SELECTED REFORM RESPONSA
relevant literature may be found in H. J. Zimmels, Die Marranen in der Rabbinischen Literatur, 21ff. One extreme position was held by Solomon ben Simon Duran (Rashbash Responsa,#89) who felt that not only the apostate, but also the children would continue to be considered Jewish forever into the future as long as the maternal line was Jewish . He also felt that nothing needed to be done by any generation of such apostates when they returned to Judaism . No ritual bath nor any other act was considered necessary or desirable. In fact he emphasized that no attention be given to their previous state for that might discourage their return. Rabbenu Gershom gave a similar view and urged the quiet acceptance of all who returned to Judaism (Machzor Vitry, 96 and 97).
The other extreme has been presented by Rashi (in his commentary to Kid. 68b and Lev. 24:10). He felt that any returning apostate, or the children of a Jewish mother who had apostacized, are potentially Jewish , but most undergo a process akin to conversion if they wish to become part of the Jewish continuity. That point of view was rejected by most later scholars, as for example Nahmanides (in his commentary
to Leviticus 24: 10: Shulhan Arukh Yoreh De-ah 268. 10f, Ezekiel Landau , Responsa,#150 etc.). We, therefore, have two extremes in the Rabbinic literature; both, of course, represented reaction to particular historic conditions. Solomon ben Simon of Duran wished to make it easy for a large number of Marranos to return to Judaism ; unfortunately, this did not occur. Even when it was possible for Jews to leave Spain, the majority chose to remain. Rashi 's harsh attitude probably reflected the small number of apostates who were a thorn in the side of the French community. Normative rabbinic Judaism chose a middle path and encouraged the apostate's return along with some studies, but without a formal conversion process. If an apostate did not wish to return to Judaism he would, nevertheless, be considered as part of the Jewish people(San. 44a). His or her marriage, if performed according to Jewish law as Marranos, and Bepennss as unwilling apostates, were valid(Yev. 30b; Shulhan Arukh, Even Ha
245