Belman: Allow less stringent conversion

By Ted Belman

Alin LevyWhen I posted on the controversy surround the conversion bill yesterday, it was not clear to me what Bayit Yehudi was upset about.

JPOST made it clear today.

    Deputy Religious Services Minister Eli Ben-Dahan of Bayit Yehudi is opposed to the clauses in the bill which would end the Chief Rabbinate’s centralized control over the conversion process, which is one of the central goals of Stern’s bill.

    Bayit Yehudi also opposes language used to in the bill to preserve the current status of Reform and Conservative conversions.


I would be happy to loosen the control of the Chief Rabbinate. It upset me to learn that that girl who was kicked out of conversion classes because she wanted to be an actress. This is untenable.

The Right of Return is granted to many people who aren’t halachicly Jewish. That works for me.

Haaretz reports that an aspiring actress, Alin Levy, cannot convert to Judaism because the profession of acting is “immodest”.

 

The vast majority of Israeli Jews find nothing wrong with being an actress. Levy should be allowed to convert to Judaism and to be like most Israeli Jews.

Similarly I believe that it is important to find an easy way for people who choose to come here under the law of return, to convert to Judaism. What is important is not whether the conversion standards are followed to the letter but that their children be recognized as Jews.

March 20, 2014 | 161 Comments »

Leave a Reply

50 Comments / 161 Comments

  1. @ Yidvocate:
    Certainly with localized friendly Rabbi’s Ruth could find someone to convert her.

    This way the Rabbi’s who are off the wall would be avoided. The beauty of decentralization in lieu of coercive monopoly of power in a centralized system.

  2. @ the phoenix:

    And you KNOW this, how??

    I know this like you profess to know the converse as your post clearly suggests. I would expect no less from the grandmother of Dovid Hamelech.

    Besides my neshama saw hers standing at Mt. Sinai ;>)

    Shabbat Shalom…………..

  3. @ Bear Klein:

    In contrast to this message, I can’t help but think that if Ruth lived under the current Chief Rabbinate of Israel, with its increasingly rigid and restrictive interpretation of the laws of conversion, she would not be accepted as a daughter of Israel, and the trajectory of Jewish history would be altogether different.

    You under estimate Ruth!

  4. I do not spend much time with Jewish religion other than in regard to Jewish nationalism. But I never have accepted any substitute for authentic Judaism.

    A united Jewish state requires a united Jewish nation and that, in turn, requires a united Jewish religion.

    Judaism to me means nothing more or less than the Tora, Tanakh and Talmud and the Jewish scholarly authorities that have served our nation since Judaism itself evolved among us some three and one-half millenia ago in Eretz-Yisrael. All else have amounted to pretentious efforts to water down our ancient attachment to the principles and commandments of haShem, to be replaced by something resembling endlessly watered-down soup at a cheap restaurant.

    Arnold Harris
    Mount Horeb WI

  5. A closer look at the story of the most famous convert in Jewish history offers up a timely message about how we can approach the dangerous fissures in Jewish life today in a way that can help us heal, and bring us closer together. In so doing, it presents a stinging challenge to the dangerously narrow interpretation of conversion laws in Israel today and the negative impact they are having throughout the diaspora.

    In synagogues around the world on Shavuot we read the Book of Ruth, whose highlight is a simple statement from Ruth to her mother-in-law, Naomi, who urges her to go back to her own people. It makes for one of the most sublime declarations in history:

    “Do not urge me to leave you, to turn back and not follow you,” Ruth says. “For wherever you go, I will go; wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus and more may the Lord do to me if anything but death parts me from you.”

    Ruth’s extraordinary act, showing not only love for Naomi but a willingness to accept the One God, makes her part of the Jewish people. And at the end of the story, she gives birth to a son, who in turn becomes the father of Jesse, the father of David, king of Israel. And according to tradition, from that progeny the messiah will be born.

