Tevya, Torah, and Jewish IdentityPart III: Hilchot Intermarriage

(GUEST POST by The CandyMan)

During my years in Israel, I decided to memorize the mishna. Like a Tanna of old, I wandered the streets of Jerusalem, silently repeating the little tidbits of case law and pithy sayings. Did you know that the word mishna means “that which is repeated”? And when you repeat something long enough, a little bit of it filters down into your soul.

Memorizing Pirkei Avot was a transformative experience. Everything I knew about Judaism was turned on its head. Before that, I’d practiced a sort of t’fillin-police Judaism. But after I read Pirkei, I realized that Judaism was about more than just keeping the law. It was about being a kind person. It was about being a humble person. Fire and brimstone had nothing to do with it. It was about love.

In Israel, I also started memorizing the chumash/Pentateuch. And became obvious to me, from verses like the Edomite kings, that the five books weren’t written by a single author. But I didn’t toss Orthodox Judaism out the window. For years after that, I was Orthoprax. I believed in God, and I had a mantra: God does not throw people for a loop. He is looking out for us. Orthodox Judaism is what he threw me into, and keeping halakha is a manifestation of His will.

This kind of Orthoprax, apologist thinking may sound familiar to some of you. I also know there are many people reading this that don’t give a damn about halakha. But there are some that do. So in this post, I want to address the halakhic position on intermarriage, as well as the status of non-halakhic Jews within the Jewish community. I am talking to myself in Israel, as well as some of the Orthoprax lurkers on the blog.

I never understood the big deal about intermarriage, probably because I was taught to think like halakhic man. Intermarriage, even with no conversion process, is hardly a halakhic crime. In the chumash - to which we are not allowed to add laws - intermarriage is forbidden only between Jews and the seven indigenous nations of the land of Canaan. These peoples are long gone (we helped wipe 'em out, remember?). A decent, if incomplete, list of Biblical intermarriages is available at half-jewish.org. I would note that, while the editor there states that Ezra forbade all foreign marriages, this is questionable in my mind. Ezra himself quotes the Biblical prohibition against “intermarrying with the nations of the land of Israel, the Amorites, Canaanites, etc.” as his rationale against these marriages (Ezra 9:1-3).

In short, from every halakhic standpoint, intermarriage these days is not even a lav -- a negative restriction like keeping kosher. And yet, to people like my parents, a child can disregard kashrut completely, work every Sabbath, and it might hurt, it might not be great, but that child will never be cut off from the family. So long as he does not commit the cardinal sin: marrying a non-Jew!

This is folly worthy of Tevya.

If anything, the Torah goes out of its way to point out that we are judged not by our origins, but by our deeds. When Moses provokes God's wrath for failing to circumcise his children, it is his Midianite wife Tzippora who performs the rite and saves his life (Ex. 4:24-26). And what could be a more compelling lesson than the book of Ruth, a story in which a Moabite woman (who, according to the literal text, should never have been allowed even to convert!) chooses to fulfill the rite of yibbum/levirate marriage at any cost, and in doing so eventually founds the Davidic lineage?

When in Israel, memorizing Bible, I stumbled across Lev. 19:34 – one of the ten verses every Jew should know. It commands us to love the non-Jewish resident as ourselves (“ger” - the word never means ‘convert’ in Biblical Hebrew). For were we not strangers in the land of Egypt? We must protect the non-Jew in Israel, provide food for her, because (like the guests in Sodom or Giv’a) she is at our mercy. How is it that I was never taught this verse in school as a child? How differently I might have treated our live-in cleaning lady, Maria!

Are we truly to believe that there is no place in this religion for people of another race, or even another faith? That we are expected to immediately cast intermarried family members out on the rocks, without even meeting the people they've chosen to spend the rest of their lives with? What if those people are Tzipporas, or Ruths? What if God has sent them for a reason?

But CandyMan, you say, we can't pasken/decide from the Bible! The Written Torah is only one side of the coin. Surely, the Oral Torah must command us to cut off children who intermarry?

On the contrary. The halakhic mind is a rational one. It's a mind of prioritization, and categorization, and it's seen it all before. Halakha might categorize children from an intermarriage as Jews or non-Jews, but it is unlikely to recommend destroying a family on such a flimsy basis.

How big a priority is it to get along? The houses of Shammai and Hillel disagreed on what was ritually clean and who you could marry. Yet they did not refrain from borrowing dishes from one another, nor from intermarrying (Mishna Y'vamot 1:4).

Not for a second am I convinced that my father's "amputation" of me is in any way a halakhic response. No, any rabbi worth his salt would know that the Torah says that you must live by these commandments - not die for them! And to the halakhic mind, the amputation of a family member is a very serious matter. There's no question this is an issue of sh'lom bayit/family harmony, which takes precedence over Rabbinic customs such as lighting menora and saying kiddush (B. Talmud Shabbat 23b). Given the extreme emotional and psychological duress of "amputation," it may even constitute pikuach nefesh/preserving a life, for which we violate all but the most fundamental precepts in the Torah (idol worship, incest/adultery, and murder).

How, then, should an Orthodox Jewish parent (or community) treat a child who intermarries? Well, if you truly believe in Orthodox Judaism, the first thing you should do is to consult with a trusted, experienced rabbi about the situation. In fact, consult a few. They may tell you something like this:

First, do no harm. Many intermarrying partners are themselves interested in Judaism, if only because their partner is a Jew. These are potential Ruths and Tziporas, ‘converts’ that make the Jewish nation stronger.

