The Gemara mentions that a ger, when he brings bikkurim, can\u2019t make the accompanying declaration (\u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd), because he can\u2019t say \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2 \u05d4’ \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5. This in turn is based on a Mishnah in Bikkurim which says so (with the proviso that if his mother is Jewish, he can say it).<\/p>\n
This turns out to be not so simple. There are actually two possible issues with a ger\u2019s \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd: the lack of a portion in Eretz Yisrael, and that he\u2019s not descended from \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5.<\/p>\n
Now, there was indeed one group of gerim who did get a portion in Eretz Yisrael. \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9, the descendants of Yisro, were given a fertile area of 500 x 500 amos near Yericho to live in until the Beis Hamikdash would be built (at which time it would be given to whatever shevet provided the equivalent area for the Har Habayis).<\/p>\n
(Incidentally, they didn\u2019t stay there for long; they needed a rebbe, and so they wound up leaving this area and traveling to Arad, in a desolate part of the Negev, to study under Osniel ben Kenaz. Their reward was that some of their descendants served in the Sanhedrin.)<\/p>\n
So the Yerushalmi mentions \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9, and then goes on to quote a baraisa that R. Yehudah holds that a ger can recite \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd because Avraham is the father of all nations, and a psak by R. Abbahu that the halachah is like R. Yehudah.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/lib.cet.ac.il\/storage\/items\/14700_14799\/0000014780\/14780M.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Tosafos (in Bava Basra) discusses what this means. According to Rabbeinu Tam, the Mishnah (R. Meir) is saying that any kind of ger (\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9 or anyone else) can say \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd as long as his mother is a born Jew, while R. Yehudah holds that you need to be \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9 as well as \u05d0\u05de\u05d5 \u05de\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc. (Although he asks: how does a ger say \u05d0\u05e8\u05de\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d5\u05d1\u05d3 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d9 \u05d5\u05d2\u05d5’, which seemingly refers to Yaakov?) ![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.amalnet.k12.il\/sites\/tanah\/images\/tan3-1.jpg\")
Ri understands that there\u2019s no real machlokes between R. Meir and R. Yehudah \u2013 both agree that only \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9 who are also \u05d0\u05de\u05d5 \u05de\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc can bring bikkurim and say the pesukim.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, Rambam states that any ger (no distinction whether \u05d0\u05de\u05d5 \u05de\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc) can say \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd, because he understands R. Yehudah to be saying that \u05d0\u05d1 \u05d4\u05de\u05d5\u05df \u05d2\u05d5\u05d9\u05dd makes it possible even for a ger to say \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5. He also adds a detail: \u201cthe promise was first given to Avraham that his children would inherit the land.\u201d Now, what does that mean? Also, why then does the Rambam differentiate between \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd and \u05d5\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d9 \u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05e8 \u2013 the latter, he says, a ger can\u2019t say? (The question is actually on the Mishnah and the Yerushalmi \u2013 no variant opinion is given about \u05d5\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d9 \u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05e8.)![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.kibbutznetwork.co.il\/shivataminim\/Shavuot.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Ramban explains that in theory gerim could have been \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05d4 because of Avraham, but practically speaking they didn\u2019t get a portion simply because Eretz Yisrael was divided only among those who left Egypt. But just as those who were children at \u05d9\u05e6\u05d9\u05d0\u05ea \u05de\u05e6\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd didn\u2019t get a portion of their own but yet, when they do eventually inherit, can say \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd, so it is with gerim \u2013 they are essentially \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e0\u05d7\u05dc\u05d4. (As for Rabbeinu Tam\u2019s question about \u05d0\u05e8\u05de\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d5\u05d1\u05d3 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d9, Ramban answers that once the ger is considered a descendant of Avraham, then by extension he has the same relationship to the other Avos.)<\/p>\n
