This post continues the weekly series on the Nishmablog that features responses on JVO by one of our two Nishma Scholars who are on this panel. This week's presentation is to one of the questions to which Rabbi Hecht responded.
* * * * *
Question: I hear the question asked, but I have not heard a good answer to it: for both purposes of inclusion, and for Israeli citizenship, what is a Jew?
I would begin by first noting that you say you hear
this question asked but, if you pause for a moment, you will recognize
that, in the actual way you framed the question, it is generally not
asked. What you usually hear asked is the question of ‘who is a Jew’ but
the question, as you framed it, ‘what is a Jew’, is actually rarely
asked. This is really most unfortunate, in my opinion, and may be the
first problem that must be faced in approaching this subject. This may
also explain your disappointment in the answers you have heard.
Asking the question of ‘who’ before the question of
‘what’ is like asking how one becomes a member of a certain group before
describing the exact nature of this group. Of course, how one answers
the ‘who’ question may inherently indicate how this person would also
answer the ‘what’ question, but it does so with a lack of clarity and in
a roundabout way. The question of ‘what’ is clearly not tackled head
on. It may just be that people think the answer is so obvious and shared
by everyone – when in reality it is not. It may, however, also be that
people are wary of facing this question because they are not sure of
where a subsequent discussion will take them. There may be a concern
that the result may be a clear recognition of the extent of the
difference in viewpoints that exist on this fundamental question – and
that such a clear enunciation of the differing views would have strongly
negative consequences. It is my belief, though, that the opposite is
actually the truth. For us to meet this challenge – the challenge of
Jewish identity and unity – it is actually important to confront this
issue, rather than avoid it. We must ask the question ‘what’.
To fully approach this question, though, we must
recognize that it really has two parts. First, it asks of the individual
to present his/her answer to the question. This would demand of me to
present my theoretical understanding of the nature of the group termed
‘the Jews’ pursuant to my belief in the principles of Orthodox Judaism.
In a certain way, with this answer I would be explaining what I think
this term should mean. Second, though, in that this definition is not
shared by all Jews but, rather, in that there are other definitions of
this group termed ‘the Jews’, there would be an additional demand to
consider whether it is possible to arrive at a further definition that
could combine these other definitions into one whole. On a certain
level, this would represent a more practical issue with an answer
attempting to formulate if these variant definitions can connect – and
if yes, how.
As a starting point, we must recognize the challenge
that is before us. Jewishness seems to combine religion and nationhood
(or ethnic identity) but what we often do not recognize is the
difficulty presented by this combination. How can religion and
nationhood combine: they refer to different constructs? Nationhood
refers to some shared genetic or social construct. Religion reflects a
different type of bonding based upon an ideological position, a certain
view of life and reality. Some may contend that such a combination is
not really so strange, after all many national entities would seem to
combine the two. For example, when we think of Italians, we think of
Roman Catholics. There are, however, many differences between this
combination of nationhood and religion and that expressed by the term
Jew. There are Roman Catholics who are not Italians and there are
Italians who are not Roman Catholics. They are two different types of
groupings that happen to converge, to a large extent, in a certain
population. The term Jew, though, would seem to inherently reflect these
two types of groupings in themselves – Jew defines religion, Jew
defines ethnic grouping. How can this one term ‘Jew’ mean both?
To answer this question pursuant to Halacha,
we must first recognize that Orthodox Jewish Thought perceives its
theology as actually universal. It is expected that all human beings
should know and accept the One God as defined by the tenets of this
theology. As such, the term Jew may categorize an individual as a
believer in, what we may term, this universal religion of Judaism; being
an adherent of Judaism, itself, would not necessarily define one as a
Jew. The fact is that throughout history there have been individuals who
believed in this universal religion of Judaism who were not Jewish. In
our present time, such individuals are referred to as Noahides (or
Noachides); a simple Google search of this term will reveal
approximately 279,000 responses (see http://www.google.ca/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=noahide&pbx=1&oq=noahide&aq=f&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_sm=s&gs_upl=1781l5603l0l8910l7l5l0l0l0l1l1118l3124l3-2.0.1.1.1l5l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=ce27fe47b2a800b8&biw=984&bih=533).
What this universal religion of Judaism then does is
distinguish between two different groupings of humanity, Jews and
non-Jews, presenting different directives (Codes) to each. The specific
term Jew, as such, refers to a specific grouping, specifically nation,
within this religious perspective that has a specific code of conduct
that is different from the rest of humanity. This nation is formed out
of the religion and is identified to further serve the goals of this
religion in a special significant way. The term Jew thus identifies an
individual as a member of this unique nation to which God has given a
special code of conduct.
