Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question  — from The New York Times

November 8th, 2009 § 7

The Supreme Court in Eng­land is set to rule by the end of this year on a case involv­ing a ques­tion that has vexed Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ties through­out the world for cen­turies: Who is a Jew? The case began because a 12-year-old boy whose father was born Jew­ish and whose mother con­verted to Judaism was denied admis­sion to an Ortho­dox Jew­ish high school on the grounds that, because his mother was con­verted not in an Ortho­dox syn­a­gogue, but in what the Times arti­cle refers to as a “pro­gres­sive syn­a­gogue” (which I assume cor­re­sponds to some­thing like Reform here in the States), she is not really Jew­ish; and so, there­fore, nei­ther is he. The boy’s fam­ily decided to sue the school for dis­crim­i­na­tion and lost. The Court of Appeal, how­ever, reversed that deci­sion on grounds that ques­tion one of the foun­da­tional tenets of Jew­ish iden­tity: that, short of con­ver­sion, the only way one can be Jew­ish is to have been born to a Jew­ish mother.

In an explo­sive deci­sion, the court con­cluded that bas­ing school admis­sions on a clas­sic test of Judaism — whether one’s mother is Jew­ish — was by def­i­n­i­tion dis­crim­i­na­tory. Whether the ratio­nale was “benign or malig­nant, the­o­log­i­cal or suprema­cist,” the court wrote, “makes it no less and no more unlawful.”

The case rested on whether the school’s test of Jew­ish­ness was based on reli­gion, which would be legal, or on race or eth­nic­ity, which would not. The court ruled that it was an eth­nic test because it con­cerned the sta­tus of M’s [which is how the boy is referred to in court doc­u­ments] mother rather than whether M con­sid­ered him­self Jew­ish and prac­ticed Judaism.

“The require­ment that if a pupil is to qual­ify for admis­sion his mother must be Jew­ish, whether by descent or con­ver­sion, is a test of eth­nic­ity which con­tra­venes the Race Rela­tions Act,” the court said. It added that while it was fair that Jew­ish schools should give pref­er­ence to Jew­ish chil­dren, the admis­sions cri­te­ria must depend not on fam­ily ties, but “on faith, how­ever defined.”

The same rea­son­ing would apply to a Chris­t­ian school that “refused to admit a child on the ground that, albeit prac­tic­ing Chris­tians, the child’s fam­ily were of Jew­ish ori­gin,” the court said. (via Who Is a Jew? Court Rul­ing in Britain Raises Ques­tion — NYTimes​.com.)

Is Jew­ish a reli­gious or an eth­nic iden­tity? I was always taught it is both. Anti­semites, on the other hand, have almost always argued oth­er­wise. For the Nazis, Jew­ish was racial; go back fur­ther, and you find the Catholic Church treat­ing Jew­ish as if it were a bio­log­i­cal char­ac­ter­is­tic. Jew­ish men, for exam­ple, were under­stood to men­stru­ate; Jews in gen­eral were believed inca­pable of per­ceiv­ing the world accu­rately, of telling the truth in any lan­guage other than Hebrew, even of learn­ing any lan­guage other than Hebrew – all because of the inher­ent defi­cien­cies they suf­fered from as Jews. Even Jews who con­verted to Catholi­cism could not fully be trusted to have become sin­cere Chris­tians, peo­ple at the time believed, because “once a Jew always a Jew,” and all it took to send a Jew­ish con­vert to be burned at the stake, or oth­er­wise tor­tured and put to death, was for some­one to imply that he or she was still, secretly, Jew­ish.

That Jews should trace their Jew­ish­ness back through their moth­ers, accord­ing to the rab­bis, is com­manded in the Torah. Here are the rel­e­vant verses from Deuteron­omy 7:

1. When the Lord the God shall bring thee into the land wither thou goest to pos­sess it, and shall cast out many nations before thee, the Hit­tite, and the Gir­gashite, 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 the Lord thy God shall deliver them up before thee, and thous 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 for thy son. 4. For he will turn away thy son from fol­low­ing Me, that they may serve other gods; so will the anger of the Lord be kin­dled against you, and He will destroy thee quickly. (Empha­sis mine.)

The com­men­ta­tor Rashi explains the pas­sage I have ital­i­cized as fol­lows. (I am quot­ing here and above from The Pen­ta­teuch and Rashi’s Com­men­tary: A Lin­ear Trans­la­tion into Eng­lish, pub­lished in 1950 by S. S. & R. Pub­lish­ing, Brook­lyn, NY.)

