Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site cbdkc1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!ask From: ask@cbdkc1.UUCP (A.S. Kamlet) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Re: Questions about conversion to Judaism Message-ID: <874@cbdkc1.UUCP> Date: Fri, 15-Feb-85 11:00:46 EST Article-I.D.: cbdkc1.874 Posted: Fri Feb 15 11:00:46 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 19-Feb-85 06:16:04 EST References: <16@unc.UUCP> <3780010@csd2.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus Lines: 54 > The 7 Noachide laws correspond to over a hundred of our mitzvoth. > > If a conservative rabbi is shomer tora and mitzvoth then he is > orthodox by definition. Otherwise we can't accept his converts. > Thus the issue is halachic not political. > > Asher Schechter I think that IN ADDITION to being shomer torah and mitzvot, the rabbi must also follow rabbinical law. After all, the Falashas seem to meet the shomer tora and mitzvot requirement, but not the rabbinical interpretations and codes which have evolved over the centuries. From what I've read, the orthodox rabbis in Israel are saying that's not good enough. Now, what happens when two rabbis disagree over the correct interpretation of halacha in a specific situation? Well, they can each rule their own way, and let the chips fall where they may. Or, if the issue is very likely to cause problems for someone later on, such as a dispute involving correct halacha interpretation for someone to be converted, they may have the good sense to refer the matter to other rabbis. Even so, there must be a degree of trust among rabbis, or there could be much fighting. In Columbus, Ohio there is a working arrangement among the orthodox and conservative rabbis (though not the reform) where the Central Ohio Bet Din consists of both Conservative and Orthodox rabbis. While a conversion may be supervised by a conservative rabbi, the bet din has, to date, accepted the conversions. On the subject of doing things according to halacha, I feel that the major separation between orthodox and conservative Jews is NOT whether they think things are done according to halacha or not, but whether any authorities exist today - and if so, who they are -- to issue rulings al pi halacha which actually change the way we behave. Conservative Judiasm, and I am a Conservative Jew, has certainly issued rulings which make permissible (rather than require) changes in how a Conservative Jew may behave -- drive to shul on Shabbat, women in the minyan, women as bal torah and as rabbis, BUT in all cases have issued responsa justifying these decisions al pi halacha. It turns out that many conservative rabbis, and virtually all orthodox rabbis do not agree that these are al pi halacha. Some do not agree that in our age we are even permitted to consider an issue such as I've listed, but the major difference I see between orthodox and conservative is that conservative believes that it is permitted to consider any issue, and so as long as the resolution is al pi halacha, responsa may be issued to allow changes in how we behave. I am not trying to offend any orthodox Jews or anyone else for that matter. -- Art Kamlet AT&T Bell Laboratories Columbus {ihnp4 | cbosgd}!cbrma!ask