I have read most of your writings and I have some questions. I know that a noahide is different from a ger. Usually a noahide observe the minimum required i.e. the sheva mitzvot (and the halachic ramifications of these). A ger observe Torah (and halacha) adding to the "minimum required" also the mitzvot not prohibited to gentiles. Orthodox rabbis today welcomes noahides but not gerim. Anyway observant noahides are instructed by orthodox rabbis to add mitzvot not prohibited to gentiles as well. Although there is a difference in opinion among you and orthodox rabbis in that orthodox rabbis do not recognize gerim while you recognize them there is a consensus that the observance of the sheva mitzvot is a "good start". In fact you instruct prospective gerim candidates to start observing the Noahide laws and continuing learning and applying Torah. Unfortunately it seem to me that you are prohibiting the observance of the only positive mitzvah of the Noahide laws. In fact according to orthodox halacha Gentiles are required to establish courts of law, batei din, for themselves. While gerim in particular and goym in general when they reside in Eretz Israel are required to submit to israelite batei din, halacha stipulate that outside Israel noahides and gerim are required to establish courts of justice to enforce, at least, the noahide laws. Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe (may he rest in peace) for example have said that gentiles:"are required to learn Torah to know how to conduct themselves, because they are meant to become fully conversant in their own right and not to rely on answers from Jews in every instance, and there is indeed no guarantee that Jews will always know the right answers for them, since there are often differences between Jewish and Noachide decisions on any given topic." The question is: since other orthodox and legitimate sects of Judaism instructs Noahides to establish batei din to perform the mitzvah of dinim, why the Netzarim do not emphasize the performing of this important mitzvah? (MilenaS, Rome, Italy )

This is a pertinent issue essential to many. Please understand that I don't intend to be short or curt but I do want to be clear and leave no doubt because it is such a critical issue to so many. It should also be noted that the earliest reference to the Shëva mitzwot B^әnei-Noakh in the literature is by the N^әtzârim Beit-Din.

Until the last century or so, there has never been such thing as a Bën-Noakh who was expected only to keep the Shëva mitzwot B^әnei-Noakh. In fact, the only distinction in Scripture or Talmud between B^әnei-Noakh and goyim is that the former comprises Y^әhudim and goyim. There is no Bën-Noakh alternative in Scripture! All humans are B^әnei-Noakh and the only promise ensuing from their b^әrit is no more Mabul accompanied by the sign of the rainbow. You'll find nothing in Scripture about kipur or a place in hâ-olâm ha-bâ. Exactly the opposite!

For everything more than that you are wrongly placing your faith in men, modern rabbis (not even ancient rabbis), NOT Scripture OR Halâkhâh. Contemporary Orthodox rabbis aren't deliberately trying to deceive. They're trying to be ecumenical. But ecumenical contradicts Scripture. Look for the Scriptural basis. This modern innovation not only lacks Scriptural basis and credibility, it completely contradicts Scripture. Look at the terms of every b^әrit in Scripture.

In fact, usually a Bën-Noakh – the Scriptural definition – entirely ignores anything to do with Scripture. Except in the cases of Y^әhudim and geirim, "observant" and "Bën-Noakh" forms an oxymoron.

The notion that Orthodox rabbis don't accept geirim is incorrect. They do accept geirim as Scripturally defined they just don't call their conversion students – whom they accept – geirim. They simply accept Scripturally-defined geirim calling them "conversion students" (having lost the Biblical definition of geir due to centuries of Church prohibition of evangelizing) without knowing the distinct status for them.

The geir status is the only transitional status between Y^әhudim and goyim (= B^әnei-Noakh). One has to at least keep the Shëva mitzwot B^әnei-Noakh to qualify to begin the transition (i.e. to qualify as a geir). According to Scripture, there is no acceptable state short of doing one's utmost to completely comply with the mitzwot Torâh non-selectively. It must also be noted here that the mitzwot Torâh subsumes mishpâtim = Halâkhâh. While Halâkhâh recognizes that the study and transition cannot happen overnight, and thus sets a reasonable period to learn and apply, there is no "gray" area. Even the geir, from the first moment, does his or her utmost (the criterion of Torâh for kipur) to keep Torâh non-selectively, which includes learning and applying.

According to the ancient definition, "conversion students" of an Orthodox rabbi would be geirim and would be counted among Israel until and unless they were dropped from the class for some reason. So, aside from the fact that Orthodox rabbis may not count their "conversion students" among Israel during the transition period (as according to ancient Halâkhâh), this is mainly an issue of terminology.

Our position is that whether the geir ("conversion student") is allowed to convert or not, as long as he or she is diligently trying to learn and implement Torâh as an Orthodox rabbi would expect a conversion student to do, the ancient Halâkhâh requires counting him or her among Israel unless and until they are dropped from that status for some reason. The need for this is that many Orthodox rabbis don't yet know the historical and halakhic distinction between a N^әtzârim geir and, l^ә-havdil, a Christian. Consequently, some Orthodox rabbis may refuse to convert a follower of Ribi Y^әhoshua irrespective of the fact that he or she entirely rejects Christian doctrines and embraces Torâh including Halâkhâh. So, there is a need to recognize the legitimate geir (i.e. recognized by an Orthodox Beit-Din) whom some Orthodox rabbis may refuse to convert. Otherwise, they would be left in limbo, between two worlds – as, indeed, the B^әnei-Noakh are; desiring to satisfy Torâh but Scripturally excluded. After centuries of persecution by the Church, Orthodox rabbis are, understandably, exceedingly reluctant to say that straight out. Understand why they have finessed the issue. (Succeeding rabbis just blindly follow unquestioningly.) But don't expect that finesse to hold up when you stand before the Beit-Din ha-Jadol in the heavens on Yom ha-Din.

There is, by contrast, absolutely NO basis – in Scripture OR ancient Halâkhâh – for any status of Bën-Noakh receiving kipur, which is an absolute requisite for a place in hâ-olâm ha-bâ.

Contrary to your misconception, Halâkhâh does NOT authorize (much less stipulate) any non-Jew to establish a Beit-Din. Courts established by goyim (= B^әnei-Noakh) are the civil and criminal courts of the various countries – like the other six a requisite to being minimally civilized – and have absolutely nothing to do with a Beit-Din. The geir must subordinate to an Orthodox Beit-Din!

If you wish to follow Rabbi Schneerson, z"l, certainly you may. But you should realize that you are following him instead of Torâh, that what you quoted isn't compatible with Torâh and, therefore, isn't compatible with the N^әtzârim.

The simple answer to your question, then, is: your premise is contrary to Torâh.

There is only One ha-Sheim and only one Way for man to relate to Him: His Torâh. The only difference between Jew and goy / Bën-Noakh is that the Jew (and geir = transitional conversion student) undertakes to do their utmost to keep His Torâh non-selectively, which is the criterion, specified by Torâh, for kipur – the requisite for a place in hâ-olâm ha-bâ. All else is racism. If that's what ha-Sheim wanted he could raise up genetic clones.

I'm like a doctor who has to tell a patient that he or she has a terminal illness. I have to tell it like it is without pulling any punches. The bright side is that there is a remedy, Torâh. You just have to want to take it undiluted.

(Details and documentation are found in the texts of our Khavrutâ.

© 1996-present by Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David,
Google+ registered author & publisher