Goals:
1) To have an understanding of the traditional opinions of who is a Jew
2) To compare traditional views and our peers' with our own views
3) To understand the sources of these views
4) To see how these views may be complicated by modern society
In an article published last Friday, Forward editor-in-chief Jodi Rudoren reported that when reached out to participate in an event for the Jewish newspaper, a spokesperson for Ella declined, saying, “Ella is not Jewish.” In subsequent emails, the spokesperson clarified that while Doug Emhoff had started celebrating Judaism “out of an independent search” over the last few years, Ella was not living with him at the time and Judaism is “not something she grew up with.” For that reason, “Ella truly has no qualms with the faith, but she does not want to speak on behalf of Judaism, as she does not celebrate herself.”
Knowing what I do about Judaism (sic), I was naturally distressed to see that you have erroneously featured me as a Jew in ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA. Please do not make this mistake again in any future additions of your voluminous, pseudo-authoritative publication. I am not today, nor have I ever been a Jew, and as a matter of fact, I am uncircumcised.
I suggest rather than fraudulently misrepresenting me to be a Jew, and dishonestly abusing my name and reputation as a kind of advertising gimmick to improve the image of your religion (Judaism), you try to promote your religion on its own merits—if indeed it has any!
The Jews are a "filthy, lying bastard people" bent on world domination through such insidious schemes as the Holocaust ("a money-making invention"), the mass murder of Christian children ("their blood is used for black-magic ceremonies"), and junk food (William Rosenberg, the founder of Dunkin' Donuts, is singled out as a culprit).
Discussion Questions
- Emhoff and Fischer are halachically Jewish, in fact they are most likely both Jewish on their mother's and father's side, but completely deny their Jewishness. Before we begin looking at traditional Jewish sources, what are your thoughts on this? Do you think this is something a Jew can, or even if not, should be able to do?
- What does it mean to you to be Jewish or part of the Jewish community?
- The Children of Yoseph (married an Egyptian) - Manassah & Ephraim (granted the honor of being descendants of Moshiach Yoseph)
- The Children of Moishe and Tziporrah (Midian) - Gershom and Eliezer
Discussion Questions:
1) Does it make logical sense from these sources that the fairest interpretation be that descent is matrilineal? Why/ why not?
2) What greater proof would you need to believe that descent should be matrilineal?
(יט) גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד שֶׁבָּאוּ עַל הַמַּמְזֶרֶת, הַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר. וְאִם בָּאוּ עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל, בֵּין פְּנוּיָה בֵּין אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, הַוָּלָד כָּשֵׁר, וּפָגוּם לִכְהֻנָּה:
(19) If a non-Jew or a slave cohabit with a female mamzer, the offspring is a mamzer. If they cohabit with a Jewish woman, whether she is single or married, the offspring is permitted [to marry into the congregation], but is considered damaged with regard to marrying a kohen.
(ו) וְאֵלּוּ הֵן שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא אֶלָּא נִכְרָתִים וְאוֹבְדִין וְנִדּוֹנִין עַל גֹּדֶל רִשְׁעָם וְחַטָּאתָם לְעוֹלָם וּלְעוֹלְמֵי עוֹלָמִים. הַמִּינִים. וְהָאֶפִּיקוֹרוֹסִין. וְהַכּוֹפְרִים בַּתּוֹרָה. וְהַכּוֹפְרִים בִּתְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים וּבְבִיאַת הַגּוֹאֵל. הַמּוֹרְדִים. וּמַחֲטִיאֵי הָרַבִּים. וְהַפּוֹרְשִׁין מִדַּרְכֵי צִבּוּר. וְהָעוֹשֶׂה עֲבֵרוֹת בְּיָד רָמָה בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא כִּיהוֹיָקִים. וְהַמּוֹסְרִים. וּמַטִּילֵי אֵימָה עַל הַצִּבּוּר שֶׁלֹּא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם. וְשׁוֹפְכֵי דָּמִים. וּבַעֲלֵי לָשׁוֹן הָרַע. וְהַמּוֹשֵׁךְ עָרְלָתוֹ:
