רב לוקשטיין: "כופר, אסור לקבל גיורים שלו" Rabbi Lookstein has been responsible for the conversion of Ivanka Trump, daughter of the new US president.

רב לוקשטיין: "כופר, אסור לקבל גיורים שלו"
 

 Rabbi Avraham Sherman is against the conversions of certain US rabbis, including Rabbi Haskel Lookstein and Rabbi Avi Weiss. In an interview with Radio Kol Chai he calls them ("Apikores/Heretic)" and we should not accept their conversions. This discussion took place at the Chief Rabbinate Council, about conversions abroad, with an emphasis on the United States. One of the allegations being examined is whether the rabbis (in Israel)  can give a blanket approval for any conversion without examining all the conversions and each individual conversion.

At this time there is discussion in the Chief Rabbinate, on the formation of an orderly criteria by which these rabbis abroad shall receive recognition for the purposes of marriage and divorce and the Jewish credentials of their converts. Sherman said that "Rabbi Haskel Lookstein who converted Ivanka Trump, published rulings contrary to the Shulchan Aruch. He is an 'Apikores/Heretic' and should not have his conversions accepted.

הרב לוקשטיין: "כופר

הרב שרמן על הרב לוקשטיין: "כופר, אסור לקבל גיורים שלו"

 

לקראת הדיון של הרבנות הראשית בגיוריהם של רבנים מחו"ל תוקף הרב שרמן ואומר: "הרב לוקשטיין פרסם פסקי הלכות המנוגדות לשו"ע. המגייר הליברלי הרב וייס מינה רבות בביכ"נ". עורך דינו של הרב וייס: "עמדת הרב שרמן מנוגדת לעמדת הרבנות"

משה ויסטוך

 
י"ד כסליו תשע"ז, 14/12/2016 12:12

הדיין, הרב אברהם שרמן, יוצא נגד הגיורים של רבנים בארצות הברית, ביניהם של הרב יחיאל לוקשטיין והרב אבי וייס. בראיון לרדיו 'קול חי' הוא מכנה אותם "כופרים" שאסור לקבל את הגיורים שלהם. בשעה זו מתקיים דיון במועצת הרבנות הראשית, סביב הגיורים בחו"ל בדגש על ארצות הברית. אחת הטענות שנבדקת היא האם לרבנים המגיירים בחו"ל ניתן אישור גורף לכל גיוריו מבלי לבחון כל גיור וגיור.

עוד כותרות בכיפה

• יאיר לפיד: מתנער מדבריו של ח"כ שטרן
• הרב דרוקמן לתושבי עמונה: קבלו את המתווה החדש
• כל חדשות המגזר בעמוד הפייסבוק שלנו

שני רבנים שעומדים במוקד הסערה הם הרב יחיאל לוקשטיין והרב אבי וייס. הרב לוקשטיין הוא ממובילי זרם היהדות האורתודוכסית בארה"ב וסגן נשיא 'בית הדין דאמריקה', הגוף המרכזי המפקח על נהלי הגיור האורתודוקסי בארה"ב כולה. הרב לוקשטיין הוא זה שהיה אחראי על גיורה של איוונקה טראמפ, בתו של נשיא ארה"ב החדש. בראיון שנתן בעבר ל'כיפה', הוא תמה על כך שלרבנות הראשית יש בעיה עם גיוריו, "אני מכהן בתור רב 58 שנה והעבודה שלי ידועה בארה"ב. אני לא מבין למה באופן עקרוני הרבנות הראשית לא מקבלת את הגיורים שלי".

הרב אבי וייס הוא רב אמריקאי המשתייך לצד הליברלי של זרם האורתודוקסיה המודרנית. עמד בראש בית הכנסת "המכון העברי ריברדייל" שברובע הברונקס בניו יורק, והיה נשיא ומייסד ישיבת "חובבי תורה". בשנת 2013 הודיעה הרבנות הראשית לישראל שלא תקבל עדות שלו על יהדות ומצב משפחתי של אדם, בנימוק שקיים ספק ביחס ל"מידת מחויבותו להלכה היהודית הנהוגה והמקובלת". הרבנים דוד סתיו, שלמה ריסקין, יהודה גלעד ואחרים התייצבו לצדו של הרב וייס. בעקבות הסערה שהתעוררה הודיעה הרבנות הראשית לרב וייס שתכיר במסמכים החתומים על ידו.

(צילום: דובר הרב לאו)

בשעה זו מתקיים דיון ברבנות הראשית, בעניין גיבוש קריטריונים מסודרים לפיהם יקבע אלו רבנים מחו"ל יקבלו הכרה לצורכי נישואין וגירושין ואישורי יהודות. במהלך הישיבה הקודמת, הגיש הרב לאו לחברי המועצה מסמך עקרונות להכרה ברבני חו"ל ועל בסיס המסמך.

לקראת הדיון המחודש בעניין גיורי השניים אמר הרב שרמן כי "הרב יחזקאל לוקשטיין שגייר את איוונקה טראמפ פרסם פסקי הלכות המנוגדות לשו"ע. הוא 'כופר' ואסור לקבל גיורים שלו. גם המגייר הליבראלי הרב אבי וייס מינה רבות בביכ"נ. מגיירים אחרים נעצרו או נאסרו בגין התנהגות מביכה ולא הולמת לרב. איך אפשר להכיר בגיורים שלהם?".

מי שמתקומם על דברי הרב שרמן הוא עו"ד אסף בן מלך שייצג בעבר את הרב וייס מול הרבנות, "אני ייצגתי את הרב וייס מול הרבנות כשהיא סירבה לקבל את אישורי היהדות שלו למתגיירים. לאחר דין ודברים הרבנות חזרה בה מסירובה, כך שמה שהרב שרמן אומר זה מנוגד לא לדעות של רבים וטובים בציונות הדתית ומחוצה לה, אלא מנוגד גם לעמדתה הרשמית של הרבנות הראשית".

בנוסף לכך, עו"ד בן מלך מצר על סגנון ההתבטאויות של חלק מהרבנים, שלדעתו הופך לבוטה יותר ויותר, "בחודשים האחרונים יש תחרות והקצנה בהתבטאויות. זה לא תהליך בריא, הדרך שבה מדברים היא דרך שבה אי אפשר להגיע להבנות ול הסכמות ואי אפשר לנהל דו שיח אמיתי. הרב שרמן לא מעוניין להידבר, הוא חלוק על הרבנים האחרים והוא מעוניין להבאיש את ריחם. הבעיה היום היא שהסגנון יוצר את הטענות ולא הטענות את הסגנון".

