YESHIVAT HAR ETZION VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH PROJECT(VBM)
**************************************************************
TALMUDIC METHODOLOGY
by Rav Moshe Taragin
The Process of Geirut
The theme of geirut is central to the yom tov of Shavuot.
The moment of matan Torah was marked by a national conversion
punctuated by the acceptance of mitzvot through the
declaration, "na'aseh ve-nishma." To this end we read
Megillat Ruth because it chronicles, among other things, the
righteous conversion of Ruth. Ruth's conversion is indeed the
earliest record of a sincere conversion (in contrast with the
Giv'onim whose conversion in Sefer Yehoshua was motivated by
less than sincere motives). This article will explore several
aspects of the halakhic process of geirut.
The gemara in Keritut (9a) derives the process of geirut
from the manner in which our ancestors converted at Har Sinai.
The gemara states that the model for entering a berit (the
historical covenant between the Jewish people and Ha-kadosh
Barukh Hu culminating in matan Torah) is mila (circumcision),
tevila (immersion in a mikva), and hartza'at damim (a korban).
These three exercises were performed by our forefathers prior
to, or during, the events at Har Sinai (there is some
disagreement between Rashi and the Ramban regarding whether
the korban was offered before Har Sinai, in parashat Yitro, or
after, in parashat Mishpatim). Given this precedent, the
process of geirut has crystallized as a three-staged process.
As we have seen in the past, whenever multiple steps are
necessary to effect one desired halakhic state, the
interrelationship and degree of meshing among those steps must
be carefully scrutinized. The context of this article does
not allow a full amplification of all three factors. Being
that the actual korban is not me'akev, i.e., its absence does
not hinder the process - when there is no beit ha-mikdash we
suspend this requirement entirely - we can safely assume that
the heart of geirut lies in the mila and tevila. What is the
relationship between these two components?
(NOTE: This article also does not address the role of kabbalat
ha-mitzvot; obviously, sincere acceptance of Torah and mitzvot
is essential for complete geirut. This article explores only
the physical constituents of geirut.
Our initial question revolves around the relationship
between mila and tevila. Are they equal partners combining to
effect the geirut, or do we assign greater weight to one of
the factors and view the other as merely ancillary? If the
latter is the case, which factor is dominant and which
subsidiary? Generally, the simplest way to analyze this case
is by examining the issue of sequence. Does it matter which
of the two is performed first? If we discover the necessity
of a certain order, we might suggest that mila and tevila are
not merely a combination of two separate factors, producing
one result. Were that truly the case, the order of their
performance would be immaterial.
The gemara in Yevamot (47b) relates that after performing
mila, the ger (convert) is given time to recover from this
minor surgery before concluding his conversion with tevila.
This statement prompts the Rishonim to ask, why cannot the
tevila be performed prior to the mila so that immediately
afterwards, the ger might be considered a Jew? The Ramban in
Yevamot offers an answer with a practical slant: We schedule
mila first to ferret out counterfeit geirim. Were tevila to
be the first step, many would start the process without being
fully committed. In this respect mila acts as a deterrent.
However, Ramban admits that since this is only a practical
consideration, were a ger to immerse first and perform mila
afterward, his conversion would be perfectly valid. In his
view, there is no mandatory sequence of mila and tevila.
In contrast to the Ramban, the Rashba suggests that the
order is essential. According to the Rashba, the ESSENCE of
geirut is actually the tevila. The mila is merely a
preparatory stage for the tevila and is intended to remove
"areilut" (the state of having a foreskin) - a state which
impedes the tevila. The two are not independent factors;
rather the mila readies the person physically so that the
tevila can have the desired effect. As such, one who performs
tevila prior to mila has performed a meaningless conversion.
As an "arel," his tevila is invalid; after mila, however, he
is primed to undergo tevila which will confer upon him the
status of a Jew.