    The message our rabbis offer up us is a profoundly bold one of acceptance. After all, Ruth is from a tribe that is an enemy of the Jewish people on a deeper level than even the descendants of Esau, the Edomites, or the Egyptians, who cruelly enslaved us for centuries. In Deuteronomy, God says, “You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your kinsman. You shall not abhor an Egyptian, for you were a stranger in his land.” But the descendants of Moab, until the 10th generation, should not be accepted into “the congregation of the Lord because they did not meet you with food and water on your journey after you left Egypt” and because they hired Balaam “to curse you.”

    And yet Ruth’s straightforward declaration to Naomi not only brings her acceptance among the Jewish people, but also makes possible her pivotal role in determining the kings of Israel and, ultimately, the messiah.

    The rabbis of old no doubt struggled with the text of the Book of Ruth — how could a member of a cursed tribe be the heroine of the story and the grandmother of King David? A legal loophole of sorts is found, interpreting the prohibition of marrying a Moabite as applying to Jewish women, thus allowing a man to marry a woman from Moab.

    In contrast to this message, I can’t help but think that if Ruth lived under the current Chief Rabbinate of Israel, with its increasingly rigid and restrictive interpretation of the laws of conversion, she would not be accepted as a daughter of Israel, and the trajectory of Jewish history would be altogether different.

    Of course it is a great responsibility to define who is and who isn’t Jewish, especially in our modern age of pluralism. The laws are complex, and the stakes are high. But what is most troubling about the views coming out of Jerusalem in recent years is that they are motivated by an effort to keep the gates closed, to prevent sincere seekers from joining our people rather than to welcome them.

    Potential converts are told that they must accept each and all of the hundreds of mitzvot of Jewish life when a more liberal approach would enable tens of thousands of Russians in Israel to join the Jewish people, potentially transforming the society in positive ways. Further, many recent conversions have been revoked by the Chief Rabbinate, and the chilling effect of such actions, and their negative message, has caused ripples of frustration and anger across the Jewish world.

    At a time when we need the spirit of Hillel, who accepted the man who wanted to learn about Judaism while standing on one foot, we have the reaction of Shammai, who shooed him away.

    On Shavuot, we mark the day that, according to tradition, all Jews — even those from future generations — gathered at Sinai and accepted the Torah, creating the greatest moment of Jewish unity in history. In that spirit, let’s read and remember the story of Ruth, reminding us that our impulse should to be to embrace rather than reject those who are sincere in their intentions to echo Ruth’s words: “Your God shall be my God.”

    I read the above which related to the discussion and I found in the tone of Ted’s original comment about the actress who had been denied conversion.

    http://www.thejewishweek.com/editorial_opinion/gary_rosenblatt/ruths_conversion_would_be_rejected_today

  6. @ honeybee:
    Hi Ms. Bee

    I am looking forward to my Shabbat Challah.

    Do you have any place you can buy a good Challah?

    My ex-wife and mother-in law made the best Challahs from scratch.

    Shabbat Shalom!

  7. yamit82 Said:

    How??? What does the Almighty say?…

    Do I need some one to interperate this passage for me. Do I need some one who will humiliate and belittle me. I ain’t that 12 yr. old girl any more.

  8. @ Shy Guy:

    May I just state that your entire article is load of —–! The more I read Darlin, the worst it became. Thank goodness I am not my name sake, she would have run you over with her chariot.

  9. Shy Guy Said:

    who engage in such pursuits might neglect their primary duties as wives and mothers

    What you are saying is that women are irresponsible fliberty jibes unable to mentally to carry out two task at one time. My Father said educating women was primary because when women are educated, you also educated the next generation.

  10. @ Bear Klein:

    You misunderstand me Bear. My point was that without some recognized central authority, conversion could well turn into a Mickey Mouse Club by “local” authorities setting their own standards. That’s all. It’s too important of a matter to leave it to anyone setting their own standards. Conversion “shopping” would result looking for easiest route and we’ll end up with untold tragedies – mumzorim, “unknown” inter-marriages and eventually the demise of the Jewish people!

    Gut Shabbos….

  11. @ Yidvocate:
    So Rabbis you do not know and Jews you do not know belong to the

    “Mickey Mouse” Club.

    Do not you not know how how harmful and hateful a statement that is?

