Conversion to Judaism

Formal conversion, or giyyur, establishes membership in the Jewish people rather than simply recording a change in religious belief.[2] It can involve adopting a cultural, national, and historical identity alongside a religious one, through learning, participation in holidays and lifecycle events, and commitment to Jewish practice.[4] In most contemporary American Jewish movements, the process commonly includes a period of study, immersion in a mikveh, and actual or symbolic circumcision for males.[2] These elements belong to a process of becoming Jewish that may take months or years, rather than beginning and ending with a ceremony.[2]

The traditional rabbinic framework combines examination of a candidate’s intentions, instruction in Jewish faith and commandments, a rabbinical court, circumcision for men, and immersion.[1] Modern movements differ over the obligations a candidate must accept, the necessity of particular rites, and the qualifications of the supervising authorities.[5] Orthodox and Conservative authorities commonly draw on rabbinic legal precedents, while requirements and recognition also differ among individual communities within a movement.[2]

Jewish teachings connect admission to the community with obligations toward the person admitted: accepted converts are to be treated as peers of Jews by birth, and disparaging their ancestors is considered sinful.[6] Maimonides understood the command to love the convert as a separate obligation in addition to the general command to love one’s neighbor.[1] Alongside this welcoming principle, rabbinic procedures examine motivation and explain the responsibilities and hardships associated with joining the Jewish people.[7]

The Hebrew Bible does not describe a formal procedure by which a non-Israelite becomes a member of Israel comparable to the later rabbinic conversion process.[2] Religion and nationality were closely connected in biblical Israel, and newcomers could join through assimilation into the community.[8] Exodus 12:47–49 nevertheless identifies circumcision as a condition for a male sojourner to participate in the Passover.[2] The Hebrew term ger is traced from an earlier meaning of a stranger or protected resident toward a post-exilic meaning of a convert to Judaism.[6] Biblical descriptions of affiliation also include the stranger joining the house of Jacob and the person who keeps the Sabbath and takes hold of the covenant.[6]

The Babylonian exile following the destruction of the First Temple changed the setting in which Jews defined their communal boundaries, with dispersed communities maintaining identity beyond a shared geography.[2] Worship beyond the land of Israel helped create the conditions in which gentiles could adopt Judaism through the formal procedures later developed by the rabbis.[8] Biblical writings express different approaches to outsiders: Ezra’s emphasis on a “holy seed” favored exclusion of people of foreign origin, whereas Ruth and Jonah express more inclusive approaches.[6]

Ruth became a central model for rabbinic understandings of conversion through her persistence in accompanying Naomi and her commitment to Naomi’s people and God.[1] In Yevamot, Naomi’s efforts to dissuade Ruth are interpreted as instruction concerning commandments, restrictions, and punishments, while Ruth’s replies demonstrate her resolve.[9] This reading connects the biblical narrative with the later court’s responsibility to establish that a candidate understands the commitment being undertaken.[9]

Greek-speaking Judaism accepted converts and appears to have promoted Jewish monotheism.[6] During the Second Temple period, attractions to Judaism included monotheism, Hebrew liturgy, and marriage to a Jewish partner.[10] Josephus described interest in Judaism among inhabitants of Greek and non-Greek cities in the Roman period.[6] Queen Helena of Adiabene and her sons Izates and Monobazus were notable converts, and women appear prominently among ancient converts.[6]

Conversion also formed part of Hasmonean expansion: Josephus’s account describes neighboring peoples, including the Idumaeans, being required to choose between leaving their country and accepting circumcision and Judaean religious and social practices.[2] Such coercion was exceptional within the broader history of ancient conversion.[10] Ancient affiliation could also stop short of full conversion: some people adopted Jewish monotheism and moral principles without circumcision or observance of other ceremonial laws.[6] Rabbinic discussions addressed their obligations, including a form of affiliation involving public acceptance of the seven Noahide injunctions before three authoritative men.[6]

The familiar formal conversion procedure took shape with the rise of rabbinic Judaism after the Second Temple’s destruction in 70 CE.[2] Its details were not definitively settled before the second century CE; rabbinic interpretation identified circumcision, immersion, and a sacrifice as prerequisites.[6] After the Temple’s destruction, sacrifice ceased, and a later practice required setting aside a small coin for an offering should the Temple be rebuilt.[6] That substitute requirement was eventually dropped as well.[6]

