What is the basis for a blanket allowance of halachik compromises by organizations involved in kiruv, if any?
The purpose of this question is to see if there were responsa that give blanket allowances regarding kiruv (as I've heard there are).
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
There really is NO heter to compromise on Halacha when doing Kiruv period.
However, when dealing with non-frum people there is a lot of thought that goes in to dealing with them and their Halachic issues.
For example: let's say you have someone who lives far away from your Shul, and you know he is driving to Shul, you do not have to tell him not to drive (if you know he won't listen to you), unless he specifically asks you about it.
It is important to remember that we are trying to bring them closer to Torah, not Torah closer to them.
It appears that one of two things occurred when you wrote your question: either you are bothered or puzzled by the things kiruv organization do, or hopeful that they have some heter. I will say that the blanket heter that you are conceiving of does not exist. Though there can be found specific examples and certain "loopholes" to certain halakhic issues, the general reason for what kiruv organizations do are not solely based on those heterim. The general consensus among kiruv organizations is that in order to bring them closer certain compromises are made. It is a decision both on the part of the organization and on the part of the rabbis running it. Many a time do rabbis have to face such decisions. A classic one would be allowing a non-shomar shabbat congregant read from the torah or be the shliakh tsibbur. Classically halakha does not allow this (even if there MIGHT be way of reinterpreting halakha), but rabbis had to allow it in order to maintain their congregation, to be kind and fair, and to conform to the reality we exist in. all this said, there is a limit and a balance involved. Sometimes the balance can be lost, but the hope is that it will be achieved. If you want, I can find something that validates what I just said, but I have spoken to several kiruv organizations and heard many rabbis say this.
I am unaware of blanket heteirim but perhaps the discussion regarding inviting a non-orthodox person for shabbos knowing she will drive may shed some light here. Based on this post it would seem that:
An additional consideration is the concept of committing a minor sin in order to save someone from a more severe sin. We do not ordinarily permit such a violation, R. Akiva Eiger (Glosses to Yoreh De’ah 181) argues that lifnei iveir is an exception. You may violate lifnei iveir, you may cause someone else to sin, in order to prevent him from committing a more severe sin. This seems particularly relevant to a Shabbos invitation which may inspire the guest toward greater religious observance.
However, R. Ya’akov Ariel points out that in R. Akiva Eiger’s case, the other person is definitely saved from a greater sin. In our case, the invitee may not be religiously inspired and may have otherwise stayed home and done nothing. On the other hand, the guest will definitely violate Shabbos in the future. Perhaps we can permit lifnei iveir for the chance to prevent these definite violations in the future just like we violate Shabbos to save someone’s life so he can observe Shabbos in the future.
There is absolutely no blanket heterim for kiruv. Halacha must be upheld. However, the halachic system itself has guidelines which teach us how to manage conflict between halachic principles and how to establish priorities.
It's like saying- how come ambulances and police cars don't have to follow the law? They can just run red lights, and speed, and nothing happens to them!
The answer is that they may not "break the law." The law contains clauses for emergency situations. But they can't just do anything. The law defines for them what exemptions apply and which don't.
We understand this when it comes to pikuach nefesh. We don't say that you violate halacha by breaking Shabbos to save a life. Halacha itself teaches us that the laws of Shabbos are put aside to save a life. And there are guidelines explaining the parameters. (See O.C. 328-330)
The same applies with kiruv. We have numerous halachic principles which apply in kiruv situations. These topics include issues like חטא כדי שיזכה חברך under certain circumstances you can do a minor sin to prevent someone from doing a major sin. There are lots of issues involved, and it needs to be studied properly; but the halacha addresses the topics.
The big rav publicizing these Halachos is Rav Yitzchok Berkovits. In fact this is a big reason he set up the Jerusalem Kollel, and has been pushing getting avreichim to enter the world of kiruv. It takes talmidei chachomim, who study these halachos well, to know when and how to apply them.
Unfortunately, there are some organizations that don't know the halachos and thus do what they think is proper, rather than what is halachically valid. These organizations unfortunately contribute to the misconception that there is no limitations in kiruv, which is regrettable. (Not naming names, since that would be lashon hara without a purpose in this forum. Different organizations change their reputability over time, so it's not appropriate to publicize anything over the internet.)
But most kiruv organizations do have rabbinic advisors advising them and giving them halachic guidelines to make sure that the outreach is done properly.
Like most any area of halacha, this has many issues, and disagreements among the authorities; answers will depend on the posek and on the situation.
One story about one detail and one authority: I was once present when a well-known talmid chacham was discussing inviting people to a Shabbos meal (as part of kiruv) if you know that they will drive to get there. He brought various opinions that were lenient, and also said that he had heard from someone who had asked R' Moshe Feinstein z"l and was told that it was forbidden.
I told him afterwards: I was once by R' Chaim Mintz shlit"a, the mashgiach from Staten Island, and the subject came up. He said that he had been at a Torah Umesorah convention (I think it was) and someone said that R' Moshe had told him that it was allowed. R' Chaim added, Some people there gave that person a hard time, R' Moshe could never have said that, etc.... But the fact is [said R' Chaim] that I also asked R' Moshe and he told me: For kiruv? - then (pretty much) everything is allowed! ("alles mutar!")
That's my story, for what it's worth; as I expected, the talmid chacham speaker I told it to didn't really accept it; I don't know if he went back to R' Chaim for clarification.