Jerusalem Talmud Bikkurim 1:4, 64a

Date: 360 CE to 400 CE

Centuries: 4th CE

Languages: Hebrew, Aramaic

Category: Jewish

Literary Genre: Talmud

Reference: Bikkurim 1:4, 64a

Title: Jerusalem Talmud

Commentary:

This passage of the Talmud discuses Mishnah Bikkurim 1:4. While converts to Judaism were considered equal to other Jews in most areas, this mishnah discusses two subjects that pertain to lineage where a distinction is made between Jews with longstanding Jewish ancestry and converts. The passage from the Jerusalem Talmud that discusses this mishnah tackles similar issues but comes to very different conclusions. In order to understand this Talmud’s line of reasoning, let us first look at the Mishnah:

These [persons] bring [an offering of first fruits] but do not recite [the declaration for offering first fruits, based on Deuteronomy 26:1-10]. The ger brings but does not recite since he cannot say: “[Today I declare to the Lord your God that I have come into the land] that the Lord swore to our fathers to give us” (Deuteronomy 26:3, based on NRSV). But if his mother were an Israelite (lit. from Israel), he brings and recites. When he (the ger) prays alone, he says: “O God of the fathers of Israel,” but when he [prays with others] in synagogue, he says: “O God of your fathers.” But if his mother were an Israelite (lit. from Israel), he says: “O God of our fathers.”

This section of the Mishnah addresses two issues: It opens by listing the ger among those who brings an offering of first fruits from their harvest, but may not recite the declaration. This mishnah explains that the ger is unable to recite this declaration since he cannot state: “I have come into the land that the Lord swore to our fathers to give us” (Deuteronomy 26:3, based on NRSV). Thus, although the ger is required to bring this offering to the Temple, he cannot refer to the patriarchs of Israel as his fathers since he has different ancestry. However, the Mishnah adds that when the ger’s mother is an Israelite, he can recite the declaration since his lineage may be considered linked to the ancestors of Israel through his mother. Second, what may a ger recite when Jews pray: “O God of our fathers”? The Mishnah distinguishes between private prayer and communal prayers in synagogue. While in private a ger may state: “O God of the fathers of Israel,” in synagogue he may say: “O God of your fathers.” The ger is not included in Israelite lineage in either case, yet, in synagogue this difference is emphasized in public, indicating that the conversion did not erase all differences between the ger and other Jews. Thus, although the ger participates in synagogue services, he should publicly mention that he does not have Israelite ancestry. However, as in the case of the ceremony for offering first fruits, if his mother is Israelite, he may say: “O God of our fathers.”

One of the main challenges to interpreting this Mishnah is posed by understanding the words: “But if his mother is an Israelite (lit. from Israel)” that are presented as a condition for the instructions “He brings and recites” and “He says: ‘O God of our fathers.’”  Does this stipulation refer to a convert whose mother is an Israelite? If so, in contrast to later halakhah, a son of an Israelite mother was required to convert to become recognized as a Jew. Alternatively, these words might refer to a son of an Israelite mother and a convert father. In that case, this text would signal that a second-generation convert is also considered a ger, yet he may recite the declaration and say “O God of our fathers” in reference to his mother’s lineage.

Section A of the Jerusalem Talmud discusses this matter although it is more concerned with whether a ger may recite “O God of our fathers” than whether a son of a Jewish mother needs to convert. The opening portion primarily refers to third- and fourth-generation amoraim, that is, sages who were active from the late third- to mid-fourth centuries: Rabbi Ḥiyyah bar Abba is a third-generation amora; Rabbi Yosi, Rabbi Yonah, Rabbi, and Rabbi Ḥizqiya are fourth-generation amoraim. Despite its mention of Rabbi, which usually applies to Rabbi Yehudah the patriarch, this is likely a scribal omission of the name of a particular amora since this passage seems focused on later generations. According to Elijah ben Solomon Zalman (also known as the Vilna Gaon), the scribe mistakenly wrote only “Rabbi,” when he should have copied “Rabbi Ḥiyyah bar Abba.” In addition to these sages, Binyamin bar Ashtor (or Astor) and his family are also introduced in this passage. We learn that the members of this family are gerim (converts) who descended from gerim; thus, they have a personal interest in this mishnah. Whereas the offering of first fruits was not practiced in that period, reciting “O God of our fathers” during prayer had practical implications.

