San Diego (special) --The battle over "Who Is a Jew" took a dramatic turn in San Diego last week when the boards of the San Diego Rabbinical Association and the United Jewish Federation, in close consultation, adopted strongly worded resolutions protesting legislation pending in the Knesset to withdraw Israeli recognition from conversions performed by non-Orthodox rabbis.

In a move that infuriated non-Orthodox Jews earlier this month, the Knesset gave preliminary approval to the bill which, if adopted in its present form, would mean that people who are converted to Judaism by non-Orthodox rabbis in the United States or elsewhere in the Diaspora would be ineligible for citizenship in Israel. Currently, the "Law of Return" guarantees the right to Israeli citizenship to Jews of all backgrounds.

Before the measure can become law, however, it must go through three Knesset readings. Further action on it has been suspended pending discussions over possible compromises, including a suggestion that all conversions be recognized but that Israeli identity cards specify under what authority a person was converted.

So heated has been the reaction in the United States to the preliminary vote by the Knesset that some non-Orthodox religious leaders have considered calling for the suspension of contributions to Israel via the United Jewish Federation and United Jewish Appeal, except to fund those activities which can be demonstrated as being supportive of religious pluralism within the Jewish community.

While such a course of action has not been ruled out, strategists in the Reform, Reconstructionist and Conservative movements for the moment at least have agreed to give the Israeli political system time to reverse course on the issue.

So that their denunciation of the proposed law might have some "teeth," however, the San Diego Rabbinical Association--whose membership is Reform, Reconstructionist and Conservative--directed its members, by its resolution, "to refuse to extend an invitation or to attend any community function at which a member of the Knesset who is not supportive of religious diversity in Israel is present, and calls upon the San Diego Jewish Community to do the same."

Rabbi Rabbi David Frank, spiritual leader of Temple Solel and this year's SDRA president, said the boycott should apply to every Knesset member who voted for the measure on its first reading, "unless they change their vote."

The Federation board made no specific reference to such a boycott, but cautioned the leaders of Israel "not to underestimate the strength of feeling on this matter and its detrimental effect on Jewish unity and Israel-Diaspora relations."

"We feel so strongly about this that we wish to send a unified message to members of the Israeli Knesset, in the most vigrous and immediate way possible, that they not risk dividing the world Jewish community," the Federation resolution said.

Federation board members --who passed their resolution overwhelmingly, but not unanimously--had to walk a finer tight rope than the members of the San Diego Rabbinical Association: whereas leaders of the Orthodox Jewish community do not participate in SDRA, Orthodox rabbis and their congregants have been active in the affairs and activities of the United Jewish Federation.

Miriam Robbins, whose UJF board portfolio is the Community Relations Committee, said there were a few negative votes and abstentions following a lively debate on the UJF resolution.

She said while no one agreed with the proposed law now being considered by the Knesset, there were some people who felt the UJF resolution should have confined itself to the question of the legislation and the Law of Return and not gone on to demand full recognition by Israel of non Orthodox Judaism.

Specifically, those opponents called for omitting from the resolution a clause urging the government of Israel "to recognize Jewish diversity among the people of the State of Israel through official state recognition of Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism in addition to Orthodox Judaism as authentic and legitimate."

Texts of both resolutions are reprinted in this issue of the HERITAGE.