Thursday, March 10, 2011

Converts In Jewish Thought

If we look in the Gemara, Midrashim, Rishonim (Medieval commentators), Achronim (Commentators from the 16th century forward) and the Torah itself we see several different attitudes towards converts. First, let's bring down the positive attitudes because the other attitudes are just depressing.

In this week's Parsha (Vayikra 1:1-2) it says:

א  וַיִּקְרָא, אֶל-מֹשֶׁה; וַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָה אֵלָיו, מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר.1 And the LORD called unto Moses, and spoke unto him out of the tent of meeting, saying:
ב  דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם, אָדָם כִּי-יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן, לַיהוָה--מִן-הַבְּהֵמָה, מִן-הַבָּקָר וּמִן-הַצֹּאן, תַּקְרִיבוּ, אֶת-קָרְבַּנְכֶם.
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them: When any man of you bringeth an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd or of the flock.

The Torah Temima brings down a quote from the Jerusalem Talmud (Shekalim 1:4):

[א ד ם .  לר ב ו ת  א ת  הג ר ים   [י ר ו ש ל מ י  שק ל ים ש״א ה ״ ד

Man: To include converts

The Gemara is coming to teach us that converts are considered part of the Jewish people and are included in this verse. That is very important because this verse seems to be saying that only people who are considered to be "From You (plural)" (from the Jewish people) are allowed to bring Korbanos (sacrifices).

Furthermore, the Midrash Tanchuma (2) on this week's parsha comes to teach us how positive some viewed converts. It says:


אמר רבי יהודה בר שלום: 
אתה מוצא ארבעים ושמונה פעמים הזהיר הקדוש ברוך הוא בתורה על הגרים, וכנגדן הזהיר על עבודה זרה. 
אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא: דיו שהניח עבודה זרה ובא אצלכם, אני מזהירך שתאהבהו, שאני אוהבו, שנאמר: ואוהב גר לתת לו לחם ושמלה וגו' (דב' י יח: 



Rabbi Yehuda the son of Shalom (Shalom means peace, perhaps this is hinting at something) said, you will find 48 times that G-D warns the Jewish people [to be kind to converts] and congruent to this G-D also warns [the Jewish people] about not worshiping Idols 48 times. G-D is saying, "It is enough [that the convert] abandoned his or her idol worship and came to be with you. I am warning you that you should love him or her, for I love him or her." As it says (Devarim 10:18), "G-D loves the convert and gives him (or her) food and clothing." 

The last source that is favorable to converts that I will quote (there are many) is found in a Tosfos in Kiddushin (71a). It is humorous, because the name of the Baalei Tosfos (Opinion in the commentary) makes known that this commentator is, in fact, himself a convert.


וה ״ ר
 אב ר ה ם  גר  פי רש לפ י  שה ג ר י ן  בק י א י ן
 במ צ ו ת   ומ ד ק ד ק י ן  בהם  קש י ם  הם
 לישראל כס פ ח ת  דמ ת ו ך  כן הק ב ״ ה
 מז כ י ר  עו נ ו ת י ה ם  של ישראל כשאין
 עושי ן  רצונו וכ ה ״ ג  מצינו גבי הצ ר פ י ת
מ ״ א  יז)  שא מ ר ה  מ ה  לי ולך איש)
 הא ל ה י ם  (כי) בא ת  אלי לה ז כ י ר  א ת
 עו נ י  שמ ת ו ך  שה ו א  צד י ק  גמ ו ר  הי ה
 נר א ה  לה שמ ז כ י ר  הש ם  עו נ ה

Rav Avraham the convert explains [the reason converts are difficult to the Jewish people like a boil] is because they are experts in the commandments and they are extremely careful [in performing them]. Therefore, they are difficult to the Jewish people like a boil, for it is because of the converts that G-D recognizes the Jewish people's sins when they are not performing His will. This is seen in the case of the Zarephath woman (Kings 1 17:18) where she says, "And she said unto Elijah: 'What have I to do with thee, O thou man of God? art thou come unto me to bring my sin to remembrance, and to slay my son?'" [She was worried about Elijah bringing her sin to remembrance] because he was a very righteous man and that is why G-D would remember her sins. (Thus, the righteous converts would bring G-D to remember the Jewish people's sins.)

