Maternal Lineage (Judaism)

[Tarheeler]

I understand that an adopted child can go through conversion, that's not my question.



My question is why does a newborn of a Jewish convert count but not an adopted? Why must the adopted child go through conversion but not the newborn?


Every definition of Ethnicity I've seen says that it's a subdivision of the concept of "race".

Difference Between Ethnicity and Race | Difference Between | Ethnicity vs Race

This basically implies that Ethnicity is an "Enhanced" definition of race into sub-groups. I'd like to see a single source that says Japanese and Germans can be of the same Ethnicity.

I've seen government forms that ask for "Ethnicity" and ask if you're black or asian or whatever, so apparently not even the government is clued in on this alleged difference.

By all means otherwise show a single definition of ethnicity that discludes "Race" as the foundation.

Then I would suggest more reading on the subject.

The US is atypical in that we associate race and ethnicity in offical forms.

In the United States of America, the term "ethnic" carries a different meaning from how it is commonly used in some other countries due to the historical and ongoing significance of racial distinctions that categorize together what might otherwise have been viewed as ethnic groups.

Ethnic group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for definitions, here ya go:

Some of the criteria by which ethnic groups are identified are ethnic nationality (i.e., country or area of origin, as distinct from citizenship or country of legal nationality), race, colour, language, religion, customs of dress or eating, tribe or various combinations of these characteristics. In addition, some of the terms used, such as “race”, “origin” or “tribe”, have a number of different connotations.

United Nations Statistics Division - Demographic and Social Statistics

An ethnic group is a group of people whose members are identified through a common trait. This can, but does not have to, include an idea of common heritage, a common culture, a shared language or dialect.[1] The group's ethos or ideology may also stress common ancestry and religion, as opposed to an ethnic minority group which refers to race.[2][3][4][5] The process that results in the emergence of an ethnicity is called ethnogenesis. Some ethnic groups are marked by little more than a common name.

Ethnic group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An ethnic group is a "socially defined group based on cultural criteria, such as language, customs, and shared history"

Race and Ethnicity in Rural America | Rural Communities Explorer

   [eth-nik] Show IPA

adjective 1. pertaining to or characteristic of a people, especially a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like.

2. referring to the origin, classification, characteristics, etc., of such groups.

3. being a member of an ethnic group, especially of a group that is a minority within a larger society: ethnic Chinese in San Francisco.

4. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of members of such a group.

5. belonging to or deriving from the cultural, racial, religious, or linguistic traditions of a people or country: ethnic dances.

Ethnic group | Define Ethnic group at Dictionary.com

The traditional definition of race and ethnicity is related to biological and sociological factors respectively. Race refers to a person's physical appearance, such as skin color, eye color, hair color, bone/jaw structure etc. Ethnicity, on the other hand, relates to cultural factors such as nationality, culture, ancestry, language and beliefs.

Ethnicity vs Race - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

Ethnicity refers to shared cultural practices, perspectives, and distinctions that set apart one group of people from another. That is, ethnicity is a shared cultural heritage. The most common characteristics distinguishing various ethnic groups are ancestry, a sense of history, language, religion, and forms of dress. Ethnic differences are not inherited; they are learned.

Sociology: Race and Ethnicity Defined

And some more scholarly examples:
Ethnic Identity - Joseph E. Trimble, Ph.D.
http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/i...ntroduction Ethnic Groups and Boundaries .pdf
http://gbl.indiana.edu/baumann/Baumann 2004 - Defining Ethnicity.pdf


As for you question about the child: Because one is born of a Jewish mother, and one is not. And, as we have already repeatedly established, Judaism accepts two avenues into the group: maternal descent and conversion.

 

[Harmonious]

What is the right question?

There are many right questions. However, the child of a convert to Judaism is as Jewish as any other born Jew. So asking when that "choice" is made for them to be Jewish is not a functionally useful question.

Okay, that's the main issue of the question. Why does a Jew stay Jewish even if they choose another religion?

That's the thing. If a Jew chooses a different religion, they are no longer considered Jewish. (God considers them Jews who have rebelled, and to what extent is determined by the choice and life circumstances of the person to have converted away from Judaism.)

