Dear Rabbi Flom,

I understand where you’re coming from, and I think it’s a very interesting "Chop." I’m saying that I can hear a Chakira which point is the main point. Is it "Hanoas Atzmo" is when it’s not "Lhaver Al Hadas" or is the opposite, that "Lhaver Al Hadas" is when it’s not "Hanaos Atzmo."

In other words, what was Chazal worried about, that it shouldn’t be not for their own pleasure or that it shouldn’t be to pushed off the religion. In our case where there is an element of both, it’s for their pleasure to push him off the religion. So if it would be like the first side, that we’re only concerned that there should be an element of their own pleasure, than this has that element. If it that he shouldn’t have their religion pushed off, which is also the case over here.

We can also see it in another Chakira, do we go after the Goy’s Kavana, which is in this case so that there shouldn’t revolt, or do you go after the Jew, in which he’s doing is an act to remove himself from his religion. (When he’s completely doing for his own pleasure, so then he’s not doing something to push himself from the religion, since all he’s doing is an act to bring pleasure to the Goy.)

Ran says the reason why you must give up your life when it’s in public because of Chilul Hashem (but for their pleasure there is no Chilul Hashem.) So in our second Chakira, I would say that the Chilul Hashem would be more on the Jews action than the Goy’s Kavana. The very acceptance of Islam would be a Chilul Hashem. For the first Chakira, I would still say, for Chilul Hashem, any element of pushing off the religion would qualify. Hanoas Atzmo would only be a Siman that it’s not pushing off the religion and not what makes it not a Chilul Hashem.

B'H
Thanks you guys!
even though most of your Talmud talk is way over my head I appreciate that we are now getting down to brass tacks. The reason I am writing back is because Rabbi Flom mentioned Marranos{Jews who converted to xtianity during the Spanish Inquisition) and that they were practicing Judaism secretly.It is my understanding that the Marranos (Pigs, as they were called by the Spaniards) were treated worse than the Jews that did not convert to xtianity, also they were tortured. It did not matter to the Spaniards that they were practicing Judaism secretly, they were still treated badly whether they practiced Judaism secretly or not. Just the fact that they were Jews who converted to xtianity gave them the status of Marranos. This is my understanding, I could be wrong. If history repeats itself in our day and age, G-d forbid, then that would mean that the Jews for Lesus would be up a creek without a paddle. So outreach to Jews who have fallen into the pit of other religions is a good and safe thing. That's all. Thanks.
Take Care,
Raybin

quote:

Jews for Lesus

Is there a difference between having a kiruv relationship with a lost Jew who has not yet notched his bible with having stolen a Jewish soul of another, and one who has chas v'shalom done so?

Perhaps at best is like the difference between someone who has thoughts on which they do not act, vs someone has taken bad actions? And that teshuva is possible if he or we can put all those genies back into their bottles?

Perhaps at worst, its like unringing a bell, or unmurdering, and there is not likelihood of teshuva without relying on a miracle, and therefore there is no kiruv mitzvah, or no obligation to broach kiruv without some initial indication of desire for teshuva?

I'm sorry, that was a really bad typo.

Who would want to put a genie back into a bottle or unring a bell?

Shalom!

Dear Rob,
I am not aware of a lesser obligation to try helping someone come (back) to Judaism, because he is further away.Every soul is valuable.
Take care.
Rabbi Flom

Are there any opinions that Jews who undertake to help a far away "missionizing" person return to Torah are participating in very dangerous behavior?

There are three aspects which I see relevant.

1) the missionizing person is actively trying or succeeding in taking Jews away from Torah

2) any information they learn about Torah and Judaism they will use to help them do more damage to other Jews -- perhaps by propogating distortions and misunderstandings -- or by claiming authority by having learned the matter with a learned Jew

A particularly disturbing trend seems to be by exposure to Jews, an undercover missionary may learn to blend in better, and even work in a few Yiddish expressions.