These sources all show a very positive attitude by some of Chazal (sages) towards converts. They view converts as a welcomed addition to the ranks of the Jewish nation. These sources create love and affection for converts because they are seen as people that can only make the Jewish people better. (The Torah itself in many places, one place is quoted by the Midrash Tanchuma (Devarim 10:18), talks about how we are to love converts. I am unsure as to why so many commentators and opinions in the Gemara show what can only be described as disdain for converts. There are opinions in favor of converts in the Gemara and later sources, but there are also opinions that seem to be disgusted by converts.)

However, there is the other side of the coin as well. This, too, is a very long list of sources that do not seem to have the admiration and love for converts. Within this group there are two mini-groups. The first group explains why converts to Judaism are troublesome to the Jewish people, but it is not the converts fault inherently, there is just some other factor that causes their conversion to be difficult for the Jewish people. The second mini-group's opinion is a little more severe. They say that a convert inherently causes many problems for the Jewish people whether he or she is righteous or not. The first mini-group will be discussed first.

Rashi on Kiddushin (70b):
 קשין גר י ם .  שא י נם זה י ר י ם  במ צ ו ת  וה ר ג י ל י ם  אצלם נמ ש כ י ם  אצלם ול ו מ ד י ם  מן  מע ש י ה ם : 
Converts are difficult for the Jewish people: For they are not careful with the commandments and those that are commonly around them learn from their ways (and therefore Jews learn from the converts to be lax in the commandments).

This Rashi seems to be stating an observation. In Rashi's experience, he saw that converts were causing regular Jews to become more lax in the commandments. That is very possible. It shows no disdain or dislike for converts, Rashi was just stating an observation. It is worth noting that, according to Rashi, there is nothing INHERENTLY bad about converts, but many of them cause other Jews to be more lax in commandments.

There is another opinion in Tosfos (70b) that says, "The reason converts are difficult for the Jewish people like a boil is because G-D commanded the Jewish people MANY times to not cause any harm or stress to converts and it is impossible for the Jewish people not to (because of all the requirements that a convert must go through before they become Jewish, I suppose). Therefore, by the mere fact that they want to convert they cause the Jewish people to sin, but that is not their fault.

This explanation by Tosfos is also reasonable. It just states a fact of life. G-D said don't cause stress or discomfort to the convert and that is, seemingly, impossible. No one is really at fault, but it is a fact of life.

The final opinion in this mini-group is the Rambam (Hilchos of forbidden relationships 13:18):
ומפני זה אמרו חכמים קשים להם גרים לישראל כנגע צרעת שרובן חוזרין בשביל דבר ומטעין את ישראל. וקשה הדבר לפרוש מהם אחר שנתגיירו. צא ולמד מה אירע במדבר במעשה העגל ובקברות התאוה וכן רוב הנסיונות האספסוף היו בהן תחלה:


Because of this the Rabbis said that converts are difficult for the Jewish people like a patch of tzraas (mistranslated to mean leprosy) because the majority convert for some reason (like money or love of a Jew) and they cause the Jewish people to err. It is very difficult to separate these desires from the converts after they convert. Go out and learn about what happened in the desert (when the Jews left Egypt the Eirav Rav, People who lived in Egypt that were not descendants of Yaakov that left with the Jews, caused the Jews to sin) with the happening of the Golden Calf etc...

The Rambam is holding like Rashi, it seems. It is hard for anyone to leave their old life behind, even a convert. They are usually going to hold onto something from their previous life and this is very dangerous. It is just the way of human nature. But again, there is nothing INHERENTLY wrong with the convert according to this opinion.

Now we move on to the final group that tells us there is something inherently wrong with a convert. The previous two groups think converts can be righteous. In fact, if you have a righteous convert, there is nothing to worry about. This would be according to both previous groups, but not this third group. Let us start with the Maharal:

The most concise place where the Maharal makes his opinion clear is in his Drashos on the Torah (6a):

All the good that the Jewish people merit is because they are the children of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov, or because they are chosen by G-D, but converts nullify this. Therefore, converts are called a boil, because a boil is an extra entity to a man and it nullifies the complete and pure form of a man. This leads to a lack in the man.