It has been acknowledged that atheism isn't actually a religion. It is a choice to not believe in God, however enthusiastically. Therefore, a Jew who chooses to stop believing in God altogether makes Jews sad, but they are still considered Jewish, just not succeeding in believing as Jews do.

What don't you understand? An adopted child, even at 1 year old, must be converted but a blood-born child even of a convert doesn't have to be.

I'm not sure why you are having trouble with this.

An adopted child must be converted to be Jewish. But they have the option of not choosing to be Jewish. The child of a convert is born Jewish. They don't have an option, as born Jews are just that: born Jewish.

I don't think I understand. When does a convert have a tribe?

They don't. When the daughters of converts or women who convert to Judaism marry Jewish men, they take on the tribe of their husbands - unless they are Cohanim, who are forbidden to marry converts.

But I haven't seen anything that says that daughters of converts can't marry a Cohen. Only the woman convert, herself.

Why does a newborn have a tribe but not an adopted child?

It may very well be that a newborn DOESN'T have a tribe. A child born out of wedlock to a Jewish mother. Or the child of a convert and a Jewish woman. A child who is adopted doesn't have a tribe, unless the child was born Jewish and he knows what tribe his birth father was from.

It doesn't matter so much for women, as we start with the tribe of our fathers, and then we take on the tribe of our husbands.

Well clearly by the fact that Levites and Aaronites have a racial element involved, that alone proves there is in fact SOME racial element in our Tribal system.

Maybe. I am a divorcee. I can never marry a Cohen. I can marry any other Jewish man, however.

A person can't just be adopted as a Cohen.

Unless he was born a Cohen. A boy can be adopted by a Cohen, but if his birth father wasn't a Cohen, the adopted boy can never be a Cohen.

This is correct.

 

[Shermana]

I'm not sure why you are having trouble with this.

An adopted child must be converted to be Jewish. But they have the option of not choosing to be Jewish. The child of a convert is born Jewish. They don't have an option, as born Jews are just that: born Jewish.

I'm just gonna focus on this one.

The trouble I'm having with this is that I am asking WHY. I asked WHY is an adopted child not of the same status of one "born into it".

Maybe. I am a divorcee. I can never marry a Cohen. I can marry any other Jewish man, however.

Well then, as long as there is the separation of Levites and Aaronites from the rest of the population and it's impossible for a convert to be one, there is indeed a racial factor involved with "Judaism" even if others can convert to the general belief. Pretty much end of story on that.

As for you question about the child: Because one is born of a Jewish mother, and one is not. And, as we have already repeatedly established, Judaism accepts two avenues into the group: maternal descent and conversion.

Come on Tarheeler, that's not an answer to the question.

Let's try it again, WHY does one born of a Jewish mother count, and WHY does Judaism accept this "Maternal descent" avenue. I've asked three times and all I've gotten is a repeat of the claim each time. I can't help but notice there's a bit of evasion on this question. You've repeatedly established this, and I've repeatedly asked WHY. So we're in a bit of a stale mate it seems for some odd reason.

Let me be more clear in case this is honest confusion and not deliberate avoidance. I totally understand that those born of a Jewish mother are considered Jewish, but not an adopted child. The question is......WHY.

Maybe I should take this to the debate threads if it's a touchy issue.

 

[Harmonious]

I'm just gonna focus on this one.

The trouble I'm having with this is that I am asking WHY. I asked WHY is an adopted child not of the same status of one "born into it".

Because an adopted child who is not born Jewish has the same rights as all other non-Jews, and that is the right to not accept the full complement of the entire Torah unless they want to. (Should they want to, the process is a lot simpler than if they were non-Jews who were previously unaffiliated to Jews in any way.)

Keeping the Torah is hard sometimes. I won't lie to you. And as the Christians who love to post that "Jesus set them free" say, sometimes life would be a lot simpler if people had to keep only seven commandments. They might want to keep those seven commandments on a high level, but nonetheless, seven is a lot simpler than a portion of 613 commandments.

Jews who are born to it believe that our souls stood at Mount Sinai and accepted the Torah when our ancestors physically stood there and said, "We will do, and we will hear."

That is why.

Well then, as long as there is the separation of Levites and Aaronites from the rest of the population and it's impossible for a convert to be one, there is indeed a racial factor involved with "Judaism" even if others can convert to the general belief. Pretty much end of story on that.

