[quote]The Torah does not specifically state anywhere that matrilineal descent should be used; however, there are several passages in the Torah where it is understood that the child of a Jewish woman and a non-Jewish man is a Jew, and several other passages where it is understood that the child of a non-Jewish woman and a Jewish man is not a Jew.

In Deuteronomy 7:1-5, in expressing the prohibition against intermarriage, G-d says “he [ie, the non-Jewish male spouse] will cause your child to turn away from Me and they will worship the gods of others.” No such concern is expressed about the child of a non-Jewish female spouse. From this, we infer that the child of a non-Jewish male spouse is Jewish (and can therefore be turned away from Judaism), but the child of a non-Jewish female spouse is not Jewish (and therefore turning away is not an issue).

Leviticus 24:10 speaks of the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian man as being “among the community of Israel” (ie, a Jew).

On the other hand, in Ezra 10:2-3, the Jews returning to Israel vowed to put aside their non-Jewish wives and the children born to those wives. They could not have put aside those children if those children were Jews.

That confirms [even though it’s a very tortuous argument] that the child of a Jewish girl and a non-Jewish boy will be Jewish. But from whence comes the opposite, that the child of a Jewish boy and a non-Jewish girl will NOT be Jewish?

TheDoctor wrote:
“I think this is a very reasonable question, and I am ashamed to say I don’t know the answer. Where in Torah does the tradition of matrilineal descent come from? And if it is not rooted directly in Torah, what is the Talmudic source for this?

Anyone?”

From ?h=174&o=137547[color=#006699]http://www.askmoses.com/article.html?h=174&o=137547[/color]

“Rabbi Latowicz: The Torah does not always state every law explicitly. In the case of Matrilineal Descent, the practice is derived from Deuteronomy 7: 4, “Because he will lead astray your son from be

But the Tanach does not talk about ordinary citizens either. It talks about very special, significant, and unusual people and situations. It also speaks of all the times where Torah laws were apparently broken, but since the situations were unusual, Hashem permitted it. For example, when He commanded us to kill although there was a commandment not to kill.

Most of the laws we follow are oral laws. That is Judaism. The written law is proof that there is an oral law. Part of the oral law is matrilineal descent just like the construction of tefillin and the method of kosher slaughter. We do not have reasons for why the laws are the way they are. We just follow them. We may try to justify the laws, but that is only for the intellectual exercise.

And so, as I mentioned before, do not expect DNA technology to change any laws.

For those who say: “David sinned, so why can’t I sin?” or “Jacob had two sisters for wives, so why can’t I”, such a person must first ask himself, “Am I anywhere near as great a man as David? Am I a king of Israel?” or “Am I a patriarch who is about to father one of the most significant dynasties on earth?”

No. I am nothing. I must follow ordinary law.

Clara

Since what we are talking about is patrilineal descent, this raises a question for me. The Bible almost invariably describes Jewish lineage as “A the son of B the son of C,” so how can anyone use the Bible as a basis to argue against patrilineal descent? You might use tradition and rabbinic interpretations and so on, but the Bible?

I agree that law and tradition are powerful weights, yet should be reviewed from time to time. Many times, new interpretations are found on points when they are re-examined in light of modernity.

As far as matrilieneal descent being key, I have an answer that satisfies me from my life experiences. I have many relatives that have entered into mixed marriages. In every single instance, the child’s religion is the same as the mother’s religion. While this wouldn’t automatically preclude patrilineal descent, it provides a strong argument for matrilineal descent being dominant.

Do I think that there would be a benefit if Jewish law conferred Jewish identity by either parent? There may be.

Do I think that it’s worth it for those who review and interpret the Law [and who will actually do so, and not just say "that’s the way it is, it’s not worth discussing] to look at this from time to time? Absolutely.

Do I think that the Law should be revised just because people agitate for it to be changed? No!

Just as the Committee on Laws and Standards in the Conservative Movement looked at issues such as women’s roles in prayer and leadership, and found legitimate ways to interpret the Law so as to allow this, and just as the Committee looked at issues such as whether non-Jews could participate in rituals such as Torah reading and could find NO legitimate way to interpret the Law so as to allow this, and just as the Committee looked at issues such as women’s ability to serve as witnesses and concluded that this was justifiable but if allowed would cause great disruption and chaos by creating situations where contracts would exist that not all would accept, those whom we look to for guidance should look at this issue, consider what specific laws pertain, the historic and cultural context in which it arose, and the implications both within their own sphere of Judaism and to Am Yisroel as a whole whether a change to patrilineal descent is both justifiable and desirable [and it needs to be both before considering such a change].

It’s not a matter of racism, it’s not a matter of popularity. Think of it as an issue before the Supreme Court. Is it a legitimate interpretation and is it a desirable interpration?