It is an issue of voting b/c the electorate determines who will be on the selection committe that votes for the chief rabbis and who will be on the dayanim selection committe. The system may not be perfect but that's the system.
You may want to shout out, but if you think that the playing field between American Modern Orthodoxy and the Israeli rabbinate is about as level as the playing field between the batei din in - oh say - the Cleves Get controversy (where everyone shouted and yelled at each other - some respectfully some not so), then you are living in a bunker. The "mercaz hakoved" and "mercaz hakavod" leans to E"Y on this issue - and not just because it's E"Y per se - it also has to do with demographic realities in Orthodox Jewish life.
Perhaps instead of engaging in hyperbole and uncorroborated attacks at individuals or organizations, please reflect on the possibility that there have been *many* ("ee efshar leportom kee rabim hem") conversions done by members of the RCA who do not have the basic elements of "kabbolas hamitzvos". We are not (necessarily) talking about "covering the hair" (though today perhaps there may be a possibility to ask from the prospective convert in many cities that are not BB or Yerusholayim as we have BH many cities that grow in Yiddishkeyt) etc.; we are talking about things like: driving a car on shabbos! eating treyfe in restaurants (or even at home), not keeping basic laws of going to the mikve (a recent incident: the convert thought there is no real need to constantly go to the mikveh). Are these the "Bedieved" cases for yehupitz and for NY and for the five towns, Florida, LA? Converting when the parents will not even send their kids to a jewish school (even when there is a jewish a school)? When they will not have any means to lead a basic jewish life when their kids will grow up with goyim and the parents do not case in the very least, except for the piece of paper?
Clean up your house before you turn this as an attack on people whom you have no proof that they are behind it.
As you point out, an important part of conversion is the subjective opinion of the rabbi(s) involved. The discussion is not about the universalization of conversion procedures. There is no arguement about the procedural aspect of conversions, it is rather about the universalization and centralization of the demands and expectations from the convert, something which IMHO is antithetical to the halakhic process. The judicial discretion of the converting beit din will essentially be nullified by the bureaucratic and politicized rabbinate.
khms - it's not an attack. i think they'd be the first to admit that they'd take down the RCA if they could. the question is the extent to which they're being given the opportunity.
you're beating up a straw man. there are some conversions that are mamash corrupt, and it's generally not difficult to find out who it is with a bit of digging. there are 'batei din' out there who will be megayer a horse if the price is right.
that said, to take that as an indictment of the entire O Rabbinate is untrue and unfair. you have no idea how many people - gerei tzedek, and especially those who converted as children, adoptees, gerim mi-safek, patrilineal gerim who were raised jewish - this affects.
You are 100% right that unfortuantely this affects numerous and countless individuals. And it is precisely because of this reason that an overhaul is needed in the thinking of the botey dinim (and individual rabbonim hamegayrim) to think over whether or not they are doing any favour to klal yisroel or to the individuals involved when they have almost no standard when they convert. And again: make a survey and see: how much is the percentage of converts (who mostly in the USA are connected with "ishus"): a) observe torah and mitzvot a year or even 6 months after the gerus, b) how many obseerve the first 6 months, c) how many converts do we know from the outset that they are NOT really sincere, d) how many of these converts have no real means (ie. kehilla, mikveh, shul, school etc.) to conduct a basic torah and mitzvot life and the list goes on.
You will be surprized (or you should not) to find out that we aer not talking about 30% of conversions; maybe more in the mark of 75% of conversions done in the USA by orthodox rabbis (and membersof the RCA) result in one of the above!
And you think that you are doing any favour by making these conversions and tommorow your son or daughter (all the yididshe kinder are "your" sons and daughters) might marry this pseudoconvert?
Do we see or hear RCA removing Rabbis from their organization, Rabbis whose track record in conversion seems to fall in one of those previous categories (ie. most of their converts have no serious kabbolas hamitzvot whatsoever)? And remember again: I"m not talking about "covering hair" or "shtreymel"; we are talknig about not working on yom tov, we are talking about not driving on shabbos (excuses like: "all the rest of the congregants do it" do not seem to qualify as a serious kabbolas hamitzvot). Why are these Rabbis who perform these conversion not reprimanded or removed from their RCA membership?
It is to attack others. But maybe you and your friends cause a real shkeup in your organization that would flood more and more cases of non serious gerim and where really it serves no good purpose (except maybe in some instances it fils the coffers of the rrabbis performing this sham).