I guess so.

Let's try it again, WHY does one born of a Jewish mother count, and WHY does Judaism accept this "Maternal descent" avenue.

Because when a mother gives birth, it is obvious who the mother is. The father... isn't always as easy to determine.

Let me be more clear in case this is honest confusion and not deliberate avoidance. I totally understand that those born of a Jewish mother are considered Jewish, but not an adopted child. The question is......WHY.

Because the adopted child might not WANT to be Jewish just because his adopted parents are.

And as someone who started life as a non-Jew, there is no obligation for a non-Jew to become Jewish.

 

[jazzymom]

Okay so if a person is BORN Jewish, why is he still Jewish even if he becomes Atheist for the rest of his life?

You inherit your Jewishness. I have a friend who is African American and Jewish, and I am Caucasian and Jewish. We do not share a race we share our Jewishness.

You cannot lose what you have inherited from your mother.

 

[jazzymom]

Let me be more clear in case this is honest confusion and not deliberate avoidance. I totally understand that those born of a Jewish mother are considered Jewish, but not an adopted child. The question is......WHY.

A child born to a Jewish mother inherits Her or his Jewishness, a child who is adopted was not born to the Jewish mother. That does not mean the child cannot be Jewish. A child who is adopted will be considered Jewish if the child undergoes conversion. Many Jews adopt children and they undergo the rituals of conversion and become Jewish.

 

[Shermana]

A child born to a Jewish mother inherits Her or his Jewishness, a child who is adopted was not born to the Jewish mother. That does not mean the child cannot be Jewish. A child who is adopted will be considered Jewish if the child undergoes conversion. Many Jews adopt children and they undergo the rituals of conversion and become Jewish.

Thanks, but the question is.....WHY.

 

[Shermana]

Because when a mother gives birth, it is obvious who the mother is. The father... isn't always as easy to determine.

Okay, so WHY does it matter if the mother makes the child or someone else? What does it matter who the Father is? WHY does it matter if a Converted Woman makes the child or adopts a newborn?

Because the adopted child might not WANT to be Jewish just because his adopted parents are.

Okay, is that YOUR opinion or the official Jewish opinion, and is there Talmud and Midrash for this explanation, and why would it matter if the Newborn doesn't want to be Jewish as opposed to the Adopted? Aren't they equally able to reject Judaism? Why does the Newborn have the advantage where the Adopted child doesn't? I still don't see how that answers the question. Why would a Newborn be any less likely to abandon the belief of his converted parent than an adopted child?

Are you saying.....there's a possible Biological connection that's retained?

And as someone who started life as a non-Jew, there is no obligation for a non-Jew to become Jewish.

By this answer, I'd say that you are agreeing there is in fact a biological rationale here at play, but why does one start life as a Jew just because his mother was? Why does an adopted child, say of 1 year or less not start life as a Jew? If you say that the Jew starts as life because his mother was Jewish....that's pretty much racial/biological by any definition.

 

[Harmonious]

Shermana, I'm not sure what you are looking for. YES, there is a biological aspect to inheriting Judaism. But that is not the ONLY aspect to inheriting Judaism.

It is Jewish law that a baby who is adopted as a non-Jew has the ability to choose. You are asking why. I can tell you that I don't know. I can tell you that I know someone who - upon discovering that she was adopted - chose NOT to be Jewish, as was her right. Oddly, she is more religious as a Bat Noach than her family is as Jews.

There is most definitely a biological connection that is retained, when it comes to inheriting Jewishness. We discuss the "merit of the Fathers," referring to extra special merit that we seek as we mention the forefathers who were particularly known to be righteous, especially Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (There are many others, but they get mentioned in all our liturgy.)

I'm not sure what else you are looking for.

 

[Shermana]

Shermana, I'm not sure what you are looking for. YES, there is a biological aspect to inheriting Judaism. But that is not the ONLY aspect to inheriting Judaism.

Because it seems there are claims that Judaism has nothing to do with the Biological aspect and I'd like to see opinions on this issue as well as the reasons for those opinions.