Section A opens with two versions of a single teaching. Rabbi Yosi presents the first, ascribing it as a tradition that Binyamin bar Ashtor explicated before Rabbi Ḥiyyah bar Abba. According to this explanation, this mishnah refers to the son of a gentile and an Israelite woman who, in violation of Jewish law, had sexual intercourse with an Israelite woman (“a daughter of Israel”). Thus, this son (of an Israelite mother and a gentile father) may recite the declaration for offering first fruits and say “O God of our fathers” during prayer. However according to Rabbi Yonah, Rabbi (perhaps Ḥiyyah bar Abba) heard members of this family, who are gerim sons of gerim (converts who are sons of converts), recite “O God of our fathers” during prayer. At this point, the editorial stratum of the Talmud challenges the permissibility for Jews with such lineage to say “O God of our fathers”: “But we learned in the Mishnah: But if his mother is an Israelite (lit. from Israel) he says: ‘O God of our fathers’” (Mishnah Bikkurim 1:4); that is to say, gerim sons of gerim cannot recite “O God of our fathers.” The Talmud brings further support for the first version of this tradition by citing Rabbi Yosi once more, then presenting a statement credited to Rabbi Ḥizqiya in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyyah bar Abba which concludes that, according to Binyamin bar Ashtor, this mishnah discusses a converted son of a gentile father and an Israelite mother. Binyamin bar Ashtor’s explanation and the practice of his family members seems to support the assertion that second-generation gerim may say “O God of our fathers” since, according to his teaching, this mishnaic text does not discuss the children of gerim and, therefore, that prohibition does not apply to them (see Cohen, The Beginning, p. 314-324, for several explanations of Binyamin bar Ashtor’s interpretation of the Mishnah).

Section B cites Rabbi Zriqan who, in turn, cites Rabbi Ze‘ora (or Ze‘ira) – both third-generation amoraim who were active from the late third- to early fourth centuries. In this section, Rabbi Ze‘ora presents a three-part challenge to the stance that a convert who has a Jewish mother would say “O God of our fathers” during prayer or recite the declaration for first fruits: first, he asks whether this ger refers to different fathers, implying other than Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; then he rhetorically asks whether the convert himself is a descendant of those patriarchs from Genesis; and, finally, he questions whether God promised the land of Israel to women (following Deuteronomy 26:3). While his first two points may refer to first- and second-generation gerim, the third is related to the status of an Israelite mother. However, problems with the textual evidence for this section complicate this reading, casting doubts on its accuracy. While this section, if this reading is correct, challenges converts as members of Israelite lineage, the next section (C) supports the claim that gerim may trace their ancestry to Israel's patriarchs through Abraham.

Whereas Section A cites third- and fourth-generation amoraim and Section B refers to third-generation amoraim, Section C starts with a teaching attributed to Rabbi Yehudah, a tanna who was active in the second century, especially after the Bar Kokhba revolt. In contrast to the Mishnah, Rabbi Yehudah states that a ger – including the convert himself and, by logical extension, all offspring – may recite the declaration for offering first fruits since Abraham became the father of all nations. According to Saul Lieberman, in the Talmud, Rabbi Yehudah allows gerim to recite this declaration on the grounds that Abraham is the father of gerim (Tosefta Ki-Feshutah, vol. 2, p. 824). Rabbi Yehudah’s biblical proof text comes from the passage in Genesis where God promises ninety-nine-year-old Abraham: “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You shall be the ancestor of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you the ancestor of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you” (Genesis 17:4-6, NRSV). Significantly, in this context, God also commands Abraham regarding circumcision: “This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you” (Genesis 17:10-11, NRSV). According to the Mekhilta de Rabbi Ishmael, Neziqin parasha 18 (Horovitz-Rabin edition, p. 312), God instructed Abraham about circumcision at that advanced age to signal that converts may become Jewish at any age. Indeed, both the Mekhilta and the Jerusalem Talmud draw from this chapter of Genesis to support positive stances on conversion and welcome gerim. Rabbi Yehudah’s opinion accepts gerim as full members of the Israelite community since they can trace their lineage to Abraham, the father of all gentiles. Although Rabbi Yehudah’s teaching concerns the declaration for first fruits, it has immediate implications for prayer, in which a ger may say “O God of our fathers” (though it could be argued that gerim are related to Abraham but not Isaac and Jacob). Even though the practice of bringing first fruits ceased after the destruction of the Temple, full participation in synagogue liturgy would presumably have had a significant impact on each ger’s sense of belonging.

