Writer Akin Ajayi, in the Jerusalem Post, has written an autobiographical op-ed concerning conversion to Judaism. Being a convert myself, I thought it would be interesting to see what Mr. Ajayi has to say. He begins:
Every so often, I’m asked-by friends, by acquaintances and even by complete strangers-whether I’ve converted to Judaism. Actually, I should reword that: I’m asked occasionally, by friends and acquaintances abroad, if I’ve converted to Judaism. I’ve been asked twice in Israel-quite aggressively, and by complete strangers-why I haven’t converted to Judaism yet.
Ajayi doesn’t explain what his relationship to Israel or Judaism is. Although Israelis aren’t known for their manners, you can see why they would ask someone this-especially someone who comes regularly to Israel. The author never explains what he is doing here, in the first place. He goes on to say:
Seriously, though, I’m always a bit bemused by the vague suspicion with which Christianity is treated by some in the Holy Land.
Seriously, this is a stupid statement. How many books have been written about the cruelty of the Christian “faith” towards Jews? Try Why The Jews? (Prager/Telushkin) for one. Finally, Ajayi gets to the point:
I was not entirely surprised to read last week about a humorless organization that calls itself the Lobby for Jewish Values. According to news reports, members of this group – who, I’d bet, would welcome my past interrogators with open arms – have been handing out fliers condemning Christmas. The fliers propose a boycott of restaurants and hotels in Jerusalem that put up Christmas trees. After lecturing sternly about “Jewish Values” and the “Jewish Identity,” the fliers instruct the good Jewish residents of Jerusalem to “continue to follow this path of the Jewish people’s tradition, and not give in to the clownish atmosphere of the end of the civil year. And certainly not help those businesses that sell or put up the foolish symbols of Christianity.” Charming.
The phrases “Jewish Identity” and “Jewish Values,” I think, are often used as a catch-all to encompass a vast, confusing and at times out-and-out contradictory range of objectives. I’m clearly not best placed to try and define what exactly “Jewish Identity” is – hey, in the eyes of these charmers, I’m actively seeking to subvert it – but I can’t help but think that the less confident one feels about a particular concept, the more aggressive one becomes in defending it. These guys from the Lobby for Jewish Values seem just a tad too defensive to be really credible. To be honest, I feel a little sorry for them.
That said, it may not be fair to suggest that they are representative of broader public opinion about Christmas. As was reported in The Jerusalem Post last week, the Jerusalem Municipality and the Jewish National Fund decided to distribute Christmas trees to the city’s Christian population – and, presumably, to anyone else interested in having a pine tree shedding needles willy-nilly all over their carpet – during the week before Christmas.
Is an organization that supports religious values supposed to be full of humor? Are they supposed to drive around the neighborhood ringing a bell, selling ice cream to little kids? Jews have endured 2,000 of “Christian kindness” and now we are supposed to pass out the ornaments of your pagan worship? What’s next? We are to supply Israeli kids of Molech worship? This article is a sly way to question the Jewish nature of Jerusalem. It’s a good thing the author doesn’t take conversion seriously-perhaps that’s the only bright part of this editorial.
Following the article, several people had some interesting comments:
3. Unlike Christianity and Islamjohn – (12/27/2009 20:01)The Torah is unique in that it does not require a person to be Jewish. The Torah is very clear that anyone who keeps the Seven Laws of Noah is a perfectly good person. Of course, such a person should be supportive of a Jewish State. So what is the big deal that the author chooses to remain outside the full scope of the Torah. This is his right. All he should do is keep the universal laws of Noah. And, I suspect he does. What a wonderful world we would live in if other religions were so tolerent.
I’d have to say I agree with this comment. Another comment I like is:
4. typical “half-pregnant” mentalityEron Silva – Israel (12/27/2009 20:28)Neither hot nor cold, the types like the author revel in their mediocrity and lack of conviction – while justifying and expecting others to be as wishi-washy like them. It does not cost a true Jew any effort to believe in Rambam’s 13 principles of faith. It all makes perfect sense for us. In earnest, human mind is unable to grasp anything measured by the millions: stars, grains of sand, earth’s age. So it is a sign of humility to stick to a count of roughly 6,500 years, see a “creation day” as an era, and make good on self betterment. Does the author keep the 7 Noahide laws? hmmm…
Yet another I like:
7. Pedantic ? Moi ?Sherlock Holmes – England (12/27/2009 21:00)I really hate to be pedantic but do three religions center on Jerusalem ? Islam centers on Mecca and Medina; Christianity centers on Rome, Canterbury and Bethlehem. Only Judaism has centered on Jerusalem for these past three thousand years. Only Jews pray thrice daily for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Messiah, son of David, who will rebuild the Temple and restore the Kingdom of David. The New Testament does mention Jerusalem and Jesus’s life there; the Koran never once mentions the city by name.