I can't speak objectively about this because my wife is a convert. She has been fully shomer mitzvot since her conversion in 2001 and remains so to this day. As I understand it, this is necessary but not sufficient for her conversion to be recognized in Israel. It is possible that simply because of who the Rabbis in her beit din were, her [future B'Ezrat Hashem) kids may not be recognized as Jewish, she may be unable to be buried in a cemetary in EY, etc.
This seems crazy to me. What's next - put her up before a beit din for keeping Shabbat as a non-Jew? If you can prove a convert was insincere (by virtue of their not keeping the mitzvot after their conversion) that is one thing, but to possul every conversion done by a Rabbi regardless of how sincere each particular convert was seems both wrong and a recipe for disaster.
Further, the idea that someone will be Jewish in the US and not in Israel is also fraught with difficulty. Our steadfast stand against recognizing conversions by the non-O movements will inevitably result in widespread difficulties in their grandchildren and our grandchildren marrying. Do we really want to see this spread to a difficulty between Jews in America and Jews in Israel? There is enough movement between MO and the American Charedi movements that eventually there will be doubts about the yichus of all American Jews, not just MO Jews.
Larry,
I really feel your plight. And that is the plight of many many convets who are really sincere. But otoh: What do you say about the vast numbers of convets performed by many of these rabbis who do not have the least bit of sincerity in keeping basic torah and mitzvot or who from the outset it is known that they would not keep it as a matter of "non-accepting" it?
How can anyone accept open handed all these conversions and yes, all these rabbis who perform these conversions and perform these conversions? Is this how we want 75% of converts to look like and to marry bney and bnoys yisroel and bney and bnoys gerey tzedek?
Rabbi Nacgum Eisenstein is one of the three rabbis on the commitee.
khms,
Who are you, and what is the source for your statistics?
i second isaac's question. where the flip are you getting your numbers from, khms? i'll be 'mekabel' them if i was convinced that they are 'emes'?
David - thanks for the confirmation. I'm curious where you learned that; is it first-hand knowledge?
Personally my prefered solution is:
1) Converts made to date can be checked for whether they were sincere when they converted. The best check for that is whether they were shomer mitzvot the first year after conversion.
2) Rabbis who have a certain percentage of candidates who do not stay shomer mitzvot should be told that future conversions they perform will not be accepted.
3 ) There should be an easy way (ideally a web page, failing that a list published annually and available to the public) for a pre-convert to determine whether their teachers and the rabbis on their beit din are accepted by the Rabbanut or not.
4) The born post conversion descendants of female converts should be considered Jewish for all conversions prior to now.
Comments and questions:
1) As I understand the law, at one time 3 respectable Jews could form a beit din for conversion. Nowadays only rabbis sit on conversion batey din. The Rabbanut is trying to require that each Rabbi on the beit din be a dayan in the field of conversion.
a) Why all 3?
b) What does 'being a dayan' mean? Yadin Yadin smicha in gerut?
2) There already is a world wide standard of conversion. Acceptance of kabbalat ol mitzvot, tevillah, beit din, and for males mila. Any elaboration of this standard should be very broad - an understanding of Hilchot Shabbat should be required, but not holding to tea essense vs kli shlishi. Hilchot Kashrut are necessary, but not a detailed command of the terms - if you know not to wash your dairy dishes in a meat sink you need not know the term nat bar nat. Hebrew knowledge is a reasonable requirement for Israelis, but not for non-Israelis except those prayers required to be said in Hebrew (of which there are virtually none).
Isac and Adderabi,
"who are you?"
I second the question to both of you, especially to Adderabbi who has taken an offensive mode to particular people. It is not "courageous" and prudent to attack people by their name while not offering you own name so that people could see who the attacker is to better evaluate his claims and motives.
In any event i have come in contact with many of the converts of many of these rabbis and many and most of them do not keep basic torah observance of shabbos and kashrut and tahrat hamishpacha.
Larry,
1) Agreed.
2) Agreed 1000%
3) Agreed again.
4) In principle agreed. Provided that there was very minimal basic levels of torah observance. If there was no observance whatsoever, i'm afraid i'm not sure i'm agreeable.