Kesef Mishneh takes a different tack. When Hashem promised the land to Avraham he wasn\u2019t yet \u05d0\u05d1 \u05dc\u05d2\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd \u2013 that came only afterwards, and by that time his biological children were entitled to it. But it\u2019s not that intrinsically gerim can\u2019t inherit Eretz Yisrael.<\/p>\n
Shaagas Aryeh, in the course of a long teshuvah about milah for \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d8\u05d5\u05e8\u05d4 (they are obligated \u2013 Rambam, Hil. Melachim 10:8), discusses the idea that the Rambam\u2019s point about the promise to Avraham is that even though Yitzchak and Yaakov aren\u2019t called \u201cfathers\u201d of gerim, since Avraham is, that\u2019s good enough. (Which means, he says, that Rambam would necessarily disagree with Ramban\u2019s answer about \u05d0\u05e8\u05de\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d5\u05d1\u05d3 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d9. One of the other mefarshim on Rambam suggests that maybe he would understand that posuk as Rashbam does, \u201cMy father (Avraham) was a wandering Aramean.\u201d)<\/p>\n
Incidentally, he points out that \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9 are in fact biologically descended from Avraham (since Midian was one of the sons of Keturah); but because of \u05db\u05d9 \u05d1\u05d9\u05e6\u05d7\u05e7 \u05d9\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05dc\u05da \u05d6\u05e8\u05e2,<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.ynet.co.il\/PicServer2\/20122005\/787238\/dore_hagar_wa.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
they\u2019re excluded (which is why R. Meir says that there needs to be \u05d0\u05de\u05d5 \u05de\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc to be able to recite \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd). Also incidentally, he points out why in Nedarim (recent Daf Yomi) we are told that even circumcised \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e7\u05d8\u05d5\u05e8\u05d4 are considered uncircumcised \u2013 because while they are obligated in milah, they don\u2019t have the mitzvah of periah, and \u05de\u05dc \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0 \u05e4\u05e8\u05e2 \u05db\u05d0\u05d9\u05dc\u05d5 \u05dc\u05d0 \u05de\u05dc.<\/p>\n
As for the difference between \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd and \u05d5\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d9 \u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05e8, there are several explanations, most of which focus on the difference in wording between the two.<\/p>\n
Radvaz notes that by \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd the expression is \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 \u05dc\u05ea\u05ea \u05dc\u05e0\u05d5, which can be understood as \u05e0\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 \u2013 to Avraham \u2013 and therefore \u05dc\u05ea\u05ea \u05dc\u05e0\u05d5, it pertains to the whole Jewish people, gerim included. Whereas by \u05d5\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d9 \u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05e8 the expression is \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e0\u05ea\u05ea \u05dc\u05e0\u05d5, and it wasn\u2019t given to the gerim; \u05db\u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 there refers to \u05d6\u05d1\u05ea \u05d7\u05dc\u05d1 \u05d5\u05d3\u05d1\u05e9.![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.nivon.co.il\/portals\/13\/images\/photos\/1054_406063.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Mishneh Lamelech quotes R. Moshe ibn Chaviv, who points out that Yechezkel states that gerim will get a portion in Eretz Yisrael in Moshiach\u2019s times; therefore they can well say \u05dc\u05ea\u05ea \u05dc\u05e0\u05d5 in future tense. (A logical reason for this is that gerim who joined the Jewish people after Yetzias Mitzrayim, when we were at the highest heights, may not have been totally sincere; not so with those who became gerim during the years of galus.) Whereas \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e0\u05ea\u05ea \u05dc\u05e0\u05d5 is in past tense.<\/p>\n
A couple of mefarshim on Rambam bring an idea from R. Shmuel Primo, ![\"\u05d0\u05de\u05e8\u05d9](\"http:\/\/www.hebrewbooks.org\/thumbs\/48-20914.jpg\")
that the expression \u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d6\u05d1\u05ea \u05d7\u05dc\u05d1 \u05d5\u05d3\u05d1\u05e9 is never found in Chumash Bereishis (addressed to the Avos), only in Shemos (addressed to the Jews in Egypt) and afterwards. So if in \u05d5\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d9 \u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05e8 the expression \u05db\u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 refers to \u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d6\u05d1\u05ea \u05d7\u05dc\u05d1 \u05d5\u05d3\u05d1\u05e9, then \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 there necessarily means the Jews who were in Egypt \u2013 and the ger isn\u2019t descended from them.<\/p>\n