3) Jews coming to such a person for kiruv purposes may be exposing themselves to heretical views which could have an impact and erode their Faith.

If the missionizing person really has a Yiddishe Kop by which to convey eloquent or convincing argument and there are any lackings in the learning of the Jew reaching out, such as if they are ill-equipped to address whether or not there was ever any "censorship" of Gemara to hide details from Jews.

How far away must a dangerous missionizing Jew go before we say it is better to not have any Jew be in contact unless there is a genuine inquiry which seems to be an expression of wanting to return? And only by extremely knowledgable Jews who are already familiar with missionary tactics?

Dear Rob,
Whereas I do agree that not all frum Jews are really capable of refuting missionaries, and that one who does must do so knowing he is not being "used " by the missionary, however "How far away must a dangerous missionizing Jew go before we say it is better to not have any Jew be in contact unless there is a genuine inquiry which seems to be an _expression of wanting to return?" that you wrote, bewilders me.All Jews are worthy of an attempt to bring them to Yiddishkeit. Obviously, if it means going into the nitty gritty of Tanach, then only one capable should do it.
Take care.
Rabbi Flom

quote:

Originally posted by rob:

quote:

Jews for Lesus

" And that teshuva is possible if he or we can put all those genies back into their bottles?

Perhaps at worst, its like unringing a bell, or unmurdering,"

Dear Rob,
I know that it's been about two and a half months since you posted this (you had more, but I wanted to mention something about this point) but today I saw something related to this general topic of Teshuva, repentance. In the sefer "Tuvcha Yabiyu" on the Torah, based on divrei Torah of Rav Yitzchok Zilberstein shli"ta, a son-in-law of Rav Elyashiv shli"ta,a baal teshuva asked him what he could do about sins he had done in the past. He was asking specifically about "loshon horah". Rav Zilberstein told him he should donate money to PUBLIC charities. (This isn't his novel idea, chazal talk about this.) Then he brings other stories of people who did this type of teshuva, when they had stolen money and did not know from whom. (Obviously if you know who you stole it from, you must repay him.) If you can get a hold of the sefer, read the few pages on Parshas Vayikra--fascinating.
Anyhow, teshuva, is a gift from Hashem, and it works. Sometimes a Rav should be consulted to see what should be done.
Take care.
Chaim Flom

quote:

like unringing a bell, or unmurdering

Rabbi Flom wrote:

Anyhow, teshuva, is a gift from Hashem, and it works.

The context of the older post I think I had in mind was how a regular Jew, who is not specificaly trained in goyism or refuting missionaries or anything having to do with their specific threats... what signs can we be on the look out for coming from a heretical Jew with past misdeeds including the spiritual murder of Jews by converting them to idolatry...

How can a simple Jew know whether it is better for themselves to steer clear of the heretic, or try to practice kiruv?


Part of the premise to my question is that some prior bad acts that such a heretic might likely have done include things impossible to correct, akin to unringing a bell.

Rabbi Flom's response quoting Rav Zilberstein shlita and Rav Elyashiv shlita seems to indicate:

When it comes to teshuva, since nothing is beyond Hashem, there are even ways for a Jew with such extreme bad acts to do teshuva! If one cannot undo the specific actions, but have the good intention of truly wishing to do so, they have this mechanism of donating money to public charities?


Did I understand the context and the response accurately?


What if he wants to do teshuva, really _could_ travel all around, door to door like might have done as a messianic missionary, and tell each person that what he did was wrong, and he is sorry, and regrets that he might have taught goyism idolatry to fellow Jews?

Perhaps he might think that while most of the irreligious gentiles he came to preach to didn't want his message of goyism - that would have meant abstaining from some of their pleasures.

But if he were to ring a redneck's doorbell, that he had even rung before, and tell the redneck that his mythologies' idol is just that, the redneck might well lynch him as a zealot!