    You are entitled to your opinion.

    You have a very common human affliction. You prefer to try find difference between people in lieu of finding commonality. This is what keeps people separated or causes separation. In this case different Jews.

    In any case if I do not connect with you later Shabat Shalom.

  12. @ yamit82:

    For Rabbinic Judaism, the laws governing conversion (gerut) are based on codes of law and texts, including discussions in the Talmud, through the Shulkhan Arukh and subsequent interpretations. (Many of the guidelines of accepting converts are based on the Book of Ruth and the manner whereby Ruth was brought into the fold through her mother-in-law, Naomi). These rules are held as authoritative by Orthodox Judaism and Conservative Judaism. Jewish law is generally interpreted as discouraging proselytizing, and religious gerut is also discouraged. Rabbis often rejected potential converts three times, and if they remained adamant in their desire to convert, they would then allow them to begin the process. This practice has been justified on several grounds, including:

    The laws Jews require of themselves are more stringent than they consider to be required of other nations; a person who would be considered derelict of religious duties under Jewish law could easily be, without change in action, an exceedingly righteous gentile.
    Jews have suffered regular and often severe persecution throughout the ages; a proselyte is exposing himself to potentially mortal danger.
    In the Book of Ruth, Naomi tried to get Ruth to go back to her own people three times before Ruth became a part of the Hebrew people.

    Call it minhag Yisroel if you prefer. It is the established practice.

  13. dove Said:

    yes, that is a much more difficult task for man isn’t it?

    Mea culpa. 🙁

    pardon me, my higher level just kicked in.

    The role of women in traditional Judaism has been grossly misrepresented and misunderstood. The position of women is not nearly as lowly as many modern people think; in fact, the position of women in halakhah (Jewish Law) that dates back to the biblical period is in many ways better than the position of women under American civil law as recently as a century ago. Many of the important feminist leaders of the 20th century (Gloria Steinem, for example, and Betty Friedan) are Jewish women, and some commentators have suggested that this is no coincidence: the respect accorded to women in Jewish tradition was a part of their ethnic culture.

    In traditional Judaism, women are for the most part seen as separate but equal. Women’s obligations and responsibilities are different from men’s, but no less important (in fact, in some ways, women’s responsibilities are considered more important, as we shall see).

    The equality of men and women begins at the highest possible level: G-d. In Judaism, unlike traditional Christianity, G-d has never been viewed as exclusively male or masculine. Judaism has always maintained that G-d has both masculine and feminine qualities. As one Chasidic rabbi explained it to me, G-d has no body, no genitalia, therefore the very idea that G-d is male or female is patently absurd. We refer to G-d using masculine terms simply for convenience’s sake, because Hebrew has no neutral gender; G-d is no more male than a table is.

    Both man and woman were created in the image of G-d. According to most Jewish scholars, “man” was created in Gen. 1:27 with dual gender, and was later separated into male and female.

    According to traditional Judaism, women are endowed with a greater degree of “binah” (intuition, understanding, intelligence) than men. The rabbis inferred this from the fact that woman was “built” (Gen. 2:22) rather than “formed” (Gen. 2:7), and the Hebrew root of “build” has the same consonants as the word “binah.” It has been said that the matriarchs (Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah) were superior to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) in prophecy. Women did not participate in the idolatry regarding the Golden Calf. See Rosh Chodesh below. Some traditional sources suggest that women are closer to G-d’s ideal than men.

    Women have held positions of respect in Judaism since biblical times. Miriam is considered one of the liberators the Children of Israel, along with her brothers Moses and Aaron. One of the Judges (Deborah) was a woman. Seven of the 55 prophets of the Bible were women (they are included in the list of biblical prophets).

    The Ten Commandments require respect for both mother and father. Note that the father comes first in Ex. 20:12, but the mother comes first in Lev. 19:3, and many traditional sources point out that this reversal is intended to show that both parents are equally entitled to honor and reverence.