בנאמני תורה ועבודה הגיבו לדברי הרב שרמן ואמרו: "הרבנים לוקשטיין ווייס קירבו אלפי אנשים לתורת ישראל ולשמירת מצוות. לרב שרמן השקפות עולם שונות, אולם רוב עם ישראל קרוב לדרכם של הרבנים  לוקשטיין ווייס, וסולד מהדרך המנכרת והמסתגרת שמייצג הרב שרמן. אנו מאמינים ומקווים כי הרבנים הראשיים, שהודיעו כי יגבשו בקרוב קריטריונים להכרה בגיורי חו״ל, יכניסו גם את גיורי יהדות התפוצות אותם פוסל הרב שרמן

http://www.kipa.co.il/now/70131.html

Most likely, the answer would have something to do with the powerful sense of fragility and vulnerability that has seized the ḥaredi world. Its watchmen have constructed high walls, fearful lest the slightest tap of doubt—like knowing that the “good” Auerbach and the “wicked” Kook were once friends—could cause the entire edifice to crumble. They have done so in order to protect the community they have created. Yet the walls are so high as to be, of necessity, unsturdy, and the fear so palpable as inevitably to trigger the doubt it guards against.

Do the Ultra-Orthodox Censor Historical Truth?

 

A new book explains, and over-explains, why ultra-Orthodox authorities resort to Photoshop.

From the cover of Changing the Immutable, by Marc Shapiro. Littman Library Of Jewish

Andrew Koss

Dec. 14 2016

About the author
Andrew N. Koss is an associate editor of Mosaic. A Ph.D. in history from Stanford, he recently completed a Mellon postdoctoral fellowship at Colgate University and is writing a book about the Jews of Vilna during World War I.

---

In 1994, an Israeli ultra-Orthodox publishing house released a volume of writings by a highly respected sage named Rabbi Isaac Kossowsky (1877-1951). Among its contents is a curious piece, titled “A Eulogy for One of the Rabbis,” which never mentions the name of the rabbi in question or any specific markers of his identity. Comparison with other sources makes clear, however, that the deceased was none other than Abraham Isaac Kook (1865-1935), the first Ashkenazi chief rabbi of Palestine and the spiritual and intellectual godfather of religious Zionism.

The omission was no mere oversight. The volume’s editors had deliberately scrubbed any mention of Kook, who is today considered a heretic in ḥaredi circles, along with the names of rabbis associated with him. In other words, the eulogy had been revised to conceal the fact that an upstanding figure like Kossowsky would have praised a figure so discredited in ḥaredi eyes.

The contemporary scholar who made this discovery, Marc Shapiro, had been noticing similar instances of selective editing in other religious texts and took to reporting them on the invaluable blog Seforim (“sacred books”). He has now collected these cases of censorship, as he characterizes them, in Changing the Immutable: How Orthodox Judaism Rewrites Its History. While the case of Kook and Kossowsky typifies those of greatest concern to Shapiro, he also includes an array of phenomena from other eras and circumstances. These include the Talmud’s apparent repression of certain views and anecdotes; the sanitized history found in 21st-century rabbinic hagiographies; the deletion, in venerable texts, of halakhic or theological opinions no longer deemed acceptable; politically “corrected” translations of Hebrew liturgical texts found in Conservative and Reform prayer books; the bowdlerization, in the 1918 Soncino English translation of the Talmud, of sexually explicit passages; the erasure of women from photographs in ḥaredi newspapers; and many more things besides.

The first seven chapters of the book catalogue these and other cases, sorted into categories. In the final chapter, Shapiro presents a comprehensive examination of attitudes toward truth-telling and lying in Jewish thought. Combining his conclusions with explicit statements made by some editors themselves and by the rabbinic authorities who have encouraged them, he argues that his discoveries are evidence of a callous attitude toward truth that can be justified from within Jewish tradition. When faced with a conflict between the past as it was and as it should have been, compilers and editors have felt not just free but positively obliged to sacrifice truth in favor of the greater good. Although he doesn’t say so outright, Shapiro would clearly prefer the opposite situation in which publishers of rabbinic texts, and Jews in general, would look more to those voices in the halakhic tradition that put a higher value on open honesty and make fewer allowances for evasion or mendacity.

Thorough, comprehensive, based on the painstaking examination and comparison of primary sources, Changing the Immutable is an impressive feat of scholarship. Yet, for all its erudition, it fails to make sense of its data in a satisfying way. The problem is not that Shapiro’s assemblage of halakhic loopholes sound as if gathered from an anti-Semitic handbook (though they sometimes do). Nor is it his slighting of the fact that only in the modern West did the assumption take hold that all information should be revealed. Nor would it have fundamentally mattered, as Allan Nadler urges in his perceptive review of the book, had Shapiro included in his final chapter a more sophisticated discussion of philosophical and theological conceptions of truth. The real problem is that, in lumping together so many disparate phenomena as instances of “censorship,” Shapiro not only obscures his most important discoveries but permits only a single, true-or-false criterion of judgment—and this criterion is the wrong one entirely.

For instance: emending an edition of the Kitsur Shulḥan Arukh—a popular 19th-century digest of a major law code, intended for lay use—to reflect current standards of halakhah isn’t really censorship or an instance of “rewriting history,” any more than would be the updating of a medical textbook to include information about the Zika virus. In this case, the intended audience is composed not of historians seeking to ascertain the authentic opinions of the work’s 19th-century author but pious Jews looking for guidance in practical matters of observance.

Worse, the book’s excessive breadth renders it ahistorical. Never does the author investigate how the exercise of selective editing might have changed over time, or how contemporary Gentile culture has affected Jewish opinions of what does and what does not constitute censorship. Since the subtitle announces a concern with “Orthodox Judaism,” one might like to know when and why selective editing under Orthodox auspices became more common, or different in kind. Was it in the early 19th century, when Orthodox Judaism first emerged in contradistinction to Reform?

 

 Or perhaps in the past half-century, due to an increasing tendency toward ideological and halakhic stringency? Or just after World War II, with the felt need to construct an image of pre-Holocaust Eastern Europe as a utopia of Jewish piety? Not only does the book neglect such questions, the reader isn’t even given a clue to how they might be addressed.

 

Rabbi Isaac Hutner (CENTER) Rosh Yeshiva Chaim Berlin in Slobodka Yeshiva 1930 - Invisible Yarmulke & Goy Hair (UOJ ADD-ON)

Picture of five young men, of a group of men who traveled to study in Slabodka Yeshiva abroad in 1930 (after the 1929 pogrom). Rabbi Dov Zochovsky, [Rabbi Eliezer Goldshmidt ], Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner, Rabbi Moshe Tikochinsky and Rabbi Zevulun Graz. Photographed in Kovno near Slabodka.].

Shapiro would have done better to focus more narrowly on the specific type of censorship that evidently drove him to his subject in the first place: the erasing of any acknowledgment that current standards of ultra-Orthodoxy were not in place from time immemorial. Had he done so, he would have necessarily had to restrict his discussion to the past century or so, which in turn might have enabled him to attempt an answer to the right questions.

