Rabbonim, dayonim and heads of Vaad HaRabbonim Haolami LeInyonei Giyur, founded by the late Antwerp Gavad HaRav Chaim Kreiswirth, issued strident protests against Rabbi Shear-Yeshuv Cohen, the rov of Haifa and a member of the Chief Rabbinate Council, for grave remarks he made against dayanim who stand firm against accepting prospective converts who fail to persuade them of their genuine intentions to keep Torah and mitzvas in full.
Speaking at a national-religious conference on conversion, Rabbi Cohen said he heard that there are dayanim at the special conversion courts who are careful not to approve the conversion of such candidates. “We have halachic authorities that can be relied on when it comes to accepting [a convert] even when we are not sure that the convert we converted will keep mitzvas,” he said. “The conversion court system was created to accept converts and not to defer them, therefore the conversion courts are not carrying out their designated task.”
Rabbi Cohen also cited a spurious ruling by former Chief Rabbi Goren, who stirred a tremendous controversy 30 years ago when he said, “In Eretz Yisroel there is no need to insist on accepting [the yoke of] mitzvas.”
Rabbi Cohen claimed, “We have halachic authorities who can be relied on when it comes to accepting [a convert] even when we are not sure that the convert we convert will keep mitzvas in the case of someone who wants to live in Eretz Yisroel and even more so regarding someone who has already intermarried and has a mixed family. We try to teach them how to run a Jewish home, which is incumbent on all of us. And I’m not saying chas vecholiloh that one should be lenient in this regard, but neither should they be rejected.”
Rabbi Cohen’s remarks stand in stark contradiction to a halachic ruling in 5744 (1984) signed by HaRav Yaakov Yisroel Kanievsky, HaRav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, HaRav Menachem Man Shach and ylct”a HaRav Yosef Sholom Eliashiv, which reads, “It is a very serious prohibition to accept converts without being convinced they have genuine intentions of accepting the yoke of Torah and mitzvas.”
The Vaad HaRabbonim LeInyonei Giyur also raised strong objections, telling the Chief Rabbinate Counsel to convene an emergency meeting to issue a decision condemning the departure from the ruling by all gedolei Yisroel.
A short time ago MK David Rotem (Yisrael Beiteinu) proposed a bill that would give chief rabbis of cities the power to perform conversions. But such legislation would be very problematic. “The fact that the rabbi of one city openly says that one need not be convinced of the convert’s intentions to keep mitzvas in full, and a conversion candidate cannot be rejected, is the best proof of all that the new law could result in bringing thousands of non-Jews into Kerem Beis Yisroel,” reads a Vaad HaRabbonim statement. “Therefore the authority to perform conversions must be vested only in established, well-known botei din.”
(Source: Dei’ah veDibur)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
20 Responses
You cannot pasken against halocho,and end up making phony Jews. The Torah IS the ONLY authority,not the zionist leaders.This is also a reason for protests.The future of our people is at stake.
HaRav Shear Yashuv Cohen Shlit’a is a well-respected talmid chacham and I am surprised at this article. I would be careful to pass judgment before seeing the original quote within the context of the conference (in Hebrew of course). I also am very careful, as Chazal have taught us, not to be mevaze talmidei chachamim like HaRav Goren zt”l especially after they are nifter, even if I disagree with them hashkafikly.
It is heart warming that the Rabbonim are protesting as unacceptable a watering-down of halachic requirements for geyrus by the zionists.
“who don’t tow the charedi line”
I think the question here is what is the line drawn by the Torah, not a hypothetical party line.
The basic question is: Is it permissible to convert individuals who do not accept the guidelines of Torah, or is such a conversion in fact a sham.
Politics, side jabs at groups of people, or personal bias should have no place in such a discussion.
r s-y cohen is simply repeating the divrei chaim, who specifically ruled that in cases of intermarried couples, we accept the convert (even encourage him / her) even though we know they will not toe the party line (oops! mixed metaphors)
and by the way, r goren was his father in law, so now all the anti tzionistim can come out and curse the two of the together! but note, r cohen has substantial connections to chareidim, even though he was a prisoner of war (of the (moderate)jordanians, whom the charedim approve of) in the krav on yerushalyim in 1948.
Harav Cohen and Rav Goren (who if I’m not mistaken was his brother-in-law), are/were indeed talmidei Chachomim but unfortunately they are/were tied to the Zionist memsholoh in hoshkofo and as such their psokim have to be scrutinized with a magnifying glass and if found to be posul, people do have to be warned against them, davkeh because they are/were talmidei Chachomim.
Mr. Fox,
once again you personalize a news item, and in the process you besmirch Gedolai Yisroel and anyone who dares to believe in them. Your consistent veonomous attacks against Gedolei Yisroel and Chariedim in general should be banned from this site.
