Friday, May 15, 2026
My love song to Jerusalem by Mordechai Schiller
In June 1967, I sat in a makeshift bomb shelter in Talpiot, Jerusalem, listening to mortar shells whiz overhead and explode all around us.
A few days later, on the holiday of Shavuos, I stood in awe by the Western Wall.
Nothing would ever be the same again.
One day, I was walking along the street in Jerusalem and the first line of this song came to me. Later that night, I wrote the rest. You can listen to the song or download it (free) here.
NJ Amalekism Looming-LevinAt11
Fri, May 15, '26:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Tefillah request, for expeditious recovery of:
Rav Yehuda Ben Masha HaLevi;
Shimon Ben Masha; &
Lea Bas Freeda~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linked below is this week's LevinAt11 radio broadcast, May 14, '26
מצורף: תכנית ראדיו רב לעוין שליט"א, פרשת במדבר תשפו
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Programming Note: No broadcast next week, due to the Shavuos Holiday.
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Clarification regarding Terminology:
When we employ the term "satanic" - e.g. as in describing the wicked legislation looming in NJ, we do so exclusively in the Jewish sense of the word. The "Sotton" is an angel. As such, he has no ability whatsoever to harm or help any person on the basis of his own will. He operates exclusively as a Divine agent, charged with the task of fulfilling the Will of G-d -- by testing Man.
When we describe a bill or agitator as "satanic," we mean that they embody evil in the extreme, especially when they seek Evil for the sake of Evil, in the spirit of the nation of Amalek.
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Primary Topic:
The Threat of Passage of NJ bill S2260/ A2218 - specifically, undisclosed variants thereof:
Action Needed:
Please share this crucial information ASAP with your NJ associates, especially those with influence, e.g. Rabbonim and media. This bill could be voted on by the entire Legislature as early as next week, before Shavuos, R"L.
All NJ residents are asked to urge both of their assemblymen and their state senator to actively combat this legislation - whatever form it takes. Citizens must demand they not only vote NO, but also unapologetically expose this bill as an antireligious edict, inasmuch as it criminalizes efforts to act on the Torah directives to save the innocent from abortion-at-whim and transgender-barbarism. See our letter to the NJ Senate Health Committee, copied below.
Subtopics:
1. Introduction of our special guest, veteran profamily leader Bill Eames: (excerpts)
Bill Eames graduated from Kent State University in 1972 with a B.A. in Journalism News.
* News Director for several regional radio stations, over a 10-year period
* Executive Director of the Greater Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce, 1976-1982
* V.P. of Public Affairs for the Newark (NJ) Chamber of Commerce
* Executive Director, NJ Tooling & Manufacturing Association
* Bill has worked in public policy and government affairs in all of these positions, and later in the field of public relations
* After concluding his corporate careers, he was certified and taught middle school English and Social Studies.
* and since 2009, he has led citizen organizations and coalitions, and currently is co-founder (with his wife, Barbara) of Working Together for New Jersey:
TogetherNJ.org/ info@TogetherNJ.org.
2. A possible insight from this week's Haftora, Hoshea 2:20:
{הושע ב:כ}
וְכָרַתִּ֨י לָהֶ֤ם בְּרִית֙ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֔וּא עִם־חַיַּ֤ת הַשָּׂדֶה֙ וְעִם־ע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וְרֶ֖מֶשׂ הָֽאֲדָמָ֑ה וְקֶ֨שֶׁת וְחֶ֤רֶב וּמִלְחָמָה֙ אֶשְׁבּ֣וֹר מִן־הָאָ֔רֶץ וְהִשְׁכַּבְתִּ֖
ע' מצודת דוד:
וכרתי וגו' . ר''ל חית השדה וכו' לא ישחיתו בהם כאלו כרתו עמהם ברית שלום : אשבור . ר''ל אבטל כלי מלחמה והמלחמה עצמה :
Perhaps one could suggest an allusion based on the position of the term "Keshes" ("bow", but also used elsewhere to refer to the rainbow) preceding "sword and war." Perhaps this alludes to the causation of war (an increasingly timely topic lately) - via tolerance of the LGBTQ "Rainbow-Rebellion" against G-d, a movement which takes Divine Compassion for "weakness" (sic, עפר לפיהם). This rebellion is being mainstreamed in our society -- due to - and via - legislation like S2260/ A2218, and its' proponents.
~~~
Additional Observations:
This lesson is urgently needed as America, approaching its' 250th anniversary, is facing formidable, escalating military threats (arguably largely self-inflicted, pursuant to foreign policy decisions of multiple administrations, pertaining to Russia, Ukraine, Iran, and beyond).
The federal government passed the Marriage De-Definition Rubicon in June 2015 and December 2022, thereby posing an existential threat to the remnants of what used to be the Constitutional Republic. Having ceded its spiritual right to exist (as we've addressed previously, based on VaYikra Rabbah 23:9 and Talmud tractate Chullin 92b) to the LGBTQ mafia, American political leadership is ill-advised to be overconfident in maintaining its global hegemony without very heavy losses, if even then.*
(* This is all the more true given the fact that the DC-led proxy-war against Russia is a war against a nation who's policies criminalizing LGBTQ agitation are far more in line with the Torah position than what's being supported by the ostensibly right flank of the Republican Party. (Trump celebrated with hundreds of gay agitators just a few days after Biden signed national Marriage De-definition legislation in December '22, as reported by Politico then: http://www.politico.com/news/
Make America "Get-it" Again:
When a country's adversaries possess that type of spiritual merit, extreme caution is necessary. The heavy US losses in the Gulf have evidently not been sufficient to reverse US policy in either the aforementioned moral or geopolitical arena.)
~~~
Additionally, perhaps the term Keshes alludes to the far-reaching impact of the Rainbow rebellion, undermining every foundation of a decent society, and even the very foundations of a viable human society. See further Nedarim 51a, which (as co-host R' Yonoson suggested, in a our Achrei-Mos Kedoshim broadcast) may allude to the fact that the widespread practice of abomination leads to introduction of a broad ideological worldview seeking to vindicate it:
הכי אמר רחמנא תועבה תועה אתה בה. (נדרים נא•)
~~~
S2260/ A2218 serves as a eye-opening sample of how the LGBTQ-Agitator Community premeditatedly subverts the values of the Aseres HaDibros (aka the Decalogue, the Ten Directives ("Commandments")) given by G-d at Mount Sinai over 33 centuries ago. It would be all the more inexcusable to allow such legislation to pass without a robust Jewish protest, as we approach the Shavuos Holiday.