Before returning to those questions, it helps to be aware of some missing historical context. For that purpose, let’s go back to Rabbi Kook, to whom Shapiro dedicates an entire chapter. Born in 1865 and educated in the great yeshivas of northwest Russia, Kook belonged to a small circle of rabbis eager to embrace Zionism and open to a variety of secular and non-Jewish influences. In Kook’s dynamic theology, which draws on kabbalah, ḥasidic teachings, secular thought, and various Western influences, the Zionist movement emerges not only as part of the divine plan but as an opportunity for a rebirth of Judaism itself within parameters that at the time, and now, could only be categorized as Orthodox.

Orthodox though they were, however, Kook’s opinions aroused serious controversy in his day. A large proportion of his Orthodox colleagues were, to varying degrees, anti-Zionist, and even those supportive of Zionism found talk of spiritual rebirth dangerous. By the 1920s, Orthodox Jews had organized themselves into two separate political parties, one Zionist, the other ultra-Orthodox—a split that, abetted by a number of social and historical factors, gave rise to two sub-denominations. In today’s Israel, the groups are characterized not only by separate political parties but by separate neighborhoods, modes of dress, educational institutions, and so forth. A similar, if less dramatic, split occurred in America between Modern Orthodoxy and ultra-Orthodoxy.

But at the time, nobody threatened Kook, or his contemporaries, with ostracism. He maintained close relations throughout his life with rabbis who would today be considered ḥaredi—and who sometimes defended him against his critics even as they disagreed with him on substantive issues. Although he was indeed involved in bitter controversies, these were seen as intra-denominational squabbles, not fights that would demarcate the boundary between two forms of Orthodoxy.

A generation later, though, such a schism was already in evidence—and nowadays the very fact that, for example, Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, a founding father of Jerusalemite ultra-Orthodoxy, had associated with Kook is a scandal that must be covered up. In this respect, the treatment of Kook, unlike many of the other examples adduced by Shapiro, really does constitute a “rewriting of history.” Pious biographies of ḥaredi figures like Auerbach studiously avoid mention of Kook and other “modern” figures.

Still, to an extent Shapiro doesn’t completely acknowledge, such proactive editorial tampering is very different from, say, just omitting a no-longer-followed halakhic opinion from a manual for practical observance. Moreover, there is also a gap—as Jacob J. Schacter pointed out in a 1990 article on a related subject—between the propagation of outright falsehoods and simply deeming certain facts best left unpublicized.

Beyond the question of how and why specific facts come to be repressed, whether by omission or by deliberate falsification, is the question of how history itself, and in particular the history of halakhic change, comes to be denied. Take the fact that Abraham, Jacob, and other biblical heroes practiced polygamy, which later became impermissible. Ask any Orthodox rabbi why, and you’ll get a variation of the following: in the 10th century, a leading halakhic authority declared polygamy forbidden for Ashkenazim. You’d get a similar story from an academic scholar of medieval Jewish history, who might add that by that date polygamy had already long ceased to be commonplace among Jews living in Christian lands. Both parties would agree that the law simply changed: what was kosher for Abraham became treyf. The Talmud has more subtle, and more historically immediate, examples of halakhic change, but the upshot is the same. There’s no theological problem involved.

What’s different in the case of the ultra-Orthodox rabbis guilty of “censorship” is that they dispute this point, to the point of denying that either attitudes or laws have in fact changed. And here another set of cases from Shapiro’s book becomes pertinent. As he notes, photographs or other visual renderings of bareheaded rabbinic figures—from the 18th-century Italian sage Moses Gentili to an early picture of the 20th-century Lubavitcher rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson—are regularly doctored to give them clearly recognizable kippot. The halakhic history here is murky, but the positive obligation to keep one’s head covered may not have become a definitive and mandatory sign of religious observance until a few decades ago. At least until World War II, it was common for even devout men to remove their head coverings when posing for pictures.

Nowadays, however, appearing without a hat or yarmulke is a clear sign of non-Orthodoxy. So today’s ultra-Orthodox establishment has faced a choice. It could say: “yes, Jacob had four wives, and Rabbi Gentili didn’t have to cover his head, but you only get one wife, and keep that kippah on.” Instead, it has resorted to Photoshop.

This response, to repeat, is very modern. Talmudic rabbis, without a modern sense of historical development, enthusiastically engaged in anachronisms but were also perfectly willing to acknowledge that Judaism had changed over time. Thus they made frequent mention of the rival schools supposedly founded by the 1st-century-BCE sages Hillel and Shammai, and their differences on many points of halakhah. According to the Talmud’s account, there was a period during which the opinions of both schools were acceptable alternatives; only later did the opinions of Hillel and his disciples become, for the most part, indisputably authoritative.

Today, one has the impression that, confronted with the task of redacting the Talmud, the targets of Shapiro’s criticism would omit any mention of Shammai and his school and simply paint a picture of continuous and universal acceptance of Hillel’s opinions. Certainly there would be no mention of Elisha ben Avuyah, the famous sage-turned-heretic whose words are quoted with approval in Pirkei Avot (“Ethics of the Fathers”). Either we wouldn’t know that he became a heretic or we wouldn’t know that the great Rabbi Meir was his student, and we certainly wouldn’t know that Meir maintained warm and admiring relations with his former mentor even after he’d left the fold. (As for Shapiro, he does mention the case of Elisha and Meir but, tellingly, only to emphasize its supposed similarity with contemporary “censorship,” not the yawning difference.)

Here we arrive at the most serious problem Shapiro has uncovered: the impulse to deny the existence of any sort of ideological diversity. An inability to say, in the Talmud’s memorable phrase, “both these opinions and those opinions are the words of the living God,” or “we disagree with the approach of Rabbi Kook and his disciples, but see no need to anathematize him,” robs Judaism of one of its most compelling and powerful doctrines, one that should appeal to believers and non-believers alike. By contrast with the contemporary mood, rabbinic literature makes the point time and again that fierce internecine debates could and should be coupled with mutual respect, and that even revered figures erred when they allowed these debates to become too acrimonious.

How did this turnabout come to be? One wishes Shapiro had sacrificed a few examples and spared us so exhaustive a discussion of truth-and-falsehood and instead broached the question head-on. Most likely, the answer would have something to do with the powerful sense of fragility and vulnerability that has seized the ḥaredi world. Its watchmen have constructed high walls, fearful lest the slightest tap of doubt—like knowing that the “good” Auerbach and the “wicked” Kook were once friends—could cause the entire edifice to crumble. They have done so in order to protect the community they have created. Yet the walls are so high as to be, of necessity, unsturdy, and the fear so palpable as inevitably to trigger the doubt it guards against.

http://mosaicmagazine.com/observation/2016/12/do-the-ultra-orthodox-censor-historical-truth/

Rushing Away From Hasidic Jail - To Rush! Teach Them Or lose Them!

