2

At the hospital 2 newborns get swapped, one Jewish for one not. 20 yrs later someone realizes what happened & informs both kids of the mistake, does their status change? Does the ‘non Jewish’ boy who was raised to be a proud observant Jew need to officially convert now? And would the Jewish boy raised ‘non Jewish’ have to convert to Judaism now or was he always considered Jewish?

DonielF
  • 34,262
  • 4
  • 40
  • 143
Lages
  • 1,124
  • 5
  • 16
  • 1
    Certainly the actually Jewish one is still Jewish. There’s no way to lose your Jewish status. – DonielF Jun 06 '19 at 16:26
  • 2
    Let's give the kids names at least. How about Yehuda and Antoninus? – user6591 Jun 06 '19 at 16:41
  • 1
    Yevamot 11 discusses many cases of mixed up babies, but not where they later figure it out. I don't know what the doubt is in this case: once we figure it out that's it, no? – Double AA Jun 06 '19 at 17:08
  • It appears that everything depends on "informs both kids of the mistake" - is that a valid testimony, is that before a valid Beis Din, etc? Keep in mind that to remove a person's status (Chazakah) a decision of a Beis Din is required! It is not sufficient that a doctor calls the parents and informs them - maybe it's a scam. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 18:55
  • Assuming it's a boy, would the Brit Milah + toiveling at some point not serve as an ersatz, undocumented conversion? – יהושע ק Jun 06 '19 at 19:07
  • @AlBerko Would DNA (paternity/maternity test) qualify as valid evidence? How about security camera footage that clearly shows the switch occurring? – user9806 Jun 06 '19 at 19:30
  • @user9806 1. It HAS to be a Beis Din, 2. In the Jewish court that does not matter (so much). I suspect that unless the State does not support the claim it would be invalidated against mother's claim - "that's my boy" - that what the Mishnah validates. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 19:37
  • @user Al is not giving you a good sense of what would happen. If you know of a real case of this go to a knowledgeable rabbi. They'll certainly work out a way to have the real truth come through. They may ask to double check certain details but that's just procedure. – Double AA Jun 06 '19 at 20:38
  • Possible duplicate https://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/52891/759 – Double AA Jun 06 '19 at 20:52
  • Is a Beis Din obligated to see the new evidence? Just posted: https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/104589/obligation-of-a-beis-din-to-judge-and-decide-on-issurim – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 21:16
  • @DoubleAA It only seems to be a duplicate if you know the answer already. Starting with no assumptions, the questions are different – b a Jun 07 '19 at 15:14
  • @ba No, even if you don't know the answer, this literally asks if a person is jewish (and again if another person is jewish). I can edit those words in without changing anythign. This is just one of many motivations someone might have for wondering if they are jewish (another could be "i have a big nose; am i jewish?"). The other question is broader and encompasses all such motivations. – Double AA Jun 07 '19 at 15:15

2 Answers2

3

According to Jewish law, a person is only considered part of the Jewish people, if they were born to a Jewish woman, or they formally converted to Judaism.

Also according to Jewish law, a person who was born Jewish, but was raised secular, as a non-Jew, is still considered to be a Jew, even if he wasn't even circumcised.

So in the hypothetical case of the OP, assuming that it was unequivocally proven that in fact they babies were switched, then the Jewish boy raised ‘non Jewish’ does NOT need to convert to Judaism, since he was he always Jewish. His "Jewishness" was conveyed to him by his biological mother.

On the other hand, the boy born from a non-Jewish woman, never had any "Jewishness" formally conveyed to him. The fact that he observed Jewish laws and customs is immaterial, since as a biological non-Jew, he requires a formal conversion process, which he never underwent.