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
3. The Transgender-tyranny and abortion-at-whim tyranny bill S2260/ A2218:
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
A few highlights of what occurred this week:
- The NJ Assembly Health Committee voted to Release the amended/substitute for S22
60 and A2218. Within 48 hours, the adopted version will be posted on the Legislature's website, here. - Next: These bills, at the discretion of each house leader, could be directly posted for final votes before the Senate and Assembly, as amended - This could happen next week, or not - we don't yet know
- The Assembly Health Committee vote was predictably 9-3 along party lines (Democrats for, Republicans against)
- You can listen to all or part of the 4-1/2 hour hearing - Click Here - by selecting the loudspeaker icon (far right) for "May 14"
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Important Links:
The "Summary" and the full revised bill:
- Here is the 4-page "Statement" released by the Senate Health Committee May 11th to "explain" the substitute for S2260 (our explanation is below)
- Here is the 11- page "substitute bill" released in the Senate on Monday, May 11
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Dates to watch for potential full house ("floor") votes in the Legislature {subject to change on very short notice}:
May 18, May 21, May 28, and June 11.
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Recent LevinAt11 Radio Broadcasts:
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Parshas Behar Bechukosai, '86:
Parshas Emor, '86:*
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Pertaining to the Haftora, Hoshea 2:19,
והסירותי שמות הבעלים מפיה, ולא יזכרו עוד בשמם:
See, for example, among related posts:
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Have a good Shabbos, and good Chodesh, and an uplifting Shavuos.Rabbi Noson Shmuel Leiter,
Executive Director,
Help Rescue Our Children
845.642.1679
Direct: 771.215.8892
Israeli Helpline: 03.721.3337
Tomim Tih'yeh [countering "New-Age" infiltration]:
Presentations on New-Age dangers: 605-313-6831 ext. 2
Heard weekly on New Jersey's WSNR Radio 620AM, co-hosting the renowned Levin-At-Eleven
program, every Thursday evening, 11pm to midnight (ET). ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
Here is a letter we sent to members of the NJ Senate Health Committee - before they passed a modified, 11-page variant of S2260 on Monday:
BS"D
May 11, '26
Re: opposition to S2260/A2218
Hon. Senators,
This legislation, S2260/A2218*, is abusive and exploitive of children, falling far below any standard of a civilized society.
In antiquity, barbarians sacrificed children in serving pagan gods. Their contemporary heirs have instead opted to murder preborn infants and brutally exploit youth to service the Medical-Industrial complex.
As such, this legislation falls beyond the realm of legitimate governmental authority.
Moreover, this legislation is a direct attack against Judaism - and its adherents. Even according to the most peripheral, lenient extremes on the Halachic spectrum, abortio
S2260/A2218 - by proscribing and penalizing certain efforts to discharge one's Torah obligations to save preborn babies from death, and youth from sexual mutilation and manipulation - constitutes an anti-religious edict. Indeed, it's arguably competitive in both word and spirit with those ancient anti-Torah decrees against which the Maccabees fought -- to the death.
Those who vote for S2260/A2218 - either in Committee or on the floor - will be remembered for their role in advancing authentic anti-Jewish persecution. No amount of throwing money at Jewish causes, or grandstanding about ostensibly "fighting anti-semitism," can undo that reality.
We urge each of you, independent of your views on related matters, to kill this draconian bill, before it kills New Jersey.
Feel invited to reach out if you'd like any Torah sources supporting the aforementioned points.
Thank you in advance,
Rabbi Noson Shmuel Leiter,
Executive Director,
Help Rescue Our Children
~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~
Broadcast weekly by:
Davidzon Radio davidzonradio.com / 718) 303-8000
Truth - Objective vs Protecting the System
The issue of the infallibility of Rabbis comes up repeatedly. The question is it meant as being literaly true or is it primarily to protect the system. Do we really have to believe that their words are aloways objectivelky true and they are never mistaken?
The Totah says Lo sasor. Which is explained that their words are to be followed whether they are right or wrong. Similalarly we are told to follow the majority. There is also the law of rebellious elder who is killed if he teaches against the majority even thgough he knows the majority is wrong. On the other hand there is the clear acknowledgement that the Sanhedrin can err in their rulings.
Rav Chaim Voloshner (Ruach Chaim 1:4): … It is prohibited for a student to accept the words of his teacher if he has questions about them. Furthermore sometimes the truth is with the student and not the teacher. Avos (1:4), One should sit in the dust at the feet of one’s teachers and drink with unquenchable thirst what they say. The word for sitting - avek - can also mean struggle or warfare. That is because this is an obligatory struggle. The holy rabbis who have composed the books we study have in fact given us permission to struggle and to fight over their words and to answer the difficulties they raise. Therefore, we have the right to question what they say and not to blindly accept their words - but one must love the truth…. Since ascertaining the truth is the prime concern - we must be very careful not to be conceited and egotistical in the discussions and to imagine that we are as great as the teacher or author with whom we are disagreeing. We should be aware in our hearts that we might simply be misunderstanding their words. Therefore we must always be very humble. We must have the attitude, ‘I am not worthy to argue but this is Torah and I must know the correct answer’. Furthermore, the Mishna states that the struggle is conditional on being ‘in the dust at their feet’ which means we must be humble and submissive and figuratively sit on the ground before them in these discussions.