The Hasidic Boy Who Learned English by Secretly Listening to Rush Limbaugh 

 

Mendel Taub couldn’t get a real education in the strict religious town he was raised in, so he bought a contraband radio and began teaching himself.

ROCKLAND COUNTY, New York — Mendel Taub grew up in a village where residents obey every utterance of their grand rabbi. The rebbe commands all aspects of his followers’ lives and rails against the secular world, banning its modern channels—smart phones, computers, television. Yiddish street signs direct men and women to walk on opposite sides of the street. Women are forbidden to drive. Wives must shave their heads, cover their wigs with scarves and wear skirts that extend at least five inches below the knee. “Modesty squads” report wrongdoers to the rebbe.

But this isn’t in a foreign country: it’s Rockland County, New York, just 30 miles north of the city.

New Square is one of the most insular communities in the country. Nearly all of its 7,700 residents are part of the Skverer sect of Hasidism, which originated in 19th century Ukraine. Post-war immigrants founded the Rockland village in 1954 to continue their Hasidic ideal of living a sanctified life, uncorrupted by the secularized Brooklyn, where they originally settled.

New Square has one large, multi-building school for all its children. Yeshiva education for boys focuses on religious texts, with little study of English and math, and no study of science or social studies. Around the age of 13, boys begin to focus almost exclusively on Judaism’s holy books, the Torah and Talmud.

Seven year ago, Taub was a good yeshiva student and very inquisitive. But after teachers punished the 15-year-old for questioning the fundamentals of Skver beliefs, he dropped out.

“I realized that Talmudic law wasn’t really going to help me get a job.” Taub said.

Taub didn’t know English and was determined to emerge beyond his native Yiddish. So he convinced an itinerant salesman, who mostly peddled watches and calculators in the village, to sell him a pocket radio. He had saved $20 of his Bar Mitzvah money to buy the contraband.

“It went down like a drug deal, at night, under a dark roof,” he said. “We didn’t talk much. I slipped him the money. He passed me the radio. And we both walked away knowing exactly what we did.”

If religious authorities were to catch wind of his actions, Taub would destroy his chances of getting a desirable match in his sect's customary arranged marriages or risk becoming an outcast in the only community he had ever known.

Taub used the device to turn Rush Limbaugh into a surrogate English teacher.

He tuned into Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and other conservative radio show hosts during 12-hour days packing hard candies into cardboard boxes in a New Square warehouse. Low wage manual labor was his only employment option. He would set the volume just loud enough to hear Limbaugh rant.

Taub chose to learn from the right-wing radio preachers because, at the time, he identified with their ethnocentric attitude.

“I came from a community of ‘chosen people’ and here were people basically saying the same thing,” he said. Other beliefs resonated for him as well. For instance, Taub had been taught homosexuality was a sin against God.

Plus, the teenager figured, their vocabulary was good, despite words that heavily skewed toward the political.

"I knew what ‘unilateral agreement’ and ‘hegemonic power’ meant but didn’t know understand the world ‘stove’,” he said. “It was funny.”

With the help of a dictionary, Taub drew up a complex word map to help him understand sentence structure and spelling.

He bypassed FM stations altogether.

"I couldn’t relate to any of the news about sports,” he said. “And music hurt my ears. I still felt guilty when I heard voice of a woman because it would elicit 'impure' thoughts."

At 16, Taub summoned the nerve to call the local school system on a public pay phone, asking in broken English how he might register for classes.

“My dream was to get a high school diploma,” he said. “With that, I would be able to hold a job and have a family. For me, it was the measure of an educated man.”

He was directed to a state-backed education program called the Board of Cooperative Educational Service.

The next day, he called Albert Moschetti, BOCES’ adult education director at the time.  When the two met in person, Moschetti offered his hand to greet the teenager.

“He didn’t know what to do with it,” Moschetti said. “Hand-shaking wasn’t natural for him.”

On his 17^th birthday, Taub began to study English as a Second Language in a classroom filled with students born in other countries.

“My classmates couldn’t believe I grew up in America. Who in America doesn’t speak English at 17 or 18?”

New Square is an extreme case but Hasidic yeshivas around the world have similar educational practices for boys relegating many to lives of poverty and public assistance. (Girls do not study the Talmud and thus have more time for nonreligious coursework.) Deficient general studies “have been an ongoing problem in Israel, London, and Quebec,” said Naftuli Moster, a former Hasidic yeshiva student and founder of Young Advocates for a Fair Education or Yaffed. “The high rates of poverty in the Hasidic community have been well-documented,” he said.

The issue is beginning to draw attention in New York, where Yaffed has partnered with famed civil rights attorney Norman Siegel and law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher to pressure the city and state to provide better general studies in the private religious schools.

On the eve of beginning at school, Taub confided in his older brother, Abraham, that he was about to break their community’s taboo against secular studies. Sitting in a gray Honda minivan outside the family’s home, Taub was shocked by Abraham’s response:

“He told me, ‘You think I’m uneducated. You think I’m illiterate. Well, I’ll tell you something you don’t know. I have a New York State GED and I’m going to college,’” Taub recalled. His brother was studying at Rockland Community College, a State University of New York school.

"I was flabbergasted. I was shocked. I felt like I was living in a fictional novel,” Taub recalled. “I viewed my brother as a nice Hasidic man who didn’t even speak English. I even looked down on him a bit because I thought I knew more than he did.”

Abraham Taub, who was married with children at the time, was risking his young family’s reputation and even his children’s enrollment in only school in town. New School authorities use expulsion as a means of mandating conformity, as evidenced by a long list of social rules parents must sign in order to register their children each year.

The brothers soon spent a semester together at Rockland Community College and both would eventually win a State University of New York Chancellor’s Award for academic excellence. Attending college with his brother “was the best thing that could have happened to me. I was a strange man in a strange land. He taught me about GPAs, college credits, how the system works.”

His brother didn’t prepare him for one thing, however—female classmates.

 On the first day, “I thought, ‘Holy crap. Girls! Front, left, right, back. Girls! Do you say hello to them? I can’t believe they’re part of this class or that I am.”

Taub hadn’t so much as walked on the same side of the street as a girl and had been forbidden from looking directly at them.

Abraham, who is studying to become an emergency-room doctor, still lives in New Square with a wife, three children, his own home and a business selling booths for security guards and parking attendants. He is graduating from the NYIT College of Osteopathic Medicine on Long Island this spring and will then begin his residency. Mendel said the community now reluctantly tolerates his brother's pursuits because he has continued to respect most communal norms doesn’t try to influence anyone to break with tradition.

