The Mamzerim Case

In Kislev 5733 (published on November 19, 1972), Rabbi Shlomo Goren issued a controversial ruling known as "The Mamzerim Case" (or "The Brother and Sister Ruling"). The ruling attempted to clear the siblings Chanoch and Miriam Langer from suspicion of being mamzerim, which sparked great anger among the Charedi community and widened the rift between the Charedi public and the Chief Rabbinate of Israel.

Historical Background

In 5683, Bolek Borkowski and Chava Ginzburg married in a church in the Polish town of Lukow. At the request of Chava's Jewish parents, he underwent giyur with the Rabbi of Likva, Poland. After several years, when Chava's parents made aliyah, Borkowski and his wife, who had meanwhile had a child, followed them. Years later, Chava separated from her first husband without a get and met another man, Yehoshua Langer, whom she married in a religious Jewish ceremony. They had two children, Chanoch and Miriam, who were considered mamzerim according to halacha, forbidden to marry any kosher Jew.

Discussion in the Batei Din

In 5716, the case came to the attention of the Tel Aviv Beis Din, which invalidated the children for marriage as mamzerim based on these details. In the 1960s, the case returned to the Petach Tikva Beis Din where witnesses appeared. Bolek Borkowski, who was known as a ger, firmly claimed he was a kosher Jew and that his giyur was performed properly. Since there were no witnesses to the giyur, the question was whether he was established and known as a Jew, and additionally, whether he maintained a Jewish lifestyle that could itself establish him as having the status of a ger. Borkowski claimed he put on tefillin daily and kept Shabbos. The Beis Din conducted a brief examination of his Jewish knowledge. Borkowski knew to say that tefillin are put on in the morning, not on Shabbos, but didn't know exactly how to put on tefillin, and made mistakes in completing the Shema Yisrael. The Beis Din investigated whether he was known publicly as a Jew, and indeed his acquaintances testified that he was considered a kosher Jew in the community. Since according to halacha a person who is presumed to be a ger is considered a ger, the Beis Din ruled that since Borkowski was known and established in the community as a ger, this could not be changed without contradictory evidence, and left the children's status as mamzerim in effect.

The discussion reached the Great Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem. Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli, from the Religious Zionist stream, believed there was room for leniency, partly due to Borkowski's inability to complete the "Shema Yisrael," but Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv ruled that even if the ger transgresses the words of Chazal, this doesn't contradict that he sees himself as Jewish, since in the Jewish community he lived in it was accepted to do so and to only be strict about fundamental things like going to shul on Shabbos and resting from work on Shabbos: "In our time, we must judge that the behavior in Jewish ways by which conversion is established takes on a somewhat different form."

The case returned to the Petach Tikva Beis Din, which heard additional witnesses, including testimony from a gabbai who related that for a long period Borkowski would visit the shul on Shabbos, and on the other hand other testimonies that he was seen in prayer standing inactive like a "statue," and ultimately decided that Borkowski was Jewish and the mamzer status remained valid. The case was returned for further discussion in the appeals level at the Great Rabbinical Court. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef joined Rabbis Elyashiv and Yisraeli. Unlike the interim ruling, this time a brief and unexplained unanimous decision was reached - not to change the ruling of the Petach Tikva Beis Din.

The Sephardic Chief Rabbi at the time, Rabbi Yitzchak Nissim, tried to establish a special Beis Din to rehear the case, but met with opposition from the dayanim who claimed there was no place to invalidate the Great Rabbinical Court from ruling on the matter based on the halacha that forbids a Beis Din from questioning another Beis Din's rulings because it's forbidden to consider them mistaken. In late 5731, seven dayanim of the Great Rabbinical Court announced they were willing to rehear the case.

Background of Rabbi Goren's Intervention

While serving as the Chief Military Rabbi, Rabbi Goren wrote a ruling outlining halachic principles that he believed would allow leniency in the halachic issue. As the case dragged on for years, Defense Minister Moshe Dayan tried to intervene on behalf of the two siblings. Prime Minister Golda Meir also met with them and was moved by their plight. Following the case, the Independent Liberals party proposed a law intended to permit civil marriage for those disqualified from marriage, which caused a coalition crisis. Rabbi Goren moved from the IDF to become Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv, and later ran for the position of Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi. The case hung like a cloud over the Chief Rabbinate election. Ultimately, Rabbi Goren was elected Chief Rabbi, replacing Rabbi Isser Yehuda Unterman, who held a strict view regarding the brother and sister case. Alongside Rabbi Goren, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef was elected Rishon LeZion, replacing Rabbi Nissim.

