THE FALASHAS AS JEWS

QUESTION:

The Chief Rabbinate of Israel has influenced the Israeli government to refuse the Falashas any recognition as Jews (and therefore they are not eligible to the privileges of the Law of Return). The rabbinate argues that the religion of the Falashas is primitive and that they have neither get nor kesuba. Evidently, therefore, their legitimacy is in question. This is the same problem faced by the Bene Israel of Bombay who are residents in Israel today, namely, doubt as to their legitimacy. The questioner, Rabbi Zaoui of Har El in Jerusalem, and representative of the World Union for Progressive Judaism in Israel, has recently visited Ethiopia. He met many Falashas and found them eager to settle in Israel as Jews. The question is, from the point of view of Liberal Judaism, should they be considered Jews or not? (Asked by Rabbi Andre Zaoui, Jerusalem.)

ANSWER:

THE ORTHODOX rabbinate in Israel is very exclusionary in its policies. If it had full power, it would certainly prefer to restrict the status of being a Jew only to Orthodox Jews or those born of Orthodox Jews. It is fighting now to rescind the law which admits the validity of conversions conducted by Reform rabbis outside of Israel. It is also excluding a Jewish brother and a sister from the right of marriage to other Jews on the ground that they are mamzerim, i.e., born after a remarriage which followed a non-Orthodox divorce. On that basis, the Orthodox rabbinate could exclude a large proportion of the loyal Jews of Europe and America, if it dared. Also, (mostly on the question of doubt as to the get being fully Orthodox) they would exclude Karaites and Samaritans and any other group about whose bills of divorce they could raise doubts.

Against such inflexible exclusiveness, there is no use arguing. It simply represents a stage in the history of the nation of Israel which we can only hope in the name of our fellow Jews will some day be outlived. But of course, from the point of view of Reform Judaism, the situation is entirely different. We face the reality of modern life and we accept the validity of a civil divorce. To us a woman divorced in the courts is truly divorced and her children by a subsequent marriage are legitimate children. But of course our liberal point of view has no significance to the Orthodox rabbinate and they have the overwhelming religious power in the State of Israel today.

But perhaps the Orthodox rabbinate might be influenced by the opinion of one of the greatest authorities (poskim) in Jewish legal history. I refer to David Ibn Zimri, the Radbaz. The Radbaz was born in Spain in 1479 and died in Safed, 1589. Yes! He lived to the age of one hundred and ten! His main career was Chief Rabbi of Egypt for forty years. Having been Chief Rabbi of Egypt for forty years, he is a better authority on the true nature of the Falashas and their Jewishness than any other single Jewish authority. He has a long responsum on the Falashas. It is found twice in the collection of his responsa, Volume IV, #219, and Volume VII, # 9. You can find it in either place.

The question involved in the responsum had to do with a Falasha woman who fled from Ethiopia after a war in which she says her husband was killed. She came to Egypt and is now a servant (or a slave) in the house of a Jew. Her Jewish master had sexual relations with her and she gave birth to a son. The question now concerns the status of her son. His status depends upon whether she is to be believed when she says that her Falasha husband had been killed. If she is to be believed that she is truly a widow, then this son, Reuben, is legitimate and he may marry a Jewess.

In the entire discussion there is not the slightest doubt expressed either by the questioner or by David Ibn Zimri that the Falashas are to be considered Jews. The questioner says as follows: “It is clear that they are of the seed of Israel, of the tribe of Dan which dwells in the mountains of Ethiopia.” And David Ibn Zimri in his answer says, “There are three groupings in Ethiopia: a) Mohammedans, b) Christians, and c) Israelites of the tribe of Dan.”

And, of course, David Ibn Zimri also discussed their type of Judaism. He says: “Since they follow the Bible and not the Talmud, they are virtually the same as the Karaites, and what applies to the Karaites and their rights to marry with Jews, also applies to these (whom we now call Falashas).” He says, of course, that the Karaites and these people of Ethiopia do not have proper gittin or kiddushin, but, he says, since they are not eligible to witness, their marriages are as illegal (from the strict Talmudic point of view) as are their divorces. Therefore, never having been legally married, according to Jewish law, their divorced women are not Eshes ish and, therefore, their children cannot be mamzerim. Hence, he says, if these Karaites (and Ethiopian Jews) will declare their comradeship (chaverus) to our Judaism, we may marry with them.

The modern Orthodox rabbis in Israel must surely admit that there is no greater rabbinic authority than this famous rabbi of Egypt, who knew the Karaites and the Falashas better than any other rabbi. In his opinion, they are Jews from the tribe of Dan, and if they express their loyalty to Judaism, we may without question include them in our community.

These Falashas, according to your testimony, are eager to be a loyal part of the Israeli community; and that, according to the greatest authorities, should be quite enough.