    There were many learned women of note. The Talmud and later rabbinical writings speak of the wisdom of Berurya, the wife of Rabbi Meir. In several instances, her opinions on halakhah (Jewish Law) were accepted over those of her male contemporaries. In the ketubah (marriage contract) of Rabbi Akiba’s son, the wife is obligated to teach the husband Torah! Many rabbis over the centuries have been known to consult their wives on matters of Jewish law relating to the woman’s role, such as laws of kashrut and women’s cycles. The wife of a rabbi is referred to as a rebbetzin, practically a title of her own, which should give some idea of her significance in Jewish life.

    There can be no doubt, however, that the Talmud also has many negative things to say about women. Various rabbis at various times describe women as lazy, jealous, vain and gluttonous, prone to gossip and particularly prone to the occult and witchcraft. Men are repeatedly advised against associating with women, although this is usually because of man’s lust rather than because of any shortcoming in women. It is worth noting that the Talmud also has negative things to say about men, frequently describing men as particularly prone to lust and forbidden sexual desires.

    Women are discouraged from pursuing higher education or religious pursuits, but this seems to be primarily because women who engage in such pursuits might neglect their primary duties as wives and mothers. The rabbis are not concerned that women are not spiritual enough; rather, they are concerned that women might become too spiritually devoted.

    The rights of women in traditional Judaism are much greater than they were in the rest of Western civilization until the 20th century. Women had the right to buy, sell, and own property, and make their own contracts, rights which women in Western countries (including America) did not have until about 100 years ago. In fact, Proverbs 31:10-31, which is traditionally read at Jewish weddings, speaks repeatedly of business acumen as a trait to be prized in women (v. 11, 13, 16, and 18 especially).

    Women have the right to be consulted with regard to their marriage. Marital sex is regarded as the woman’s right, and not the man’s. Men do not have the right to beat or mistreat their wives, a right that was recognized by law in many Western countries until a few hundred years ago. In cases of rape, a woman is generally presumed not to have consented to the intercourse, even if she enjoyed it, even if she consented after the sexual act began and declined a rescue! This is in sharp contrast to American society, where even today rape victims often have to overcome public suspicion that they “asked for it” or “wanted it.” Traditional Judaism recognizes that forced sexual relations within the context of marriage are rape and are not permitted; in many states in America today, rape within marriage is still not a crime.

    There is no question that in traditional Judaism, the primary role of a woman is as wife and mother, keeper of the household. However, Judaism has great respect for the importance of that role and the spiritual influence that the woman has over her family. The Talmud says that when a pious man marries a wicked woman, the man becomes wicked, but when a wicked man marries a pious woman, the man becomes pious. The child of a Jewish woman and a gentile man is Jewish because of the mother’s spiritual influence; the child of a Jewish man and a gentile woman is not. See Who Is a Jew? Women are exempted from all positive mitzvot (“thou shalts” as opposed to “thou shalt nots”) that are time-related (that is, mitzvot that must be performed at a specific time of the day or year), because the woman’s duties as wife and mother are so important that they cannot be postponed to fulfill a mitzvah. After all, a woman cannot be expected to just drop a crying baby when the time comes to perform a mitzvah. She cannot leave dinner unattended on the stove while she davens ma’ariv (evening prayer services).

    It is this exemption from certain mitzvot that has led to the greatest misunderstanding of the role of women in Judaism. First, many people make the mistake of thinking that this exemption is a prohibition. On the contrary, although women are not required to perform time-based positive mitzvot, they are generally permitted to observe such mitzvot if they choose (though some are frustrated with women who insist on performing visible, prestigious optional mitzvot while they ignore mundane mandatory ones). Second, because this exemption diminishes the role of women in the synagogue, many people perceive that women have no role in Jewish religious life. This misconception derives from the mistaken assumption that Jewish religious life revolves around the synagogue. It does not; it revolves around the home, where the woman’s role is every bit as important as the man’s.

    Nashim Dabrani’ot Hen.

  14. @ Shy Guy:

    ones thoughts have to be kept modest as well

    yes, that is a much more difficult task for man isn’t it? 🙂

    pardon me, my higher level just kicked in.