It is noteworthy that, in tannaitic texts, the same Rabbi Yehudah presents stringent opinions toward the integration of converts into Israel when lineage is at issue. So in Tosefta Bikkurim 1:2, we read:

ר' יהודה אומ' כל הגרים כולן מביאין ולא קורין בני קיני חתן משה מביאין וקורין שנ' והיה כי תלך עמנו 

Rabbi Yehudah says: All gerim bring [an offering of first fruits] but they do not recite [the declaration for that offering]. The descendants (lit. sons) of the Kenite, Moses' father-in-law, bring [an offering of first fruits] and recite [the declaration for that offering] since it is written [in Scripture]: “If you go with us, [whatever good the Lord does for us, the same we will do for you]” (Numbers 10:32, NRSV).

This Tosefta provides an explicit contrast to the opinion that is attributed to Rabbi Yehudah in the Jerusalem Talmud: “The ger (convert) himself brings [an offering of first fruits] and recites [the declaration for that offering, based on Deuteronomy 26:1-10].” From this tosefta, and especially from the discussion on the descendants of Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, it is clear that, for Rabbi Yehudah, the term ger not refers only to the individual who has converted to Judaism (first-generation converts) but it also applies to his offspring. Thus, as Shaye J. D. Cohen states: “According to R. Judah the status of convert (ger) is inherited in precisely the same way as the status of priest (kohen), Levite, and Israelite: just as the status of priest, Levite, and Israelite is inherited from the father, so too the status of convert is inherited from the father. The legal and social disabilities that apply to the convert father also apply to the offspring” (Beginning of Jewishness, p. 310).

Rabbi Yehudah’s perspective in this tosefta is consistent with his view in Mishnah Qiddushin 4:6, which addresses the marriage of a daughter of gerim and a priest. The Jewish priesthood was transmitted from father to son and its members were permitted to marry women who belonged to three categories: Israelites, priests and Levites (Mishnah Qiddushin 4:1; with additional prohibitions like a divorced woman for a regular priest, and a widow for a high priest, following Leviticus 21:7, 14). Whereas the prevailing view in rabbinic texts is that priests cannot marry female converts, no consensus is conveyed regarding the daughters of converts. Mishnah Qiddushin 4:6-7 presents three opinions on this issue, with Rabbi Yehudah holding the most stringent position among them. He rules that such a womancannot marry a priest and, moreover, none of the ger’s offspring will ever be able to marry a priest. According to this view, Israelite lineage is transmitted from a father to his offspring; thus, full membership in Israel requires an Israelite father. By contrast, the other rabbis mentioned in this mishnah offer rulings that allow easier integration of gerim: Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya‘aqov claims that, in the case of children of gerim, one Israelite parent is enough for an individual to be considered an Israelite and for a woman to be eligible to marry a priest; Rabbi Yose takes a more lenient position by contending that even a daughter who is born to two gerim is recognized as an Israelite in all respects and is suitable to marry a priest. Therefore, Rabbi Yehudah’s view is significantly stricter in this context.

The contrast between these tannaitic texts and Jerusalem Talmud Bikkurim 1:4, 64a is striking. According to the Talmud, Rabbi Yehudah rules that a convert may trace his lineage back to Abraham and, consequently, he may recite the declaration for offering first fruits. If the transmission of sages’ names in these texts is accurate, it is interesting to compare this difference (interestingly, a portion of Rabbi Yehudah’s teaching from the Jerusalem Talmud appears in Tosefta Berakhot 1:12, albeit without the passage “The ger himself brings and recites” and without attribution to Rabbi Yehudah).

Following Rabbi Yehudah’s teaching, the Talmud cites two prominent rabbis who support his halakhic stance: first Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, a first-generation amora who was active in the first half of the third century; then Rabbi Abbahu, a third-generation amora who was active in the late third- and early fourth century. This closing section of our sugya seems to suggest that the Jerusalem Talmud supports Rabbi Yehudah’s stance over the teaching upheld in the Mishnah. Although this talmudic source includes opinions that object to a ger’s participation in these two aspects of Jewish religious life (in A and B), and especially to saying “O God of our fathers,” which has practical implications for gerim in this period, its closing portion (C) draws a completely different conclusion: gerim are considered children of Abraham and, thereby, can trace their lineage back to the patriarchs of Israel.

This text discusses the process of integrating recently converted Jews into Israel. The ability of new “citizens” to fully participate in their new nation was pertinent to both Romans and Jews. This talmudic source devotes particular attention to the personal status of newcomers and their lineage. This sugya (talmudic unit) demonstrates the Talmud’s interest in facilitating the integration of converts into Israel and to making it as easy as possible within the confines of halakhah.