To comments and questions:'
1) I beleive (i have to check if it is correct) that 3 "hedyotoss" is a "bedieved"; i think lechatchila there should be at least one who is "gomir vessovir" an expert in Torah learning in general.
Also: wrt to "respectable people" (in the bedieved): obviously it means people who are themselves observant and certanily have not done phony or even many non succesful conversions.
2) Fine in general. but when you come to specfics: i'll ask again, what are the basic level of *commitment* expected in observance of shabbos, kashrut and taharat hamishpacha?
Do we accept someone: who drives on shabbos? A person who is willing use the telephone on shabbos? and so on so forth in all the areas mentioned.
khms- i was seconding the second question - where do you get your stats from. i honestly don't care who you are. as you say, kabel hoemes mimi sheomroy!
regarding my anonymity, if it makes you feel any better, r' nochum had his boys figure out who i am within a day of my post. it's not a huge secret, i just prefer to keep my blog identity and my paramount identity separate.
khms,
It doesn't matter if you're more or less anonymous than Adderabbi or me (for the record, much more).
What should matter to you is whether your statements have any credibility in the eyes of the readers of these comments. I asked about your identity and your sources to get you to establish some credibility, because so far, with no name, no history, and no cited sources, you and your statements have next to none.
This is particularly important because you have invited us "to find out that ... maybe more in the mark of 75% of conversions done in the USA by orthodox rabbis (and membersof the RCA) result in one of the above [major deficiencies]!" Well, this is such a shocking, and if true, important claim, that it is something that I, at least, would be very interested to "find out" from some source that I consider credible.
Unfortunately, you cited no source. Instead, when asked for one, you said that you've met "many" of the converts of "many" of America's Orthodox rabbis and determined that "many and most" of them do not keep basic halachot. That, coming from anyone, would be a dubious basis for a claim (especially a negative one) about ~75% of all Orthodox Jewish converts in the US. Coming from a nameless, historyless, as-yet-nonentity, the claim lacks all credibility.
I disagree slightly with our host. I also don't care to know your identity for its own sake, but if your reported life experiences are going to be the sole source for questioning the sincerity of 3/4 of all American Orthodox Gerim, (and therefore the legitimacy of the American Orthodox rabbinate) you have to understand that to me, at least, your reports mean nothing without a life to back them up.
Issac,
You have a point. But i will not disclose my anonymity to make it more "Credible" since some people may get hurt and anyway the generic you will try discredit it from other angles.
However for the "emess" sake just go out and ask RCA for their converts in the past ten years and see for yourself their level of observance. Ask them for the list of converts of the past 4 months and see the results.
If you are searching for "emess" you will be in for a shock.
Just to give some feeling of credibility for what i have written: Find out the percentage of conversion done for marriage sake (one partner is Jewish). Find out if the level of the Jewish's souse's observance is on par of basic shmiras shabbos, kashrut and taharas hamishpocho and then you tell us: that the majority of these covnersions are people who observe shabbos, kashrut and taharas hamishpocho. (Just look also at the expressions of posskim like REb Moshe in the teshuvos (and many others echo the same when discussing this phenomena): "how much observance can you get already, when the jewish spouse is not observant..."?
Are you saying that you've done this research? Have you gotten a list of n years' or months' converts from the RCA? Have you then interviewed or otherwise investigated all of those converts (or a randomly drawn, representative-sized sample thereof) to determine their observance level?
I have gotten contact with a sample thereof (won't say how), have asked others about their experiences with their significant sample: gthe result was staggering: below minimal level of observance.
khms- your anecdotal evidence is at odds with my anecdotal evidence.
I once read an article by one of the Solevetchiks, about this woman who was raised Reform with a Jewish father, gentile mother. While in college she became more observant and underwent an othodox conversion. Years later she converted to catholicism. So the question was, is she still Jewish?
The conclusion was that indeed she is still Jewish. Once youre in, youre in for life. A conversion cannot be nullified. I am not neutral on this issue, I had a very similiar story to that woman (though I am still shomer mitzvot and not Catholic). When I was about to take the dip, the beis din made it clear that there was no turning back once compleated. So while it would be great if every ger remained shomer torah mitzvot, b'dieved if they stop, theyre still yidden. This is really a debate of who is a Rabbi, not who is a Jew.
Aaron,
With all due respect, it is not that simple.