The Maharal discusses this idea in several places, but I think his idea is clear: Converts blemish the Jewish people because they were not born Jewish. They are inherently not good for the Jewish people. If anyone can find a different explanation for the Maharal, please let me know. The only thing I can really say for the Maharal is that he was dealing in a time when there were many Jewish people that were working very hard to kill their fellow Jews. There were many heretics and converts to Christianity that tried to destroy the Jewish way of life. Maybe this is why the Maharal says this, because he saw so many Jews that were inherently evil.

The last opinion I will bring down is Tosfos on Kiddushin (71a):

ו ר ״ י
 פי ר ש  דל פ י כ ך  קש י ם  שנ ט מ ע ו  בישראל
 וא י ן  ה ש כ נ ה  שו ר ה  אל א  על  מש פ ח ה
 מי ו ח ס ת
RI explains that therefore, converts are difficult for the Jewish people because they are mixed in with the Jewish people and the presence of G-D does not rest on people unless they are from a family with a good lineage.

This idea of pure lineage makes no sense to me, but I am sure it is based on the idea that it used to be that if you were not of pure lineage that meant you didn't really keep the commandments. Nowadays, that is certainly not the case and no one really knows who is of "pure lineage" and who is not. Either way, these ideas should be better addressed.

The most favorable Gemara I could find for converts is found in Pesachim (87b):

R. Eleazar also said: The Holy One, blessed be He, did not exile Israel among the nations save in order that proselytes might join them, for it is said: And I will sow her unto Me in the land; surely a man sows a se'ah in order to harvest many kor!

Apparently, G-D really loves converts because He exiled the Jewish people just to recruit them. That is a pretty powerful statement.

I think it is interesting to see the various attitudes that exist among the sages of the past. However, I will say this, Korbanos (sacrifices) are considered to be one of the most holiest of things a Jew could do. The mere fact that converts are included among the Jewish nation for this commandment just shows that converts are truly Jews on every level and in every sense of the word. There might be some debate about the nitty gritty parts, but G-D commanded the Jewish people to accept converts as one of their own, who are we to deny that COMMANDMENT?

18 comments:

Tamir said...

The final opinion in this mini-group is the Rambam (Hilchos of forbidden relationships 13:18):
...
Because of this the Rabbis said that converts are difficult for the Jewish people like a patch of tzraas (mistranslated to mean leprosy) because the majority return [to their original practices] for some reason and they cause complaints against the Jewish people. It is very difficult to separate previous things from the converts after they convert. Go out and learn about what happened in the desert (when the Jews left Egypt the Eirav Rav, Egyptians that left with the Jews, caused the Jews to sin) with the happening of the Golden Calf etc...

There are some places I disagree with you translation:

(1) your write: "because the majority return [to their original practices] for some reason and they cause complaints against the Jewish people".
Actually, I have two problems with this:
(a) Although the Eliyahu Touger's translation( shown by chabad.org here) gives "חוזר" as "revert", in Halakhah 12[15], "החוזר מן הגויים בשביל דבר מהבלי העולם" means( as Eliyahu Touger translates there) "who seeks to convert because of the vanities of this [material] world"( see also Halakhah 11[14], "וראו אותן שחזרו מאהבה", translated as:"and thus we see that they are motivated [to convert] by love"). Therefore, in the contxt of the Halakhot, I'd say "שרובן חוזר בשביל דבר" is referring to "החוזר מן הגויים בשביל דבר מהבלי העולם", and should be translated as: "the majority convert for a [vain] matter".
(b) "ומטעין את ישראל" means "cause Israel to err"( or "cause Jews to stray", if you prefer). I'm not sure where you got "cause complaints against the Jewish people" from.

(2) your write: "It is very difficult to separate previous things from the converts after they convert".
"וקשה הדבר לפרוש מהם, אחר שנתגיירו" is referring to what is said in the previous Halakhah( 14[17], and translated, almost here), that a Ger, once he has circumcised himself and immersed in the presence of three ordinary people, even if not properly vetted( as described in previous Halakhot), is considered a Jew, and judged as such( i.e. cannot be Halakhtically separated from the Jewish people). Therefore, following Eliyahu Touger, I'd translate it as: "It is difficult to separate from them once they have converted".
As an aside, to translate it as you have suggested, the original should have read: "וקשה להם לפרוש מן הדבר", or, "וקשה להפריש הדבר מהם".