A procedure developing after the Hadrianic rebellion placed a court of three at the center of assessing intentions and explaining the burdens and obligations of joining the Jewish people.[6] Circumcision and immersion followed for a candidate who persisted, with instruction accompanying the rites; this procedure entered rabbinic codes.[6] The Talmudic presentation in Yevamot and the later tractate Gerim became important accounts of the process, including acceptance of Jewish religious law and rites performed publicly with witnesses.[2]

Rabbinic attitudes combined encouragement with scrutiny of motives, warning against conversion for marriage, material gain, honor, fear, or superstition.[6] A tradition derived from Ruth called for turning candidates away three times, but not more often; this is a tradition rather than a binding law.[6][11] Contemporary organized recruitment of non-Jews remains limited, and Jewish non-proselytizing developed through both beliefs about salvation and historical limits on Jewish power to persuade or coerce others.[11]

Christianity’s rise as the Roman Empire’s official religion brought laws threatening converts and the Jews who received them with death and prohibiting Christians from undergoing circumcision.[2] These conditions contributed to declining conversion and greater emphasis on warning candidates about hardship and persecution.[2] Punishment of converts and their Jewish communities, followed by prohibitions on accepting converts, also encouraged communal wariness.[10] Historical accounts associate greater security with more openness toward newcomers, while persecution strengthened concern with communal boundaries.[10]

Instruction continued to precede conversion ceremonies in modern Jewish practice, but nineteenth-century American discussions introduced significant differences over adult circumcision.[6] A Central Conference of American Rabbis resolution declined to insist on milat gerim, the circumcision of converts.[6] In Israel, an inherited Orthodox rabbinical establishment became the setting for increasingly prominent disagreements after Reform and Conservative communities established themselves following the Six-Day War.[12] Some non-Orthodox candidates converted before immigration, while others studied in Israel and completed the formal conversion abroad.[12]

Immigration also made questions of Jewish status pressing within Israel: after more than 45,000 Jews arrived from Poland in 1956–57, an estimated 10 percent of those immigrants were not Jewish under Jewish law.[13] Disputes over registration of mixed-family members contributed to a coalition crisis in 1958.[13] Chief Rabbi Shlomo Goren later established conversion courts and educational institutes, interviewed candidates, and sought to expedite conversions; certificates under his jurisdiction stated that they were valid only in Israel.[13] Mass immigration from the former Soviet Union subsequently increased the significance of conversion for immigrants who did not meet halakhic criteria for Jewish status.[12]

A prospective convert commonly begins by learning about Jewish religion and culture, seeking Jewish experiences, and speaking with a rabbi.[14] Study and participation can include Jewish holidays, lifecycle events, and everyday practice rather than classroom instruction alone.[4] People may begin considering conversion in adolescence, through a relationship, when starting a family, or in connection with a child’s Jewish education or bar or bat mitzvah.[2] Some non-Jewish spouses live a Jewish life for years before undertaking formal conversion.[2]

The Talmudic procedure in Yevamot 47a begins with questions about motivation and an explanation of the hardships experienced by Jews.[7] A persistent candidate is taught some lenient and stringent commandments, together with their consequences and rewards, but should not be overwhelmed with threats or excessive detail.[7] The Shulchan Arukh similarly includes inquiry into motives, instruction in principles of faith and selected commandments, and discussion of the Jewish people’s hardships.[1] This preparation places the decision within both religious obligation and membership in a historically vulnerable people.[1]

Traditional conversion is supervised by a beit din, a rabbinical court of three.[9] In a contemporary process, the court evaluates knowledge, motivation, sincerity, and the intention to live as a Jew.[14] Its composition depends on the community: a general description includes at least one rabbi and two other observant Jews knowledgeable about conversion, whereas Orthodox standards require authorities who meet Orthodox qualifications.[14][15] Those qualifications include standards for acceptable witnesses, such as observance of Shabbat.[15]

For male candidates, the traditional rite is brit milah, circumcision, or hatafat dam brit, the ritual drawing of a drop of blood when the candidate is already circumcised.[14] Reform and Reconstructionist rabbis may offer a choice concerning hatafat dam brit.[14] Yevamot records differing early positions on whether circumcision or immersion alone could suffice in particular circumstances, alongside Rabbi Yoḥanan’s ruling that both are necessary.[9] In the sequence described in Yevamot 47a, immersion follows circumcision after healing.[7]

