Letter from Saul Penkar to Dr. Weiss about the Position of the Israeli Rabbinate on Marriage with Bene Israel (1962)

View The Text

This content is currently available in its original PDF format. As we expand the library, we plan to add a text version as well.

Letter to Moses Feuerstein about the Position of the Israeli Rabbinate on Bene Israel (1961)

Dear Moe: Concerning the [redacted] fiasco, I had spoken to Rabbi Kahaneman at least twice. I very much fear that the situation is beyond his control at this point. Rabbi [redacted] has already agreed to the "Heter." The problem is the circumstances under which this was done. I think that Dr. Weiss can enlighten you more in the discouraging aspects of the case. Sincerely, Rabbi Norman Lamm

Practical Halacha India

Letter to Moses Feuerstein about the Position of the Israeli Rabbinate on Marriage with Bene Israel (1962)

Dear Moe: I think no more about the enclosed than you do. I am awaiting the text of the Chief Rabbi's decision before I can appreciate all the nuances and subtleties of the situation. However, superficially it seems that Rabbi Nissim struck a compromise. He allows intermarriage with the Bene-Israel, but only after a thorough search of the genealogy of the Bene-Israel applicant. The Rabbis of the right object to the dispensation altogether, and the Bene-Israel activists in Israel object to the special condition. Poor Rabbi Nissim is right in the middle. Which is where we are, too. Cordially yours, Rabbi Norman Lamm

Practical Halacha India

Letter to Dr. Weiss about the OU's Attitude Towards the Position of the Israeli Rabbinate on Bene Israel and Sending a Rabbi to India (1962)

Dear Dr. Weiss: (1) The enclosed copy is for your records.(2) Your letter to Jhirad was most appropriate. To say that I am dismayed by the information he has sent us from Bombay is an understatement. (3) I have before me the letter to you of April 22nd from Dr. Tartakower. Basically, I think he is right. The “p’sak” by the Chief Rabbi has been given and, as you so well put it, “gazetted.” The problem of the controversy that remains would come into consideration, possibly, if the Union were called upon to officiate at a wedding or openly declare its position. However, this is not the case. All that we are asked to do is to participate in the budget for sending a qualified Rabbi to India. We ought to have sufficient confidence in the Chief Rabbi to do at least this. Frankly, from Jhirad’s letters, from the apparent deterioration in the situation in Bombay, and from information from other sources, the situation is most acute, and nothing less than sending a Rabbi now—not three years hence—will be an adequate solution.To my mind, we ought to inform Dr. Tartakower that we agree in principle, but that the exact nature of our budgetary commitment is as yet undetermined. The Overseas Commission should then make a decision in the matter.Sincerely,RABBI NORMAN LAMMNL\:ffEnd.

Practical Halacha India