    The role of women in traditional Judaism has been grossly misrepresented and misunderstood. The position of women is not nearly as lowly as many modern people think; in fact, the position of women in halakhah (Jewish Law) that dates back to the biblical period is in many ways better than the position of women under American civil law as recently as a century ago. Many of the important feminist leaders of the 20th century (Gloria Steinem, for example, and Betty Friedan) are Jewish women, and some commentators have suggested that this is no coincidence: the respect accorded to women in Jewish tradition was a part of their ethnic culture.

    In traditional Judaism, women are for the most part seen as separate but equal. Women’s obligations and responsibilities are different from men’s, but no less important (in fact, in some ways, women’s responsibilities are considered more important, as we shall see).

    The equality of men and women begins at the highest possible level: G-d. In Judaism, unlike traditional Christianity, G-d has never been viewed as exclusively male or masculine. Judaism has always maintained that G-d has both masculine and feminine qualities. As one Chasidic rabbi explained it to me, G-d has no body, no genitalia, therefore the very idea that G-d is male or female is patently absurd. We refer to G-d using masculine terms simply for convenience’s sake, because Hebrew has no neutral gender; G-d is no more male than a table is.

    Both man and woman were created in the image of G-d. According to most Jewish scholars, “man” was created in Gen. 1:27 with dual gender, and was later separated into male and female.

    According to traditional Judaism, women are endowed with a greater degree of “binah” (intuition, understanding, intelligence) than men. The rabbis inferred this from the fact that woman was “built” (Gen. 2:22) rather than “formed” (Gen. 2:7), and the Hebrew root of “build” has the same consonants as the word “binah.” It has been said that the matriarchs (Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah) were superior to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) in prophecy. Women did not participate in the idolatry regarding the Golden Calf. See Rosh Chodesh below. Some traditional sources suggest that women are closer to G-d’s ideal than men.

    Women have held positions of respect in Judaism since biblical times. Miriam is considered one of the liberators the Children of Israel, along with her brothers Moses and Aaron. One of the Judges (Deborah) was a woman. Seven of the 55 prophets of the Bible were women (they are included in the list of biblical prophets).

    The Ten Commandments require respect for both mother and father. Note that the father comes first in Ex. 20:12, but the mother comes first in Lev. 19:3, and many traditional sources point out that this reversal is intended to show that both parents are equally entitled to honor and reverence.

    There were many learned women of note. The Talmud and later rabbinical writings speak of the wisdom of Berurya, the wife of Rabbi Meir. In several instances, her opinions on halakhah (Jewish Law) were accepted over those of her male contemporaries. In the ketubah (marriage contract) of Rabbi Akiba’s son, the wife is obligated to teach the husband Torah! Many rabbis over the centuries have been known to consult their wives on matters of Jewish law relating to the woman’s role, such as laws of kashrut and women’s cycles. The wife of a rabbi is referred to as a rebbetzin, practically a title of her own, which should give some idea of her significance in Jewish life.

    There can be no doubt, however, that the Talmud also has many negative things to say about women. Various rabbis at various times describe women as lazy, jealous, vain and gluttonous, prone to gossip and particularly prone to the occult and witchcraft. Men are repeatedly advised against associating with women, although this is usually because of man’s lust rather than because of any shortcoming in women. It is worth noting that the Talmud also has negative things to say about men, frequently describing men as particularly prone to lust and forbidden sexual desires.

    Women are discouraged from pursuing higher education or religious pursuits, but this seems to be primarily because women who engage in such pursuits might neglect their primary duties as wives and mothers. The rabbis are not concerned that women are not spiritual enough; rather, they are concerned that women might become too spiritually devoted.

    The rights of women in traditional Judaism are much greater than they were in the rest of Western civilization until the 20th century. Women had the right to buy, sell, and own property, and make their own contracts, rights which women in Western countries (including America) did not have until about 100 years ago. In fact, Proverbs 31:10-31, which is traditionally read at Jewish weddings, speaks repeatedly of business acumen as a trait to be prized in women (v. 11, 13, 16, and 18 especially).