This recognition is necessary to fully understand
the two different standards that are applied in defining members of the
Jewish group. According to Halacha, the first definition of a Jew is one born to a Jewish mother (T.B. Kiddushin 66b). This would seem to point to Jewishness as an
ethnic identity. In that being born to a Jewish mother would not seem to
reflect any ideology, this definition would actually seem to challenge a
perception of Jewishness as reflecting a religious perspective. What
the Halacha is really stating is that, within this universal
religious perspective, one way we can identify members of the Jewish
nation who are bound to the unique Code of Torah is that they include
those who are born to a Jewish mother. What of someone born to a Jewish
mother who does not believe in this religion? That person is still
Jewish, i.e. an individual who is Divinely commanded to meet the
standards expected of members of the Jewish nation.
This leads us to the second definition of a Jew, according to Halacha: one who has gone through a process of gerut, generally translated as conversion. If we understand Halacha as perceiving Jewishness as defining those who are bound to a special code of conduct, gerut
would thus be the process by which one outside this group, not so
commanded, can become a member of this group and become commanded. It
could thus be expected that the essence of the process would be the
verification that this person wishing to enter this group indeed will
meet these standards of this group. This brings the matter back
to the realm of religion and may explain why this process is described
as conversion, a process by which one joins a different religion. As
mentioned above, it is actually expected of non-Jews that they should
also accept the tenets of universal Judaism so gerut is not a process, really, by which one changes his/her faith. Gerut,
though, still demands the acceptance of this theological perspective
for, to be part of this process -- whereby one, not within this nation
with this special Code, can join this special nation -- there, first,
has to be an acceptance that this nation has this special Code. As such,
Halacha perceives as the first necessity of one wishing to become Jewish a commitment to meet such obligations. It is kabbalat mitzvoth, acceptance of the commandments, which is the prime focus of conversion for within the purview of Halacha, this is what it means to be part of the Jewish nation.
So what is a Jew according to Halacha? A Jew
is a member of the Jewish nation, a nation that was distinguished by God
and given unique tasks in His service as defined in the Halacha.
One born Jewish is one born with these responsibilities even if he/she
does not recognize it. To become Jewish, though, someone must recognize
what it really means to be Jewish – bound to these responsibilities –
and accept this obligation.
Now we can go on to the second part of this answer.
It is clear that not every person who calls himself/herself a Jew would
accept this definition. There is a reality of differing definitions even
as people may not be able to articulate them. Indeed, over the past few
centuries since the beginning of the Haskalah, we have seen
extremes in both directions: some even declaring Jewishness to be solely
a religion and rejecting any element of nationhood (early adherents to
Reform Judaism); others declaring it to be solely a nation with
religious practice simply being this nation’s cultural expression
(secular Zionism and, to some extent, Reconstructionist Judaism).
Further diversity in theological principles also
emerged. This is an essential issue in the controversy over conversion.
If one converts pursuant to Reform Judaism, for example, that person
would be declaring an acceptance of the theological principles of Reform
Judaism, principles that are in disagreement with, let us say, Orthodox
Judaism. As Orthodox Judaism would demand as a prelude to gerut
the acceptance of its theological principles, by definition it cannot
accept a conversion based upon acceptance of principles with which it
disagrees. The challenge is further complicated by the attempt to avoid a
recognition of such differences and their consequences. (In "Adjective
and Non-Adjective Jews”, available at http://www.nishma.org/articles/introspection/introspection5761-2-adjective_jew.htm,
I maintain that it is actually necessary for us to confront these
differences and consequences if we are to have any chance for unity.) Essentially
what this all represents are different understandings of the nature of
the Jewish group, leaving us with a further challenge of seeing if there
is any way of devising a feasible, pragmatic definition that could
integrate all those (or most of them) who define themselves as Jewish
into one working, understanding of this grouping.
To this part of the question, I really can’t give an
answer. It is a challenge – a challenge that we must face and solve.
This is the real issue in Israel regarding Jewish identity. There is
value in accepting Orthodox standards for they are the most restrictive
and, as such, almost anyone defined as Jewish within these standards
would also be accepted as such by those maintaining other definitions.
Maybe, though, there is a need for new terminology reflecting, for
example, one who would be accepted as part of the Jewish group by
certain definitions but not so accepted by others. Such an approach may
be very relevant for Israel. Perhaps the reason you have not heard a
good answer to the question of ‘what is a Jew’ is because the question
is actually more of a maze than one may think.
No comments:
Post a Comment