(3) you write: "(when the Jews left Egypt the Eirav Rav, Egyptians that left with the Jews, caused the Jews to sin)".
From where do you conclude that the 'Erev Rav where Egyptians, any more than Mosheh Rabeinu was( Shemot 2:19) ?

E-Man said...

"b) "ומטעין את ישראל" means "cause Israel to err"( or "cause Jews to stray", if you prefer). I'm not sure where you got "cause complaints against the Jewish people" from."

טעין- the shoresh here, I think is tet-ein-nun, that means claims against. Like to be toein taanis gaaniv means to claim that [an object] was stolen. It also fits with how other commentators describe the converts. That they cause G-D to have claims against the Jews. You could be right, but I think my translation makes more sense. If you want, look in a jastrow or a hebrew english dictionary, or even a lexicon, I think my translation is justified.

"(a) Although the Eliyahu Touger's translation( shown by chabad.org here) gives "חוזר" as "revert", in Halakhah 12[15], "החוזר מן הגויים בשביל דבר מהבלי העולם" means( as Eliyahu Touger translates there) "who seeks to convert because of the vanities of this [material] world"( see also Halakhah 11[14], "וראו אותן שחזרו מאהבה", translated as:"and thus we see that they are motivated [to convert] by love"). Therefore, in the contxt of the Halakhot, I'd say "שרובן חוזר בשביל דבר" is referring to "החוזר מן הגויים בשביל דבר מהבלי העולם", and should be translated as: "the majority convert for a [vain] matter"."

Return to their previous religion fits better with what the Gemara is talking about in kedushin. It also fits better with the context in this halacha of the Rambam whether you say tein means claim or err.

""It is difficult to separate from them once they have converted"."

This leaves out the word davar from the translation comepletely. If you look at the previous Rambam he clearly says that even if the convert converts because of some reason (davar) he is still accepted as a Jew. Therefore, davar means he had some reason to convert other than truely wanting to. Therefore, I translated it as I did. Maybe, I could have said "The reason he converted is hard to separate from them after they convert." But, it definitely does not mean that it is difficult to separate FROM THEM once they convert, that leaves out the word davar all together.

"(3) you write: "(when the Jews left Egypt the Eirav Rav, Egyptians that left with the Jews, caused the Jews to sin)".
From where do you conclude that the 'Erev Rav where Egyptians, any more than Mosheh Rabeinu was( Shemot 2:19) ?"

Midrashim, commentaries, etc.. all refer to the eirav Rav as Egyptians.

I am sorry your comment did not show up before, it went to spam for some reason. If you care to discuss this further or you feel I have not adequately addressed your issues with my translation, please let me know.

E-Man said...

I just wanted to add more specific sources for the Erev Rav: the Erav Rav where Egyptian converts that were not descendants of Yaakov. The verse you quote is referring to a description of what Moshe looked like to the daughters of Yisro. Here, Rashi tells us (according to Mizrachi) that the Erav Rav (Shemos 12:38) was a mixture of converts from the Egyptians and other nations.

The Ibn Ezra actually says straight out (Shemos 12:38) that the Erev Rav were egyptians that mixed with the Jews.

There are many more sources that talk about how the Erev Rav were either Egyptians or just a mass conglomeration of converts that were, unfortunately, troublemakers. However, they were definitely not the descendants of Yaakov.

Tamir said...

E-Man: טעין- the shoresh here, I think is tet-ein-nun, that means claims against. Like to be toein taanis gaaniv means to claim that [an object] was stolen ... If you want, look in a jastrow or a hebrew english dictionary, or even a lexicon, I think my translation is justified.