For he will turn away thy son from fol­low­ing Me: [Rashi is here para­phras­ing the pas­sage from the Torah:] The son of a hea­then, if he will marry your daugh­ter, will turn away your son, which your daugh­ter will bear him, from fol­low­ing Me. So [here begins Rashi’s com­men­tary], we learn that your daughter’s son that is born of a hea­then is con­sid­ered your son; but the son of your son that is born of a hea­then woman is not con­sid­ered your son, but her son, for it is not stated regard­ing his [the heathen’s] daugh­ter: “Thou shalt not take…for she will turn away thy son from fol­low­ing Me.” (Empha­sis mine)

In other words, a son born to your (Jew­ish) son and a non-Jewish woman does not count as a mem­ber of your fam­ily, i.e., that child is not con­sid­ered Jew­ish, and so it is not nec­es­sary to state the pos­si­bil­ity that she will turn the child away from her or his Jew­ish her­itage. One spiritual/mystical expla­na­tion that is given for this line of think­ing is as follows:

Jew­ish­ness is not in our DNA. It is in our soul. The rea­son it is passed down through the mater­nal line is not just because it is eas­ier to iden­tify who your mother is. It is because the soul iden­tity is more directly shaped by the mother than the father.

From a purely phys­i­cal per­spec­tive, a child is more directly con­nected to their mother. The father’s con­tri­bu­tion to the pro­duc­tion of a child is instan­ta­neous and remote. The mother, on the other hand, gives her very self to the child . The child is con­ceived inside the mother, devel­ops inside the mother, is sus­tained and nour­ished by the mother, and is born from the mother.

This is not to say that a father and child are not inti­mately attached. Of course they are. But as deep and essen­tial as the bond between father and child may be, the child’s actual body was never a part of her father’s body. But she was a part of her mother. Every child begins as an exten­sion of their mother’s body.

This is a sim­ple fact. It doesn’t mean she will be closer to her mother, or more sim­i­lar to her mother, or fol­low her mother’s ways. We are not dis­cussing the emo­tional bond between par­ent and child, but rather the nat­ural phys­i­cal bond. There is a more direct phys­i­cal link between mother and child, because a child starts off as a part of her mother.

The body and its work­ings are a mir­ror image of the work­ings of the soul. The phys­i­cal world is a par­al­lel of the spir­i­tual world. And so, the direct phys­i­cal link between mother and child is a reflec­tion of a soul link between them. While the father’s soul con­tributes to the iden­tity of the child’s soul, it is the mother’s soul that actu­ally defines it. If the mother has a Jew­ish soul, the child does too.

If the mother is not Jew­ish but the father is, his Jew­ish soul will not be extended to the child. There may be a spark of Jew­ish­ness there, but if it was not ges­tated in a Jew­ish mother, the child will have to go through con­ver­sion for their Jew­ish­ness to be activated.

Jew­ish­ness is passed down by the mother because being Jew­ish is a spir­i­tual iden­tity, it defines our very being. And our very being we get from our mother, both in body and in soul. (Via Chabad.)

This expla­na­tion essen­tial­izes Jew­ish in a way that would have been very famil­iar to the medieval Church, I think, and I imag­ine the Nazis as well, to the degree that any of them accepted the notion of a soul, would have endorsed it as well. I think any­one who believes in the neces­sity of keep­ing church and state sep­a­rate, how­ever, would be rightly trou­bled if a sec­u­lar court were to accept such an expla­na­tion for why the actions of the Ortho­dox High School in Eng­land refused admis­sion to M. (I should be clear that I have not read the court doc­u­ments and so I don’t know if this expla­na­tion even entered into the school’s argu­ment.) More to the point, if you read the pas­sage from Deuteron­omy with­out the mys­ti­cal expla­na­tion, it’s hard to see matri­lin­eal descent as any­thing other than a ques­tion of ethnicity.

The more I think about the ques­tions raised by this case, the dizzier I get. I don’t know British law; I don’t know the Race Rela­tions Act; I don’t what the legal stand­ing of M’s family’s suit would be here in the States. Indeed, I think the idea of a court rul­ing on what I have always thought of as a reli­gious ques­tion is kind of scary. If the courts can rule on this, then what other ques­tions that have tra­di­tion­ally been han­dled within reli­gious com­mu­ni­ties by the fol­low­ers of the faith in ques­tion might the courts and then the gov­ern­ment sud­denly have juris­dic­tion over? What hap­pens then to our sep­a­ra­tion of Church and State. Then there is the part of me that says the legal ques­tion is almost beside the point. The larger ques­tion is who gets to define the cri­te­ria by which some­one is con­sid­ered Jew­ish by other Jews? If we fol­low the rea­son­ing of the Ortho­dox, aren’t we (and I mean here the Jews) say­ing that it’s okay for us to dis­crim­i­nate within our own com­mu­nity in a way that we would never accept were the dis­crim­i­na­tion racial, say, or eth­nic and tak­ing place out­side the community?