Ruling of the Special Beit Din

As Chief Rabbi, Rabbi Goren decided to convene a special rabbinical court to rule on the matter. Nine rabbis were assembled, but only one - Rabbi Goren himself - was willing to be identified. All others maintained anonymity "to protect themselves and their families from threats, attacks, and slander from groups that spread terror," according to Rabbi Goren. This special court, which Rabbi Goren said was composed of dayanim, heads of batei din, and even a dayan from the Great Rabbinical Court, ruled to declare the mamzerim kosher, mainly by challenging the very validity of the conversion. Immediately upon publishing the ruling, the Chief Military Rabbi, Rabbi Mordechai Piron, married Chanoch Langer and his partner, and that evening Miriam Langer also married her chosen one. The weddings were attended by the Defense Minister, and the two new couples received a congratulatory telegram from Prime Minister Meir. Left-wing parties expressed satisfaction and hope that the Rabbinate would continue to respond to the needs of "enlightened and progressive society." Rabbi Goren was placed under police protection, and Young Mafdal members offered to help protect him. His father's burial place, whose yahrzeit fell nearby, was kept secret for fear of desecration.

Rabbi Goren's ruling was published extensively in a booklet he released sometime after the ruling was announced. He relied on arguments all intended to supposedly prove that there was no chazakat gerut for this convert. To establish this claim, he combined several arguments: In one, he argued that since the details of the conversion status were not clearly known, this was considered a "chazaka she'ein ima ta'ana," despite the fact that this din only relates to legal chazakot like chazkat shalosh shanim and chezkat mamon and not to issurim that are unrelated to claims at all. He relied on testimony from passul eidut who did not maintain a Jewish lifestyle, and additionally Rabbi Goren cited a singular opinion among the Rishonim that even a convert who converted properly, if they returned to their old ways and stopped observing mitzvot - their conversion is nullified, and according to him in this case this opinion could be combined to determine that the father's conversion was invalid. He combined opinions of Rishonim and based on this "ruling" "permitted" the two mamzerim to marry into the Jewish community.

Chabad's Response

The Rebbe strongly opposed the move, particularly emphasizing that the Rabbi was only elected so he would issue the lenient ruling, and harshly condemned the government's interference in Torah rulings, and the declarations by government ministers that the brother and sister were permitted to marry into the community, even before the rabbis' ruling, which constitutes gross and serious interference in Torah law. Such interference, had it occurred in any court operating under gentile laws, would have shocked the enlightened public worldwide.

Without doubt - said the Rebbe - this concession by Rabbi Goren on halacha is only the first, and undoubtedly they will turn to him to "find permission" for other halachic "problems," like marriages between a kohen and a divorcee and the like.

The Rebbe said that the "religious" ministers, the Mafdal ministers, declared that they care for Am Yisrael, Torat Yisrael, and Eretz Yisrael. On the completeness of the Land they already compromised with far-reaching concessions, on Am Yisrael they already compromised with the Who is a Jew law, and now they compromised on Torat Yisrael.

The Rebbe called on Rabbi Goren to resign from his position, and thereby partially correct the wrong.

At the conference held against the move and in the massive protest that took place, Chabad rabbis participated, including Rabbi Yaakov Landau who emphasized the personal bias that Rabbi Goren had, having been appointed as Rabbi due to the lenient ruling he had declared in advance. Rabbi Landau explained that when a ruling judge has a personal interest in the ruling, the ruling is invalid. All the more so when it is done to find favor in the eyes of the secular. Additionally, all the great rabbis of the Charedi public participated in the protest, including all the Lithuanian leaders, among them the Steipler who sent his representatives to the event, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach who wrote a harsh letter, and Rabbi Elyashiv who commented on Rabbi Goren's ruling that "it didn't even reach the level of mockery."

Following the Rebbe's vigorous protest, the Mafdal-owned newspaper HaTzofeh began to disgrace the Rebbe and the Lubavitch movement with shallow articles, using crude and vulgar words against them. Gedolei Yisrael protested against this insolence.