Menoras HaMeor (2:34): We are obligated to believe all that our Sages said in medrashim and agada - in the same way we believe in the Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu. If we see something which appears to be exaggerated or unnatural, we should attribute this to our inadequate minds and not to a problem with what the Sages said. Therefore, someone who ridicules anything that our Sages stated is deserving of the punishment of being boiled in manure…. We learn from a number of gemoras that the Sages and the righteous ones - who are the source of the medrashim - even their conversations with others need to be studied and surely their words of instruction and reproof. All their words are the words of the living G d and nothing is without meaning. Everything which is written in their name must be believed as being true. One cannot ridicule them or even view them as ridiculous - and one who ridicules them will be punished. Therefore, it is necessary to be careful not to speak against the Sages or their words. Instead, one should study them to the degree his mind permits. This idea is taught in Avos (2:10): “One should warm himself by the fire of the Sages but be careful of their coals not to be burned. That is because their bite is that of the fox and their sting is that of the scorpion and their hiss is that of a poisonous snake and all their words are like the coals of fire.“ In other words, one should draw close to the wise in order to learn from them but if one gets too close, he will be burned. Similarly, a person who gets too close and comes to ridicule their words will lose the benefit of learning and his love will change to hatred and he will lose the attainments he had hoped to obtain…
Pesachim (94b): The Jewish sages assert that the sun travels underneath the sky during the day and above the sky at night. The sages of the nations of the world say that during the day the sun travels under the sky and at night under the ground. R’ Yehuda Hanassi said: Their view seems more correct than ours since during the day the wells are cold but at night they are hot….
Rav Tzadok (Sefer HaZichronos #3 Yichud HaShem): It is already well established for all Jews the words of our Sages and all those who are sanctified with kabalistic wisdom, what the Kabbalistic matter of the Chariot refers to. Consequently there is no need to justify it against the words of our early scholars who understood it in terms of philosophy and science and metaphysics. The rejection of this early naturalistic view has already been done by the sages throughout the generations. They questioned this approach because if it were truly valid than that means that more had been revealed to the lowly of the nations of the world and to anyone who looked at their philosophy books than had been revealed to the greatest prophets by means of only allusions and riddles. There is no need to talk about this at length to right minded Jews now that the accepted views of Kabbalistic knowledge have become widespread. Whoever denies the Kabbalistic view is a heretic as is explained concerning the mitzva of lo sasur. The Bach (# 5) says that anyone who ridicules our Sages and rejects Kabbala - which is the source and foundation of Torah and all fear of G d – there is no worse form of ridiculing the words of our great Sages and he is deserving of nidoi.
Chasam Sofer (Y.D. 2:356): R’ Hillel who is quoted in Sanhedrin (99a) as rejecting salvation through Moshiach but asserted [according to Rashi] that G d Himself would directly save the Jews. Rashi is without a doubt correct that R’ Hillel was not rejecting the fact of salvation but only the agency of Moshiach… Furthermore, it is obvious that we don’t accept his view. In fact someone today who asserted that there will be no Moshiach because he accepts R’ Hillel’s view is denying the principle of the Torah to follow the majority position. Since the overwhelming majority of sages have rejected this view no one has the right to go against that majority and insist on accepting the sole dissenting view of R’ Hillel. This is no different that the case of R’ Eliezer who ruled in for his community that it permitted on Shabbos to cut wood to make charcoal to make iron for a milah knife in order to do bris mila on Shabbos. Since the majority of Torah scholars rejected this view, anyone who performs these actions on Shabbos before witnesses and with a warning is liable to capital punishment and he cannot claim that he is following the authority of R’ Eliezer. This that it teaches in Eduyos “Why are the minority views taught” is in fact obviously dealing with a different issue which there is no need to go into here. Nevertheless even though Salvation and the coming of Moshiach are themselves not foundation principles that determine Judaism but a person who doesn’t accept them is rejecting the foundation principle of belief in the Torah and the words of the prophets.
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 pure and burned it. They also voted to ostracize him…
Emes L'Yakov (Emor Vayikra 21:02) The Torah and halacha works from the viewpoint of the human intellect even though it is not objectively true. The Torah has given us rules for interpretation and deciding halacha. We are not to decide except on the evidence we see and we are to follow the majority view even though the minority view might be the correct one. The gemora Eiruvin says there was a dispute on an issue for three years between Beis |Hillel and Beis Shammai until finally a Bas Kol proclaimed the halacha was according to Beis Hillel even though both views were the word of G-d This seems to be different than other disputes and it established a general rule to follow the view of Beis Hillel over that of Beis Shammai even though Beis Shammai seemed superior. This seems to mean we follow what seems to be common sense of Beis Hillel and not the apparent greater brilliance of Beis Shammai which more likely to be objectively true. A clear example of this is found in Kesubos(17a) regarding praising a new bride. Beis Hillel says always say positive things even if they might not be true while Beis Shammai says you must say only truthful praise. This is a general rule even concerning purchases. You need to be concerned how the purchaser views it, not how it is objectively. In Kabbala seforim we are told that while we normally follow the view of Beis Hillel in Messianic times we will switch to Beis Shammai. That means only in the present world do we judge the truth according to how most people see it but in the future we will only follow objective truth.
Devarim (17:11): According to the Torah which I will teach you and the laws which they will tell you, don’t turn from that which they say right or left. And the man who deliberately performs and act and [thereby] does not listen to the cohen who serves the L-rd your G-d or to the judge and performs an act - shall die and you should destroy the evil from Israel. and all the people should hear and fear and not transgress further
Rashi (Devarim 17:11): Even if they tell you that “right” is “left” and “left” is “right” and surely if they tell you that “right” is “right” and “left” is “left”.
Sifri (Devarim 154:11): Right and left - Even if it appears in your eyes that “right” is “left” and that “left” is “right” – you should obey them.
Yerushalmi (Horios 1:1): You might think that you must obey the [Sanhedrin or Rabbinic authorities] even when they tell you that “right” is “left” and that “left” is “right” – but the Torah says that you are to follow after them “right and left”. Thus it is only when they tell you that “right” is “right” and “left” is “left” that you should obey them.