Immersion in a mikveh concludes the procedure presented in Yevamot, after which the convert is “like a born Jew in every sense.”[7] The passage describes women assisting a female candidate in the bath, with Torah scholars standing outside to provide instruction while preserving modesty.[7] Contemporary explanations also understand immersion as symbolic spiritual rebirth, marking the candidate’s entry into Jewish status.[14] Traditional communities expect acceptance of the commandments, while liberal rabbis may seek commitment to selected commandments.[14]

Orthodox conversion requires an Orthodox beit din, immersion, circumcision or hatafat dam brit for male candidates, and acceptance of applicable commandments.[5] Conservative practice combines more traditional ritual requirements with greater flexibility regarding motivation and acceptance of commandments.[5] Reform and Reconstructionist procedures are generally more flexible and often depend on the sponsoring rabbi.[5] Reform practice can include agreement to observe commandments according to Reform standards and public participation in the community without universally requiring circumcision or immersion.[15]

Preparation has no single duration across movements or communities.[2] A guide to American conversion describes Orthodox preparation as commonly involving at least a year of study, while Reform and Conservative Introduction to Judaism courses typically run for 14–18 weeks.[16] Those course lengths do not define the full personal process, which can extend over months or years.[2] Historical descriptions of Israeli Orthodox programs include ten months of twice-weekly afternoon study and a separate account of 450 hours over approximately an academic year before assessment by a special conversion court.[17][18]

After conversion, a person traditionally takes a Hebrew name and is associated with Abraham and Sarah as spiritual parents in religious or legal contexts.[14] Naming customs include Avraham ben Avraham Avinu for men and Sarah or Ruth bat Avraham Avinu for women, but these particular names are not legally required.[15] Abraham’s association with converts reflects the biblical description of him as “the father of a multitude of nations” and interpretations of converts joining his family.[15]

In Israel’s state application system, citizens, permanent residents, and legal residence-visa holders who have not previously applied may seek to open a conversion procedure without an application fee.[19] The application is submitted online with supporting documents, with different documentation requirements for citizens or permanent residents and visa holders.[19] An existing military conversion case must be closed and scanned into the district before that application can proceed.[19]

Military service can also provide a setting for education leading to conversion.[20] Milena Gershkowitz, born in Belarus to a Jewish father and Catholic mother, moved to Israel as a young child and joined Nativ while serving in the IDF.[20] She studied Jewish philosophy and history before continuing into a conversion program, recalling that learning about Shabbat candles, challah, and Jewish ceremonies felt like “all these puzzle pieces of my life were finally coming together.”[20] Her subsequent conversion formalized that developing connection.[20]

The Law of Return, passed in 1950, provides a separate civil framework relevant to converts.[13] A 1970 amendment defined a Jew for its purposes as someone born to a Jewish mother or converted to Judaism who is not a member of another religion, without specifying a denomination whose conversions would count.[13] The law also extends immigration eligibility to specified relatives, including children and grandchildren of Jews and their spouses.[13] Aliyah applicants must document their connection to Judaism, for example through conversion papers or a letter from an affiliated rabbi of an affiliated Jewish community, and additional evidence may be required.[21]

Israeli court decisions progressively addressed the civil treatment of different conversion institutions.[22][23] In 2009, the Supreme Court held that although the state was not obliged to fund private conversion organizations, any funding provided could not favor preparation for Orthodox conversion over preparation for Reform conversion.[22] The decision connected that support with integration of Law of Return-eligible immigrants and with pluralism and freedom of religion.[22] A 2016 ruling allowed non-Israelis living in Israel who converted through private Orthodox courts to seek citizenship under the Law of Return.[23]

In 2016, the High Court also ruled that publicly funded mikvaot had to be accessible for Reform and Conservative conversion immersions, making their exclusion illegal and discriminatory.[24] In 2017, Reform and Conservative conversions conducted in Israel were recognized for Jewish registration in the Population Registry but not yet for obtaining citizenship.[23] On March 1, 2021, an 8–1 High Court ruling extended Law of Return recognition to Reform and Conservative conversions performed in Israel.[25] The petitions involved 12 people, most had been filed in 2005, and the court had repeatedly postponed deciding to allow legislative action.[25]

