Giyyur 007

10:
We continue now, for a moment, our study of the barayta which is to be found in Yevamot 47a-b. After describing the manner in which a candidate for conversion was first received (see Giyyur 006) the barayta teaches that the members of the Bet Din dealing with the case must inform the candidate of "a few light mitzvot and a few serious mitzvot. This is presumably to make the candidate aware of what he is taking upon himself. But the barayta then concludes this part of the discussion with the general notice that "we do not offer too much nor do we enter into details."

11:
The barayta now states quite categorically that

And now – at long last! – the barayta relates to the other half of humanity:

12:
This concludes the very long barayta – which is in no way contested in the Gemara. (If you would like to read the Hebrew text of the whole of this barayta please click here.) From even the most cursory reading of this passage it is very clear that the sages, in Talmudic times, were very lenient in their demands of what is expected of a candidate. There is no mention at all in this passage of a period of study or any discussion with the candidate about Jewish theology or Jewish philosophy. And yet, from other sources, we know that there must have been such a discussion.

13:
Elsewhere in the Gemara [Bekhorot 30b] there is another barayta which touches on this subject. I bring here only the part of the barayta which is relevant to our present discussion:

The tenor of this passage makes it clear that the would-be Jew must know something about Judaism before his conversion because otherwise he would not be able to demur at this mitzvah or that. Rabbi Yosé bar-Yehudah goes even further: he must accept the interpretation of Torah as established by the sages without question.

14:
However, there is ample evidence in the Talmud that at least some of the sages, while not denying the requirement that a candidate for conversion must accept Torah – both written and oral – with no exceptions, managed to alleviate the absoluteness of the requirement. We shall now look at one very well-known example of this phenomenon. There is a barayta in the Gemara [Shabbat 31a] which tells of three separate cases of would-be converts who were rejected by the great sage Shammai yet accepted – against the ruling of the barayta in Bekhorot – by the even greater sage Hillel.

Let us interrupt the barayta here to comment on the salient points. Shammai lived in the closing years of the first century BCE and the opening years of the first century CE. Therefore, in all probability, the would-be Jew described in this passage was a Roman, probably attached in some way or other to the Roman colonial government. Firstly we should note that this non-Jew knows quite a bit about Judaism. His initial question shows that he has interested himself in Judaism and knows about Torah: he knows Shammai's answer before it is given. Therefore, his request of Shammai is not flippant or simply to annoy: he is one of those members of the pagan intelligentsia that we have mentioned before in this series who seriously considered Judaism as an alternative to the Olympian religion of their society. He can accept that God gave Israel the Written Torah, but his intellect does not permit him to accept that all the interpretations of the Torah by the sages are also divine. With great intellectual honesty our candidate tells Shammai of his problem. Shammai, because of the ruling that a candidate for conversion must accept Judaism without the slightest quibble, dismisses him roughly.

15:
However, our would-be Jew is very serious in his intentions. Having been rejected by Shammai he turns to Shammai's associate.

Hillel, presumably because he could see how earnest this man was, accepted him as a candidate for conversion with the condition that he teach him only the Written Torah. If the man wants to study the Written Torah he will first have to learn how to read Hebrew. So Hillel begins teaching him the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. He points to the letter Alef and teaches the man that this letter is Alef. Then he points to Bet and teaches the man that this letter is Bet. And so on down the alphabet. The following day Hillel points to the letter Alef and asks 'What letter is this?' Our Roman replies 'Alef'. 'Wrong!' says Hillel, 'it's the letter Tav.' Then he points to the next letter. The Roman remembers what he was taught the previous day and answers 'Bet.' 'Wrong!' says Hillel, 'it's the letter Shin.' But the Roman is no fool, as Hillel well knows.

Hillel's riposte is not nearly as simplistic as it seems. What he is really showing the Roman is that it is impossible to learn any text without a traditional interpretation. Indeed, the very art of reading itself presupposes a tradition that such a letter is 'A' and another letter is 'B'. In a very real sense Hillel is showing the man that the Oral Torah in fact must come before the Written Torah because without it one cannot understand what is written.

16:
One of Israel's great modern philosophers – and a man who provoked great antagonism in some circles – was Yeshayahu Leibowitz [1903-1994]. To the great annoyance of many orthodox Jews he was wont to point out that the Oral Tradition is greater than the Written Torah itself (which is what Hillel too is implying). This is because it is only the Oral tradition that gives the Written Torah its sanctity. The Torah is holy because we say it is. Any sanctity that the Torah may have in our eyes is because we reverence it by tradition. As Hillel demonstrated to the Roman, we cannot even begin to read the Written Torah without the Oral Tradition telling us how to read it.

17:
For the purposes of our present study we must note that contrary to Shammai, Hillel ignored the rule that a conversion candidate must have no quibbles. Rashi makes the following comment on the word that Hillel accepted the Roman for conversion:

My revered teacher, Rabbi Professor Naftali Wieder z"l, once opined to us, his students, that "it is permitted to disagree with Rashi". In this case, with great trepidation, I think Rashi got it wrong.

We have not reached the end of this barayta and in the next shiur we shall, God willing, bring two other instances in which Hillel defied tradition with great success. (If you would like to read the Hebrew text of this barayta please click here.)