Mamzer
Halakhic texts relating to this article | |
---|---|
Torah: | Deuteronomy 23:3, Zechariah 9:6 |
Babylonian Talmud: | Yevamot 49a-b, 69a, 78b, 87b, Kiddushin 67b and 73a |
Shulchan Aruch: | Even HaEzer 4 |
In the Hebrew Bible and Jewish religious law, a mamzer (Hebrew: ממזר, lit., "estranged person"; plural mamzerim) is a person who is born as the result of certain forbidden relationships or incest (as it is defined by the Bible), or the descendant of such a person. Mamzer status (ממזרות, mamzerut) is not synonymous with the traditional western definition of illegitimacy, since it does not include children born to unmarried mothers.[1]
Definition
Etymology
Some have explained the word mamzer as the masculine noun form derived from the root m-z-r, having a meaning of spoilt/corrupt.[2]
According to
The Talmud explains the term homiletically as consisting of the words mum (defect) and zar (strange/alien), a euphemism for an illicit union in the person's lineage.[4]
Hebrew Bible usage
The term occurs twice in the Hebrew Bible. The first time is Deuteronomy 23:3 (23:2 in non-Hebrew versions). The Septuagint translates the term mamzer as son "of a prostitute" (Greek: ek pornes),[5] and the Latin Vulgate translates it as de scorto natus ("born of a prostitute").[6] In English, it is often translated as "bastard".
A bastard (mamzer) shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
- ("shall not enter the congregation of the Lord," Explained by the Rabbis to mean that the bastard cannot marry a son or daughter of Israel)[7][8] Alternatively, the "congregation of the Lord" can refer to the legislature of ancient Israel [9]
The other occasion is in Zechariah 9:6: "And a bastard (mamzer) shall dwell in Ashdod", a sea port.
Halakhic definitions
In the Talmud, the term mamzer is applied to the descendants of specific illicit unions. According to the Mishnah, a mamzer is the offspring of a biblically forbidden union for which his progenitors are liable to extirpation at the hands of heaven.[10] An exception to this rule is when a Jewish man cohabits with a menstruant woman: Although he is liable thereby to extirpation, the child born from such union is not a mamzer. The practical bearing of this ruling is that it excludes from such defamation a child born outside of wedlock, and which child is often wrongly called "bastard" under common law. According to the Shulchan Aruch, a new line of mamzerim can only be produced by two Jews but the product of a non-Jew and a mamzeret (female mamzer) is a mamzer.[11]
There are two categories of mamzerim. A child born of incest, as defined by the Bible, is a mamzer. Note, however, that an incestuous relationship between one or two non-Jews cannot produce a mamzer, and if the product of such a union were to
A child born of a married Jewish woman's adultery is a mamzer. The child of a single woman and a man she could lawfully have married is not a mamzer.[13] It is irrelevant if the man is married or not. If one of the parents is not Jewish, the child is not a mamzer. Any child born to a married woman, even if she is known to have been unfaithful, is presumed to be her husband's, unless she is so promiscuous that such a presumption becomes unsupportable,[14] or if she enters a public relationship with another man.[15]
A child born within 12 months of a woman's most recent meeting with her husband is presumed to be legitimate, since Jewish law believes that in rare cases, a pregnancy can last that long.[16] However, if more than 9 months have elapsed, and she is known to have been unfaithful, then the presumption does not apply.[17] Modern assisted reproductive technology has complicated the issue. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein ruled that if a married woman is inseminated by sperm from another man, the child is not a mamzer, since it did not result from an act of adultery; Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum (2005) disagreed, and ruled that, since the child is known to be that of a man other than her husband, it is a mamzer.[18]
The status of an abandoned child (Hebrew: asufi) was determined by the state in which it was found. If there were indications that the foundling had been abandoned due to the parents being unable to support it, then, halakhically, the child would not be a mamzer.[19] However, if the unknown parents could have supported the child, it was regarded as potentially being a mamzer.[19] A child whose mother is known, but not the father, was known as "silent one" (Hebrew: shetuki), and fell into the same category as a foundling;[19] this status, however, could be changed if the mother knew and revealed the identity of the father.[19]
The mamzer status is hereditary – a child of a mamzer (whether mother or father) is also a mamzer. However, since these rules are regarded as applying only to Jews, and since traditional Rabbinical law regards Jewish status as only transmitted through the mother, the child of a male mamzer and a non-Jewish woman cannot be a mamzer. However, the child of a female mamzer and a non-Jewish man is a mamzer.[20]
Marriage restrictions
The biblical rule against certain people becoming part of the "congregation of the Lord"[21] was interpreted in the Talmud as a prohibition against ordinary Jews marrying such people. Although the biblical passage includes in this up to the tenth generation of the descendants of a mamzer, classical rabbis interpreted this as an idiom meaning "forever". Thus, in traditional Jewish law, a mamzer and his or her descendants are not allowed to marry an ordinary (non-mamzer) Jewish spouse.