The 2021 decision addressed the law’s reference to a person who “has converted,” which did not expressly require conversion according to halakhah or through the Chief Rabbinate.[26] It applied an earlier test involving a recognized Jewish community with an established, enduring, shared Jewish identity, and noted existing recognition of those movements’ conversions abroad.[26] Justice Noam Sohlberg agreed with the legal conclusion but favored delaying implementation until twelve months after formation of the 36th government to permit legislation.[27] The Knesset retained the ability to enact a different or additional definition.[26]

In 2023, the Population and Immigration Authority recognized Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform conversions performed in Israel for immigration, citizenship, and registration purposes.[28] The 2021 judgment did not determine halakhic status for marriage, divorce, or burial, and the Chief Rabbinate did not recognize non-Orthodox conversions for those religious purposes.[29] Thus, receipt of citizenship under the Law of Return does not itself establish eligibility to marry through the Rabbinate.[3]

The command to love the convert gives conversion an ethical significance extending beyond the requirements of admission.[1] Accepted converts are peers of Jews by birth, and rabbinic teachings prohibit disparagement of their ancestry.[6] The image of a convert as a newborn expresses a change in legal status, including consequences for some earlier family relationships.[1][6] This legal transformation coexists with continuing obligations toward non-Jewish parents, including honoring them and observing Jewish mourning practices after their deaths.[15] Talmudic discussion also permits a convert to inherit from a deceased father alongside a non-Jewish brother.[15]

Joining the Jewish people may require social adjustment after the rites are complete.[14] Converts can face the work of rebuilding relationships with birth families, developing relationships in Jewish communities, and reconciling an awareness of being a convert with belonging fully to the Jewish people.[14] Study, shared observance, and community participation therefore form part of the broader process through which conversion becomes a lived identity.[4]

In Israel, the issue has particular significance for immigrants and their descendants whose Jewish identification does not meet the Chief Rabbinate’s criteria.[28] In 2023, approximately 450,000 citizens who identified as Jewish but did not meet those criteria, together with members of unrecognized religious groups, were registered as “lacking religion.”[28] The vast majority were immigrants from the former Soviet Union and their descendants unable to demonstrate Jewish matrilineal descent to the Rabbinate’s satisfaction.[28] Conversion consequently intersects with integration, family identity, access to religious services, and the relationship between civil and religious institutions.[22][28]

Historical numerical accounts illustrate different parts of this institutional landscape rather than supplying a current national total.[17][3] A 2007 account cited approximately 2,000 converts annually, plus another 2,500 among Ethiopian immigrants whose procedure formed part of the Jewish Agency’s absorption process.[17] Around the 2021 ruling, Reform and Conservative conversions in Israel were estimated at about 30 a year.[3] The judgment’s reach nevertheless established civil recognition for conversions conducted within Israel by those movements, ending the previous distinction between their domestic and overseas conversions for Law of Return purposes.[3]

Recognition across movements remains a major dispute: most Orthodox rabbis do not recognize conversions performed by liberal movements, while liberal rabbis generally accept conversions conducted under a Jewish movement’s auspices.[4] Disagreement can also extend to Conservative conversions and even some Orthodox conversions.[15] Conservative authorities may accept Reform conversions involving circumcision and immersion regardless of the court’s observance level.[15] These differences affect whether a convert’s Jewish status is accepted in another community.[4]

Within halakhic debate, a central question is what acceptance of the commandments requires and how intended or subsequent observance affects validity.[30] Rabbi Ben-Zion Meir Hai Uziel held that a court need not know that the candidate would observe every commandment, while stricter interpretations require acceptance of every commandment.[30] A Talmudic position codified by Maimonides and the Shulchan Arukh maintains the Jewish status of a convert who later returns to former practices; a stricter approach associated with Rabbi Yitzhak Schmelkes’s 1876 ruling questions conversions lacking an intention to observe.[30] Such disputes have led to annulments by rabbinical courts and challenges to conversions conducted by Rabbi Chaim Druckman’s courts.[30][31]

Israeli political disputes have included a proposed 2017 bill limiting recognition of conversions conducted in Israel to the Chief Rabbinate and state rabbinical courts, and a bill seeking to exclude Reform and Conservative conversion immersions from public mikvaot.[23][24] The enduring distinction between civil recognition and religious personal status means that Law of Return recognition does not settle those broader disagreements.[29] Separately, scholarly reconstruction of ancient conversion involves interpretation of biblical evidence, incomplete evidence about reception of converts, and questions about Josephus’s accounts of Hasmonean coercion.[2][10]