|
| |
|
Latest Comments:
Thank you Rabbis Silberberg and Freeman and muman613 for engaging in this discourse. I appreciate it very much. I've learned a lot and have further investigated Deuteronomy 7:3-4 and the Talmudic tractates cited. I found the commentaries on Ruth's status and her conversion fascinating. I noticed that Deuteronomy ch. 4 is translated in the plural in many editions. The Stone Chumash, of course, translates it in the singular, hence the possible interpretation of matrilineal descent. Are these other translations merely trying to be politically correct and/or change the Halachah by semantic deceit? What is the literal translation of the Hebrew here? "For they will turn away thy son from following Me, that they may serve other gods" or "For he will turn away thy son from following Me, that they may serve other gods"? This seems to be the thing the entire argument hinges upon.
|
This is implied by the verses in Deuteronomy 7:3-4. See Why is Jewishness Matrilineal? for an explanation. See the footnote there for the Talmud sources.
This ruling one of those rare instances in the Talmud where there is no debate recorded. The only explanation to such is that it was always a well-known tradition. If it had been otherwise at any time, some contention would certainly have been recorded.
Further evidence comes from Ezra the Scribe's admonition to the men of his generation to send away their non-Jewish wives. If Jewishness were matrilineal, what would be the purpose of sending them away?
As for those Biblical instances where men apparently took non-Jewish wives, in each such case the woman chose to reject idolatry and wholeheartedly embrace the Jewish People. In other words, she became a member of the tribe. There is no reason to believe that she did not immerse in the mikvah and bring a sacrifice.
|
The source that tells us that child from a gentile woman is not Jewish is the Talmud, Tractate Yevamot and Tractate Kiddushin. This is based on a verse in the book of Deuteronomy (7:4), as is explained there by Rashi.
The belief that a Jew is created with an elevated soul is based on the teachings of the Arizal and cited extensively in Tanya and many other traditional works.
|
Still, to claim that Jewish souls are divine and part of G-d Himself and that the souls of non-Jews are merely creations of G-d, albeit creations of the highest order, seems unnecessarily divisive to me and unsupported by anything in the Torah. And the conversions spoken of (those of Tzipporah, Ruth, etc.) certainly weren't as stringent as the conversions mandated today.
|
In every case in the Torah when a Jewish man marries a woman who was not born Jewish she has converted. Moses wife Tzipporah converted, Ruth the grandmother of King David converted, and in every case the woman have converted. A valid conversion is a soul rebirth and the convert is looked upon as a full Jew and their children is a Jew.
|
Rabbi Silberberg says in this talk that the Torah tells us that children born to non-Jewish mothers do not have a Jewish soul, even if the father is Jewish. My question is: where in the Torah does it say this? As far as I know, there are many instances in the Torah of a Jewish man having children with a non-Jewish woman. In each of these instances the children are fully Jewish.
|
|
|
 |
|
LOGIN
ASK THE RABBI
6 Comments
Listen