Suffice it to make two points:
1) There are situations in which poskim (like Reb Moshe Feinstein and others) hold that if it was clear from the outset that the commitment was not serious and that it clear to all that the "convert" was not ready to commit and would not observe Torah and Mitzvot then conversion never took place (so that it does not have to be "nullified").
2) Even in situations where this is not the case and the prospective convert observed for a significant period of time, nevertheless: if it to be "expected" that there will be clear obstacles and the likelihood is that it will not "last", then some poskim (like Reb Shlomo Zalmen and others) raise the point: is it proper to "convert" someone who as a Jew will violate so many transgressions and especially when he will revert back almost all the way (or worse) when he stays a non jew he does not have the obligation to be jewish and could and should lead the live of a non jew and observe 7 Noahide laws and fulfill his/her mission in life. Reb Shlomo Zalmen raises the point that this falls under "lifney iver...".
So while many here and abroad would like to accuse this as "Rabbi agaisnt rabbi" it is not the case. it would worthwhile to reexamine and see where the conversion factories have gone wrong and retreat a bit to make it a more lasting process and a more honest one.
There are two problems here:
1. Rabbi Basil Herring, who consistantly is weak and ineffective.
2. Rabbis Schachter and Willig, who are silent.
In other words, MO has very bad leadership. You want to stop the haredi takeover of American Orthodoxy?
Replace your leaders.
I know hundreds (well probably over a 1000) people that have either converted or are in the process of converting orthodox around the world (I co-moderate a group for potental converts & those that have completed conversion). All have been told that they are required to keep shabbat (yeah, no driving is a given), kashrut (in and out of the house), marry an observant jew (yes really), keep taharat hamispacha (basics taught prior to conversion if single), have basic hebrew reading (not comprehension in the US), daven (women less obligated then men), if a women dress tznius (as defined by their community), if a man tzizit & tefillin, commit to sending current children converting as well as all future children to full-time orthodox day school. All the couples I know where the convert was dating or married to a jewish spouse the jewish significant other was interviewed and required to commit to the above also.
I have also been allowed to observe 5 conversion (gone with friends to their beit dins) and all were asked these questions. The parents of the child I watched be converted was also asked these questions.
So my anectdotal evidence says that converts are held to a high standard and that a few bad eggs manage to lie and squeak by harm the rest of us. Us converts are much harder on potetial converts than born jews and rabbis because we KNOW what things are really like.
Malka Esther - my own experiences are very similar to yours. i have been involved in three conversions, all with the same av beis din who is very highly regarded, but not on 'the list'. while i do know of a number where there wasn't a full commitment to shiras mitzvos, there was a definite commitment to participate in jewish life, give their kids jewish education, be involved in shul, etc. in those cases, the kids were often encouraged by their rebbeim to take a dip 'mi-safeik' after the bar or bat mitzvah (the milah was le-shem giyur).
i often wonder about those cases - what does constitute a 'kabbolas mitzvos' - does a commitment to join the community, give kids a jewish education, etc., even if there's no intent to observe everything (even if there is an acknowledgement of Torah U-Mitzvos as binding) - is that a 'kabbolah'?
this type of case which seems to be a bone of contention.
so we have "different" experiences. In my exepriences 75% do not seriously keep shabbos, kashrut and taharat hamishpacha.
I will just ask you: in your scenario of "hundreds" of converts, what is the percentage of people who converted for marriage sake (ie. where they have a jewish girlfriend or boyfriend)?
Yes, i know they are "Told" that they are required to keep shabbos, but everyone knows that it means almost nothing as the prospective convert's lifestyle is at odds with these requirements. This is even more so when the jewish partner is almost not interested in a jewish lifestyle (despite minor success stories of the prospective convert's turning the lifestyle of the jewish partner positively, the vast majority of the cases are just the opposite where the jewish partner not interested in something serious and likewise the prospective convert).
"... there was a definite commitment to participate in jewish life, give their kids jewish education, be involved in shul, etc. in those cases, the kids were often encouraged by their rebbeim to take a dip 'mi-safeik' after the bar or bat mitzvah (the milah was le-shem giyur).
i often wonder about those cases - what does constitute a 'kabbolas mitzvos' - does a commitment to join the community, give kids a jewish education, etc., even if there's no intent to observe everything (even if there is an acknowledgement of Torah U-Mitzvos as binding) - is that a 'kabbolah'?
this type of case which seems to be a bone of contention".