The restriction does not prevent a mamzer from marrying another mamzer, nor from marrying a
This interpretation is not universally shared, with Matthew Poole interpreting the "congregation of the Lord" as being the Israelite government.[22][23]
Social status of mamzerim
Although in many historical societies, illegitimacy of birth was a quality which could make a person somewhat of an outcast, this was not the official attitude of Judaism; apart from the marriage restrictions, a mamzer is not officially considered a second-class citizen, and is supposed to be treated with as much respect as other Jews.[24] For example, the Mishnah teaches that a learned mamzer should "take precedence" over an ignorant High Priest of Israel;[25] the meaning of "take precedence" is not explicitly explained by the Mishnah, nor by the Talmud in general, although the preceding part of the Mishnah uses it to refer to the priority in which people should be rescued from danger, while other parts of the Mishnah use the phrase to refer to the priority in which people should receive aliyot.[26]
Rabbis in the Talmud, and those in the Middle Ages, saw fit to spell out that, aside from in questions of marriage, a mamzer should be treated as an ordinary Jew. The Talmud insists that a mamzer should be considered as an ordinary relative for the purpose of inheritance,
The status of mamzerim could even be relinquished, either by the mamzer marrying a servant or the mamzer becoming a servant themselves, with their status being immediately relinquished upon their release.[34]
Modern investigations into mamzer status
Orthodox Judaism
The principal approach in Orthodox Judaism is to require strict evidentiary standards for mamzer status, sufficiently strict that proof of the existence of mamzer status is hard to develop and generally does not arise. Typically, it is impossible to prove either that a prior marriage ever existed, or that a child was born of relations outside that marriage. Orthodox rabbis always allow the suspect child the benefit of the doubt in this matter. This usually leads to the conclusion that at the time of a person's birth, their parents were married, or that the person is the child of a man and woman who were married to each other when the child was conceived.
An example is a contemporary
Conservative rabbi Daniel S. Nevins, commenting on this case, noted that the box of traditional tools Rabbi Yosef used to discredit evidence of mamzer status may be sufficiently robust as to cover virtually all cases of inquiry in the types of situations a congregation rabbi would be likely to experience.[37] Nonetheless, Orthodox rabbinical authorities hold that while contemporary rabbis have authority to refine procedural rules such as rules of evidence, they do not have the authority to abolish biblically mandated categories or procedures entirely.
Israeli law tries to prevent the conferring of mamzer status by refusing to allow men other than the husband or recent ex-husband from registering as a child's father without a court order.
Conservative Judaism
The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS) of the Rabbinical Assembly of Conservative Judaism has declared that Conservative Rabbis should not inquire into or accept evidence of mamzer status under any circumstances, rendering the category inoperative. In doing so, the CJLS distinguished the Conservative approach to Jewish law from the Orthodox approach, noting that Conservative Judaism regards Biblical law as only the beginning of a relationship rather than a final word, and that the Conservative movement regards it as its role and responsibility to revise Biblical law from time to time when such law conflicts with evolving concepts of morality.[26]
Karaite Judaism
In
In Israeli law
In the modern
The existence of mamzer status as a category in Israeli family law has been criticized. An extensive review and opinion advocating the adoption of civil marriage in Israel, written by Prof. Pinhas Shifman and published in July 2001 by the
Israeli religious courts resolve mamzer status by generally ruling that the child was born within the marriage, despite the existence of evidence to the contrary. This convenient formula sometimes causes difficulties for lovers or subsequent spouses who wish to assert paternity over a child which may be biologically theirs. A 2006 case, in which a child born eight months and two weeks after a divorce, was declared the former husband's child, rather than the child of the wife's subsequent husband, and this was reported as causing a dilemma for the subsequent couple.[42]
Nonetheless, the existence of the category of Mamzer, and the marital impediments inherent to it, is one of the arguments frequently used by Israeli
Connection with French medieval nicknames
A persistent etymology of the surname
References
- Babylonian Talmud, Yebamot 49a
- Brown Driver BriggsHebrew and English lexicon: with an appendix containing the Biblical Aramaic : coded with the numbering system from Strong's Exhaustive concordance of the Bible, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005
- ^ Strong's Concordance: #4464
- ^ Yevamot 76b
- ^ Deuteronomy 23:2-4, LXX
- Augustin Calmet, Dictionary of the Holy Bible 1837 English edition p. 151 Charles Taylor, Edward Robinsoneditors: "But the Vulgate, the LXX, and the authors of the canon law, take the Hebrew mamzer, (Deut xxiii. 2.) for the child of a prostitute; while some interpreters take it for a generic term, which signifies illegitimate children"
- Shulhan Arukh, Eben ha-Ezer 4:1–ff.
