur according to halacha should remove all stigma of doubt regarding their ancestry if you would just leave them alone to live life as they want according to the Torah.

Now I will respond to Daniel Eidensohns questions by the numbers that he placed on them [….] I’m going to respond however because there is a chance that you might be an authentic seeker of truth and honesty.

1) Regarding what I wrote you about safek deoraita lehumra: I was referring to the practice of discouraging a potential convert of non-Jewish origin. What if this person is really Jewish just as he claims? What if it is true that the person has a tradition in his family that remained unbroken just as he said and I discouraged him from returning to Judaism. That would be an avera risk that I am not willing to take. Rather I continue to follow the Takana of Rabbenu Gershom and the work of Rav Aboab de Fonseca and Rav Menashe Ben Israel because I did not see any expiration date on their takanot. And even if you say that their work was situational in that they were working while the problem existed during that generation directly after the inquisition, I posit to you that the problem persists and that this exchange of blogs proves that it is all too real and that controversy exists around it and therefore some form of halachic response must be offered. Since there are earlier poskim such as those I mentioned that responded already to this question when it already arose all we need to do is apply the mechanisms that the poskim already created earlier. […] The important thing is that they [anusim] remained loyal to the Torah and at great personal risk have attempted to return to Jewish practice. Anusim will continue to return to Judaism whenever they want to. We will not subject ourselves to ridiculous questions like why not sooner? The answer is that we returned as soon as we saw that what we were living was Jewish customs – as soon as it became clear to us that we needed to return to our original identity. I don’t know why it takes generations for people to return to Torah, if it was in my ability I would have done it three generations ago but I wasn’t alive then I’m alive now and now is when I have chosen to live as a Jew and to help others do so as well. The return to Judaism is heroic in any generation it proves that “la sangre llama” the blood calls.

Rabbi Vinas asserts that there are two types of non-Jews. Those that are really non-Jews and those that there is a sofek doreissa that they are truly Jews. While he is asserting that the Anusim are a sofek doreissa however he regards the existence of a pattern of family minhag which bears a possible relationship to Judaism as prima facie evidence that these people are actually Jews. Therefore he feels that they should be encouraged to rejoin the Jewish people and go through a pro forma conversion ceremony – not because they need it to be Jews – but to avoid questions and inconvenience. Thus geirus l’chumra is only window dressing because in fact the anusim are already Jews and never stopped being Jews – no matter how many hundreds of years they lived as goyim. Thus he says bluntly regarding the Anusim – and including himself and his family

“Anusim will continue to return to Judaism whenever they want to. We will not subject ourselves to ridiculous questions like why not sooner? The answer is that we returned as soon as we saw that what we were living was Jewish customs – as soon as it became clear to us that we needed to return to our original identity.”

“I am not a Christian. My mother and father were not Christians, the only religion I have ever known was Orthodox Judaism.”

Thus since the purported descendants of anusim are really Jews – including Rabbi Vinas – there is really no need to do geirus. Therefore the question raised about why he sat shiva for his mother despite the clearly stated prohibition of the Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 374:5) is because he believes she was also a Jew – even without conversion. This also answers the questions raised concerning Rabbi Vinas’ own conversion.

The only problem with all of this is that as far as I have ascertained there is not a single posek who is on record agreeing with him! It is Rabbi Vinas – who is not a posek nor does he claim to be a posek – who has decided that the pesakim that were applied to those in the years immediately following forced conversions in Spain and Portugal when there was no doubt at all that these people had Jewish mothers and were themselves Jewish. He asserts on his own that all those who have unique family minhagim which might be Jewish - qualifies them for the same status of truly being Jewish! He states:

“The answer is that we returned as soon as we saw that what we were living was Jewish customs – as soon as it became clear to us that we needed to return to our original identity. I don’t know why it takes generations for people to return to Torah, if it was in my ability I would have done it three generations ago but I wasn’t alive then I’m alive now and now is when I have chosen to live as a Jew and to help others do so as well. The return to Judaism is heroic in any generation it proves that “la sangre llama” the blood calls.”