Thanks for being honest (as opposed to the previous poster) and if you are even more honest you should acknowledge that this is the crux of the problem (not "Who is a rabbi" that you want to make out of this sad issue):
When we have no *intention* to observe anything what "kabolloh"
do we have? When they are told that they have to observe shabbos, kashrut and taharat hamishpocho and it is clear that they have no intetions to keep anything what is the meaning for this "commitment" and kabboloh???
Zilch!
While Reb Chayim Ozeir is known to have come up with a lenient position, he nevertheless rejected outright the validity of a conversion where it was known that the "Commitment" was completely insincere and there was no "intention" to actually observe the mitzvot!
IT is high time for American Rabbis to correct this sad situation where most covnersions are not done with the "intetion" to actually observe the mitzvot.
KHMS - from my own experience, there are very few 'zilch' cases, but there are cases where the ger adopts communal norms which are not up to snuff halakhically, even, in cases, violating shabbos (but, nevertheless, being mekayem the 'zachor' aspects of shabbos). i believe that if a person is making the commitment to torah and mitzvos, and the communal standard of observance (amongst those who affiliate orthodox) is particularly low, then the commitment can be considered sincere even if the person only adopts that communal standard.
i think that it would be terrible for this type of decision - the judgement calls of sincerity where there aren't many good orthodox role models - to be taken out of the hands of the local orthodox rabbi. i can't help but see that attempt as fundamentally undermining the american orthodox rabbinate.
"Yes, i know they are "Told" that they are required to keep shabbos, but everyone knows that it means almost nothing as the prospective convert's lifestyle is at odds with these requirements. This is even more so when the jewish partner is almost not interested in a jewish lifestyle "
Told? It has been insisted that their jewish significant others have led an observant lifestyle for 3-9 months prior to the conversion being allowed to happen as well as being required VEBALLY & IN WRITING to keep the mitzvot post-the-converts conversion. None of the rabbis I know that do conversions will allow a conversion if the jewish significant other is NOT clearly, and permanently committed to keeping the mitzvot any more than they will allow a convert to convert if they are not committed to the bindingness of all the mitzvot & have kept kashrut, shabbat, tznius, davening etc. fully for 3-6 months.
Again I don't know where your stats come from but they do NOT match my real-life experience with real convets.
"Thanks for being honest (as opposed to the previous poster) "
Wow, thanks for calling me a liar. I would love to know how you know whether I am telling the truth about MY experiences without knowing anything about me or the rabbis I've known that do conversions. Do you know who I am? Do you know what beit din's I've gotten to observe? Do you know the people I know that have converted?
".. but there are cases where the ger adopts communal norms which are not up to snuff halakhically, even, in cases, violating shabbos (but, nevertheless, being mekayem the 'zachor' aspects of shabbos)...."
Shmiras Shabbos is dictated by Shulchan Oruch and not by "communal standards of observance...". If the Rabbis (who are supposefly doing the right job) are asking the prospective converts to observe shabbos (ie. not "zachor" shabbos by eating gefilte fish, but) ie. refrain from desecrating shabbos (as the gemoroh says "yoday bemay" and does not satisfy with "zachor"), and the converts are not up to it and reject it from day one how can this be commitment to the laws of shabbos given by Hashem in sinay?
So when you write:
"i believe that if a person is making the commitment to torah and mitzvos, and the communal standard of observance (amongst those who affiliate orthodox) is particularly low, then the commitment can be considered sincere even if the person only adopts that communal standard".
Where is your *halachik* source for such a sweeping statement? that Kabbolas Hamitzvot suffices with the "low standard" of the community and not the acceptance of the laws given by Hashem in Sinay?
" - the judgement calls of sincerity where there aren't many good orthodox role models ..."
There are no "judgment calls; there is a litmus test if we have commitment to keep *Shulchan Oruch*! Who has the right to take this kind of commitment and to codify a new kind of commitment contrary to shulchan oruch?
"..i can't help but see that attempt as fundamentally undermining the american "orthodox rabbinate.
adderabbi"
and i can't to see your attempt as fundamentally undermining shulchan oruch and creating your own critrira without *any* backing from *halocho*.
