"drop dead!" vs. "you are not acting leshem shamayim"

Recently I was harshly criticized on this blog by two individuals. One told me to "drop dead!" while the other accused me of not acting "leshem shamayim". The question has been raised why I treated the one who told me to "drop dead!" with respect while I told the one who questioned my integrity that his views were stupid and nonsense? To understand my response one needs to understand a puzzling gemora in Berachos (33a), All those who are lacking in daas - it is prohibited to have mercy on them.

When I was a learning this gemora in yeshiva, I asked one of my rebbeim, "How could it be that a person lacking in knowledge should not be treated kindly. Isn't such a person in great need of mercy?" He replied that I misunderstood the term "daas." It doesn't mean intelligence or understanding. Daas means seichel. In other words a person who doesn't act in accord with his knowledge is said to be lacking in seichel or daas. It is not a question whether he has a high or low level of knowledge or intelligence but just whether he has integrated his knowledge into his behavior. Since the person has the ability to act better - we are not doing him a favor by letting him get by with acting on a lower level than he is capable of acting.

The critic who told me to "drop dead!" was in fact acting with great seichel - but he comes from a world where such harsh and coarse expressions are acceptable way of expressing one's views. From his cultural background his arguments were consistent - he viewed me as creating a spiritual holocaust and he communicated his passionate feelings in a way he felt was appropriate. He in fact is ignorant of the halacha and the critical importance of halachic analysis. His culture values independent free speech - not authority or scholarship. It values passionate expressions of one's feelings and concerns. So I responded respectfully - because he was in his own way being respectful to me. On the other hand the 2nd critic who questioned my integrity and motivation - he shares the same culture I do. However he is lacking in seichel. While acknowledging that I am raising a legitimate and appropriate question - he attacked me because I wasn't concerning myself with bigger problems that were beyond mine and his ablity to correct. That is simply a lack of seichel. He obviously was more concerned with pesonally attacking me than he was about the issue - since any improvement should be welcome.

I mention this because it has ramifications for the issue of kiruv and geirus. People who are being brought in to our community by both kiruv programs and through conversion - have a different culture with different values. Inevitably we will be influenced by them - and are being influenced by them - as they are being influenced by us. It is obviously encumbent on us to treat the newcomers with respect and dignity - but also to realize that the programs have long term consequences for our communities and families. Simply taking a bean counting approach - that we need to minimize the amount of sin in our brothers and sisters - often fails to adequate evaluate the consequences. As Rav Sternbuch has pointed out, running after those who have violated the prohibition of intermarriage conveys a major change in how serious intermarriage is seen. It should be an open discussion whether it is worth paying that price. Are we recovering lost souls at the expense of creating more lost souls? The whole picture needs to be discussed - and it is not. Where are the studies? Where are the statistics? What is the success rate of conversion - both where there is high standard of the acceptance of mitzvos and where there is a low standard. What consequences do these programs have on our communities and schools? All the anecdotal evidence being thrown around is of little value in helping make intelligent decisions for the future of the Jewish people.