Mendel, however began to slowly shed his regulation white shirt, black suit, and black brimmed wool hat soon after he started studying outside of his village. At first, he carried his books in a shopping bag because no one in his village uses backpacks. The day he finally slipped on one and walked through the village, he felt stares of disapproval and knew gossip about him had begun in earnest.

“At that point, by walking around like that, and without all the garb, I finished any future I had in the community,” he said. His chances to find a marriage match were through. “I was ostracized from that point on.”

He lost lifelong friends. “My worst fears had come true,” he said.

But outside New Square, Taub excelled. After graduating Rockland Community College with honors, he was asked to become a trustee. In May, he earned a bachelor’s degree in political science and criminal justice at Pace University, which he attended on full scholarship. He earned his Emergency Medical Technician certification and has worked for two ambulance corps. Now a certified Yiddish court translator, he is studying for the LSATS, with hopes of attending law school in the fall.

Taub no longer identifies with conservatives. His multi-ethnic classmates helped him appreciate the value of racial and cultural diversity, he said. He attended the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia July and credits Democratic policies—those that support school loans and grants—with allowing him to fulfill his dreams.

Though there were tearful times with his parents and plenty of disagreements, they allowed him to live with them for several years while he earned his degrees. His friends abandoned him but when he began to show success in the outside world, a few softened and began speaking with him again. He now has a “beautiful” relationship with his parents and siblings and lives in an apartment close to New Square.


 He respects the Skverer’s communal values but insists that “Community leaders have a responsibility to provide people with a basic secular education,” he said. “Depriving students is blatant injustice.”

“Mendel is an amazing young man. He is courageous, tenacious, poised, and really smart,” said Thomas Della Torre, RCC’s associate vice president for academic and community partnerships. Perhaps more importantly, Della Torre said he carries no overt bitterness.

 “His attitude is: This is what’s best for me and I want others to know it’s available to them.’”  

Taub has helped Orthodox Jewish organizations design curricula to improve vocational training for Hasidic men. And people from his hometown secretly reach out to him for advice all the time, often through the banned WhatsApp messaging platform.

In the last year, he said as many as 80 people have contacted him. “I talk with them. I give them information about BOCES and RCC. It is such a crisis for them when they realize they have options. There are so many decisions to make. Being socially isolated comes with a certain peace of mind.”


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/12/11/the-hasidic-boy-who-learned-english-by-secretly-listening-to-rush-limb-augh.html?via=desktop&source=twitter

Good Riddance Obama....So....Let's Give Trump a Chance...

I Too Have Become Disillusioned.

By Matt Patterson (An ultra-Liberal Opinion Writer) Originally written in 2011...

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job? 

Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer;" a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, less often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor;" a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president? There is no evidence that he ever attended or worked for any university or that he ever sat for the Illinois bar. We have no documentation for any of his claims. He may well be the greatest hoax in history.

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dems to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were 'a bit' extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard because of the color of his skin.

Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is.

And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois . He was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people - conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches and that's when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth - it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. (An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerless-ness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track). But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job.

When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such an impostor in the Oval Office.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/08/obama_the_affirmative_action_president.html

The charges involve five main cases. In the first, Metzger allegedly took bribes from rich foreigners seeking to convert to Judaism or determine their religious status. The alleged go-between was Rabbi Gabriel Cohen, head of the Los Angeles rabbinic court. Cohen allegedly gave Metzger half of each bribe...

Former Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger Charged With Accepting $2 Million in Bribes

Indictment also includes counts alleging fraud, theft, conspiracy, breach of trust, money laundering and tax offenses.

The indictment was served after a hearing, in which Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein rejected Metzger’s arguments.

The charges involve five main cases. In the first, Metzger allegedly took bribes from rich foreigners seeking to convert to Judaism or determine their religious status. The alleged go-between was Rabbi Gabriel Cohen, head of the Los Angeles rabbinic court. Cohen allegedly gave Metzger half of each bribe.

In one case, from 2011, Metzger referred to Cohen a Russian businessman who had immigrated to Israel and wanted his two children converted. After the conversion, Metzger and Cohen allegedly split evenly between them the $360,000 the man paid.

Metzger allegedly pocketed commissions from money he raised for charities. In one case, Metzger raised $105,000 for a soup kitchen, Beit Hatavshil, from the businessman Leonid Nevzlin, and Beit Hatavshil’s director gave some 30 percent of that sum to Metzger without informing Nevzlin.

The third charge pertains to Metzger’s alleged receipt of favors during his term as chief rabbi. According to the indictment, from 2003 to 2013, Metzger received significant amounts of money from private individuals who needed his services.

Another charge involves Esh Hatorah Yeshiva. Metzger allegedly stole donations to the yeshiva, which operated in Tel Aviv’s Tiferet Tzvi Synagogue, where Metzger is the pulpit rabbi. One $28,000 donation was divided between Eisenstadt and Metzger instead of going to the yeshiva.

In another case, in 2009 Metzger allegedly inducted the associate of a wealthy Jew from Moscow as rabbi of the Caucasus Jewish community in Israel, in exchange for $70,000.

Metzger is also charged with concealing income from the tax authorities by accepting money through others and in cash.

He is also accused of encouraging Eisenstadt to lie during the investigation and urging Eisendstadt to continue to “protect him.”

Metzger’s attorneys, Prof. David Liba’i and Elad Rath, said: “We received with great sorrow the prosecution’s decision today to indict Rabbi Metzger. Rabbi Metzger vehemently denies the allegations and rejects the claims of the state’s witness. The rabbi says he never accepted bribes, either from the state’s witness or from others and he is determined to fight for his innocence.”

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.680292

GABRIEL COHEN WITH HIS BELOVED TORAH

COHEN'S FULL SERVICE FRAUD FACTORY NOW AVAILABLE ON THE EAST COAST:
http://www.beth-din.org/

\

CHIEF RABBIS TO UOJ - "MONEY TRUMPS EVERYTHING!" Worthless Rabbis - Manipulating 2000 Years of Jewish Law --- “They may approve of Rabbi Lookstein, not because of Rabbi Lookstein but because of Donald Trump. But there is no way in the world they will accept and legitimize the rank and file without further inquiry into individual converts."

So Much For Jewish Law That Can Be Altered Based On Politics And Self-Interest! The Fools And Crooks Are Running The Asylum...As Always....*

Israel’s Chief Rabbinate promises standards for conversion rabbis and to count Ivanka Trump as Jewish (several DC-area Jewish day school parents saying that they don't want their schools accepting her kids.)

By Andrew Tobin December 7, 2016 

 Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, right, and Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau

JERUSALEM (JTA) — Israel’s Chief Rabbinate committed to creating standards for recognizing which Diaspora rabbis it trusts to handle Jewish conversions.
.
The Ashkenazi and Sephardi chief rabbis announced separately Wednesday afternoon that they would convene a meeting next week with the Chief Rabbinate Council and the Supreme Rabbinical Court to determine the standards. The conversion of Ivanka Trump, the daughter of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, will be recognized under the new standards, Chief Sephardi Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef promised in his statement.