- OCLC 1031721874.
- ^ "Deuteronomy 23 Commentary". Biblehub.com. 2021.
- ^ Yevamot 4, Mishnah 13: "כל שחיבין עליו כרת בידי שמים"
- ^ Shulchan Aruch, "Even haEzer" 4:19
- ^ Shulchan Aruch, "Even haEzer" 4:21
- ^ Shulchan Aruch Even haEzer 4
- ^ Shulchan Aruch, "Even haEzer" 4:15
- ^ Shulchan Aruch, "Even haEzer" 4:16
- ^ 4:14
- ^ Even haEzer Rama 4:14
- ^ Jakobovits, Yoel (2005). "Assisted Reproduction through the Prism of Jewish Law" (PDF). Jewish Action. 65 (3): 26–29. Retrieved 2007-03-27.
However, many equally prominent rabbinic authorities maintain that only actual physical relations would confer this status on the woman.
- ^ a b c d e This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Singer, Isidore; et al., eds. (1901–1906). "Foundling". The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.
- ^ "Shulchan Aruch, "Even haEzer" 4:19
- ^ Deuteronomy 23:2–4 (verses 1-3 in some English translations)
- ^ "Deuteronomy 23 Matthew Poole Commentary". Biblehub.
- ^ This article incorporates text from the 1903 Encyclopaedia Biblica article "assembly", a publication now in the public domain. See columns 345-6.
- ^ Silberberg, Naftali. "What is the legal definition of a "mamzer"?". AskMoses.com. Retrieved 2007-08-06.
- ^ Horayot 3:8
- ^ a b Rabbi Ellie Kaplan Spitz, Mamzerut, Committee of Jewish Law and Standards, EH 4.2000a, pp. 5587-585.
- ^ Yevamot 22b
- ^ Yevamot 22a
- ^ Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Mispatim – Laws of inheritance – 1:11
- ^ Joseph Karo, Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 276:6
- ^ Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Shoftim – Sanhedrin – 2:9
- ^ Joseph Karo, Shulkhan Arukh, Hoshen Mishpat 7:2
- ^ Talmud, Yavamot 45b Tosefot
- ^ "Deuteronomy 23 Gill's Exposition". Biblehub.
- ^ Shut Yabia Omer, part 7, Even haEzer 6; addressed to Rabbi Grubner of Detroit, Michigan
- ^ a b Talia Westberg. "Open Beit Midrash: Perspectives on Mamzerim, From Sinai to the Knesset". Sefaria.
- ^ Rabbi Daniel S. Nevins, A Concurring Opinion Regarding Mamzerut, Committee of Jewish Law and Standards, EH 4.2000b, pp. 587-592 Archived 2006-12-13 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ "When the Child Falls Through a Loophole in Jewish Law". Haaretz.
- ^ "Court Orders Paternity Test Despite 'Mamzer' Factor". 21 December 2007.
- ^ Abraham ibn Ezra Commentary on Zechariah ix. 6. See also Kimhi same.
- ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2007-08-25. Retrieved 2007-07-27.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) - ^ Dayan, Aryeh (2006-09-07). "Better to be a mamzer or to grow up without a father?". Haaretz. Archived from the original on 2006-09-02. Retrieved 2007-10-30.
- ^ Ben Sales. "Barring "bastards": Israel's marriage blacklist said to break privacy laws".
- English Jews"Manser" is derived ..."
- ^ Edward Augustus Freeman. The History of the Norman Conquest of England: The reign of Eadward the Confessor.