Torah Temima (Devarim 17:11.62): Don’t turn right or left … Even if your view and reasoning inclines the opposite of the view of the Sanhedrin and their reasoning. That is because it is well known that in all matters – people’s views and reasoning differ. This is mentioned in Berachos (58a), “When you see a crowd of Jews you should say the beracha, Blessed is He who discerns secrets. That is because the views of men are not the same.” We see that even in one halacha that there are strongly divergent views – some will declare it to be impure while others say it is pure, some say it is prohibited while others permit it. So even when it is obvious in your eyes that the truth is with you - since you know how to distinguish between right and left – nevertheless you should listen to the Sanhedrin in their ruling and reasoning. It is clear from this that you are only obligated to obey them concerning right and left only if seems that they are wrong. But if you in fact know that they are wrong e.g., they are permitting eating forbidden fats or allowing a marriage between prohibited partners – then it is prohibited to listen to them. This is stated explicitly in the Yerushalmi (Horios) that I mention in the previous drasha… However this understanding is contradicted by the Ramban who writes, “Even if you think in your heart that they are in error and it is obvious to you as your right and left – you should still follow what they say. Don’t be bothered by the fact that you are eating prohibited fats or that you will be executing a person you view as innocent – but you should say that is what G d has commanded me to do… according to their understanding the Torah was given to me – even if they err.” These words seem to teach that even if the Sanhedrin permits something which is absolutely forbidden by the Torah that you are obligated to obey them! However the words of the Yerushalmi (Horios) that I cited in the previous section explicitly refute such an understanding. Furthermore commonsense rejects this entirely… Therefore we are forced to explain that the intent of the Ramban is what we have written. It must be in a case where it is not definitely prohibited fats… but it merely seems to be that way based on their deduction and reasoning which you view as mistaken…
Michtav M’Eliyahu (1:75): The Talmudic sages (Chazal) have told us to obey the words of gedolim – even if they tell us that left is right. This expression isn’t meant to imply that we must obey them even when they have actually erred. But rather that we must listen to them even when we - with our lowly understanding – think that we definitely have observed that they have erred. That is because our senses are totally nothing as if they were the dust of the earth compared to the clarity of their intellect and the Heavenly support they have. Thus our belief that they have erred has no practical consequences since there is a rule that a beis din cannot nullify the ruling of another beis din unless it is greater in wisdom and number. Even without this rule it is clear that what we think is awareness or experience is only a figment of our imagination and unstable moods. This superiority is Daas Torah within the framework of emunas chachom (faith in our sages).
Abarbanel (Devarim 17:11):… Rashi wrote that even if the Sanhedrin tells you right is left or left is right and surely if they tell you right is right and left is left [you must obey them]. That means that what is stated in the Sifre that even if they tell you that right are left… means that this is merely the perception and understanding of the one asking the question to the Sanhedrin but not according to what the actual truth is. That is because the right of the Sanhedrin is always right and the left is always left. [i.e., they are infallible]. This is the correct understanding because the Sifre that Rashi cites actually says, “Even if it seems in your eyes that right is left… you must obey them.” The Ramban agrees with this explanation. However the Ran [Derashos HaRan #11] disagrees and says that left and right are to be understood literally and thus the Sanhedrin must be obeyed even if they err…. He also explains that even though a person is harmed by doing something against the Torah – but if this is done because of the mistaken ruling of Sanhedrin then the reward of listening to them compensates for the harm… G d forbid to say that that is the meaning of our Sages. The Torah does not rely on an illusion that one is spiritually pure when in fact he is impure or that something is permitted when in reality it is prohibited or that harm is permitted. Because the Torah is concerned with righteousness and G d is the G d of Truth and His Torah is True.
Ramban (Devarim 17:11): Left and Right. Rashi explains that even if the Sanhedrin tell you that right is left or left is right – [you must obey them]. Meaning that even if you are certain that the Sanhedrin has erred and it is as obvious to you as the difference between your right and left – you still must comply with their understanding of the Torah. In other words you can’t argue, “How can I eat that which is prohibited by the Torah or how can I execute this person when I know he has not transgressed?” Rather your attitude must be, “The absolute obedience to the rulings of the Sanhedrin is what G d has commanded me and I must observe the mitzvos exactly as the Sanhedrin (which is in G d’s presence in the Temple) says. The Torah was given to me according to their understanding – even if they err.” This is what happened when R’ Yehoshua had a dispute with the Sanhedrin as to what day was Yom Kippur. R’ Gamliel the head of the Sanhedrin ordered R’ Yehoshua to appear before him on the day that he thought was Yom Kippur (Rosh HaShanna 25a). The necessity for this mitzva is very great. That is because the Torah was given to us in writing and it is known that people don’t think identically in all matters. Therefore it would be natural for disputes over what the Torah means to continually multiply and it would end up that there would be many Torahs instead of one. That is why this verse tells you that one must obey the Sanhedrin which convenes in G d’s presence in the Temple – in everything they say concerning the understanding of the Torah. There is no difference in the requirement to obey whether this Torah understanding is part of the Tradition which goes back what G d told Moshe or what their understanding of the meaning or intent of a Torah verse. This requirement to accept their Torah understanding is because the Torah was in fact given to us according to their understanding. Therefore they must be obeyed even if their view contrasts with your understanding as left contrasts with right and surely if you agree with their understanding. That is because G d’s spirit is on those who serve in His Temple and He does not desert His pious ones. G d always protects them from error and mistake. The Sifri (Shoftim 154) says that you must obey them even if appears that they have reversed right with left and left with right.
Kuzari (3:41): Do not add to that which the members of the Sanhedrin have agreed to since they have special Divine assistance. In addition since their number is very great, it is illogical that they would agree to something which is against the Torah. Furthermore it is not expected that they would err since their wisdom is very great. Some of them have wisdom by what they were taught, others because they have natural brilliance, and some of developed it through their own efforts. According to our Tradition, the Sanhedrin mastered all the knowledge and wisdom that is available to man.
Rabbeinu Bachye (Devarim 17:9): And bring your halachic questions to the judge who is in your days… Your final authority is the judge who is in your days and therefore Yiftach in his generation has the same authority as Shmuel in his generation. That is the meaning of the expression “who is in your days.” Even if he doesn’t have as much wisdom as judges in previous generations – you still must listen to him. Even if he tells you that right is left and that left is right and surely if he tells you that right is right and left is left. The Ramban wrote, “the need for this mitzvah is great. That is because the Torah was given in written form and that there is a great diversity of opinions about new issues that arise. That leads to great disputes and consequently the Torah would become many Torahs. Therefore the Torah legislated for us that we must obey the Sanhedrin, which stands before G d in the Temple in all that they tell us in regards to the understanding of the Torah. Furthermore that we must view all that they say as if it were told us by Moshe as a messenger of G d. That is because the Torah was given based on their understanding. Consequently even if it appears in your eyes that their view is the opposite of your understanding just as the reversal of right and left - we must obey them. And surely we are to view that they are the possessors of truth and that ruach hakodesh rests on them to always determine the truth.
