The conversations that pop up in the modern-day news cycle about antisemitism, Israeli history and Jewish identity lead many scholars back to a centuries-old discussion. The question surrounding whether Judaism categorically fits more as an ethnicity or a religion has captivated scholars in sociology and theology for many centuries, and the debate often approaches the question from an anthropological and cultural perspective. However, as someone who considers himself to be a practicing member of the religious Jewish community, I’ve found myself curious as to how Jewish Halachic authorities have raised this question and discussed the possible ramifications of its answer. Specifically, within the vast discussions of Jewish law regarding converts, there are interesting insights on how the Jewish faith grapples with being a religion that is intrinsically tied to a particular lineage.
The dilemma in this realm of Jewish practice is clear: a person born into a different faith who then converts to Judaism is obligated in the same commandments and practices as someone born Jewish, but the person born Jewish has the connection with their heritage dating back to the forefathers and foremothers in the Torah. The convert does not have such a connection.
The Mishnah Bikkurim 1:4 discusses the laws surrounding the bringing of first fruits to the Temple, and specifies that a convert is not permitted to recite the traditional declaration made when presenting the fruits “because he cannot say, ‘which the Lord swore to our fathers to give to us (i.e. Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov).” Since a convert has not biologically descended from the forefathers, the Mishnah argues that a convert cannot honestly make this declaration. In this interpretation, ‘Jewishness’ seems inherently tied to genealogy and ancestry becomes a prerequisite for certain elements of Jewish tradition Like this declaration, a convert’s lack of lineage seems to have practical implications on Jewish practices.
Despite this, the Jerusalem Talmud in Bikkurim 1:4:5 presents a contrary view by Rabbi Yehudah, who challenges the Mishnah’s limitation. Rabbi Yehudah rules that a convert may indeed make the declaration of bikkurim, even though they are not a physical descendant of the patriarchs. By virtue of joining the Jewish people, says Rabbi Yehudah, a convert becomes an inheritor of the promises made to the forefathers and earns the right to make the declaration regardless of who their ancestors were.
Rabbi Yehudah’s perspective seems to resonate with other attitudes expressed throughout the Gemara regarding the status of converts in the Jewish faith. Yevamot 47b discusses the process of conversion and ultimately declares that “once a person has converted, he is like a Jew in every regard.” The Talmud specifies that even if the converted Jew reverts back to behaving like a gentile in every way, they remain Jewish regardless, and their betrothal to a Jewish spouse would be a valid Jewish marriage capable of bearing valid Jewish children.
Additionally, the notion of spiritual lineage is further reinforced in Brachot 13a where it is written that Avram’s name was changed to Avraham to indicate him becoming “the father of the entire world,” including the multitude of nations surrounding him. This positions Avraham not just as the biological ancestor of the Jewish people, but as a father to all who choose to follow in his footsteps—a broadened view on Jewish identity that particularly encapsulates members of the Jewish faith without a biological connection to the Abrahamic lineage. This understanding seems to align with Rabbi Yehudah’s perspective on bikkurim. A convert is as much a descendant of Avraham as a biological Jew, because Avraham’s legacy transcends genetics, and can indeed declare that the forefathers of Judaism are their forefathers as well.
Ultimately, the Tosafot’s commentary on Baba Batra 81a:8 rules in favor of Rabbi Yehudah’s position over that of the Mishnah and affirms that a convert is fully included in the heritage of the Jewish people. By converting, an individual not only accepts the commandments and beliefs of Judaism but also seemingly inherits the history and promises given to the forefathers. The convert becomes a full-fledged member of the Jewish people in doing so and is no less legitimate than someone born into the community. Now, while this seems to be the view of the Tosafot within the scope of this Halachic debate, another notable Rishon pronounced this principle in a more universal sense.
Ovadiah, a former priest who converted to Judaism and embraced the religion, once wrote to the Rambam with a question: Could he, as a convert, recite certain prayers that include phrases like “our God and God of our fathers” or otherwise refer to the biological connection of Jews to their ancestry in prayer, even though he did not have the biological connection? In a now-famous letter, the Rambam responded unequivocally. He affirmed that Ovadiah, like any other Jew, could and should use these expressions, and further emphasized that Ovadiah was no different from a Jew with biological ties to the Jewish ancestry. He wrote to Ovadiah,
“since you have come under the wings of the Divine Presence and confessed the Lord, no difference exists between you and us, and all miracles done to us have been done as it were to us and to you.”
This position ties directly into the concept of Avraham as the “father of the entire world” as mentioned in Brachot 13a, and in the broader context of the halachic debate, strengthens the argument that converts are fully part of the Jewish people. The commitment to follow God and his commandments, and embrace the covenant of the Jewish faith, is what defines Jewishness. A biological connection to Jewish ancestors, while conceptually significant to Jewish rituals and prayer, ultimately does not separate Jews from one another.
Now, this conclusion does not precisely answer all the questions posed by the ethnic-religious debate. At the end of the day, with modern genealogical technology, sects of Judaism can undeniably be traced in people with a shared ethnic origin, and Judaism is often classified as an ethno-religion to illustrate its dual nature. This position has proven to be particularly influential over the last decade in the United States, as the pretense of Jews having a shared national origin has been used to protect antisemitism under the U.S. Civil Rights Act, entitling Jews to the same legal protections as any other race, color, or nationality.
The Halachic conclusion clarifies an important caveat to the ethno-religious conversation, though. While Judaism may have its roots both in faith and in national origin, these two aspects of the Jewish self do not rely on each other to make Judaism a valid identity. The Jewish faith fully embraces converts and grants them religious rights and responsibilities regardless of genealogy. At the same time, a person of Jewish descent who does not actively practice the faith is still societally entitled to the Jewish title and legal protections based on their national origin. The Gemara in Yevamot 47b states that the convert fully remains a Jew forever, even if they revert back to non-Jewish practices—so too, a person born to a Jewish mother but does not actively practice the religion remains a member of the nation in the same way. Because of their biological tether to the Jewish community, they will always be a Jew, in the same way a convert gains a spiritual tether to the same community. As the Rambam would say, these people are the children of Israel all the same, and will always have a seat at the Shabbas table.