 (Although The new standards will be set next week, 7 years after her fraudulent conversion by the RCA, Hershel Schechter and Haskel Lookstein in 2009. Whatever standards these bozos set next week will be retroactive to 2009 for Trump only) UNREAL! 
 

“This reform is expected to stop the suffering of many converts who have been through a conversion abroad when they come to register for marriage and divorce in Israel. In contrast to the situation in the past, in which some officials in the Chief Rabbinate assumed the authority to check every case individually, now as mentioned above, every conversion that will be approved by a rabbi who is on the list of the approved rabbis will not be subject to further checking but will be approved automatically,” Yosef said.

“For example, what reached the headlines recently was the issue of the recognition of the conversion of Ivanka Trump, the daughter of the president-elect of the United States. According to the new proposed outline in which you check the converting rabbi only, their conversion would be legitimized without the need for further checking,” Yosef said.

The Chief Rabbinate is Israel’s highest Jewish authority, with control over personal status issues, like conversion, marriage and divorce. The Chief Rabbinate Council is its advisory body. The Supreme Rabbinical Court is the highest rabbinical court, which resolves disputes regarding personal status issues.

The Rabbinate released a list in April of more than 100 rabbis from the U.S. and 19 other countries whose authority over Jewish conversions it accepts. But the Rabbinate attached a letter to the list saying it was “not exhaustive” and simply included rabbis whose authority had been accepted in the past. The letter also said there was no guarantee the rabbis would be trusted in the future.

The new list will be compiled based on the standards to be determined next week, Yosef said.
The Chief Rabbinate did not respond to JTA’s request for comment.

Controversially, the Rabbinate’s April list did not include prominent modern Orthodox rabbis like New York Rabbi Avi Weiss, who founded the progressive Open Orthodoxy movement.

The haredi-dominated Rabbinate has never recognized non-Orthodox rabbis or conversions, and in the past few years it has questioned the credentials of a few leading liberal Orthodox rabbis. In September, Haaretz revealed the Rabbinate had rejected four conversions by Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz, the head of the Rabbinical Council of America’s rabbinical court.

 In July, the Rabbinate rejected a conversion by Rabbi Haskel Lookstein, the former leader at Kehilath Jeshurun in Manhattan’s Upper East Side who converted Ivanka Trump before her marriage to Jared Kushner.

Itim, an organization that helps Israelis navigate the state’s religious bureaucracy, petitioned a Jerusalem court in 2015 to pressure the Rabbinate to be more transparent about how it determines which Jewish conversions are legitimate. That petition led to the release of the Rabbinate’s first list of rabbis. It also drew attention to Itamar Tubul, a midlevel bureaucrat who evaluates requests from Israeli immigrants seeking a marriage license and ensures they are Jewish.

Rabbi Seth Farber, the director of Itim, responded to Wednesday’s announcement with cautious optimism.

“We are incredibly gratified that the rabbinate has recognized its lack of policies regarding converts from overseas in harmful to Judaism in Israel and around the world. I hope that the outcome of this assembly will remove the insane bureaucracy that converts are forced to undergo to certify their Jewishness,” he said in a statement. “We will need to see the results of these meetings and ensure the criteria do not exclude wide swaths of the Jewish people.”

But Rabbi Uri Regev, the head of Hiddush, an organization that promotes religious pluralism in Israel, was skeptical the Rabbinate was capable of significantly liberalizing.

“With the makeup of the group that is convening next week, in my view it is very unlikely that they will come up with an agreed upon set of criteria that will be inclusive of the mainstream modern Orthodox rabbinate of North America today,” he told JTA. “They may approve of Rabbi Lookstein, not because of Rabbi Lookstein but because of Donald Trump. But there is no way in the world they will accept and legitimize the rank and file without further inquiry into individual converts.

http://www.jta.org/2016/12/07/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/israels-chief-rabbinate-promises-to-establish-conversion-standards-and-count-ivanka-trump-as-jewish#.WEhoePMtcK4.facebook

Shedding Light On The Conversion Racket! The Facts Of The "Jewish Converts" Industry - The Vast Majority Do It For Personal Reasons Totally Unrelated To Becoming Jews!

 photos of a woman from the adult film industry very recently converted to "Orthodox Judaism"

 We must take a hard look at the 2 rabbis that have made conversions their top priority as rabbis. Leib Tropper & Barry Freundel (among many others). Google these two perverts and you'll understand what motivates them!
....."Where questions of religion are concerned, people are guilty of every possible sort of dishonesty and intellectual misdemeanour".....Sigmund Freud; The Future Of An Illusion.

 Conversion to Judaism: Denomination by Denomination

From JTA's special series on conversion: Do you want a Reform, Orthodox or Conservative conversion — and what does each entail? Compare the denominations.


Orthodox

Number of converts: Unknown. Over the last seven years, approximately 1,275 conversions have been certified by conversion courts affiliated with the Rabbinical Council of America, but plenty of Orthodox conversions take place outside the RCA’s system.

Ritual: Approval by a three-judge religious court comprised of three Orthodox men (usually rabbis), male circumcision (or, for circumcised men, symbolic drawing of blood at the place of circumcision) and ritual immersion in a mikvah.

Requirements: Commitment to performing all the Torah’s commandments according to Orthodox interpretations of Jewish law. (Practically never happens)

Preparation: In most cases, regular study with a rabbi and/or religious mentor. The only rabbi known to offer an Orthodox conversion class in the United States, Rabbi Maury Kellman of New York, has a yearlong curriculum for his Manhattan Mechina L’Giyur that covers Jewish philosophy, law, history and ethics; field trips to places like Brooklyn and Israel; and occasional Shabbaton weekends. Prospective converts are expected to adopt Jewish practices, join an Orthodox Jewish community and regularly attend synagogue.

Who’s converting?

 Spiritual seekers, non-Jews dating Jews, gentiles drawn to Judaism through friends and those who converted through other Jewish denominations. The latter category includes individuals raised as Jews in non-Orthodox households who subsequently realized they don’t count as Jewish according to Orthodox Jewish law (usually because their mother isn’t halachically Jewish), as well as individuals who previously converted Reform or Conservative and then decided they wanted an Orthodox conversion. This usually happens because they became more observant or want their Jewish status to be unimpeachable. Kellman estimates the breakdown of students at his Orthodox conversion course in Manhattan as 30-35 percent converts who already converted outside of Orthodoxy, 30 percent relationship converts, 15 percent seekers and 15 percent drawn to Judaism for social reasons. (That makes it 60% are invalid converts out the gate) The vast majority of Kellman’s students are women, mostly aged 25 to 40.