It is Jewish law that a baby who is adopted as a non-Jew has the ability to choose. You are asking why. I can tell you that I don't know. I can tell you that I know someone who - upon discovering that she was adopted - chose NOT to be Jewish, as was her right. Oddly, she is more religious as a Bat Noach than her family is as Jews.

Well if you don't know, then the question still remains, though I can accept an answer of "We don't know, it just is", I prefer that to avoiding the question. Regardless, this further proves that, according to this, there is in fact a biological or "Racial" factor involved and this would be in stark contrast to the view of NO biological factor within Judaism. If two newborns are compared, and one is automatically Jewish while the other isn't because one is a "blood-born Jew" (regardless of whether its a convert) versus an "Adopted", that is 100% clear cut proof that there is a dividing Biological line between "Jew" and "Goy", and therefore the concept of biological "segragation" does in fact exist, and to deny this is to deny the standard Jewish view. I'm not complaining, I already agree, but it definitely is a stance that does not jive with certain "liberal" perspectives. At least from what I understand of them.

There is most definitely a biological connection that is retained, when it comes to inheriting Jewishness. We discuss the "merit of the Fathers," referring to extra special merit that we seek as we mention the forefathers who were particularly known to be righteous, especially Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (There are many others, but they get mentioned in all our liturgy.)

Then we are agreed then, that the concept that there's NO racial/biological factor involved, is not in line with actual traditional Jewish thought. Regardless of the reason. There IS in fact a segragation among those "born into it" and those who aren't.

I'm not sure what else you are looking for.

That'll do.

 

[Harmonious]

I'm glad I could be of service. But be aware that different doesn't necessarily mean "better" or "inferior." Just different.

 

[Shermana]

I'm glad I could be of service. But be aware that different doesn't necessarily mean "better" or "inferior." Just different.

Of course, I'm not calling anyone inferior or superior, just clarifying what might be a touchy fact or two that some opinions seem to reject. Though I do believe that those souls chosen to be incarnated as Cohens and Levites may be "superior" in the Heavenly ranking, but that's for another subject.

 

[dantech]

Although it would seem like it is strictly a biological factor in Judaism, and many perceive it that way, the truth is that there is in fact a spiritual factor that could only be explained using the Kabbalah

Although one’s Jewishness is dependent on the mother, other genealogical factors important in Judaism, such as one’s tribal affiliation, are contingent on the father. Whether one is a Kohen, Levite, or Israelite depends on the father’s lineage. Here's the reason...

There are two basic components to a human being: his essence, and that which he projects forth, such as his talents and abilities. In Kabbalistic terminology, this second component is referred to as “revelations” of himself, as opposed to his essential self.The creation of a child requires both a man and woman, but for entirely different functions.

The mother provides the essence, while the father adds the potential for what the child will eventually project: "the revelations of his self". This is due to the different natures of male and female souls. The male soul emanates from God’s emotive qualities, such as kindness, discipline and harmony, qualities that do not define G‑d Himself, but rather are the means through which He relates to His creations. The female soul, on the other hand, originates in God’s attribute of "Malchut", royalty.

According to the teachings of Kabbalah, "Malchut", is rooted in the essence of God that transcends all divine "revelations."
The essence of a Jew is his Jewish soul, his Jewish identity. This is inherited from the mother. His tribe, a revelation or projection, the way his Judaism is practiced and actualized—is begotten from the father.

For this reason, an adopted child would not have inherited the Jewish essence from his mother. However, a mother who has converted, has this Jewish essence in her sould. Her newborn will have inherited it. This essence and soul that is in this child cannot be given up or rejected in any way. This is why it is said that a Jew could never convert.

He can of course become Buddhist, Christian, Muslim, or anything else in this world but his soul will have remained Jewish, and at the end of his days, he will be Judged as a Jew who has transgressed all the commandments given to Jews, not Noahides.

 

[Shermana]

Now that's an interesting answer, Dantech, I would indeed be more interested in seeing more about this.

So do you believe that Jewish Souls are appointed to be Jews before they are born? It seems you're definitely agreeing that there's indeed a difference of Soul as well as biology among Jews, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Tarheeler]

Come on Tarheeler, that's not an answer to the question.

Let's try it again, WHY does one born of a Jewish mother count, and WHY does Judaism accept this "Maternal descent" avenue. I've asked three times and all I've gotten is a repeat of the claim each time. I can't help but notice there's a bit of evasion on this question. You've repeatedly established this, and I've repeatedly asked WHY. So we're in a bit of a stale mate it seems for some odd reason.