Riva (Devarim 17:11): Don’t deviate from what they tell you left or right – Rashi explains, “You must obey them even if they tell you right is left and left is right and surely if they tell you right is right and left is left.” This is an astounding statement. Are we really required to listen to a rabbi who tells you that something that is impure is pure or that something which is prohibited really permitted?! The answer is that this command does not concern Torah obligations but rather Rabbinic decrees. Thus “the right that is really left” is referring to decrees such as not doing the Torah mitzva of blowing shofar because of the concern of profaning Shabbos. The meaning of “the left that is really right” is referring to decrees such as prohibiting marriage to someone who is permitted by the Torah.
Sefer HaIkkarim (3:23): Since it is possible that there will be a dispute amongst the sages regarding a matter which has not been received by Tradition but has been generated by one of the 13 Hermeneutic Principles or someone other intellectual method – therefore the Divine Wisdom decided in order for G d’s Torah to be perfect and devoid of disputes to the degree possible – the principle of decision making was given to every generation i.e., to the majority of sages. That is why the Torah says, “follow after the majority” (Shemos 23:2) and “Do deviate from what they tell you right or left” (Devarim 17:11). Our Rabbis have commented that means that if even if they tell you that right is left and left is right. The Rabbis’ intent was that every man values his thoughts and understanding more than that of others - to the degree that we find that many fools, women and ignoramuses who insist that the sages are mistaken and their understanding is superior. Thus this verse is saying that even if it appears that the sages are saying the opposite of the truth - right is left and left is right – you should never disobey their words but accept that the final decision is always based on the view of the majority of sages. This is true even though it is possible that an individual can have greater knowledge and that he has a greater grasp of the truth then they – the halacha still follows the decision of the majority. An individual or minority is not allowed to act in disagreement with the majority. This was the issue in the dispute between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Eliezer (Bava Metzia 59b). Even though Rabbi Eliezer was clearly superior to the others in wisdom as we see that a Heavenly Voice announced that his disputants had no basis to disagree with him since the halacha was always in accord with him – but Rabbi Yehoshua stood up and declared that the halacha was not in heaven. In other words that even if the truth was in accord with the view of Rabbi Eliezar, the view of the majority could not be abandoned in deference to the minority since the Torah has stated that halacha is determined by the majority. Even if in a single matter we would follow the minority against the majority, it would create a major dispute in every generation. That is because it will set a precedent for allowing each individual to claim that he is right and allow him to follow his own views against the majority and this will cause a general collapse of the Torah system. Therefore we can’t allow exceptions to the rule of following the majority in order to accept a minority opinion. Of course the authority of the majority is only if they are sages and not the ignorant masses who are typically fools in these matters and their views are not trustworthy….
Chinuch (#496): We are enjoined not to dispute the authorities of the Oral Law, not to change their words and not even to avoid fulfilling their commands regarding any aspect of the Torah. Concerning this matter, the Torah (Devarim 17:11) says: You shall not turn aside from that which they tell you right or left. The Sifre (Devarim 154) explains: Not to turn aside - this is a Torah prohibition. The reason for this commandment is the fact that the views and understandings of people concerning issues are not identical. In other words, you will not find total agreement on an issue amongst a large group of people. G d knew that if everyone was given the authority to follow his own interpretation of the Torah, each person would understand the Torah differently and there would be a large number of disagreements between Jews. Consequently instead of having a single Torah there would be many Torahs. (This is similar to what I wrote concerning the need for the principle of majority rule Mishpatim #75). Therefore G d, the master of all wisdom, made our Torah of Truth complete by commanding us to obey the true understanding of our Sages. We are to obey not only our ancient sages but those of each generation. That is because the sages in each generation have received their words and drunk the water from their books and have toiled mightily day and night to understand the depths of their words and the wonder of their views. With this principle of agreement we have the path of truth to knowing the Torah, while without it we will be ensnared by our thoughts and poor understanding and not succeed at all. As an indication of the greatness and truthfulness of this mitzva, our sages (Sifre) have said that we are to obey our Torah authorities even if they say to you that right is left and the left is right. In other words, even if they are mistaken in one issue they are not to be disobeyed but their error must be followed. It is better to suffer from this one error in order to assure that everything is always under their authority. The alternative is that everyone follows his own opinion which will result in the destruction of the religion and anarchy and ultimately the complete loss of the entire people. Because of this the determination of the correct meaning of the Torah has been given to the Torah authorities and amongst these authorities the governing principle is that the minority must submit to the view of the majority for the same reason. And illustration of this principle is found in the astounding Bava Metzia (59b) concerning the dispute between R' Eliezar and the Oven of Achnai. It states that Eliyahu was asked what G d was doing during the dispute. He answered that He smiled and said My children have triumphed over me. G d was happy that His children followed the way of the Torah and its command to always obey majority rule. This that it says there My children have triumphed over Me obviously is not meant literally - Heaven forbid! The explanation is that in this dispute the truth was in fact with R' Eliezar as was testified to by the Heavenly Voice (bas kol). Therefore even though the truth was with R' Eliezar but since his thinking was too profound for them and they did not want to concede to him even after the bas kol. Their claim was that the Torah clearly establishes the requirement to listen to the majority always whether their position is true or they are mistaken. That is why G d said that My children triumphed over me. In other words since they have deviated from the path of the truth which R' Eliezar had determined and not them, they asserted their authority based upon the principle of majority rule. Therefore it had to be concede that in this case truth was vanquished and it was like the Master of Truth was vanquished.
Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabiah Omer Y.D. 6:7.2): … The Yerushalmi (Horious 1:1) states, that you might think even if they tell you that "right" is "left" and that "left" is "right" that they must be obeyed. Therefore the Torah says that you should only obey them if they say that "right" is "right" and "left" is "left". But this is the opposite of the Sifre [that you must obey them even if they tell you that "right" is "left" and "left" is "right"…. However according to the explanation of the Ramban (Sefer HaMitzvos Shoresh I) and those who support him [Ran Sanhedrin 87a] there is a reconciliation. According to the Ramban as long as the dissenting view has not been directly presented to the Sanhedrin [or Rabbinic authority] then he must refuse to eat that which the Sanhedrin insists is kosher. [If he eats food that he regards as unkosher because he is relying on the Sanhedrin he must bring a korbon] However once he has directly discussed the issue with the Sanhedrin and they have rejected his view [despite his best efforts] then the halacha becomes that he must obey them [even if he is still convinced he is right.]
Thursday, May 14, 2026
Israel to sue NY Times over opinion article alleging widespread rape of Palestinian prisoners
Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Sa’ar, say piece by columnist Nicholas Kristof is ‘one of the most hideous and distorted lies ever published against the State of Israel in the modern press’
Israel will sue The New York Times over an op-ed alleging widespread sexual abuse and rape against Palestinian prisoners, said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar in a joint statement Thursday.
Kristof’s column, published Monday, alleged “a pattern of widespread Israeli sexual violence against men, women and even children — by soldiers, settlers, interrogators in the Shin Bet internal security agency and, above all, prison guards.”
Kristof quoted testimony from Palestinians who said they’d been regularly stripped naked in prison and groped, forcibly penetrated with various objects, or been mounted and raped by specially trained dogs. The latter claim, circulating in anti-Israel media for some time, has recently been amplified by the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, which was also a key source for Kristof’s report.
Rav Dessler - Daas Torah means not only total obedience but an inability to judge gedolim
from Daas Torah - translation copyrighted
Michtav M’Eliyahu (1:75): Our Sages have already told us to listen to the words of gedolim - “Even if they tell you that left is right.” Furthermore a person should not think, Gd forbid!, that they have certainly erred just because someone so insignificant as himself has perceived that they erred. In fact it is important to know that one’s perception of reality is totally null and void as the dust of the earth in comparison to the clarity of intellect and Divine assistance that they have. We have an important halachic principle that one beis din can not nullify the ruling of another beis din unless it is greater than the first in wisdom and number. Otherwise it is likely that that which he thought that he perceived is merely an illusion and distorted understanding of reality. This is what is meant by Daas Torah - which is an aspect of Emunas Chachomim (faith in the sages).
Rabbi Meiselman's Torah, Chazal & Science - Chazal are infallible even regarding Science
Jewish Press There is one area of agreement, though, between sophisticated scientists and Torah scholars: attempts to make “peace” between the two sides. As methodologies of both science and halacha demand precision in the formulation and application of their respective principles, Rabbi Meiselman writes that “Consequently, both scientists and Torah scholars bristle when amateurs make assertions about their areas of expertise based on superficial contact with the sources.” It is for this reason that Rabbi Meiselman, rosh yeshiva of the Yeshivas Toras Moshe in Jerusalem, has authored the book, Torah, Chazal & Science
Rabbi Meiselman is uniquely qualified to address the delicate topic of Torah and science. He was trained by outstanding academicians in a variety of disciplines – mathematics, philosophy and several of the natural sciences. Most importantly, however, he had unlimited access to his uncle and rebbe, Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik, zt”l, who guided him in attaining a profound, thorough and Torah-true perspective on this topic. When reading this book, one will immediately notice the unique combination of vast Torah knowledge and extensive understanding of science from a sophisticated point of view. Those elements are brought to bear in this book.
One of the crucial aspects of the Jewish people’s belief, Rabbi Meiselman contends, is that the Torah was given by Hashem on Har Sinai and does not contain mistakes. The Torah is not a “primitive document,” and everything the Torah describes is absolutely truthful. Additionally, in this view, our mesorah of Torah She’be’al Peh is completely accurate. Therefore, to suggest that Chazal are full of mistakes has the potential to undermine our mesorah’s authenticity.
This new literature has disturbed many, who see it as radical. Conversely, many others oblivious to its danger warmly embraced its new ideas. Those concerned that this new thinking is dangerous have voiced their worries, while numerous others seem content with its unique approach. Torah, Chazal & Science was written for the benefit of both camps. Rabbi Meiselman satisfies both those who have been eagerly awaiting a proper response to the non-traditionalists as well as those unaware of the need for a response. Both can be satisfied with the sophisticated level of scientific expertise, coupled with a proficiency in Torah, which is apparent in this work. Thus, this book has the potential to unite Klal Yisrael pertaining to these issues.
Rabbi Meiselman begins Torah, Chazal & Science by explaining why it is that Chazal’s knowledge is superior to that of scientists – past, present and future. This is so because Chazal’s knowledge comes from the Torah. As Rabbi Meiselman writes: “The physical world is a manifestation of a completely separate underlying spiritual-metaphysical reality.” Everything occurring in our world, Rabbi Meiselman notes, is a reflection of realities and relationships existing there.This reality is not subject to change; accordingly all insights and conclusions derived from it are likewise immutable. Consequently, one who understands the spiritual world will also understand the resultant material world. [...]
Among the book’s goals is to demonstrate that there is no support in the classic sources for the approach that has recently surfaced, and to explain how it represents a deviation from the perspective that has been passed down throughout the centuries. In the book, Rabbi Meiselman examines many examples of how the chachmei hamesorah dealt with conflicts between Chazal and certain observable facts. His conclusion: Neither the integrity of the mesorah nor Chazal’s reliability was ever in question. One will come to the realization that Chazal’s mesorah and their definitive teachings represent absolute truth – even with respect to science.[...]