    Women have the right to be consulted with regard to their marriage. Marital sex is regarded as the woman’s right, and not the man’s. Men do not have the right to beat or mistreat their wives, a right that was recognized by law in many Western countries until a few hundred years ago. In cases of rape, a woman is generally presumed not to have consented to the intercourse, even if she enjoyed it, even if she consented after the sexual act began and declined a rescue! This is in sharp contrast to American society, where even today rape victims often have to overcome public suspicion that they “asked for it” or “wanted it.” Traditional Judaism recognizes that forced sexual relations within the context of marriage are rape and are not permitted; in many states in America today, rape within marriage is still not a crime.

    There is no question that in traditional Judaism, the primary role of a woman is as wife and mother, keeper of the household. However, Judaism has great respect for the importance of that role and the spiritual influence that the woman has over her family. The Talmud says that when a pious man marries a wicked woman, the man becomes wicked, but when a wicked man marries a pious woman, the man becomes pious. The child of a Jewish woman and a gentile man is Jewish because of the mother’s spiritual influence; the child of a Jewish man and a gentile woman is not. See Who Is a Jew? Women are exempted from all positive mitzvot (“thou shalts” as opposed to “thou shalt nots”) that are time-related (that is, mitzvot that must be performed at a specific time of the day or year), because the woman’s duties as wife and mother are so important that they cannot be postponed to fulfill a mitzvah. After all, a woman cannot be expected to just drop a crying baby when the time comes to perform a mitzvah. She cannot leave dinner unattended on the stove while she davens ma’ariv (evening prayer services).

    It is this exemption from certain mitzvot that has led to the greatest misunderstanding of the role of women in Judaism. First, many people make the mistake of thinking that this exemption is a prohibition. On the contrary, although women are not required to perform time-based positive mitzvot, they are generally permitted to observe such mitzvot if they choose (though some are frustrated with women who insist on performing visible, prestigious optional mitzvot while they ignore mundane mandatory ones). Second, because this exemption diminishes the role of women in the synagogue, many people perceive that women have no role in Jewish religious life. This misconception derives from the mistaken assumption that Jewish religious life revolves around the synagogue. It does not; it revolves around the home, where the woman’s role is every bit as important as the man’s.

  15. dove Said:

    Here is a better explanation as to why women and men sit separately at shul

    The first explanation is the main one and that is what is meant by modesty. Even if everyone is dressed modestly, ones thoughts have to be kept modest as well. The Hebrew word for modesty, Tzniyut, applies both externally and internally, physically as well as spiritually.

    Loopy.

    🙂

  16. Simply put, the Israeli Chief Rabbinate is destroying the Jewish Faith in Eretz Yisrael and the best solution would be to totally eliminate this governmental department. It is not just the conversion process which the Rabbinate has corrupted, but the entire process of “gittin” with Jewish women being abused and punished and impoverished when they want to get a “get!” The Rabbinate is a heartless monster and most Israelis, including the haredim, modern Orthodox, and of course the secular Israels just ignore it, too bad the Rabbinate still has the power to destroy Judaism.

  17. @ Shy Guy:

    Here is a better explanation as to why women and men sit separately at shul

    Question:

    Why do men and women sit separately at traditional Jewish services?

    Answer:

    All Jewish practices have their simple reasons as well as deeper, more spiritual explanations.

    One obvious benefit of separate seating in a synagogue is that it helps ensure that the main focus is on the prayers and not on the opposite gender. There is no question that we don’t act the same in a mixed crowd as we do in a same-gender one. There is nothing wrong with that. It is good and healthy that we are attracted to each other, but during prayers we shouldn’t be trying to impress anyone other than G-d.

    In addition to that, a synagogue should be a welcoming and inclusive place. No one should feel left out. Many single people feel extremely uncomfortable at a function or event at which everyone seems to be with a partner except them. No one should ever feel this way at a synagogue. When men and women sit separately, there is no discrimination between singles and couples. (There will always be a chance for singles to mingle afterwards at the Kiddush!)