"מטעין", as a verb, can be understood in to ways:
(a) The male singular, present( actually: Beinoni) tense, Binyan Hif'il form of the root Tet-'Ayin-Nun. In Binyan Qal it would be "טוען"( To'en), in past Binyan Hif'il it would be "ה(י)טעין"( Hit'in), and in present Binyan Hif'il "מטעין"( Mat'in). Originally the Shoresh referred to loading( like in Bereshit 45:17: "טענו את בעירכם"), as stabbed by the sword( like in Yeshayahu 14:19: "לבש הרגים, מטעני חרב") ,but by Talmudic times came also to mean making a claim( like in "הלכות טוען ונטען", and "הטוען טענת גנב").
(b) The male plural, present tense, Binyan Hif'il form of the root Tet-'Ayin-Heh. In singular Binyan Qal it would be "טועה"( To'eh), in singular past Binyan Hif'il it would be "ה(י)טעה"( Hit'ah), in present Binyan Hif'il "מטעה"( Mat'eh), and although the proper plural form would be "מטעים"( Mat'im), in Rabbinical Hebrew, where in plural forms Mem-Sofit is often exchanged with Nun-Sofit, "מטעין"( Mat'in) can also be used. The Shoresh refers to making a mistake, erring.

Generally, a verb in Binyan Hif'il means "to cause another to be Po'el( Binyan Qal)". To used it, in the first sense (a), in the context of of the Halakha you quoted, would mean that the Gerim would cause Israel to be the To'en( claimant), which doesn't fit the idea you're trying to ascribe to it. To fit your translation the words should have been: " ומטעין נגד ישראל", or " ומטעין על ישראל".

Using it in the second sense (b), the words "ומטעין את ישראל" translates as: "and cause Israel to err"( as I said, Binyan Hif'il means "to cause another to be Po'el", in this case: To'eh).

E-Man: It also fits with how other commentators describe the converts. That they cause G-D to have claims against the Jews. You could be right, but I think my translation makes more sense.

Which commentators actually describe the converts as causing "G-D to have claims against the Jews" ?

In fact the Rashi on Qidushin 70b says, as you translate it:
"Converts are difficult for the Jewish people: For they are not careful with the commandments and those that are commonly around them learn from their ways (and therefore Jews learn from the converts to be lax in the commandments)"
How does that not fit with my "and cause Israel to err" translation ?

Tamir said...

E-Man: Return to their previous religion fits better with what the Gemara is talking about in kedushin. It also fits better with the context in this halacha of the Rambam whether you say tein means claim or err.

Regarding the Gemara - maybe. What does the Gemara actually say ?

Regarding the context of the Halakhot in the Mishneh Torah - No. I showed that, three Halakhot previous, "החוזר מן הגויים בשביל דבר מהבלי העולם" is a parallel to "חוזר בשביל דבר", in your quoted Halakhah, and, as there it obviously was referring to the act of converting, so does it here. In parentheses I showed that, also in the Halakhah before the one I mentioned, the Shoresh Chet-Zayin-Reish is used to to describe the process of becoming a convert.

So, however the Gemara understood it, the Mishneh Torah definitely seems to have used "חוזר בשביל דבר" as I described.

E-Man: This leaves out the word davar from the translation comepletely ... that leaves out the word davar all together.

No, it does not.( The only thing I may ave left out is Vav haChibur at the beginnig.) veQasheh is "and ... is difficult", haDavar is "it", liFrosh is "to separate", meHem is "from them", and the rest can be as you said. All together: "veQasheh liFrosh meHem ...", is "and it is difficult to separate from them ...".( See ? I corrected myself, and added "and" to my translation)

E-Man: If you look at the previous Rambam he clearly says that even if the convert converts because of some reason (davar) he is still accepted as a Jew. Therefore, davar means he had some reason to convert other than truely wanting to. Therefore, I translated it as I did. Maybe, I could have said "The reason he converted is hard to separate from them after they convert."

Then, the original should have been: "וקשה הדבר להפריש ממנו".

E-Man: But, it definitely does not mean that it is difficult to separate FROM THEM once they convert ...

So why does Eliyahu Touger translate it:
"It is difficult to separate from them once they have converted" ?

Tamir said...

E-Man( March 11, 2011 7:01 AM): Midrashim, commentaries, etc.. all refer to the eirav Rav as Egyptians.

( March 11, 2011 11:58 AM): ... Here, Rashi tells us (according to Mizrachi) that the Erav Rav (Shemos 12:38) was a mixture of converts from the Egyptians and other nations.

But Rashi himself only says: "תערבת אומות של גרים"( no "מצריים"). I'll have to take your word on Mizrachi.