Do we require him to try that???? Given the risk???

Perhaps he would target only the Jews whom he had missionized to, and if he had been successfuly good at spiritually murdering them, perhaps they would respond strongly? But he is probably not in any danger of being lynched?

Do we require him to go door to door until he has reached at least some of his prior "success" stories?

Or do we let him off so easily, that its too much work and effort, and rationalize that they might have moved away?

At least we know one sign to look for --- if the former heretic comes and announces that failing other ways to undo his prior damage, he has donated money to public charities in the hope that Hashem will accept his teshuva.

Such a sincere baal teshuva is perhaps sufficiently repentant that a simple regular Jew who knows nothing about goyism and wants to keep it that way can risk having them around.

Would Rav Elyashiv or Rav Zilberstein also advise such a reformed heretic to do this public act with an eye toward reminding Jews they might come in contact with of their big public action at least for some period of time?

For example a simple Jew who might recall knowing that the heretic was a danger, but did not know of their public act; yet doesn't want to remind a Jew of their past misdeeds, yet cannot let the former heretic come close without knowing that they have used the halachic process to perform an act of teshuva?

Or more simply: does giving the benefit of the doubt include presuming that a former heretical dangerous Jew has following a rabbi's specific advice, and we should come to trust and let close even without hearing them proclaim that they did teshuva in such and such specific way for lack of specific opportunities to unring bells?

What if one of the notches on their bibles was a Jew's own relative who died a heretic?

If the living relative would still be considered an avenger of blood for a physical murder in the time of cities of refuge?

Should a living Jew really be expected to give benefit of the doubt and presumption of teshuva without hearing from the former heretic's own lips that on rabbinic advice they did teshuva, and need not apologize further to the dead heretic's family before coming close?

Is this question clear?

Dear Rob,
I quoted Rav Zilberstein just to show that sometimes on a certain level we CAN "put the genie back into to the bottle".
As far as which type of teshuva is best for the different types of people, a Rav should be consulted. I can definitely hear that a former missionary should go into anti-missionary or deprogramming work. Sometimes however, it might be opening up a "Pandora's box" and might not be worthwhile.
Take care.
Chaim Flom

quote:

Originally posted by Raybin:
B'H
Thanks you guys!
even though most of your Talmud talk is way over my head I appreciate that we are now getting down to brass tacks. The reason I am writing back is because Rabbi Flom mentioned Marranos{Jews who converted to xtianity during the Spanish Inquisition) and that they were practicing Judaism secretly.It is my understanding that the Marranos (Pigs, as they were called by the Spaniards) were treated worse than the Jews that did not convert to xtianity, also they were tortured. It did not matter to the Spaniards that they were practicing Judaism secretly, they were still treated badly whether they practiced Judaism secretly or not. Just the fact that they were Jews who converted to xtianity gave them the status of Marranos. This is my understanding, I could be wrong. If history repeats itself in our day and age, G-d forbid, then that would mean that the Jews for Lesus would be up a creek without a paddle. So outreach to Jews who have fallen into the pit of other religions is a good and safe thing. That's all. Thanks.
Take Care,
Raybin

Dear Raybin,
I know your letter was half a year ago, but I got an email from Professor Matt Goldish (of Ohio State University, one the foremost experts on the Spanish Inquisition) that I thought you might find interesting.


"The Jews who converted in Spain may have been treated OK by some Spanish
"Old Christians", but very often they were treated terribly. Aside from the
Inquisition always looking over their shoulders, there were laws against
Christians of Jewish ancestry joining many organizations and guilds, and
sometimes there were outbreaks of violence against conversos. So, in a
nutshell I would say they were often not treated well at all, but many of
them probably lived peacefully enough."

Also, in your letter, I agreed with you 100% about being mekarev J's for j, but I would say that that is true even they "history wouldn't repeat itself". It is ALWAYS GOOD to help other Jews.
Take care.
Chaim Flom