Thus regarding the first question – the answer is that Rabbi Vinas is relying on his own sevora which apparently no posek accepts. I would love to hear a major posek such as Rav Ovadiah Yosef or Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul state this sevora and then I would have no trouble acknowledging that is is legitimate. The letters that were written by Rav Aaron Soloveitchik and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu – did not state such a position. It also explains why Rabbi Vinas insists he is not proselytizing – he views himself as only doing kiruv!

Let me reiterate that I think that Rabbi Vinas is a wonderful human being who has dedicated his life to helping others with great mesiras nefesh. I am truly sorry about the loss of his mother. The issues I am raising are purely halachic issues - which are critical to being a Torah Jew. These are the type of questions that every observant Jew needs to raise to clarify the halacha. The issue of following halacha even if it hurts - something raised many times already - will be addressed in a separate posting.

Statistics: More American Jews are unmarried and unconnected to organized Judaism

Jerusalem Post reports:

Jun. 17, 2008
Michal Lando, Jerusalem Post corespondent , THE JERUSALEM POST

More US Jews today are "uncoupled" in two senses of the term -unmarried and unconnected to organized Jewry - according to the latest study by researchers Steven Cohen and Ari Kelman, who call this data "disturbing," though not for the reasons one might expect.

In 1990, 33 percent of non-Orthodox Jews aged 25-39 were single. By 2000-01, the number had grown to 50%. In fact "never in Jewish demographic history have we seen so many young adults unmarried, or 'uncoupled,'" the study says. That in itself is not surprising, because Americans as a whole are getting married much later.

The good news is that single Jews are as interested as ever in connecting Jewishly. The bad news is that they shy away from available Jewish institutions in part because synagogues, Jewish community centers and federations "remain geared to the conventional family unit," the study claims.

As many as 67 percent of non-Orthodox singles say they are "proud to be a Jew," slightly surpassing the 66% of in-married (Jews married to Jews) who agree.

Given the high level of Jewish interest and low rate of communal and ritual involvement among young adult, single Jews, this uncoupled population represents the "greatest opportunity and the greatest risk" of Judaism in the United States, the study claims. "Single Jews are akin to 'swing voters'- they can go either way," the two sociologists suggest. "How they 'vote,' how they make Jewish (or non-Jewish) choices, will determine the future of Jews, Judaism and Jewishness in the United States."

Important to note is that single Jews practice religion in lower numbers than in-married Jewish couples: Just 19% of singles belong to synagogues as opposed to 51% of the in-married, and only one-third of singles are "somewhat attached" to synagogues.

A total of 20% of singles visit Jewish community centers, as opposed to 44% of in-married; 15% of singles contribute to UJA/Federation campaigns compared to 32% of in-married; and 8% of singles volunteer with a Jewish organization compared to 28% of in-married.

On the surface, the unmarried appear "fairly distant" from Jewish life, the study suggests. But other markers point to single Jews still being connected.

Of single Jews aged 25-39, 42% claim that half or more of their friends are Jewish, and of those making that claim, 51% said they talk to their friends about "Jewish matters." They read Jewish-oriented books in higher numbers than the in-married, are more eager to learn more Jewishly, and more regularly read Jewish blogs.

When it comes to Israel, 79% agreed that "Caring about Israel is a very important part of my being a Jew," compared to 83% of the in-married. And 67% of singles said they feel "proud" of Israel, compared to 62% of in-married. [...]

DNA and the Jewishness of Ethiopians and purported Conversos

The following is an excerpt of an interview (published in the June 2008 Reform Judaism magazine) with Jon Entine concerning the latest DNA findings and conjecture about their meaning for the origin of the Jews. Please note that this is not halachic data - especially when the DNA shows patrilinear descent - which has no standing in being a Jew.