Attitude toward conversions performed by other denominations: Not good enough. Orthodox conversion is the only acceptable path to becoming a Jew.

Problems: Only in 2007 did the Rabbinical Council of America, the country’s main centrist Orthodox rabbinic association, establish a standardized process for conversions. The system, called Geirus Policies and Standards, or GPS, constituted an attempt to “provide reasonable assurance that its converts and their offspring be accorded acceptance and recognition in other Jewish communities in the future.” But with many Orthodox conversions still taking place outside this system (perhaps most), critics say the establishment of central standards automatically casts aspersions on the Jewish credentials of anyone who does not go through the GPS process.

Who is a Jew without conversion: Anyone whose mother is Jewish according to halachah. In cases of uncertainty, such as some Ethiopian immigrants to Israel or members of so-called Lost Tribes whose Jewish ancestry is not universally accepted or known, most Orthodox authorities prefer conversion just to be on the safe side.

Conservative

Number: Unknown. A ballpark estimate of 2,500-3,000 converts per year worldwide is cited by the head of the movement’s Rabbinical Assembly, Rabbi Julie Schonfeld, a figure based on an extrapolation from the 350 people the movement says convert every year under its aegis in Los Angeles.

Ritual: Approval by a three-judge religious court, male circumcision (or symbolic drawing of blood) and mikvah immersion. The court judges ideally will be three Conservative rabbis, but it’s not a must. In smaller communities, cantors or suitable community members will do.

Preparation: Several U.S. cities have conversion institutes that run Introduction to Judaism courses. In addition — and in some places instead of classes — conversion candidates will meet with a rabbi one on one. Prospective converts are also expected to become part of the Jewish community, attend synagogue, celebrate holidays and engage with Jewish practice in some meaningful way. A sponsoring rabbi is necessary to complete the conversion.

Requirements: “The prospective convert must renounce all other religious beliefs and practices and commit to living a moral life according to Jewish teaching, having a Jewish household and, if they have children, raising them as Jews,” Schonfeld says. “They must commit to adopt and grow in their observances of Shabbat and holidays and kashrut, to give tzedakah and to engage in Jewish study. The exact minimum requirements for these and other observances vary somewhat from rabbi to rabbi.” Few if any rabbis require commitment to Jewish law as defined by the Conservative movement.

Who’s converting? Two-thirds are non-Jews in an interfaith relationship with a Jew, says Rabbi Adam Greenwald, director of the Miller Introduction to Judaism Program at American Jewish University in Los Angeles. But because intermarriage is so prevalent among Conservative Jews these days (nearly four in 10 Conservative Jews are doing it, according to Steven M. Cohen of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion), partners willing to go the extra step and convert tend to be pretty involved with Judaism, Greenwald says. The other one-third of Conservative converts include spiritual seekers, young people turned on to Judaism through friends in college, the elderly — even single moms looking for direction, according to Greenwald.

Attitude toward conversions performed by other denominations: If the conversion meets Conservative requirements, it’s kosher. That generally includes Orthodox conversions and excludes Reform ones, but not across the board. If a Reform conversion included an acceptable three-judge panel, mikvah, circumcision, and a serious course of study and commitment to Jewish life, there are Conservative rabbis who would find it acceptable.

Problems: Conservative conversions are not recognized by Orthodox institutions, including Israel’s Chief Rabbinate. So if you immigrate to Israel (the Israeli Interior Ministry accepts Conservative conversions for the purposes of immigration), you probably won’t be considered Jewish by the Rabbinate and therefore won’t be permitted to marry a Jew in Israel. You’ll either have to marry overseas, have an “unofficial” wedding in Israel that won’t be recognized by law or re-convert Orthodox style.

Who is a Jew without conversion: Anyone with a Jewish mother according to Conservative interpretations of Jewish law.

Reform

Number: Unknown, but at least 800-900 per year. The American Jewish Archives in Cincinnati keeps a record of conversion certificates but does not know what proportion of converts send them in. The Union for Reform Judaism says over 1,000 individuals took one of its 16-week conversion classes in 2013.

Ritual: Varies. All “Jews by choice” make some kind of public declaration of commitment. It may be in the rabbi’s office before a three-person religious panel, in front of the entire congregation in the synagogue sanctuary or at the mikvah. Mikvah immersion is recommended but not required. Some men also undergo circumcision or the symbolic drawing of blood, but it’s not required. In synagogue conversion ceremonies, the convert typically holds the Torah, recites the Shema, is given a Hebrew name and receives a blessing.

Preparation: A 14- to 16-week Introduction to Judaism class that meets weekly and covers such topics as basic Hebrew and prayer, holidays, Jewish history, Jewish lifecycle, Israel and how-to Judaism. These may be supplemented or substituted by individualized counseling or study sessions with rabbis.

Requirements: Broadly speaking, commitment to the Jewish people, living life as a Jew and Jewish values. Some ceremonies require affirmation of six key tenets as outlined in the conversion service published by the movement in 1988: accepting Judaism to the exclusion of all other religious; freely entering the covenant between God and the Jewish people; being loyal to Judaism and the Jewish people; establishing a Jewish home and participating actively in synagogue and communal life; pursuing Torah and Jewish knowledge; raising one’s children as Jews.

Who’s converting? Longtime non-Jewish spouses of Jews who may have raised Jewish children and long been involved in synagogue life and now want to formalize their Jewish identity; gentiles marrying Jews; spiritual seekers.

Feeling toward conversions performed by other denominations: If you have chosen to become a Jew and gone through some kind of legitimate conversion, you’re Jewish.

Problems: If you’re applying for Israeli citizenship, Reform conversions usually pass muster with the Israeli Interior Ministry but not with the Orthodox-dominated Israeli Chief Rabbinate. That means you can move to Israel but you can’t marry a Jew there. In the United States, too, Orthodox institutions don’t accept Reform conversions. Your conversion probably won’t count according to Conservative interpretations of Jewish law, either, but that depends on the specifics of your conversion and which Conservative rabbi you ask.

Who is a Jew without conversion: Anyone with a Jewish parent (mother or father) living as a Jew. Someone with a Jewish parent who identifies with another faith is not considered Jewish.

(This piece does not include conversion by other denominations or no denomination because the numbers are negligible compared with the three main American Jewish religious denominations.)


http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/1.619502

"According to the Jewish People Policy Institute, only 23 percent of Jews believe that a rabbi should have the final say on who is and who isn't a Jew."

Vast Majority of Jews Don’t Want Rabbis Deciding if They’re Jewish, Survey Shows

According to the Jewish People Policy Institute, only 23 percent of Jews believe that a rabbi should have the final say on who is and who isn't a Jew.

Most Jews do not believe rabbis should have the authority to determine who qualifies as a member of the faith, and even among the Orthodox, only a slight majority do.