Let me be more clear in case this is honest confusion and not deliberate avoidance. I totally understand that those born of a Jewish mother are considered Jewish, but not an adopted child. The question is......WHY.

Maybe I should take this to the debate threads if it's a touchy issue.

It's exactly the answer to the question you've asked.
And there are several reasons that specific system developed: because Judaism was a tribal religion; because maternal descent is easily verified, because that is how the group has determined to define membership.
Take your pick as each is a valid motivator.

The fact that you're trying to turn this into a racial issue when it isn't is extremely tiring.

Did you find the definitions helpful?

 

[Shermana]

It's exactly the answer to the question you've asked.

You honestly believe that? For real?

And there are several reasons that specific system developed: because Judaism was a tribal religion; because maternal descent is easily verified, because that is how the group has determined to define membership.
Take your pick as each is a valid motivator.

If "maternal descent" can be easily verified as the criteria as opposed to an adopted newborn, then you've agreed as well that there is indeed a "Biological" component.

The fact that you're trying to turn this into a racial issue when it isn't is extremely tiring.

Too late, we've already established that there is indeed a Racial and Biological element that cannot be denied at least in terms of standard Jewish thought. Otherwise, you'll have to explain Levites and Cohens.

Did you find the definitions helpful?

Not really, I think they're very PC-ish and arbitrary based on the society that employs the term. So unless you can find a single link that says Japanese and Germans can be of the same ethnicity, no dice.

 

[Tarheeler]

You honestly believe that? For real?

If "maternal descent" can be easily verified as the criteria as opposed to an adopted newborn, then you've agreed as well that there is indeed a "Biological" component.


Too late, we've already established that there is indeed a Racial and Biological element that cannot be denied at least in terms of standard Jewish thought. Otherwise, you'll have to explain Levites and Cohens.

Not really, I think they're very PC-ish and arbitrary based on the society that employs the term. So unless you can find a single link that says Japanese and Germans can be of the same ethnicity, no dice.

Biological does not equal racial. Ethnicity does not equal racial. Genetic does not equal racial.

I can understand that the need to constantly link them together is central to your argument, but that doesn't mean they are the same.

Your dismissal of multiple definitions because they refute your argument is telling though, and it effectively ends our discussion. I refuse to beat my head against a brick wall trying to converse with someone who avoids reality.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The trouble I'm having with this is that I am asking WHY.

The trouble you're having is the consequence of a perverse racist and xenophobic perspective, and it leads to some remarkable absurdities.

So, for example, we can imagine a husband and wife converting to Judaism and then having a child. Your options are:

• The parents changed their race when they converted.
• The child is a different race than his or her parents.
• The child is not a real Jew.

Which is it?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It is interesting that Deuteronomy 7 ...

1. When HaShem thy G-d shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and shall cast out many nations before thee, the Hittite, and the Girga****e, and the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
2. and when HaShem thy G-d shall deliver them up before thee, and thou shalt smite them; then thou shalt utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them;
3. neither shalt thou make marriages with them: thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
4. For he will turn away thy son from following Me, that they may serve other gods; so will the anger of HaShem be kindled against you, and He will destroy thee quickly.

... often quoted a/the halachic basis for matrilineal descent, speaks exclusively of those peoples to be displaced.

 

[Shermana]

Biological does not equal racial. Ethnicity does not equal racial. Genetic does not equal racial.

I can understand that the need to constantly link them together is central to your argument, but that doesn't mean they are the same.

Your dismissal of multiple definitions because they refute your argument is telling though, and it effectively ends our discussion. I refuse to beat my head against a brick wall trying to converse with someone who avoids reality.

Yeah, ignore the Cohen and Levite issue, and act as if your definitions trump others when the term is not concrete. I guess there's a reason why you can't find a single link that would say Japanese and Germans can be of the same ethnicity, and you're the one who's dismissing the connection between Biological lineage and Race, so we're at a stalemate, but accusing me of "avoiding reality" because I disagree with your definitions of ambiguous terms is just not right.

Yeah, I think this thread needs to be in the debate section after all.