The following is a brilliant observation:
8. Have we got conversions for you !This article could have been a lot worse. I was expecting an attack on the Rabbis who keep revoking each other’s conversions. From a Jewish point of view all people who believe in G-d and observe the Seven Laws of Noah have a place in the world to come. We have a split personality in Israel. We want Israel’s Russian non-Jews who have no official religion to consider conversion to Judaism; on the other hand we don’t believe in conversion without genuine belief, which many of these Soviets really can’t seem to muster.
Danny – GB (12/27/2009 21:07)
9. There is no such thing as converting to JudaismInstead of thinking about converting, maybe the author should 1st read the Torah. There is no procedure to convert and even if one intermarries with an Israelite the children would not be considered as Israelites until the 4th generation (about 160 years). So if the Torah says it takes 160 years, how can one convert in 12 months with a rabbi? Furthermore, if you read the Book of Ruth you will see that nowhere is she referred to asa Jew and, even after her “your God is my God speech” she is still referred to as a Moabite. Finally, when Obed is born the people say: “A son was born to Naomi”
Dror Ben Ami – Israel (12/27/2009 22:04)
Deuteronomy 10:19Love you therefore the stranger; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.ספר דברים פרק י
יט) ואהבתם את הגר כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים
The following Gemara (Yevamoth 77a) discusses the very issue of Ruth’s “Jewishness:”
I have this tradition from the Beth din of Samuel the Ramathite: An Ammonite but not an Ammonitess; A Moabite, but not a Moabitess’!6 Could he, however, be trusted?7 Surely R. Abba stated in the name of Rab: Whenever a learned man gives directions8 on a point of law, and such a point comes up [for a practical decision], he is obeyed if his statement was made9 before the event;10 but if it was not so made he is not obeyed! Here the case was different, since Samuel and his Beth din were still living.11
(6) V. supra p. 517, n. 17. [On the political issues involved in this controversy v. Aptowitzer, Parteipolitik der Hasmonaerzeit pp. 31ff. He regards the attack on the legitimacy of David as a movement inspired by the Sadducees to support the Hasmoneans’ right to the throne against the challenge of their opponents. V. Kid. Sonc. ed. pp. 332ff].
(7) In such circumstances.
(8) Basing his ruling on traditional law which he claims to have received from his teachers.
(9) In the course of his discourses and studies.
(10) Before the point of law assumed practical importance.
(11) Had not the statement been a true on, he would not have ventured to make it when its validity could be so easily tested.תלמוד בבלי מסכת יבמות דף עז/א
כך מקובלני מבית דינו של שמואל הרמתי עמוני ולא עמונית מואבי ולא מואבית ומי מהימן והאמר רבי אבא אמר רב כל תלמיד חכם שמורה הלכה ובא אם קודם מעשה אמרה שומעין לו ואם לאו אין שומעין לו שאני הכא דהא שמואל ובית דינו קיים
Referring to: “Furthermore, if you read the Book of Ruth you will see that nowhere is she referred to asa Jew and, even after her “your God is my God speech” she is still referred to as a Moabite. Finally, when Obed is born the people say: “A son was born to Naomi”:
R.Hanina says this is derived from the following: And the women her neighbours, gave it a name, saying, There is a son born to Naomi.28 Was it then Naomi who bore him? Surely it was Ruth who bore him! But Ruth bore and Naomi brought him up; hence he was called after her [Naomi's] name.
(28) Ruth IV, 17.
תלמוד בבלי מסכת סנהדרין דף יט עמוד ב
רבי חנינא אומר: מהכא ותקראנה לו השכנות שם לאמר יולד בן לנעמי. וכי נעמי ילדה? והלא רות ילדה, אלא: רות ילדה ונעמי גידלה, לפיכך נקרא על שמה
Baba Batra 91b
There they dwelt occupied in the king’s work, refers to Ruth the Moabitess who saw the kingdom of Solomon, the grandson of her grandson; for it is said: And [Solomon] caused a throne to be set up for the king’s mother,’36 and R. Eleazar said, ‘to the mother of the dynasty’.37
(36) I Kings II, 19.
(37) I.e., Ruth the mother of the dynasty of David. Cf. Ruth, IV, 10, 21-22.
It is obvious that Dror Ben Ami is not familiar with Torah Judaism.