(ז) חֲמִשָּׁה הֵן הַנִּקְרָאִים מִינִים. הָאוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין שָׁם אֱלוֹהַּ וְאֵין לָעוֹלָם מַנְהִיג. וְהָאוֹמֵר שֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם מַנְהִיג אֲבָל הֵן שְׁנַיִם אוֹ יוֹתֵר. וְהָאוֹמֵר שֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם רִבּוֹן אֶחָד אֲבָל שֶׁהוּא גּוּף וּבַעַל תְּמוּנָה. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵינוֹ לְבַדּוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹן וְצוּר לַכּל. וְכֵן הָעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָב אוֹ מַזָּל וְזוּלָתוֹ כְּדֵי לִהְיוֹת מֵלִיץ בֵּינוֹ וּבֵין רִבּוֹן הָעוֹלָמִים. כָּל אֶחָד מֵחֲמִשָּׁה אֵלּוּ הוּא מִין:
(ח) שְׁלֹשָׁה הֵן הַנִּקְרָאִים אֶפִּיקוֹרְסִין. הָאוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין שָׁם נְבוּאָה כְּלָל וְאֵין שָׁם מַדָּע שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ מֵהַבּוֹרֵא לְלֵב בְּנֵי הָאָדָם. וְהַמַּכְחִישׁ נְבוּאָתוֹ שֶׁל משֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ. וְהָאוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין הַבּוֹרֵא יוֹדֵעַ מַעֲשֵׂה בְּנֵי הָאָדָם. כָּל אֶחָד מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה אֵלּוּ הֵן אֶפִּיקוֹרוֹסִים. שְׁלֹשָׁה הֵן הַכּוֹפְרִים בַּתּוֹרָה. הָאוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין הַתּוֹרָה מֵעִם ה' אֲפִלּוּ פָּסוּק אֶחָד אֲפִלּוּ תֵּבָה אַחַת אִם אָמַר משֶׁה אֲמָרוֹ מִפִּי עַצְמוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה כּוֹפֵר בַּתּוֹרָה. וְכֵן הַכּוֹפֵר בְּפֵרוּשָׁהּ וְהוּא תּוֹרָה שֶׁבְּעַל פֶּה וְהַמַּכְחִישׁ מַגִּידֶיהָ כְּגוֹן צָדוֹק וּבַיְתּוֹס. וְהָאוֹמֵר שֶׁהַבּוֹרֵא הֶחֱלִיף מִצְוָה זוֹ בְּמִצְוָה אַחֶרֶת וּכְבָר בָּטְלָה תּוֹרָה זוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא הָיְתָה מֵעִם ה' כְּגוֹן הָהַגְרִים. כָּל אֶחָד מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה אֵלּוּ כּוֹפֵר בַּתּוֹרָה:
(ט) שְׁנַיִם הֵם הַמּוּמָרִים מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. הַמּוּמָר לַעֲבֵרָה אַחַת וְהַמּוּמָר לְכָל הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ. מוּמָר לַעֲבֵרָה אַחַת זֶה שֶׁהֶחֱזִיק עַצְמוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת אוֹתָהּ עֲבֵרָה בְּזָדוֹן וְהֻרְגָּל וְנִתְפַּרְסֵם בָּהּ אֲפִלּוּ הָיְתָה מִן הַקַּלּוֹת כְּגוֹן שֶׁהֻחְזַק תָּמִיד לִלְבֹּשׁ שַׁעַטְנֵז אוֹ לְהַקִּיף פֵּאָה וְנִמְצָא כְּאִלּוּ בָּטְלָה מִצְוָה זוֹ מִן הָעוֹלָם אֶצְלוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה מוּמָר לְאוֹתוֹ דָּבָר וְהוּא שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה לְהַכְעִיס. מוּמָר לְכָל הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ כְּגוֹן הַחוֹזְרִים לְדָתֵי הָעוֹבְדֵי כּוֹכָבִים בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁגּוֹזְרִין גְּזֵרָה וְיִדְבַּק בָּהֶם וְיֹאמַר מַה בֶּצַע לִי לְהִדַּבֵּק בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהֵם שְׁפָלִים וְנִרְדָּפִים טוֹב לִי שֶׁאֶדַּבֵּק בְּאֵלּוּ שֶׁיָּדָם תַּקִּיפָה. הֲרֵי זֶה מוּמָר לְכָל הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ:
(6) The following are the people who have no share in the World to Come, but are cut off and lost and judged for the magnitude of their wickedness and sins forever and ever: Sectarians (minim); Heretics (apikorsin - from epicurean); Deniers of Torah; Deniers of Resurrection; [Deniers] of the coming of the Messiah; Apostates; those who lead the masses into sin; those who separate from the community; those who separate from the ways of the community; those who sin with a high hand in public like Jehoiakim; Collaborators [with the government]; those who bring fear upon the community but not for the sake of Heaven; Murderers; Gossipers; and those who reverse their circumcision.
