A convert is suppoed to accept the ol mitzvot, the burden of halacha but does this mean an explicit intent to follow the mitzvot or simply the acceptance that there is a punishment if the mitzvot are not kept properly?

If a covert goes out to a treif restaurant after the conversion (as per the situation inm minute 17 of http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/736032/Rabbi_Dani_Rapp/Topics_in_Geirus:_Kabalas_Ol_Mitzvos) the judges have the right to say that the acceptance of the mitzvot is lacking and the geirut is null. But what if the convert says "I now intend to go and commit an aveirah and I accept that hashem will punish me as per the halachot of Judaism to which I am bound"?

The ol mitzvot is explicitly accepted. Does the action or the mindset control the status of the conversion? Is it kabbalat OL mitzvot or kabbalat KIYUM hamitzvot?

Note -- I am not talking about a case where a woman on the verge of conversion knows she has to work on one more yom tov but generally intends to keep mitzvot (I was told there is a tshuva on that), but a case where someone, with full malice aforethought, accepts and agrees with mitzvot but does not intend to keep mitzvot (either all, or one particular one); he sincerely accepts that there will be divine punishment for his decision.

  • 1
    I heard in R' Mordechai Willig's name that accepting responsibility for mitzvos is enough. Meaning like your OL option, not KIYUM. I heard this from a student of his, I don't have any confirmation. Feb 19, 2014 at 18:49

1 Answer 1


Shaalos U'Tshuvos Achiezer 3:26 says that if one accepts all the Mitzvos yet intends to break one of them intentionally, it is not a lack of accepting the Mitzvos.

. אבל במי שמקבל עליו כל המצוות, רק שבדעתו לעבור לתיאבון, אין זה חיסרון בדין קבלת המצוות

Igros Moshe Yoreh Deah 3:108 also says that if one converts knowing they will be unable to keep one of the Mitzvos it is a Kosher conversion.

מסתבר ממשמעות כמה דברים דגר שקיבל כל המצוות, אבל אמר לבי"ד שאף שמקבל עליו כל המצוות יודע שלא יוכל לעמוד בניסיון ליהרג כשיאנסוהו בדברים שהדין הוא ייהרג ולא יעבור, שנחשב קבלת מצוות, מאחר שקיבלה חיוב המצוות לקיימם כשיהיה לה באפשר שהוא שלא תהא אנוסה, ומה שתעבור הוא מפני שאין בכוחה לעמוד בניסיון אף שברצונה לקיים המצווה ולא לעבור... מסתבר דאף כשיאמר שלא יוכל לעמוד בניסיון דממון, דהוא הדין

  • Thank you -- the first source seems to be key. The second might be the case I was told about (the woman who knew that she wouldn't be able to keep one). Does the first case only apply if there is ONE mitzvah at play or even if the convert intends not to keep multiple mitzvot?
    – rosends
    Feb 19, 2014 at 14:52
  • I was just told that there might be an issue with judging the notion of "tei'avon".
    – rosends
    Feb 19, 2014 at 15:48
  • I think your introduction of the Achiezer should reference his limitation of "letei'avon", rather than "break one of them intentionally" which would appear to include someone who didn't accept that it's obligatory / prohibited. Jul 7, 2017 at 10:48

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .