Neeman's sickly olive branch

Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman's comments this week at the rabbinical judges conference, in which he suggested that he would like to see a "return" to the Torah litigation system (ostensibly in place of Israeli law) are understandable. But they are also indefensible.

Prof. Neeman, himself an Orthodox Jew and a long-standing important figure in both the legal profession and in public service, has worn his Orthodoxy on his sleeve since he entered public life. He has always maintained relationships with the senior Orthodox rabbinical leadership, and in recent years, has made little secret of the esteem in which he holds the Sephardi chief rabbi, Shlomo Amar, the ideological heir to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. Neeman's comments reflect his general identification with the conservative branch of Orthodoxy, which sees halakha (Jewish religious law) as dynamic and capable of providing solutions for every modern problem.

But a closer look at Minister Neeman's comments indicates that they were more political in nature than substantive. A number of times, in an attempt to explain why Jewish law should reign supreme, he cited the phrase "lehahzir atara leyoshna" ("to return the crown to the days of old"). This wording is identical to the electoral slogans of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, with which many of the current rabbinical court judges identify.

I don't believe that Yaakov Neeman is a champion of theocracy, nor that he believes that every section of the Shulhan Arukh code of Jewish law should be implemented in today's society. Rather, I would conjecture that his formulations were an attempt to hold out an olive branch to the rabbinical court judges, with whom he has had several brush-ups in recent years. Seen in this context, one can understand - if not excuse - Neeman's error.

On the macro level, the last 10 years have seen considerable enmity between the rabbinical courts and the corridors of justice in Israel - both the Supreme Court and the Justice Ministry. The rabbinical courts have been stripped of much of their power (particularly when it comes to monetary disputes), the secular courts have ruled countless times in favor of a more pluralistic view of Israeli Jewish society, and increasingly, Orthodox rabbis (including myself) are using those same courts to pressure the rabbinate to uphold the law even when it conflicts with their understanding of Jewish law. A believer in the relevance of halakha, Neeman may have seen his speech as an opportunity to relieve some of the tension between the rabbinical courts and the secular legal system he represents. By "speaking their language," he may have sought to rein in the radical elements within the rabbinical courts.

But on the micro level, the minister may have had a more specific goal. For the past decade, Neeman has championed another cause in which the rabbinical courts have been a thorn in his side. Since 1998, he has been an outspoken advocate for reforming the process of conversion here, and has crafted coalition agreements to that end. He has stated publicly that the demographic challenge faced by the state in the presence of at least 300,000 immigrants who received citizenship under the Law of Return, but are not Jewish according to Orthodox halakha, represents a threat to Israel that is no less significant than Iran's missiles.

Particularly because the Neeman commission - which created a government-sponsored conversion program - has been accused of recognizing the Reform movement, most of what Neeman has done in this area has been considered suspect by rabbinical court judges.

Most importantly, he has been personally involved in the selection of conversion court judges and has reportedly lobbied for appointing additional "volunteer" judges for the task. He was personally attacked, and spoke out in the Knesset when conversions were annulled in rabbinical courts three years ago. In the last two weeks, the Knesset called upon him to impose sanctions on marriage registrars who refuse to register converts who have completed the national (Orthodox) conversion program.

In short, as justice minister, Neeman wants to move his concept of conversion forward, but realizes that he needs the support of the rabbinical courts to do so. Perhaps he was thinking he could earn credibility by making a peace offering - at least a theoretical one - to their judges.

But all this doesn't justify the comments he made this week. The secular press has cited Neeman's remarks ad absurdum, highlighting ancient texts that have no relevance - according to anyone - today. Jewish tradition and halakha have been made - once again - to look foolish and outdated, and rather than bringing a message of tolerance and tradition to the general community, Orthodoxy has been made to look like something out of the 16th century (or perhaps earlier).

If Neeman was indeed trying to offer an olive branch to the rabbinic world, he may well have succeeded. But at the same time, he has alienated himself from the world in which democracy and modernity inform halakha, as much as they clash with it. Little was gained from his foray, for the ultra-Orthodox continue to bask in their newfound power, without having to cede anything along the way.

Rabbi Seth Farber is the director of ITIM: The Jewish Life Information Center (www.itim.org.il) and the rabbi of Kehillat Netivot in Ra'anana.