According to a report published on Monday, 37 percent of Jews worldwide believe that local communities should be the final arbiter of who is a Jew. Another 30 percent would have individuals decide for themselves, and only 23 percent think the question should be determined by rabbis. A small minority of 6 percent believe the state of Israel should have the final say in this thorny matter.

The report, published by the Jewish People Policy Institute, a Jerusalem-based think tank, was based on responses received from 715 participants in dialogue groups held in March and April this year in Israel, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Brazil and Switzerland. The majority of the participants were from the United States.

Among Orthodox Jews, 54 percent said rabbis should be left to determine who is Jewish.

Among Conservative Jews, it was 24 percent, and among Reform Jews, only 10 percent.

In Israel, it is the Orthodox rabbinical establishment that determines who is a Jew for the purpose of marriage.

When questioned whether Israel should consider views of non-Israeli Jews when determining who is considered Jewish in Israel, only a tiny minority of 6 percent of the respondents said the state need not take into account their views.

Still, 57 percent of the participants said it was “necessary to have a broadly accepted understanding of who is a Jew.”

On the question of whether a conversion by a Reform or Conservative rabbi should be considered legitimate, Israelis seemed to be far more rigid than their counterparts abroad. They were the only group in which a large portion of the participants (44 percent) objected to some degree or another to non-Orthodox conversions.

Asked whether they “strongly agree” that Israel’s definition of a Jew is an “insult” to Diaspora Jewry, more than 20 percent of Conservative Jews and more than 30 percent of Reform Jews responded in the affirmative.


http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/.premium-1.755828

Merry Chanukah - Happy Christmas! The More Fraudulent "Conversions", The More Confusion!

Natalie Portman to put up first Christmas tree

 

With Hanukkah and Christmas coinciding this year, pregnant actress and her Jewish family make exception to tradition

A pregnant Natalie Portman talks with Jimmy Fallon on The Tonight Show, November 29, 2016.

It’s taken 35 years, but Natalie Portman is finally getting her first Christmas tree.

The Jewish actress told The Tonight Show’s Jimmy Fallon on Tuesday that since the first night of Hanukkah coincides with Christmas eve this year, her family has decided to celebrate both holidays together. 

Portman, her French choreographer husband Benjamin Millepied (who converted to Judaism in 2014), and their 5-year-old son Aleph usually observe Hanukkah at their home, and celebrate Christmas with Millepied’s family at their house. However, this holiday season Portman and Millepied are hosting everyone at their Los Angeles house, with both a Christmas tree and a menorah on display.

“I was asking my husband, ‘Is it okay for your family if we don’t have a tree?’ and then my parents were like, ‘We can get a tree,'” she told Fallon.

The Jerusalem-born Portman, who is pregnant with her second child, said she couldn’t have been more pleased about her parents’ willingness to deviate from tradition, at least this once.

“So excited! Like my whole life no Christmas tree, and then all of a sudden they have this great excuse, because it’s every Jew’s kind of secret wish to have a Christmas tree,” Portman explained.

Happy for the actress to have her first Christmas tree, Fallon presented her with an official The Tonight Show ornament to hang on it. Fallon pointed out that the ornament was silver and blue, presumably referring to traditional Hanukkah decoration colors.

It is unlikely, given the Israeli-born Portman’s outspokenness about her Judaism and Zionism, that the tree is a sign of any weakening of the actress’ Jewish identity. Furthermore, it can be expected that Portman and her husband will raise their second child in the Jewish faith, as they are their son Aleph.

News of Portman’s second pregnancy broke in September when she appeared at the premiere of her film “Planetarium” at the Venice Film Festival with her baby bump showing through her form-fitting white Grecian-style Dior gown. Portman’s pregnancy was also apparent as she has walked the red carpet recently for her other soon-to-be release film, “Jackie,” in which she plays the former first lady Jacqueline Kennedy.

Portman’s due date has not been announced, but she assured Fallon that it is not for months, despite how large her belly is already.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/natalie-portman-to-put-up-first-xmas-tree/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Jared the Jew joins the xmas festivities

•  TRUMP FAMILY CHRISTMAS 2011 - WATCH VIDEO

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1346715344001/a-trump-family-christmas/?#sp=show-clips

RCA GEIRUS STANDARD AND POLICIES:

Requirements of Other People in a Candidate’s Life

When a candidate is previously intermarried or is converting for the sake of an individual Jew,  the spouse’s observance level and attitudes must be consistent with the present and future Torah observance of the candidate and not be a source of conflict or opposition to the convert’s adopting a halachic lifestyle. The Beit Din should also consider whether other significant individuals in the candidate’s life such as parents, or any existing minor children, will have an impact on the success or failure of the process and the aftermath of conversion.

http://www.judaismconversion.org/GPS_Policies_and_Procedures.html

Suggested New RCA Logo

http://www.timesofisrael.com/natalie-portman-to-put-up-first-xmas-tree/?utm_source=dlvr.it&u

“Both a man who converted for the sake of a woman and a woman who converted for the sake of a man,” we read in Yevamot 24b, “they are not converts.”

Rabbi Hershel Schechter and the RCA - Rabbinical Council of America - I AM WATCHING YOU!

On Saturday Josh Kushner Goes For A Stroll With Girlfriend Supermodel Karlie Kloss

-

The paparazzi were out on regular patrol in New York on Saturday, and this time they were able to capture entrepreneur Joshua Kushner, whose brother Jared is married to Ivanka Trump, out for a regular Saturday stroll in Soho in the Spring sunshine, with his girl friend Victoria’s Secret model Karlie Kloss.

Both wore regulation blue jeans and appeared to be wrapped up in each other’s eyes as they held hands. The photographs appeared in today’s Daily Mail.Karlie, 21, was wearing a black top and a blazer to match, while 28-year-old Joshua, whose sister-in-law is Ivanka Trump, was low key in a cozy sweater.

According to US Weekly, the couple met at a Victoria’s Secret party a year and a half ago, and have been going out ever since.

-

-

When interviews by Metro.com just in February, she was asked if she believed in falling in love at first sight. “Yeah, I do, I was definitely not planning on falling in love [with Joshua]. But I think that’s the thing about it. You can’t plan or anticipate it.”

While Kylie enjoys life as a super model she is also pretty smart, and even took a business class at Harvard recently, studying the Business off Entertainment and Sports there, according to the new York Post, posting this picture of herself there on Instagram. (NOT FOR THIS BLOG)

http://jewishbusinessnews.com/2014/05/25/josh-kushner-goes-for-a-stroll-with-girlfriend-supermodel-karlie-kloss/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+JewishBusinessNews+%28Jewish+Business+News%29

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2638569/Karlie-Kloss-walks-hand-hand-boyfriend-Joshua-Kushner-romantic-city-stroll.html

 -