    But it goes deeper than that. Women and men are very different beings. Not only are we physically different; our thought processes, emotional states and psychology are all different. This is because our souls are different – they come from complementary but opposite sources. The prayer experience is supposed to be an opportunity to be with your true self, to communicate with your soul. Men and women need space from each other to help them become intuned to their higher selves.

    Ironically, it is by sitting separately in prayer that we are able to truly come together in the other areas of our lives; because it is only when both male and female spiritual energies are allowed to flourish that we are complete as individuals, families and a community.

  18. honeybee Said:

    Can one love the almighty with out all the bureaucratic nonsense?

    How??? What does the Almighty say?…

    “Therefore thou shalt love the LORD thy God, and keep His charge, and His statutes, and His ordinances, and His commandments, always“. Deu 11:1
    “And it will be, if you hearken to My commandments that I command you this day to love the Lord, your God, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul,
    For if you keep all these commandments which I command you to do them, to love the Lord, your God, to walk in all His ways, and to cleave to Him,
    then the Lord will drive out all these nations from before you, and you will possess nations greater and stronger than you.
    Every place upon which the soles of your feet will tread, will be yours: from the desert and the Lebanon, from the river, the Euphrates River, and until the western sea, will be your boundary.
    Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse.

  19. @ Bear Klein:

    The converts I met (granted only a few ) seemed to have encyclopedia knowledge of Judaism

    It takes all kinds. By the time I have that kind of knowledge I will have surpassed George Burns and be 101 yrs old. 🙂

  20. Yidvocate Said:

    So the Jews of England shouldn’t have any rabbis because they don’t live in Israel?

    They shouldn’t.

    Their Rabbis should have led the way back to the Land of Israel.

    That was their overriding mandate and religious obligation. They should have set the example like the Ramban, who could be described as one of history’s first Zionists, because he declared that it is a mitzvah to take possession of Israel and to live in it (relying on Num. 33:53). He said, “So long as Israel occupies [the Holy Land], the earth is regarded as subject to Him.” Ramban fulfilled this commandment, moving to the Holy Land during the Crusades after he was expelled from Spain for his polemics. He found devastation in the Holy Land, “but even in this destruction,” he said, “it is a blessed land.” He died there in 1270 C.E.

    Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav left this world 203 years ago. His life is a reproach to all too many modern rabbis.

    For Rabbi Nachman, the return to Zion was integral to Judaism, worth suffering for. Rabbi Nachman sold all his belongings and sent his daughter to work so he could undertake aliyah. The effort wasn’t in vain: upon reaching Eretz Israel, the rabbi changed his views so much that he prohibited references to his earlier opinions. Rootless Jews who have never been to Israel cannot understand that change.

    Unlike the politically correct rabbinical establishment, Rabbi Nachman was uncompromising about his teachings and goals. That cost him official recognition.

    Rabbi Nachman did one unprecedented thing: he refused to bless marrying couples, saying that in a hundred years, a generation would appear which had better not be born. A generation of Ukrainian and Polish Jews born a century later was annihilated in the Holocaust.

    Rabbi Nachman made clear that he was horrified by the fate of that generation: he asked to be buried in Uman, among the victims of the Ukrainian carnage that took the lives of 30,000 Jews 43 years before he died. Modern rabbinical establishments, particularly in the Ukraine, are eager to absolve and befriend murderers. They might learn from Rabbi Nachman.

    To quote the Rambam “I forgive everyone who speaks ill of me through stupidity,”.

  21. yamit82 Said:

    Know that: I have been compared favorably to John Holmes

    Is he from Texas?

    yamit82 Said:

    Of course.

    You first!!!Darlin
    :

    yamit82 Said:

    Anything north of Twiggy

    TX says any thing more then a mouthful is a waste!!!

    yamit82 Said:

    Are you still a virgin

    ??????????????????????????

  22. honeybee Said:

    If you show yours, I’ll show you mine.

    Deal… but you go first.

    Know that: I have been compared favorably to John Holmes.

    Are whips, chains and hand cuffs involved?????

    Of course.

    How round is adequate? TX says bones are for dogs.

    Anything north of Twiggy.