(This R. Shmuel Primo \u2013 probably no relation of the hatter \u2013 was an interesting character. He was a youngish talmid chacham when Shabsai Tzvi appeared on the scene, and he became his secretary \u2013 and even after Shabsai Tzvi\u2019s shmad he continued to believe in him. He later became rav of one of the important communities in Turkey, wrote a couple of sefarim, and is quoted respectfully by the Chida and others.)<\/p>\n
Yet another answer, from Mirkeves Hamishneh, is that \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd must be said in lashon hakodesh, and there \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 can mean \u201cmasters\u201d (as in \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05d9\u05de\u05e0\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1 \u05dc\u05e4\u05e8\u05e2\u05d4); whereas \u05d5\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05d9 \u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05e8 can be said in any language, and in other languages \u201cav\u201d means only \u201cfather.\u201d<\/p>\n
*<\/p>\n
All of this, in turn, brings up the question about what a ger says in davening. Can he say \u05d0\u05dc\u05e7\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5, and can he say in bentching \u05e9\u05d4\u05e0\u05d7\u05dc\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5?<\/p>\n
The Mishnah there in Bikkurim says that a ger should say \u05d0\u05dc\u05e7\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea \u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc, and in shul he should say \u05d0\u05dc\u05e7\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05db\u05dd (unless \u05d0\u05de\u05d5 \u05de\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc, in which case he can say \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5 because of her). On the other hand, we have the opinion of R. Yehudah mentioned earlier, and the Yerushalmi stating that R. Abbahu paskened like R. Yehudah (which necessarily would have to refer to davening, since in R. Abbahu\u2019s times there were no bikkurim).<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.oztorah.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/11\/bensching-birkat-hamazon-sheva-brachot-zimmun-zimun.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
In the Tosafos mentioned above, Rabbeinu Tam decides according to the Mishnah, and therefore says that a ger can\u2019t lead a mezuman, because he can\u2019t say \u05e2\u05dc \u05e9\u05d4\u05e0\u05d7\u05dc\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5. Whereas Ri argues that the halachah is like R. Yehudah, and therefore that he can.<\/p>\n
Similarly, Mordechai tells how in Wurzburg they prevented a ger from being chazzan because of the problem with him saying \u05d0\u05dc\u05e7\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5, but that Rabbeinu Yoel allowed it based on R. Yehudah.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/i.ytimg.com\/vi\/D01hxSr5UCI\/hqdefault.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Yossele Rosenblatt (not a ger)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Rambam, too, writes in a teshuvah to R. Ovadiah the ger that he should daven like everyone else, because all gerim are children of Avraham.<\/p>\n So this is accepted as halachah. The Alter Rebbe summarizes it as follows: with women there is a safek whether they are chayav in \u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05ea \u05d4\u05de\u05d6\u05d5\u05df \u05de\u05d3\u05d0\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05d9\u05ea\u05d0, since they don\u2019t get a portion in Eretz Yisrael (and they are \u05e2\u05dd \u05d1\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9 \u05e2\u05e6\u05de\u05df, so not necessarily included with the men). With Kohanim and Levi\u2019im, the only reason they are chayav is because they have \u05e2\u05e8\u05d9 \u05de\u05e7\u05dc\u05d8, but otherwise they are important enough to have a status of their own. Whereas gerim can be considered an appendage (\u05e0\u05d8\u05e4\u05dc) to the Jewish people.<\/p>\n One last detail we talked about: isn\u2019t being a chazzan a type of \u05e9\u05e8\u05e8\u05d4, and gerim are not allowed that? The answer is that a chazzan is not telling anyone what to do, just saying kaddish and Borchu and so forth, to which everyone answers.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Makkos 19a (2) Special Thanks to Alex Heppenheimer. The Gemara mentions that a ger, when he brings bikkurim, can\u2019t make the accompanying declaration (\u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05d9\u05db\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd), because he can\u2019t say \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05e0\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2 \u05d4’ \u05dc\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5. This in turn is based on a Mishnah in Bikkurim which says so (with the proviso that if his mother is Jewish, … Continue reading Makos 19a (2) Shiur by Alex Heppenheimer<\/span> ![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.kingofcopy.com\/site\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/You-dont-have-to-be-Jewish-to-Love-Levys.jpg\")
<\/p>\n