E-Man( March 11, 2011 11:58 AM): The Ibn Ezra actually says straight out (Shemos 12:38) that the Erev Rav were egyptians that mixed with the Jews.

No. Ibn Ezra says: "מאנשי מצרים שנערבב עמהם". That means "of the people of Egypt that got mixed in with them". It is hardly conclusive that he meant Egyptians, rather than others that, like the Israelites, resided there( maybe even former slaves and prisoners of war).

E-Man( ibid.): There are many more sources that talk about how the Erev Rav were either Egyptians or just a mass conglomeration of converts that were, unfortunately, troublemakers.

Saying that the sources, that they were actual Egyptians, rather than many nation's peoples, exist, I'll take back my last objection.

Still, it s a far cry from "all refer to the eirav Rav as Egyptians".

E-Man( ibid.): ... the Erav Rav where Egyptian converts that were not descendants of Yaakov. The verse you quote is referring to a description of what Moshe looked like to the daughters of Yisro ... However, they were definitely not the descendants of Yaakov.

I never said, or inferred, that they were "the descendants of Yaakov".

When I compared the 'Erev Rav to Moesheh Rabeinu, it was not for them being Israelites, but for them being, as I saw it, non-Egyptians, like him, but being labeled Egyptians by you, just as Moesheh Rabeinu was labeled "an Egyptian" by the daughters of Re'u'el.

I said: "... were Egyptians, any more than ...".
I didn't say: "... weren't Israelites, any more than ...".

( I hope my latest salvo of comments hasn't gone to the spam bin.)

E-Man said...

Tamir, I am sorry, I did make a couple mistakes while translating and let me explain them. You were right about Chozer, it definitely means convert. I looked at halacha 15 and it definitely means convert. Also, I was looking at rambam's general use of the word tein and it definitely means err. I thought it ment claim against or complain against because the other rishonim use it in this way.

I will make the proper corrections, thank you.

E-Man said...

Tamir, I appreciate your help. In all honesty, I did a very hasty translation without thinking much about it. I should not do that. Usually when I translate Rambam I take my time and think about every word very carefully, this time I did not. I had written an entire other dvar Torah and it all got erased and I was rushing through.

However,

וקשה הדבר לפרוש מהם אחר שנתגיירו

This clearly means that "It is hard to separate the thing (Which caused the convert to convert) from them after they convert.

If it is as Eliyahu Touger the Rambam should have said


וקשה לפרוש מהם אחר שנתגיירו

But the word davar is there so it must mean it is hard to separate HADAVAR from them once they convert.

E-Man said...

The term DAVAR, as stated earlier in the Mishna torah, clearly refers to some reason the convert is converting and eliyahu touger's translation leaves that out.

E-Man said...

And yes, your comments are still going to spam, I think it is because you link to the chabad site.

E-Man said...

Here is jastrow, http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=38236&st=&pgnum=560 it says tein can mean to claim. Rambam did not use the modern hebrew language, he used the gemara language, so i think using jastrow for Rambam is much more effective. But,as I said, I agree with you because I found the Rambam using tein in a different section, talmud torah, when he uses tein he clearly means err.

E-Man said...

Also, about Eliyahu touger's translation. AS you pointed out, he was clealry wrong about chazier, that clearly means to convert. AS is seen in halacha 15

E-Man said...

"haChibur at the beginnig.) veQasheh is "and ... is difficult", haDavar is "it", liFrosh is "to separate", meHem is "from them", and the rest can be as you said. All together: "veQasheh liFrosh meHem ...", is "and it is difficult to separate from them ...".( See ? I corrected myself, and added "and" to my translation)"

hadavar does not mean it. Hadavar means the desire that the mishna torah was talking about. If it just meant it, there would be no hey in front of davar. Hadavar clearly refers to the davar that cause the geir to convert.

Sorry, I forgot to address this.

Tamir said...

E-Man( March 12, 2011 8:28 PM): hadavar does not mean it. Hadavar means the desire that the mishna torah was talking about. If it just meant it, there would be no hey in front of davar. Hadavar clearly refers to the davar that cause the geir to convert.

"It" refers to a specific thing( mentioned somewhere else, or understood by the listener\reader), so it is a good enough translation for haDavar.