  23. honeybee Said:

    What about a Texas drawl.

    Requires extensive investigation.

    honeybee Said:

    I am waiting. On that Chinese menu of Judaism I am Sweet and Sour Chicken and a nice round dumpling.

    How round????

  24. Yidvocate Said:

    accordance with Halacha, the Rabbi is supposed to reject the would be convert no less than 3 times

    What Halacha is that?

    Show me the Halacha?

  25. Shy Guy Said:

    hat you really want is open citizenship for any goy who’s got a Brooklyn accent or a Jewish ancestor listed somewhere up his/her tree on Geni.com. No thanks

    What about a Texas drawl.

  26. Bear Klein Said:

    Did not bet with you but if you’d like you have my I.O.U for one shekel @ Shy Guy>You owe me a shekel. Please pay it to Honeybee c/o Texas so I can get out of debt

    I am waiting. On that Chinese menu of Judaism I am Sweet and Sour Chicken and a nice round dumpling.

  27. @ the phoenix:

    There is entire tractate in the Talmud by that very name, although not the exclusive treatment of the subject.

    So the Jews of England shouldn’t have any rabbis because they don’t live in Israel?

    You are fortunate to be born a Jew (I assume you were)and therefore can bear that appellation while remaining blissfully ignorant of what that really means and what G-d demands of a Jew.

    Not so those who want to join the club. It’s rather like the millionaire who inherits his millions as apposed to the one who had to earn those dollars with sweat and toil.

    Yes those select mortals could to some degree, if we had a Sanhedrin but we don’t and won’t till Mashiach comes and the Temple is rebuilt.

  28. @ Yidvocate:
    WHERE was the Sanhedrin mentioned in the Torah?
    I kept bringing as an example the honorary illustrious sir lord rabbi Jonathan sacks….
    The point I made, and I repeat now, is if HE who is supposed to be the sumum of today’s Judaism is. not. exactly. 100% halachic (does not live in Israel) then what hope is there for a simple Jew that IS NOT a luminary Torah scholar to ‘qualify’ as a Jew, when even the most illustrious of them all does not fit the bill…. Not to mention a long list of all kind of ‘averot’ committed by the very ones to whom we should turn for guidance and example ?
    Now I am being told that “hey! SOME mortals (chachamim) can actually add/ delete/ modify the TORAH. And THAT is ok.
    It should be taken without questioning that their word is to be taken as such.

    Please forgive me for asking you (with the flexor surface of the palm turned upward) why, who are they?

  29. @ Bear Klein:

    We can agree to disagree on the linearity of Torah true Judaism from Sinai. I take it as a tautology as it’s existence today and throughout the ages proves the adage.

    I do agree that the Israeli Rabbinate could be a bit more friendly as they have developed a reputation, mostly deserved. But you have to remember that unlike other religions, Judaism is not looking for converts and in fact in accordance with Halacha, the Rabbi is supposed to reject the would be convert no less than 3 times before entertaining accepting his as a potential convert. Moreover some local Rabbinical authorities in the States in elsewhere don’t all adequately adhere to Halacha and therefore their “converts” are rightly suspect by the authority in Israel. Some central, universally accepted authority is therefore preferable to local Mickey Mouse Clubs.

  30. @ the phoenix:

    I am only pointing out that when FOR WHATEVER REASON it becomes OBVIOUS that something should be changed/modified/abrogated it was done!!!!

    It’s not for whatever reason. There are halachic principles at play and consistently applied. The Sanhedrin was empowered by the Torah to determine halacha and if you study Jewish history you would know this and know who the Chachamim where. It was even empowered to suspend halacha under certain halachic principles. A micro-example of this takes place in today’s Torah portion of parasha Shimini where Mose admonishes Aaron for not eating a certain Korban. Aaron gives Mose a compelling reason and Mose concedes.That’s how halacha evolves. It’s not a free for all. There has to acceptance by the majority of Torah sages who hold the tradition from Sinai. The Torah states that halacha is made on earth and not in heaven and Jews are empowered in this regard but bound by principles laid down by G-d.