Halocho allows discretion for each rabbi to determine whether the prospective convert is sincere in keeping torah and mitzvot; halocho does not allow a new definition of commitment to mean that the person can commit to eat gefilte fish and eat latkes and that is equivalent to "commitment" to live Jewish as Jews have received the Torah in Sinay!
oy vey. you're missing the point. a person can agree to something in principle but fall short in practice. there's a difference between a person accepting shabbos but not observing it and one who doesn't accept at all. obviously, we're not talking about encouraging this lechatchilah. rather, that depending on the context, non-observance is not nec`essarily an indicator of insincere acceptance.
i'm not missing any point. When one in advance that this person is not "ready" to observe in *practice* that means he is not comitted to perform in *practice* it's all merely lip service.
This is exactly the crux of the problem: You think that "commitment" means *saying* that one is *comitted* but it does not oblige him in *practice*. Bring a *source* in Halacha that defines "comitment" as this. Rus said "basher telech elech", i'll be commited to go, it means that i'll actually go. When one knows that the prospective covnert from the outset is distant from observing shabbos in a very basic level, ie. prior to gerus he has *never* stopped to drive at all on shabbos and does whatever he sho wishes in "practice" his verbal commitment is zilch.
insead of attacking rabbonim who call the attention for yyou to change your ways, you should thank them for trying to fix the situation where we have mass conversion factories whose "kabbollas hamitzvot" means merely a verbal declaration and eating latkes and gefilte fish.
khms - the shulkhan arukh writes that it must be observable after the tevila (specifically talking about in a case of a bediavad gerus, such as for marriage) that the ger is sincere. my contention is that this sincerity is not observable based on some objective standard, but on communal norms. the question of whether this ger should have been converted in the first place is a separate one; i'll grant that, all else being equal, we shouldn't be megayer someone who will not observe 'kmo she-tzarich'. but there are other factors, as everyone involved in this is aware, both in Israel and the USA. Some example that i cited earlier - bnei anusim, russians, bene menashe, falashmura, couples who are already intermarried, their children, safeik gerim, etc.
starting to get the picture?
"..the shulkhan arukh writes that it must be observable after the tevila (specifically talking about in a case of a bediavad gerus, such as for marriage) that the ger is sincere.."
I'm not sure what you are referring to. but if i'm correct, the that Halacha does not talk about a "faulty" commiment; where we have a low standard in his commitment; it is actually talking when there is a "commitment" to observe Torah (for that is the essenceof conversion) but Shulchan Oruch raises the issue: when he converts for ulterior motives. Here he does commit him self, but since this is not the main goal we have to see how the issue will develop. But nowhere does Shulchan Oruch limit the commitment to fulfill Torah and Mitzvot.
"... my contention is that this sincerity is not observable based on some objective standard, but on communal norms....".
The question was where is a *halocho* source for your contention. How do you go about making your own interpretations without any halachik backing.
In fact, this interpretation is completely yours and is contrary to literal reading of Talmud Rambam and Shulchan Oruch that commitment to Torah and Mitzvot is the commitment to fulfil what Shulchun Oruch writes and not how society observes these laws!
In fact Talmud states that a Ger who "rejects" even one thing "chutz midovor echod" has his entuire conversion in question (possibly even "bedieved").
" the question of whether this ger should have been converted in the first place is a separate one;"
I assumed that it was clear that i was raising two seprate issues: 1) Many/most cases there is a problem even on a level of "Bedieved".
2) Even without this problem: We have a problem in the wisdom and need to undergo this conversion when the negative outcome is forseen.
" but there are other factors, as everyone involved in this is aware, both in Israel and the USA. Some example that i cited earlier - bnei anusim, russians, bene menashe, falashmura, couples who are already intermarried, their children, safeik gerim, etc."
some of this may be legitimate, some of this may require expert posskim to decide and some of them may not be legitimate (like "sofeik gerim" where based on yuor previous writings: what you call "sofeik" may be "vaday" not gerus to Shuchan Oruch!
Especially: when we have conversions for those who want to marry who are not interested in really observing the very basics, and even in the intermarried we lack any serious commitment we have just aproliferation of numerous cases where "lehistofef tachas kanfey hashcinoh" with the intetion of "lehikoness labriss" is totally absent, and then the we have the whole picture: numerous "converts" who do not have basic shmiras shabbos, kashrut and taharas hamishpocho.
starting to get the picture?
adderabbi | Homepage | 05.15.06 - 9:18 am | #
Commenting by HaloScan