Sarah is right, personal bias should have no place in such a discussion, but you, Mr. Fox, can’t ever seem to pass up an opportunity to light the fire of Machlokes.
If anyone on this site is guilty of “bizayon and outright character assasination of talmidei chachamim,” it is YOU and your continuous backhanded slaps and past and present Gedolim.
You tread on very dangerous ground indeed.
I beleive the Rambam paskens(In hilchos gerus I assume- its been a while since I went through)that someone who converts for alterior motives(e.g.lions)is a GER!
However this may be assuming that he accepts Ol Mitzvos ince he has decided to convert.
Even the Rambam, though, would probably agree that this type of conversion is improper(I beleive there are shitos in the gemora that this type of conversion is invalid)
Attacks on Rabbinic leaders are beneath contempt. You ought not allow it in comments; you certainly ought not print them.
Providing a “source” does not exonerate you if you print half-truths and statements out of context.
As noted from all the commenters, there are many faces to Torah observances. Uniformity is needed in the field of geirus, not just kippah color, size or design.
B’makom she’yeish chillul Hashem ein cholkim kovod larav.
Rabbi Goren was — ad hominem — denounced by the greatest Torah authorities 30 years ago. That attack was led by Rav Moshe Feisntein and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, two “Chareidi” gedolim the MOs have attempted to misportray as accepting of their distortion of Torah.
He was elected Chief Rabbi by promising to be mattir the mamzeirim of a government official.
Rabbi Shear Yahuv Cohen, Rabbi Goren’s brother-in-law, has been trying to get himself elected Chief Rabbi for longer that most of us can remember. Perhaps he feels that this posiiton will better his chances.
‘It is a sad select few that feel so threatened with their own belief system (or who have other issues…)who lash out and blast anything that looks different from them. ‘
What kind of nonsense is this? Who says they feel threatned by their own beleif system?? Its a fact that we are not supposed to encourage Geyrim especially those who have alterior motives and there are many. Did it ever occur to you that the OUTRAGE here is ‘lishmo’ and nothing else??
You’re correct, Stan the Man, but such uniformity is probably impossible. While there are 70 “faces” to Torah, nowadays none of those faces look at each other. Just luck at the various postings to this site and the decibel level of some of the writers. The bottom line is that each stream of religious and non-religious Jews set up their own courts for Geyrus and to promote their own, bash all the others. I’m sure glad I don’t have Moshiach’s job.
ok art you are again like many others making statements based on bias rather than facts that are the standard taina on one side of the machloket. Again I advise everyone to be careful what they say about dead Z(and in this case also living) tzadikkim – they have a way of getting back at you….
I agree with Melecheitan. Many here are personalizing the issue, and using the above article to spew their dislike of those who dare “tow the Chareidi line.” Chas V’Shalom anyone should ever tow the Chariedi line, it’s an abomonation. How dare anyone follow the Psak of their Posek HaDor (or THE Poskai HaDor). (Sarcasticlly written)
But like MelechEitan states, if the Steipler Gaon, Rav Shlomo Zalman, Zatzal, Rav Shach, Zatzal, and, YB”L, Rav Elyashiv, Shlita, have issued a psak absolutely and very directly contraticting the psak of Rav Cohen, I too would advise everyone to be careful of how their words come across.
Argue the Halacha all you want, and Rav Cohen is certainly of stature to argue the Halachah if he so chooses, just be careful not to personalize it and in doing so besmirch Gedolai Yisroel. You would be treading on very thin ice indeed.
art some misinformation on your comment.
please detail, stan…
I heard Rabbi Cohen also spoke at Chovevei Torah. He must be pasul and put in herem for speaking to such obvious kofrim.
To the moderator:
Your status as a ba’al lashon hara is now proven. You claim to moderate and delete comments to prevent lashon hara-but did you do any checking about what I posted before posting it? I intentionally wrote “I heard” which is a clear indication that lashon hara is coming, and you didn’t even bother to edit out the comments denigrating Chovevei Torah at the end. It happens to be true that he spoke at Chovevei Torah (which I think is just fine), but you should be ashamed of yourself for allowing an aveira like lashon hara to be spread on your website. You probably won’t allow this comment to be posted, but I know what you’re doing. Hakadosh Baruch Hu knows too.
Comment Moderation Panel: We have nothing to be ashamed of. There is no Lashon Harah here. Chovevei should be shut down. See HERE
Moderator-you miss the point. You allowed a statement denigrating a talmid chacham to be posted without checking it out, because the co-object of denigration was an institution you disagree with. If someone posted that Rav Elyashiv spoke at Chovevei Torah, would you have posted it without checking it out? Whether or not you think that Chovevei Torah as an institution should be shut down, is sheker now permissible when you don’t agree with the victim????