Maharal - Why a husband can go to Gehinom for listening to wife's advice about the world or spirituality
Without any doubt, this is the correct way of understanding the words of our Sages and not like those who explain the words of our Sages as being mere conjecture and guesses. That is because these things which we said are words of wisdom, we explain elsewhere concerning the words of our Sages. Bava Metzia (59a), “Whoever follows the advice of his wife will fall into Gehinom...But people say if your wife is short then bend down and hear her whisper? That is not a contradiction because the one that says not to listen to you wife is referring to worldly matters while the other is referring to household matters. Alternatively do not listen to your wife in spiritual matters but it is permitted concerning worldly matters.” Now I will explain with this the words of the Mishna which says that a man who follows the advice of his wife will fall into Gehinom.
The man who is compared to the Form, if he follows after his wife who is Substance and substance is inherently deficient and he obeys her advice then it is definitely fitting that he should fall into Gehinom. That is because as we explained before – Gehinom is complete deficiency – as the names of Gehinom teach... Therefore since the Form deviates from his proper level to be drawn after Substance he is attaching himself to deficit and falls into Gehinom as the Form is drawn to Substance.
The question was raised from, People say If your wife is short then bend down and hear her whisper. The answer was given that one should not listen to her for worldly matters only for household matters. The explanation of household matters is that the man is not deviating after his wife when he listens to her in thes matters since the wife is the foundation of the home. And that is the way it has been in the order of the world. And consequently if he follows the advice of his wife in household matters we don’t say that the man is like the Form following after Substance and thus deviating from his spiritual level. That is because in this that the wife is the foundation of the home, from that aspect he is not attaching himself to deficit. In fact the opposite is true since the wife is the basis of the existence of the home and therefore she should be listen to in household matters. However in all other matters in which the wife is not the prime figure, if the man follows after her advice then he will be in fact going after deficit and will fall into Gehinom.
And even according to the alternative answer of listening to worldly matters and not to spiritual matters – he should listen to her in worldly matters because that would not be deviating towards deficit. That is because this world is materialistic which is relevant to the woman who is Substance and therefore for advice in worldly matters he will not fall into Gehinom. In fact the opposite is true – he should follow her advice in worldly matters since that involves material things and that is the wife’s domain. It is only in spiritual matters that he should not listen to her because concerning spritual matters he is the Form and she is only Substance to which is associated the deficit. Consequently if he listens to her in spiritual matters he is deviating after the deficit and he will fall into Gehinom because he is being brought into a deficit and a state of lacking.
I am writing these things to explain to you that the words of the Mishna are clearly correct and are not mere conjecture.
Furthermore in Berachos (61a), They say that it is better to go behind a lion and not go behind a woman. In other words even though a lion can maul a person, nevertheless one who goes behind a lion is not in as much danger as one who goes behind a woman. That is because the lion is not deficit as is a woman. Because going after a woman is the Form following the Substance which causes completely loss to the Form when he deviates to follow after Substance. There is no question that it is worse for him then what the lion can do to him. Because even if the lion harms him, the lion’s main concern is to maul to eat and is nothing personal. But the deficit which is attached to Subtance - that involves his essence. Thus a lion will sometimes damage and sometimes not as is in all cases of accident which is not the case of following after a woman. I will offer addition explanations of this with G-d’s help.
Deja vu! - Conservative & Reform attack Israeli rabbinate for being more concerned with halacha than social reality
The following describes the problem from a different perspective. It is an exceprt of an article which appeared in The Associated of the Baltimore community. It is not a current article - but it does indicate clearly that the claims the RZ/MO have against the Chareidi view are exactly the claims of the Conservative movement against the RZ/MO view.
This illustrates that ultimately the issue is how to strike a proper balance between concern for halachic integrity and social needs/reality. What kind of consequences can we live with? What are our options?
This illustrates that ultimately the issue is how to strike a proper balance between concern for halachic integrity and social needs/reality. What kind of consequences can we live with? What are our options?
On Eve of Shavuot, Conversion Still is a Divisive Issue in Israel
Dina Kraft TEL AVIV, May 18 (JTA) — As Jews around the world prepare for Shavuot and its reading of the Book of Ruth — which features the Moabite woman's famous conversion with the words, "Your people shall be my people and your God my God" — Israel continues to grapple with the highly charged subject of conversion.
Long a battleground between Israel's Orthodox establishment and the Conservative and Reform movements, the issue took on urgency with the mass wave of immigration from the former Soviet Union in the 1990s. "I think Ruth and her conversion should indeed set the model for the current challenge of converting the Russians who live among us," said Rabbi Ehud Bandel, president of the Masorti-Conservative movement in Israel. "Once they identify with Israel and the Jewish people and society and accept the Jewish faith, they must be embraced exactly as Naomi embraced Ruth, who became the grandmother of King David." Bandel and others claim that Israel's chief rabbinate makes conversion especially difficult for those they suspect may not lead an Orthodox lifestyle. "The real challenge is that unfortunately, the Orthodox establishment does not convert for Judaism but for Orthodoxy," Bandel said. The rabbinate is "reluctant to open its arms to Russian converts because everyone knows they will not be Orthodox." Rabbi Eliyahu Ben-Dahan, general director of the rabbinical court of Israel — which oversees conversions — says there can be no shortcuts when it comes to following halachah, or Jewish law, with regard to conversions. Orthodox authorities say Jewish law requires that converts undergo traditional ritual conversion and commit to adhering to all the precepts of Jewish law, or halachah. Non-Orthodox streams contend that these authorities inevitably interpret halachah as Orthodox observance. "If they think we will give up on halachah, then of course we cannot," Ben-Dahan said. "At the end of the day, the ones who want to convert, do convert," he said. "We are doing all we can do." As many as 300,000 of the nearly 1 million immigrants who came to Israel in the 1990s from the former Soviet Union are not considered Jews under Jewish law. They pay taxes and serve in the army, but can't marry Jews in Israel or be buried in Jewish cemeteries. On their Israeli identity cards, the category for religion is left blank. It's a void that activists from the non-Orthodox streams of Judaism are trying to fill by lobbying for broader acceptance in conversion processes. "They live as Jews but are not considered Jews," Gilad Kariv, a lawyer and ordained Reform rabbi who works for the movement's lobbying arm, said of the Russian immigrants. Prevented