(7) There are five [types] who are called "sectrarians" (minnim): One who says that there is no god and no director of the world. One who says that there is a director, but there are two or more. One who says that there is one master but that he has a body and a being with a form. And similarly one who says that He is not the first alone and creator of all. And similarly one who worships a star or constellation, and similar things, in order to intercede between him and the Master of Worlds. Any one of these five is considered a "min" - sectarian.
(8) There are three that are called "heretics" (apikorsin): One who says that there is no such thing as prophecy and there is no such thing as information that is passed from the Creator to the heart of man. And one who denies the prophecy of Moses, our teacher. And one who says that the Creator does not know man's actions. Any one of these is considered an "apikores" - heretic. Three are deniers of the Torah: One who say that the Torah is not from God, even one verse, even one letter, if he says that Moses said it on his own, that is denying the Torah. And similarly, one who denies the interpretation of the Torah, that is the Oral Torah, and denies its imparters, such as Tzaddok and Beothius. And one who says that the Creator switched this commandment for another one, and that the Torah has been voided, although it is from God, such as the Haggarites (Arabs). Any one of these is a denier of the Torah.
(9) There are two that are Jewish apostates: One who rebels against a single mitzvah, and one who rebels against the entire Torah. Someone who rebels against a single mitzvah – this is a person who accustoms himself to do a certain sin intentionally and becomes notorious for it, even if it were one of the minor sins, such as wearing sha’atnez or shaving the corners [of one’s beard], so that it is as if, for him, that mitzvah has been erased from the world. Such a person has rebelled against that particular thing, meaning that he does it spitefully. Someone who rebels against the entire Torah – such as those who return to the religion of idolaters during a time of oppression, and cling to them and say: How does it benefit me to cling to Israel who are lowly and pursued? It is better for me to cling to those whose hands are forceful. Such a person has rebelled against the entire Torah.
Discussion Questions:
1) The above sources talk a lot about who isn't a Jew. Reading what you have read, who do you think these sources would consider a Jew?
2) Do you think Emhoff or Fischer would be considered a Jew?
3) Would you be considered a Jew according to these sources?
Ezra is one of the last books of the Hebrew Bible. Many have asked why this issue was not raised earlier—even in the times of Moses?
If the Hebrew Bible provided a detailed exposition of every law and custom, this would be a question. But with even a cursory look it’s obvious that this is not so. Some laws, such as priestly rites and offerings, or the design and artifacts of the Tabernacle are described in detail.
Others—generally the most common ones—are presented with no specifics at all.
For example, we are told to “rest on the seventh day” and “do no work.” What is rest? Are we meant to sleep the entire day? What is work? Does it mean exertion, or productivity, or just anything not enjoyable? The few details that the text provides are of little help. (“Don’t burn fire in your dwellings.” “No one should move from their place.”)
Moses is told that we are to slaughter an animal “… as I commanded you.” But nowhere are we provided the details of just what Moses was instructed.
So why are some details provided and others left out?
One possible answer is that it is only necessary to commit details to writing that are easily forgotten. Those matters that all the people are intimately familiar with are left to be passed down organically and tacitly.
But whatever the reason, the fact that there is no explicit verse stating which parent makes you Jewish is not unusual.
There are many things in Jewish tradition that are hard to understand. The Five Books of Moses provide many instructions, but rarely provides the “why.” And even the explanations that we do have are not the ultimate reason, as Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi explains. We’re speaking, after all, of the wisdom of our Creator. It’s wondrous that we understand anything at all.
Nevertheless, in this instance, writes the Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, of righteous memory, not only is matrilineal descent perfectly reasonable, it’s absurd to imagine otherwise.