Tagged: , , , ,

§ 7 Responses to “Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question  — from The New York Times”

  • Humans says:

    Who is a Jew can be used wrong in many ways.

    NEVADA SUPREME COURT CASE “United States of Amer­ica” GOING ON: THIS HATE CRIME RACIST ACTIVITY THE SAME AS HITLERS LAWS WERE OF
    “WHO IS A JEW”
    IS GOING ON EVERYWHERE BY CHABAD.

    WHO WANTS HITLERS LAWS AROUND AGAIN CHABAD?

    IN LAS VEGAS FEDERAL COURTS A CONVICTED SEX OFFENDER IS ALLOWED TO HIDE IN BANKRUPTCY.

    WHY? SO THE VICTIMS HAVE NOTHING LEFT IN COURT TO GO FORWARD ON THE ISSUES OF RAPE AND “WHO IS A JEW” RACIST INVESTIGATIONS.

    IN LAS VEGAS THAT IS HOW YOU GET A JUDGMENT ON VICTIMS OF HATE LAWS.

    Chabad Motto? If At First You Don’t Suc­ceed, Sue the Victim

    A Chabad man serves as the haz­zan of a Chabad syn­a­gogue. Sev­eral years ago, out­side another syn­a­gogue after a com­mu­nity event, the Chabad haz­zan sex­u­ally assaults a woman who is a mem­ber of the Chabad syn­a­gogue. He is even­tu­ally arrested and pleaded guilty to a mis­de­meanor charge of lewd con­duct. He is sen­tenced, serves a very brief time, is given pro­ba­tion and com­mu­nity service.

    Mean­while, the vic­tim civilly sues Chabad, in part because she claims Chabad shel­tered the haz­zan. Now Chabad has sought a judg­ment against the vic­tim for more than $175,000 in attor­neys’ fees, and a judge is about to grant that.

    The Chabad? Las Vegas, Nevada. The Rabbi? She Harlig. The haz­zan? Michael Segel­stein. As Jew­ish Sur­vivors notes:

    Rabbi Harlig is attempt­ing to sue a rape vic­tim for attor­ney fees. This is a rape vic­tim of a con­victed sex offender who is on the national sex offender list.

    Imme­di­ately after the arrest, Rabbi Harlig falsely claimed this vic­tim – who worked in the synagogue’s kitchen – was not Jew­ish. She went to the RCA’s beit din. They inves­ti­gated and found Rabbi Harlig’s claim false. The woman is the daugh­ter of a Jew­ish holo­caust sur­vivor from Vienna, Aus­tria. The beit din issued her a doc­u­ment ver­i­fy­ing her Jew­ish­ness. But, dur­ing the time the beit din was inves­ti­gat­ing Rabbi Harlig’s false claims, this woman’s teenage son – a very active syn­a­gogue goer and par­tic­i­pant – was forced to sit in the back of the syn­a­gogue. He was banned from receiv­ing aliyot or lead­ing ser­vices. And he was shunned by other mem­bers, as was his mother, appar­ently at the direc­tion of Rabbi Harlig.

    And the man who attempted to rape this woman? He is a proud mem­ber of Chabad to this day, lead­ing ser­vices and fully par­tic­i­pat­ing in syn­a­gogue life.

    A dou­ble stan­dard? You bet it is. And that dou­ble stan­dard is sanc­tioned by and orches­trated by Chabad-Lubavitch.

    • I am going to leave this com­ment up, Humans, to give you a chance to post some links to sub­stan­ti­ate the claims you are mak­ing. If you don’t do that, I will remove the com­ment since, as you’ve writ­ten it, it appears to be noth­ing more than a smear against Chabad – of which, I will add, I am no great fan, but that doesn’t mean that I think accu­sa­tions like yours should be allowed to stand with­out substantiation.

  • Humans says:

    Richard, Thank You very we can do this. I agree.

    Case of Can­tor Michael Segel­stein (Las Vegas, NV)
    It appears that Michael Segel­stein is an hon­ored mem­ber of Chabad of South­ern Nevada. Please con­tact Rabbi Shea Harlig and let your voice be heard! …
    http://​www​.theaware​ness​cen​ter​.org/​s​e​g​e​l​s​t​e​i​n​_​m​i​c​h​a​e​l​.​h​tml — Cached

    MICHAEL SEGELSTEIN — Florida Sex­ual Offender
    Name: MICHAEL SEGELSTEIN. Sta­tus: Released — Required to Reg­is­ter. Depart­ment of Cor­rec­tions #: Not Avail­able Search the Dept of Cor­rec­tions Web­site …
    offender​.fdle​.state​.fl​.us/​o​f​f​e​n​d​e​r​/​f​l​y​e​r​.​d​o​?​p​e​r​s​o​n​I​d​=​3​6​939

  • Humans says:

    No human needs to smear Chabad­nicks, they are quiet well at prov­ing what they do even inside of The United States now.

    Please ask “Rabbi Krin­sky” at head­quar­ters in Crown Heights, and his power rul­ing group how they make money off “Safeco Amer­i­can Ultra Reli­gious Sex­ual Molesta­tion Pol­icy” threw lawyers who take the case against “Who Is A Jew and the sex vic­tims” they receive kick­back ten per­cent profit off the lawyers fees?

    They call them­selves Torah Jews?

    Please call nvscclerk@​nvcourts.​nv.​gov
    Tele­phone: {775) 684‑1600 (Car­son City) how­ever they “guard the case under secrecy under the orders of a Con­gress per­son and sen­a­tor” who they give or allow any right to that infor­ma­tion to but here is a start with infor­ma­tion and proof and can be obtained threw the Free­dom Of Infor­ma­tion Act»> Secret block­ing any media to like Com­mu­nist you know.

    CASE NO. 49341
    THE STATE OF SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

    ON APPEAL FROM THE EIGHT JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, CLARK COUNTY NEVADA CASE NO. A466121

    You see one can use “Who Is A Jew Ques­tion” for many evil was as the Nurem­berg laws were revered and used to hurt Jews.

    That law of Who Is A Jew is being used against Jews by Chabad to dis­credit vic­tims of sex crimes they choose to profit off of.

    Who wants that law around racist and big­ots sim­ple and plain?

  • Humans says:

    Richard, make sure you see speak­ing “pray­ing” at the Sen­ate and Con­gress floor video.

    Polit­i­cal rules Las Vegas Judaical sys­tem even when they know about a sex crimes with a conviction.

    Sen­a­tor Harry Reid and his son Rory Reid are a share­holder in the law firm “Lionel Sawyer and Collins” who pro­tected them. Great honor bestowed as they all share in the prof­its off “WHo Is A Jew and sex crimes” where the vic­tim almost died by hours.

    It is “OK for a Ortho­dox Beth Din” to do inves­ti­ga­tions. But when Chabad Rab­bis says the Beth Din rul­ing they are against. Then have non Beth Din lawyers and Safeco Amer­i­can Insur­ance pay lawyers of the pub­lic Court and in the Amer­i­can Judaical sys­tem start doing inves­ti­ga­tions it is a human rights abuse and dan­ger­ous for all Jews.

    Chabad of South­ern Nevada
    For more infor­ma­tion please call Chabad at 259‑0770. This pro­gram was made pos­si­ble through a grant from the UJC/Jewish Fed­er­a­tion of Las Vegas …
    http://​www​.chabadlv​.org/ — Cached — Sim­i­lar

  • Humans says:

    Richard one last say the case in Eng­land started after the cou­ple left Israel he was from a fish­er­man fam­ily. She con­verted told the Beth Din she had no mar­riage planned. After she mar­ried the Beth Din in Israel said because they were not informed she had a love and he is a Cohen, and a Cohen should not have mar­ried a con­vert. If she left Israel she was no longer Jew­ish so her chil­dren either. {I do not agree with this but I’M not a Beth Din} how­ever the suf­fer­ing for the chil­dren was hor­ri­ble ter­ri­ble abuse and this causes hate against Jews. From the non Jew­ish side of the fam­ily as it makes Jews look racist and an insult to the non Jew­ish family.

    After mov­ing back to Eng­land her Mother took the chil­dren to the yeshiva school and a “Chabad­nick woman” over heard the word “CONVERTS” and then she ran report­ing it caus­ing trou­ble. After that the inves­ti­ga­tion of “Who Is A Jew” started. Due to the rea­son above the chil­dren were thrown out of the school.

    This case has been going on well over nine years as the case in Nevada to.

    I will try to get the case from Eng­land that was reported in Hebrew in Israel back many years ago for you.

    Chabad receives money from State and Fed­eral funds to as the case in Eng­land. Because they receive money from the Gov­ern­ment they have a say in the race issue.

    The case in Las Vegas should enter the Fed­eral sys­tem under a new suit.

What's this?

You are currently reading Who Is a Jew? Court Ruling in Britain Raises Question  — from The New York Times at Richard Jeffrey Newman.

meta