Aderaba, if haDavar had referred to something already mentioned( i.e. "to the davar that cause the geir to convert"), then it should have said: "haDavar haZeh". Not adding "haZeh" means it refers to the thing he is about to mention, i.e. "liFrosh meHem, Achar sheNitgairu".

Even if it had said "haDavar haZeh", for the sentence to be understood as you suggest it would have had to have read, "veQasheh laDavar haZeh liFrosh meHen ..."( "וקשה לדבר הזה לפרוש מהם"), where the Lamed is used to mean "for", thus translating into: "and it is difficult for this thing( 'the davar that cause the geir to convert') to separate from them".
The problem is that this sentence now makes it sound like the "cause of converting" is having the difficulty, where in reality it is either the Gerim, or "us"( the Halakhic system), who are having the difficulty with it. Thus the original, to fit your understanding of it, would have done better to have read, "veQasheh laHem liFrosh mehaDavar haZeh ..."( "וקשה להם לפרוש מהדבר הזה"), translating as, "It is difficult for them( the Gerim) to separate from this thing( 'the davar that cause the geir to convert') ..."( the difficulty being that of the Gerim), or "veQasheh leHafrish haDavar haZeh meHem ...."( "וקשה להפריש הדבר הזה מהם"), translating as "and it is difficult[ for 'us'( the Halakhic system)] to cause the thing( 'the davar that cause the geir to convert') to separate from them"( where "we" have the difficulty).

E-Man( March 12, 2011 7:57 PM): If it is as Eliyahu Touger the Rambam should have said


וקשה לפרוש מהם אחר שנתגיירו

But the word davar is there so it must mean it is hard to separate HADAVAR from them once they convert.


I understand now. You are not used to the using of "Qasheh haDavar", instead of simply "Qasheh". I assure you, that, although it is a somewhat arcane form, and not used much( especially today) it is correct. The Rambam, for instance, uses it again in Hilkhot Melakhim uMilchamot 6:9[5]( " ולמה קשה הדבר לנשיאים"), even when "haDavar" isn't mentioned anywhere else in that Pereq, and would seem redundant to you( he could have said: "ולמה קשה לנשיאים").

E-Man said...

I disagree, I think hadavar over there means the previous idea as well. I think you are incorrect on your translation in this area, Kasha hadavar probably refers to the desires that the Geir refers to throughout the chapter that Rambam talks about just like hadavar in hilchot melakhim refers to the previous idea that was discussed earlier in the halacha. I don't think it is just a phrase.

I will do more research later and get back to you though. If you can find another instance of kasha hadavar I would be interested in looking at it. Also, I have to go do an autopsy now, but when I get back I will do more research.

Thanks

E-Man said...

There are no other places in the Rambam where he uses the phrase kasha hadavar other than these two places. So, I don't think it is a phrase found throughout Rambam.

E-Man said...

Also, I am not claiming hadavar specifically refers to the word davar that was used before. I am saying it refers to the thing that causes the convert to convert. My point is that Hadavar would be superfluous because there is no davar to be referring to in your translation.

In this halacha the davar would be referring to the money or love that the Geir covnerts for.

In Melachim the davar refers to the situation of the gibeonites. It doesn't just mean it is hard for the princes. It means the situation of the gibeonites was difficult for the princes.

E-Man said...

Here is a good example of what the Rambam should have said if he wanted to just say it is hard to separate from them once they convert. From hilchos teshuva 7:3

ואלו העונות קשים מאותן שיש בהן מעשה שבזמן שאדם נשקע באלו קשה הוא לפרוש מהם.

These sins are more difficult than those that involve deed.If a person is attached to these, it is more difficult for him to separate himself.

Notice the phrase, kasha hu lifrosh meihem. NOT kasha HADAVAR hu lifrosh miehem.

Also from Isurei Biah 22:18

אין לך דבר בכל התורה כולה שהוא קשה לרוב העם לפרוש אלא מן העריות והביאות האסורות.

There is nothing in the entire Torah that is more difficult for the majority of people to separate themselves from than sexual misconduct and forbidden relationships.

Again, no davar.

There are many more examples, but I think it suffices to say that without addressing what the davar is referring to, the translation would not be accurate.