from converting, the immigrants' level of identification with the Jewish state eventually goes down, he said. "They feel less Israeli, less Jewish, and this is a problem in Israel — this lack of accessibility to Judaism," he said. Kariv cites statistics from the Jewish Agency for Israel showing that close to half of the non-Jewish immigrants when asked before they moved to Israel said they wanted to convert. Asked after their move to Israel, only 10 percent to 20 percent said they still wanted to convert. Rabbi Chaim Druckman, who served in the Knesset as a member of the National Religious Party, has just taken up a new post as director of conversion affairs in the Prime Minister's Office. The position was established largely to deal with immigrants who may have Jewish ancestry but are not Jewish according to Jewish law, which accepts as Jews only those with Jewish mothers. "Those who want to convert need to be helped," Druckman told JTA. "We need to help these people and let them know we do want them." In 1998, a government commission on conversion, headed by then-Finance Minister Ya'acov Ne'eman, issued recommendations to the government. They included the establishment of a joint institute for conversion taught by a combination of Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform rabbis. The liberal streams agreed that those wishing to convert would then go to a Beit Din, or Jewish law court, for an Orthodox ceremony that would be universally recognized. Orthodox representatives did not sign on to the final recommendation, but the conversion institute has been established since, with branches across the country. Currently, it serves 2,500 students and is funded by the Jewish Agency and the government. Catering to immigrants, most classes are run in Russian. Some are conducted in Spanish for South American immigrants. The institute's executive director, Nehemia Citroen, said he thinks the government realizes how critical it is to facilitate the conversion process for new immigrants. "I believe the leadership here in this country in all realms understands the enormity of the problem, understands the situation by which hundreds of thousands of immigrants are brought here and told they are not Jewish," he said. "All those in leadership positions, including religious positions, have to see the reality of the situation today and allow for answers." In the four years since the institute was founded, 3,256 people have finished their conversion studies and 1,367 have been converted. But Bandel bemoaned the figure as "just a drop in the ocean." He and others say there's a backlog at the rabbinical courts for students from the institute. Critics also claim that those who study in Orthodox-run conversion classes have an easier time being converted by the rabbinical courts.[...]
Long a battleground between Israel's Orthodox establishment and the Conservative and Reform movements, the issue took on urgency with the mass wave of immigration from the former Soviet Union in the 1990s. "I think Ruth and her conversion should indeed set the model for the current challenge of converting the Russians who live among us," said Rabbi Ehud Bandel, president of the Masorti-Conservative movement in Israel. "Once they identify with Israel and the Jewish people and society and accept the Jewish faith, they must be embraced exactly as Naomi embraced Ruth, who became the grandmother of King David." Bandel and others claim that Israel's chief rabbinate makes conversion especially difficult for those they suspect may not lead an Orthodox lifestyle. "The real challenge is that unfortunately, the Orthodox establishment does not convert for Judaism but for Orthodoxy," Bandel said. The rabbinate is "reluctant to open its arms to Russian converts because everyone knows they will not be Orthodox." Rabbi Eliyahu Ben-Dahan, general director of the rabbinical court of Israel — which oversees conversions — says there can be no shortcuts when it comes to following halachah, or Jewish law, with regard to conversions. Orthodox authorities say Jewish law requires that converts undergo traditional ritual conversion and commit to adhering to all the precepts of Jewish law, or halachah. Non-Orthodox streams contend that these authorities inevitably interpret halachah as Orthodox observance. "If they think we will give up on halachah, then of course we cannot," Ben-Dahan said. "At the end of the day, the ones who want to convert, do convert," he said. "We are doing all we can do." As many as 300,000 of the nearly 1 million immigrants who came to Israel in the 1990s from the former Soviet Union are not considered Jews under Jewish law. They pay taxes and serve in the army, but can't marry Jews in Israel or be buried in Jewish cemeteries. On their Israeli identity cards, the category for religion is left blank. It's a void that activists from the non-Orthodox streams of Judaism are trying to fill by lobbying for broader acceptance in conversion processes. "They live as Jews but are not considered Jews," Gilad Kariv, a lawyer and ordained Reform rabbi who works for the movement's lobbying arm, said of the Russian immigrants. Prevented from converting, the immigrants' level of identification with the Jewish state eventually goes down, he said. "They feel less Israeli, less Jewish, and this is a problem in Israel — this lack of accessibility to Judaism," he said. Kariv cites statistics from the Jewish Agency for Israel showing that close to half of the non-Jewish immigrants when asked before they moved to Israel said they wanted to convert. Asked after their move to Israel, only 10 percent to 20 percent said they still wanted to convert. Rabbi Chaim Druckman, who served in the Knesset as a member of the National Religious Party, has just taken up a new post as director of conversion affairs in the Prime Minister's Office. The position was established largely to deal with immigrants who may have Jewish ancestry but are not Jewish according to Jewish law, which accepts as Jews only those with Jewish mothers. "Those who want to convert need to be helped," Druckman told JTA. "We need to help these people and let them know we do want them." In 1998, a government commission on conversion, headed by then-Finance Minister Ya'acov Ne'eman, issued recommendations to the government. They included the establishment of a joint institute for conversion taught by a combination of Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform rabbis. The liberal streams agreed that those wishing to convert would then go to a Beit Din, or Jewish law court, for an Orthodox ceremony that would be universally recognized. Orthodox representatives did not sign on to the final recommendation, but the conversion institute has been established since, with branches across the country. Currently, it serves 2,500 students and is funded by the Jewish Agency and the government. Catering to immigrants, most classes are run in Russian. Some are conducted in Spanish for South American immigrants. The institute's executive director, Nehemia Citroen, said he thinks the government realizes how critical it is to facilitate the conversion process for new immigrants. "I believe the leadership here in this country in all realms understands the enormity of the problem, understands the situation by which hundreds of thousands of immigrants are brought here and told they are not Jewish," he said. "All those in leadership positions, including religious positions, have to see the reality of the situation today and allow for answers." In the four years since the institute was founded, 3,256 people have finished their conversion studies and 1,367 have been converted. But Bandel bemoaned the figure as "just a drop in the ocean." He and others say there's a backlog at the rabbinical courts for students from the institute. Critics also claim that those who study in Orthodox-run conversion classes have an easier time being converted by the rabbinical courts.[...]
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)