He says that so far, genetic detective work among Jews reveals:

• The majority of Jewish males shares a Middle East ancestry that dates back 4,000 years.
• Only about 50% of Jewish females are genetically linked to the Middle East; the others appear to be descended from gentiles.
• Some 30% of the Ashkenazi gene pool has genetic markers from a variety of local, non-Jewish populations among which Jews lived.
• Most Jewish men claiming to be kohanim (of priestly descent) carry markers that originated about 3,000 years ago.
• The African Lemba tribe carries Jewish markers, including a 53% frequency of kohanim markers among the tribe's priests, supporting the tribe's claim of Israelite descent.
• Markers among Asia's Indian Jews suggest that they descended from biblical Israelites.
• Despite their tradition of Solomonic descent, Ethiopian Jews carry no Jewish marker.
• Many Southwestern conversos and Hispanos descend from Sephardim on the male side.
• One in four Ashkenazi Jews carries genetic risk for diseases like Tay-Sachs, Familial Dysautonomia, and Cystic Fibrosis.
• Some forms of breast cancer are found only in Jews and their descendents.

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

What does the genetic evidence show about the Jewish origins of Ethiopian Jewry?

The Black Jews of Ethiopia, who were airlifted to Israel in the mid 1980s as part of a massive Jewish rescue of what many believed was a mythical Lost Tribe, have steadfastly claimed a biblical royal pedigree tied to King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. At the urging of many Orthodox Jews, Israel’s chief rabbis embraced this account and granted them official status as descendants of the lost tribe of Dan. But more recent DNA evidence is not so generous: Ethiopian Jews do not have the Jewish genetic markers seen in all other Jewish groups, which tells us that they don’t have genetic roots in ancient Israel. This finding is in line with historical evidence suggesting that in the 5th or 6th century C.E. a fairly sizable number of Ethiopians, including some of the royalty, converted to Judaism. Still, they have remained faithful to Judaism for 1,500 years—longer than the history of Ashkenazic Jewry.

For the groups that have received DNA confirmation of their Jewish ancestry, the news must be empowering.

Oh yes, having genetic witness to their ancestral Israelite roots has provided these communities with cultural cohesiveness, a sense of real pride—no one can take it away from them now—and a new level of respect from other Jews.

What does DNA evidence reveal about the conversos in the Southwest United States?

For years a host of anecdotal reports have appeared about people in the American Southwest and northern Mexico who practice Jewish rituals such as lighting candles on Friday evenings and covering the mirrors after a family member has died. Occasionally some claimed they were descendants of Jews, but few people took them very seriously. Cultural anthropologists tended to believe they had adopted the rituals from Jewish traders. Thanks to genetic research, however, we can now confirm that many of these individuals and pocket communities do, in fact, have Jewish roots. In my book I tell the story of William Sanchez from Albuquerque, New Mexico, who had always wondered about the Jewish-like rituals in his family. After he saw a story on genetic genealogy on PBS he sent in a DNA sample for testing. When the lab reached him on the phone and said, “Mr. Sanchez, we found some interesting results from your DNA; you may be descended from or closely related to priests,” Sanchez replied, “That makes perfect sense, because I am a priest.” There was stunned silence on the phone because William Sanchez was, in fact, a Catholic priest. He and many of his family members have since pieced together their family history and discovered that they—as well as many Hispanos in Sanchez’s congregation and in communities throughout the Southwest—are the descendants on their male side of Sephardic Jews who converted to Catholicism and then settled in the New World, where they took on Native American wives. Over time the descendants’ Jewish practices atrophied and they became Christian in belief. Nowadays, to celebrate their Jewish heri­tage alongside their Catholic beliefs, Sanchez and many of his parishioners wear a Star of David with a cross in the middle. Interestingly, too, a few of his family members have been touched so deeply by this revelation, they have converted to Judaism.