The Knesset Finance Committee approved this Monday the first reading of the proposed law of Mikvo'os drawn up by MK Rabbi Moshe Gafni and other Knesset members. The Coalition members supported the bill while the Opposition opposed.
In the Knesset legislative process (based on the British model), each bill undergoes three readings. The first is a sort of preliminary approval, but often there is serious discussion in the appropriate Knesset committee and changes are made before the second reading. By the time the bill receives its second reading, it usually has reached a form in which there is enough approval to ensure its final passage. The third reading is usually just a formality. For a law proposed by a member of the governing coalition, as Rabbi Gafni is, getting it past its first reading is a major milestone and makes it quite likely that it will eventually be passed.
The new law stipulates that the religious councils are not required to enact agreements with Reform and Conservative organizations regarding the ritual immersion in mikvo'os of candidates for their so-called conversions. The High Court had recently ruled that they must reach such agreements. It was agreed that several outstanding issues would be discussed in the future, in committee discussions preceding the second and third reading of the bill. It was also agreed that preceding the final approval of the bill, certain changes be made to the text.
Rabbi Gafni, who drew up and presented the bill, emphasized that it does not change the status quo in any way or alter anything that existed up till now regarding immersion. All it does is block the breach created by the ruling of the High Court which determined that the Reform and Conservative movements must be permitted to use existing mikvaot for their self-styled conversions.
After the bill was approved in the Knesset Interior Committee with its first reading which nullifies the High Court decision to recognize the Reform movement regarding mikvo'os, Rabbi Gafni was asked if perhaps the Reform movement will establish their own private mikveh through the Jewish Agency or other such bodies.
"In any case, that is irrelevant. It is merely a sideshow without any value or substance. My position on the matter, as well as that of my colleagues, is that the High Court decision that recognizes the Reform and Conservative be nullified. That is what appears in the bill incontestably. The bill deals with the fact that the religious council need not be connected in any way or agreement with other bodies, and since, according to the law, the religious council operates according to directives from the Chief Rabbi, the law states that we do not recognize the Reform and Conservatives, as opposed to what the High Court said. This is the bill. We did not ask for anything beyond this, no more or no less.
"They said that they want to create their own Reform mikveh and I replied that I object! They shall not build mikveh from public taxpayer funds for this is altogether superfluous. In addition, in the U. S. there are, to our regret, large concentrations of their followers which has led to disastrous assimilation and yet they don't have a single mikveh! They don't believe in it and they don't need it either.
"Here, they seek the legitimization which the High Court provides, and this is what we eliminated. They could have built their own private mikveh before, as well. Who is stopping them? Half of all the mikvo'os in the country are private to begin with. Who stood in the way of rich Reform members in the past building their own mikveh, or who prevents them from doing so now as well? But they won't do so because they don't need the mikveh per se, and only seek legitimization - and that is what we abolished.
"The State shall not be a partner to this. Period. If there are private bodies who wish to build, let them go ahead and build, just as they could have in the past, but this is altogether irrelevant."
Does the Jewish Agency have Reform leanings?
"Certainly. They have a large number of Reform members but notwithstanding, they won't build. A mikveh in their eyes is no different from a swimming pool."
Why does the Reform wage this battle about an issue that does not interest them in America?
"Simply to provoke, to attack the Torah because they know that here they have had no legitimacy. The chareidi representatives, ever since the establishment of the State, stand adamant in refusing recognition to the Reform and they object to this. Whenever they address a Knesset committee, we leave. I have served in the Knesset for many years and have never sat in a committee where the Reform or Conservatives have appeared. I do sit together with many people who, to my chagrin, are very far from keeping Torah and mitzvos but I refuse to sit together with Reform members. I don't sit with them or recognize them in any way. As far as I am concerned, they are transparent."
What is your opinion about the media which invariably heats up public opinion whenever a religious issue arises?
"It is true that they deliberately seek to incite. I must make an interesting observation that this time, the provocation is much milder and less pronounced than in the past. This present sitting was less volatile than previously.
"I am happy that we have arrived at the text formula which I presented before the Knesset plenum and which was also acceptable to the Coalition members. I didn't expect anything from the Opposition which, of course, voted against it but I am happy that the Arabs abstained from the vote.
"My fear, which we always felt in passing bills such as these, is in raising a storm of protest, which did not occur this time. True, the bill was thrashed over, as usual, but it was no different proportionally from the past and we are used to this, as it invariably turns out to be incitement against the chareidi public. The media coverage this time was hardly what it used to be in the past and not much beyond a discussion of the issue per se. I am happy with how it turned out."