SUMMARY:
-----------------
We have studied two divergent views regarding the
interrelationship between mila and tevila. According to the
Rashba, the tevila is the principal factor and the mila is
auxiliary, preparing the person for a proper tevila. Hence,
the mila must precede the tevila. In contrast, one might view
the two as working independently and combining to instill
kedushat Yisrael. If so, the particular order of their
performance would not be crucial.
To inspect this issue we might examine, among other
things, the exact FORM of mila which is necessary. If mila is
a full-fledged participant in the process, a high standard
might be required for it. If it merely serves to remove the
areilut in preparation for tevila (which ITSELF effects the
entire geirut), we might suffice with minimal mila. Of
course, the most blatant example is that of a ger who has
already been circumcised as a Gentile. Would he require an
additional mila (hatafat dam berit - removing a drop of blood)
during his geirut? This issue is debated by Beit Shammai and
Beit Hillel in the gemara (Shabbat 135, according to the
interpretation of Rav Shimon ben Elazar). Possibly, their
machloket revolves around our very question. If mila is an
active participant in effecting the geirut it must be
performed as part of EVERY conversion. If the ger already has
been circumcised prior to his conversion, a substitute mila
must be implemented - i.e., hatafat dam berit. If, however,
mila's role is simply to remove areilut prior to tevila, it
might be superfluous in the case of the Gentile who is not
technically an arel due to his previous circumcision. (Of
course, we might have to question whether areilut is for our
purposes a purely physical condition or also a halakhic one.
How do we define a non-Jew who has been circumcised? Even
though he is certainly an arel regarding the eating of the
korban pesach, is he also necessarily an arel regarding the
efficacy of tevila?)
A similar question might involve mila which was not
performed in the context of the mitzva. The aforementioned
gemara in Keritut mentions that our ancestors were circumcised
prior to matan Torah. This is consistent with the fact that
they did not receive mila in Mitzrayim. What about the benei
Levi who were allowed to perform mila in Mizrayim - did they
require hatafat dam berit as part of their geirut at Har
Sinai? An act of mila had been performed, true, but not as a
part of their conversion. The Ramban in Yevamot (46a) claims
that they did not have to perform hatafat dam berit since they
were not areilim; they performed mila and did so under the
rubric of a mitzva (so that they are not physical areilim nor
are they halakhic areilim). Possibly, this supports the
Rashba's position that mila merely removes the areilut so that
the tevila can be valid. In contrast, the Rambam (quoted by
the Ramban) maintains that benei Levi WERE required to perform
hatafat dam berit. Mila, then, is not merely a prefatory
stage for tevila; rather it is one of the pivotal components
of geirut. Either mila or a substitute must be performed as
part of every process of conversion.
The gemara in Yevamot (71a) raises an additional
question. Can the mila of a ger be performed at night? The
basis for this question is the fact that the normal mitzva of
mila can only be performed during the day. If the role of the
mila were merely to remove areilut leading up to tevila, one
would have no reason whatsoever to consider a nighttime mila
invalid. If, however, the mila is an integrated aspect of the
process of geirut, one can indeed question the status of
nighttime mila. (The question remains an open one if one
chooses to view mila in the latter fashion. The fact that the
standard mitzva of mila is invalid at night does not
necessarily imply that mila as a component of geirut is
similarly restricted. However, the very possibility of
voiding nighttime mila seems plausible only if we consider
mila an integral aspect of geirut.)
The gemara in Yevamot (46b) claims that tevila must be
performed during the day. Since conversion is considered a
"judgment" and requires a beit din, it is subject to the
standard rule that beit din only functions during the day (ein
danin ba-laila). Tosafot question this halakha. If the mila
was already performed during the day why cannot the conclusion
of conversion - the tevila - be performed at night? After
all, the principle of "gomrin din be-leilav' allows any
judgment which began during the day to be concluded at night.
Accordingly, question Tosafot, if mila constitutes the first
stage of the process and tevila its conclusion, the latter
procedure should be valid at night. Evidently, Tosafot
disagree with the Rashba and view the mila as the inception of
the ACTUAL geirut process. According to the Rashba the
question is immaterial, since mila is not really a part of the
conversion process - it is merely preparatory.