Can halakhic conversions be done where marriage is a motivating factor? The short answer is yes. The Talmud itself cites such a case. The upshot of the current Orthodox Jewish halakhic position is that it is up to every particular rabbi/court to decide whether the particular conversion is sincere enough. If you are interested in learning more about this topic, a good place to start is Rabbi Marc Angel’s book.

Last Rosh Hashana, I found myself in Hong Kong with my girlfriend. We attended a Reform service. The rabbi stood up and lauded the many non-Jewish or converted spouses who brought their children to synagogue services. “These locals are putting their Jewish spouses to shame,” he said. “Even though they were not raised Jewish, they are the bedrock of our community, more so than their Jewish spouses.” It reminded me of how Tzipora had to circumcise Moses’ children. This kind of thing has been going on for thousands of years.

What if the non-Jewish partner is not interested in Judaism at all, and your child nevertheless opts to marry him or her? In this case, you should keep in mind the motivations your child has for intermarrying.

In rare cases, the Jewish partner may actually be an Orthodox Jew, but feels compelled by love to marry his partner. From a halakhic standpoint, that’s an easy one. A similar discussion arose recently regarding the status of active male homosexuals within the Orthodox community. R. Chaim Rapoport argues that such an individual can be considered at worst a mumar l'tayavon/hedonistic renegade, and at best a tinnok she'nishba/Jew captured and reared by non-Jews, who is not judged for his lack of observance.1 The child in this case is still an Orthodox Jew and should be treated with the same respect as before.

In most cases, the intermarriage is just a symptom of a larger rejection of Orthodox or halakhic doctrine. This Jew simply does not believe in halakha, or perhaps God. How should the halakhic Jew approach a skeptic?

Back in the days of the mishna, when Pharisees dominated the intellectual scene, such a skeptic would probably be labeled an apikorus. But it has been a long time since those days. Today, non-Orthodox and non-Jewish schools of philosophical dominate. We live in an open society, and the influences of the modern world, as well as other streams of Judaism, are mitigating factors. Elements such as Biblical criticism, or the new appreciation of p'shat, have a huge impact on Jewish thought. (Indeed, a truly halakhic point of view should also take these new circumstances, or panim chadashot, into general consideration.2) Even the Chazon Ish, who was by no means modern Orthodox, argued that the status of apikorus could no longer be applied in practice. He instead encourages outreach “with acts of love and affection.” My guess is that any rabbi you ask will say something similar.

From this perspective, a skeptic child’s intermarriage changes nothing. Indeed, the concerned parent should work overtime to avoid conflict and make his child feel loved. Many people, like my father, assume that there is no halakhically acceptable way to attend a mixed wedding. Don’t assume! Ask some rabbis first! In many cases, the concern of sh’lom bayit may override your anticipated chumrot/stringencies. If your rabbis bar you from attending, explain it in those terms and express your sadness at missing such an important occasion. After the marriage, open your doors to the intermarried partner and family. Invite them over for Shabbat dinner. Bring that family closer to the fold! Indeed, research suggests that 80% of children from all half-Jewish marriages are raised with some degree of Jewish identity.3 They must be considered in the category of k'rovei yisrael -- and potential converts.

What irritates the situation is that even educated men, rabbis who should be much smarter, like R. Dr. Norman Lamm, are behaving like non-halakhic alter kokers -- thinking with their tears, and not their brains! Criticizing Noah Feldman for marrying a woman he loves, a woman who probably encourages their children to explore their Jewish heritage... and he's never even met the woman! Was not Miriam stricken with leprosy for this kind of talk? R. Lamm should be ashamed of himself!

These Jews are taking their cues from Fiddler on the Roof -- from Tevya, not Torah! It's one thing for my "areligious" grandfather (my grandmother's term) to make intermarriage his Alamo thirty years ago. He was a Tevya. But the chief rabbi of a major modern Orthodox institution?

Halakhic mind?

HA!

This is not the tradition I have picked up through my years of dedicated learning. My tradition, the rabbis of Pirkei, know the forest for the trees. They value open-mindedness, compassion, sensitivity. They are students of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing it vigorously. They check their egos at the door, and live by the mantra that the Torah's ways are gentle ways, and all its paths are paths of peace. And if it not be so, remove me from this book You are writing!

For if we are not moving towards peace, where are we moving?

(Next time, I’ll investigate the classic argument against intermarriage: that it threatens the survival of the Jewish people.)

Notes:

1. R. Uri Cohen. "Relating to Orthodox Homosexuals: the Case for Compassion." Tradition 40:3, 2007. pp. 81.
2. There is a debate going on over the heart of Orthodox Judaism. Some think Orthodoxy is equivalent to Pharisaic or Rabbinic Judaism. Others, like me, have never seen it this way. We see Orthodoxy is a truth-seeking sect, devoted to doing what is true and what we believe God's will to be, based on all the available information. If we discover, for instance, that there is good reason to doubt the Oral Law, then Orthodox Judaism - by its very own standards - must correct these traditions post-haste.
3. R. Dr. Arthur Blecher, The New American Judaism, pp. 179.