Letter to the Editor
I found Rabbi Avi Baumol’s recent review of Rav Eliezer Melamed’s new sefer on giyyur (conversion) comprehensive and enlightening. However, I found his conclusions fundamentally misguided. While Rabbi Baumol’s main polemical driver in favor of the book has to do with flaws and pitfalls within the current system, the heart of the debate is, as he admits, ultimately about what counts as kabbalat ol mitzvot (acceptance of the yoke of mitzvot). While Rabbi Baumol offers a brief overview of this debate and of why he feels Rav Melamed’s view is worth considering, only a rigorous halakhic analysis proving that responsible posekim have clearly overlooked Rav Melamed’s arguments is capable of attacking the normatively accepted Halakhah. If Rav Melamed argued that the mainstream view is based on a misreading or misunderstanding of classical sources or that key perspectives failed to occur to them, then that would obligate a responsible posek to revisit the evidence. However, if his arguments are merely that there is another perspective and that he personally believes it should be followed, that does not put the views of other posekim into question in the slightest. Today’s posekim have every right to feel that the Halakhah should follow those posekim of the past who were stringent and to make their own calculations about what is the soundest approach through the Gemara, rishonim, and posekim. While Rav Melamed, as a qualified posek in his own right, is entitled to follow his own views, we cannot and should not expect or pressure other posekim to follow suit. Nor should we be quick to assume that other posekim have adopted their views out of ignorance.
As for the central driver of Rabbi Baumol’s endorsement—the problems with the current system—Rabbi Baumol overlooks the fact that many of these problems are not due to the current standards for conversion, but their implementation. Rabbi Baumol disturbingly mischaracterizes the RCA’s adaptation of standardized guidelines for conversion as caving to pressures from the Chief Rabbinate to adopt stricter standards. While one goal of the standardization was to obtain the Rabbinate’s recognition, a more basic reason for their guidelines was to solve the very problems Rabbi Baumol describes: inconsistencies, unprofessionalism, and a lack of transparency around the conversion process. The standards were designed to (1) help ensure that the giyyur process is neither too lenient nor too strict and that the ger has a clear understanding of expectations, and (2) professionalize the giyyur process in an age where giyyur was in a far worse state than it is now. While there is no doubt still work to be done even within this system, most of the problems gerim face today are from batei din outside of the RCA’s network, where such policies do not exist in the same way. Following in the RCA’s footsteps, a more effective solution to the problems with giyyur today is not to fight the system but to improve it.
Yehuda Dov Reiss
Disclaimer: The author is the son of the chairman of the RCA’s Geirus Protocols and Standards (GPS) Network.
Site Operations and Technology by The Berman Consulting Group.