An interesting gemara in Yevamot (71a) discusses those
who may eat of the korban pesach. According to one opinion a
special pasuk in parashat Bo, "Toshav ve-sakhir lo yokhal bo"
(Shemot 12:45) excludes a ger who had mila but no tevila from
eating a korban pesach. The Rashba questions the need for
such a limud. After all, we already know that geirut is not
complete until both mila and tevila have been executed.
Hence, a ger who has been circumcised without tevila is no
different from a non-Jew (who was explicitly excluded by the
Torah earlier, in verse 3). The Rashba answers that without
our pasuk we might have thought that a ger who has completed
mila, even without having performed tevila, "has partially
begun to join the Jewish religion and should be allowed to
partake of the korban pesach." Evidently, even according to
the Rashba, we might have entertained the hava amina (initial
supposition) that mila DOES represent an initial phase of
geirut.
Now, according to the Rashba an intriguing question
remains. After the pasuk specifically excludes this "partial
ger" (who has been circumcised but has not performed tevila)
from korban pesach, what can we determine about his status?
Does the pasuk, by excluding him, completely negate our hava
amina? Does it certify that mila is merely a preliminary and
hence he IS NOT EVEN A PARTIAL GER and that is why he cannot
partake of the pessach? Is the entire purpose of the pasuk to
dispel such speculations and confirm the Rashba's view
regarding the dynamics of geirut? Or can we suggest that,
even in the maskana (conclusion), mila does represent a
fundamental component of geirut, but the pasuk goes out of its
way to inform us that, despite this partial status, korban
pesach may only be eaten by a complete Jew. Apparently, this
opinion in Yevamot (certainly in the hava amina and possibly
even in the maskana) adopts a position which is contrary to
the Rashba's vision of geirut.
METHODOLOGICAL POINTS:
-----------------------------------------
1. As stated above, any time two factors combine to produce
one halakhic effect, their interrelationship must be examined.
Are they working in combination as two equals or does one
serve as auxiliary to the other? If there does exist an
unequal relationship, which is the essence (ikkar) and which
the subordinate (tafel)?
2. Nafka minot (practical differences which arise from an
either/or question) which help to resolve this issue include
the question of sequence and the standard required of each
factor. The more ancillary something is, the less strict the
standard might be.
3. Whenever a hava amina is introduced it is predicated upon
two premises: Firstly, about the nature of a halakha and
secondly, about how this nature influences a halakhic
ramification. In rejecting the hava amina the gemara might be
redefining the nature of the halakha as something other than
was assumed. Alternatively, the gemara might be maintaining
the nature as is, but denying that such a nature determines
the particular ramification. Particularly so in the case of a
pasuk, the Torah might be deliberately dismissing a particular
implication even though its essence might theoretically
warrant such a halakha. Essentially, it is important to study
hava aminot because the premises raised are not always
completely rejected in the maskana.
**************************************************************
WWW.VIRTUAL.CO.IL
**************************************************************
VISIT YHE'S WEB SITE: HTTP://WWW.ETZION.ORG.IL
**************************************************************
To subscribe send e-mail to: majordomo@etzion.org.il: subject:(leave
blank or type word 'subscription'), on first line of text
type: subscribe YHE-METHO .
**************************************************************
To participate in a weekly discussion group on this shiur
moderated by the instructor, please subscribe to YHE-METH.D as
described above. For direct questions or comments to Rav
Moshe Taragin, please send email to MT@JER1.CO.IL .
**************************************************************
Copyright (c) 1996 Yeshivat Har Etzion. All rights reserved.
**************************************************************
SHIURIM MAY BE DEDICATED TO VARIOUS OCCASIONS - YAHRZEITS,
SEMACHOT,
BIRTHDAYS, ETC. PLEASE E-MAIL YHE@JER1.CO.IL FOR AN
APPLICATION.
YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH
ALON SHEVUT, GUSH ETZION 90433
E-MAIL: YHE@JER1.CO.IL or OFFICE@ETZION.ORG.IL