Let’s start with a simple question: To which parent is the child more biologically connected?
Yes, the father provides half the chromosomes. But there’s more to a person than two sets of chromosomes.
An embryo must sit within its mother’s womb and develop for nine months. During those months, the fetus is nurtured from the bloodstream of the mother, affected by her emotions, by the sounds she hears and the places she goes. And none of this, especially the birthing process, is a terribly comfortable experience for the mother.
This aside from the nursing and nurture, both physical and psychological, in the primary years that are most critical to the child’s development. Generally, that’s provided by the mother, who is capable of providing far more than the man.
Now, ask yourself, to whom would you give dominance in the fundamental identity of this child? Is it justified to ignore the woman’s role, and identify the child after the father? If the mother is, say, Cherokee, determining that the child is Jewish because the father is Jewish is in conflict with the basics of biology.
The Rebbe sharply criticized those who insist we change Jewish law and accept patrilineal descent. Firstly, he said, they cannot succeed. Torah law does not change, and every attempt to make changes of this sort has failed in the long run.
But aside from that, these people do not realize what they are playing with. Each human being is created with a role in this world that is tied to their identity. To tell a person that he is Jewish when he is not is a crime against both mother and child. It is robbery in the worst sense to steal away a person’s identity and the fundamental meaning of their life.
That’s a point many who argue for patrilineal descent ignore. They argue that we must have compassion, that we must be more inclusive, and we should open the doors of Jewishness to those who have either a mother or father who is Jewish. Why demand a conversion in these cases?
But this argument ignores not only the fundamental makeup of the child, but the dignity of the mother of the child, as well as women in general. “I would have expected all the women of the world to protest,” the Rebbe said.
And it is extremely ethnocentric, as though Jewish identity exists in a vacuum. There are people in the world besides Jews, and they also have identities. By simple biological fact, that identity principally follows the mother.
Jewish law recognizes a person as Jewish if his mother was Jewish, even though the father was not a Jew. One born of such mixed parentage may be admitted to membership in the synagogue and enter into a marital relationship with a Jew, provided he has not been reared in or formally admitted into some other faith. The child of a Jewish father and a non- Jewish mother, accoridng to traditional law, is a Gentile; such a person would have to be formally converted in order to marry a Jew or become a synagogue member.
Reform Judaism, however, accepts such a child as Jewish without a formal conversion, if he attends a Jewish school and follows a course of studies leading to Confirmation. Such procedure is regarded as sufficient evidence that the parents and the child himself intend that he shall live as a Jew. (Rabbi's Manual, p. 112)
We face today an unprecedented situation due to the changed conditions in which decisions concerning the status of the child of a mixed marrige are to be made.
There are tens of thousands of mixed marriages. In a vast majority of these cases the non-Jewish extended family is a functioning part of the child's world, and may be decisive in shaping the life of the child. It can no longer be assumed a priori, therefore, that the child of a Jewish mother will be Jewish any more than that the child of a non-Jewish mother will not be.
This leads us to the conclusion that the same requirements must be applied to establish the status of a child of a mixed marriage, regardless of whether the mother or the father is Jewish.
Therefore:
The Central Conference of American Rabbis declares that the child of one Jewish parent is under the presumption of Jewish descent. This presumption of the Jewish status of the offspring of any mixed marriage is to be established through appropriate and timely public and formal acts of identification with the Jewish faith and people. The performance of these mitzvot serves to commit those who participate in them, both parent and child, to Jewish life.
Depending on circumstances, mitzvot leading toward a positive and exclusive Jewish identity will include entry into the covenant, acquisition of a Hebrew name, Torah study, Bar/Bat Mitzvah, and Kabbalat Torah (Confirmation). For those beyond childhood claiming Jewish identity, other public acts or declarations may be added or substituted after consultation with their rabbi.
Discussion Questions
These two sources sum up the general practical beliefs around being Jewishness being matrilineal or otherwise. It should also be noted that the Conservative movement still does not accept patrilineal Jews citing tradition.
1) There is a situation where the Reform movement would not accept someone as Jewish that the Orthodox movement would. Can you think of it based on the above text? How does it make you feel?
2) After reading the above sources, where do you think the line is for someone to be a Jew? Why?