IsraelReader
  • 4,988
  • 1
  • 12
  • 28
  • 2
    I disagree with the later. It appears that since 1. he was circumcised 2. he accepted Mitzvos at 13, he's considered automatically converted. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 19:01
  • 1
    @Al he presumably toiveled at some point or at least went swimming in a kosher mikvah, as well – יהושע ק Jun 06 '19 at 19:40
  • 1
    @JoshK and because he was Katan, his consent was not required. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 19:57
  • 1
    @JoshK Immersion in a mikva per se, without the auspices of Beis Din, is ineffective for conversion. This is clear from the sugya in Yevamos 45b. Despite the argument among the Rishonim, as to the exact meaning of the Gemara, the common denominator is that BD is required. The same is for the Gemara in Yevamos 47a. – IsraelReader Jun 06 '19 at 20:20
  • 1
    @AlBerko I stand by my answer. Conversion requires a Beis Din. In this case, since there was no BD involved, therefore there was no formal conversion. – IsraelReader Jun 06 '19 at 20:21
  • 1
    I understand, but there's Chazoke that he's a Jew, and unless a BD decides he isn't a BD can't decide he needs conversion. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 20:27
  • @AlBerko If you want to go the "Chazaka" route, then the kid that was raised by non-Jewish parents is presumed to be a non-Jew, and you would need to disagree with me on that point too. - However my assumption about the OP was that it was unequivocally proven that in fact they babies were switched, so no "chazakos" are currently in play (I now added this to my answer). – IsraelReader Jun 06 '19 at 20:34
  • How does this differ from the previous answer, other than being unsourced? – Double AA Jun 06 '19 at 20:39
  • 1
    I completely agree, it needs to be rethought altogether. However it seems to be two different cases - to prove one is Jewish and "let him in", it seems that one prominent Rabbi (R' Moshe z"l?) would suffice, but to deny Chazoke of one who already is held so, a real BD is required etc, as I commented. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 20:52
  • 2
    @AlBerko The point is moot. I wrote that we're assuming that it was unequivocally proven that in fact they babies were switched. That covers all bases. – IsraelReader Jun 06 '19 at 20:56
  • @DoubleAA IMHO, the other answer given follows a much more convoluted route, whereas my answer is direct and to the point, and reflects the basic nuts and bolts of what defines a Jew. – IsraelReader Jun 06 '19 at 21:01
  • Please see https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/104589/obligation-of-a-beis-din-to-judge-and-decide-on-issurim – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 21:16
2

The gemara in Gittin 42b discusses whether a slave owned by a Cohen that has been freed, but has not been given a formal document of freedom (גט שחרור) can still eat Terumah. The gemara attempts to bring a proof that he may eat Terumah from the following Mishna (Yevamos 99a):

כהנת שנתערב ולדה בולד שפחתה הרי אלו אוכלין בתרומה וחולקין חלק אחד על הגורן הגדילו התערובות משחררין זה את זה

If the wife of a Cohen mixes up her child with her maidservants' child, the 2 children may eat Terumah, and collect a portion of Terumah (together). When they grow up they both free each other.

The implication is that the slave is effectively considered "freed" since you cannot work them since they may be Jewish, yet they were not formally freed with a גט שחרור and the Mishna says that they may eat Terumah.

The gemara rejects this proof:

הכי השתא התם אם יבא אליהו ויאמר בחד מינייהו דעבד הוא קנין כספו קרינא ביה

That case is different because If Eliyahu Hanavi would come and identify which one is a slave, they would indeed revert back to being in the possession of their owner.

From here It seems clear that even a child who was raised as Jewish, but Eliyahu Hanavi revealed that they are not, they would indeed have the status of a non-Jew.

Community
  • 1
Silver
  • 1,203
  • 5
  • 19
  • 1
    A slave isn't exactly a non-jew. More like a half Jew. – Double AA Jun 06 '19 at 17:12
  • You can't learn from Eved to a Jew. Rambam (end of Melachim) rules that regarding the ancestry one who's considered a Kosher Jew can't be withdriven that status, I think. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 18:52
  • @AlBerko I don't understand the comment. This gemara shows that if Eliyahu would come and tell someone presumed as a Jew that they are, in fact a slave, they would revert back to being a slave. The Rambam in Melachim 12:2 (if thats what youre referring to) says that in the Yemos Hamashiach Eliyahu is not going to invalidate people's lineage. But that doesn't mean that if he would do it, it wouldn't work. He just isn't going to do it. – Silver Jun 06 '19 at 19:10
  • As DoubleAA commented, it seems that your learning from one case to another is far fetched. Unless you bring a source, that learns that explicitly. – Al Berko Jun 06 '19 at 19:15
  • @AlBerko DoubleAA's point was about extrapolating from an Eved to a non-Jew, which is a fair point. It just seems farfetched to me to say that if we realize someone who was presumed Jewish was really a slave then we would revert them back to slave status, however if we found out they were a non-Jew, they would remain a Jewish. However, I dont understand what you mean when you say "You can't learn from an Eved to a Jew" – Silver Jun 06 '19 at 19:24
  • 1
    My point was just a matter of precision. There is no reason to think it matters. @AlBerko please don't invoke my name next to incorrect claims – Double AA Jun 06 '19 at 20:44