Does religion = ethnicity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First off, the use of Ashkenazi/sephardi/mizrahi as ethnic descriptors is only one usage within the Jewish world. An older usage refers to halacha (Jewish law) Observant Ashkenazi Jews follow ritual traditions going back to medieval Germany and northern France, sephardim to those from the yeshivas of medieval Spain. In this sense most "mizrahi" jews are actually sephardim (though Yemenites have their own independent traditions) even if their families never spoke Ladino.

Secondly, at least in the US, Ashkenazi is almost never used by itself as independent descriptor. It would always be "ashkenazi Jew" or "Sephardi Jew" etc, unless context made it very clear that it was only ethnic Jews being referred to. Ashkenazi is sometimes use to refer to Israelis by antizionists trying to claim that Israelis are interlopers to the region (despite Mizrahi Jews making up about 40% of the Jewish population there)

There is one poster here who seems to think "Ashkenazi" is a term for Jews of eastern european descent who have become Christians. I have never heard it used that way outside DCUM. People who are not part of the Jewish community don't really follow "ashkenazi customs" (saying Kaddish on yom tov, avoiding legumes on Passover, etc). I mean you are a christian who kugel cause your mom made it? Great, but calling yourself "Ashkenazi" just makes you sound silly.

For the 100th time, genetic counsels will ask you if you have Ashkenazi descent for testing purposes. They don’t care if you’ve converted to Christianity, you’d still be of Ashkenazi (option to include the word Jewish!) descent. It can be understand as an ethnic indicator only.

Of course this because this makes perfect sense.

Ashkenazi, like Mizrahi, Sephardi, etc, denotes the ethnic origins. Nothing more needs to be actually said. It makes no sense to continue including the Jewish label because that is the religion. If they aren't that religion, they don't need to be called Jewish.

Yes, these different groups can be traced back to regions, but the regions make up multiple countries and it's often not known which country they exactly originated from. So the terms help with understanding the regions from which they came from-- which is their ethnic make up. These names do not have to end with "Jewish". Yes, you can say you are generically Jewish to express your ethnicity but this is more exact.

At one point in history it may have made sense but history evolves and language must evolve with it. We're not all living like we did 3000 years ago.

Language evolves - in use, not because you happen to prefer it that way. "Jewish" meant more than a "religion" in 2000 years ago when Jewish law was established - and one hundred and 20 years ago when the Jewish national movement was established - and now, when people refer to themselves as cultural Jews or secular Jews or humanist Jews. Not Humanist Ashkenazi or secular sephardi.

And your usage doesn't work terribly well in Israel where so many Jews both religious and secular are part Ashkenazi and part Mizrahi - it flies against that consolidation intermixing which is historical importance to the Jewish people. (its less common in the US, where there are fewer mizrahim, but its still not a trivial concern).

Basically secular Jews who are in some way engaged with and living Jewish culture - here or in Israel - call themselves Jews, and deny (as do most religious Jews) that jewishness is only a religion, as opposed to a fuller culture, a civilization even.

Ashkenazi seems to be used by people whose main concern is with genetics. Though I think not all of them, by any means.

No one NEEDS to be called anything (other than late for dinner). But the term used by Jews and non Jews, for a person of Jewish culture and identity who happens to not be religious is "Jew"

We can agree to disagree. I think you're more invested in the person keeping their term 'Jewish' as some sort of need for constant reminder.

The Jewish diaspora was so widespread- Middle East, North Africa and other parts of Africa, Europe, South Asia, Central Asia, even China. Saying that someone's ethnicity is generically "Jewish" is pretty incorrect.

A converted Ashkenazi or a converted Beta Israelite are no longer Jewish. If a Tamil Thattar Jew of Sri Lanka converted to Christianity, would you still call them Tamil Thattar Jewish? Would that still be considered their ethnicity? Or would they just a be a Tamil Thattar Christian?

They are no longer Jewish by religion, but they are still ethnically Jewish. Their genetic composition does not change regardless of what religion they chose to practice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what you are missing is that Jewish denotes religion and ethnicity is English. In other languages, the term for a Jewish ethnicity and religion is a different word, like Herbrew for ethnicity and Jewish for religion. English is just limited in that regard.

+1. Some of the posters in this thread are so ridiculously literal. There are many and varied usages for these terms in English and other languages. Language is messy that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what you are missing is that Jewish denotes religion and ethnicity is English. In other languages, the term for a Jewish ethnicity and religion is a different word, like Herbrew for ethnicity and Jewish for religion. English is just limited in that regard.

+1. Some of the posters in this thread are so ridiculously literal. There are many and varied usages for these terms in English and other languages. Language is messy


In other languages specific words are/were applied to Jews who converted to Christianity. In Russian it was Vicresti, in the middle ages Jews forced to convert to Catholicism were called marranos or conversos in Spain and Portugal. The ethnicity is fixed, religion is fluid.

[Anonymous]

There are, of course, the falacha Jews of Ethiopia who claim to be descendants of Menelic’s courtiers. There is also the Lemba tribe of Zimbabwe who claim to be descendants of Jews who were led south after a great natural disaster in Yemen.

[Anonymous]

Then there are the Khazars, a Caucasian nation who converted to Judaism. This explains how the Ashkenazi population quickly grew larger than the Sephardi, who had always been the majority before. This conversion of a nation used to be spoken of with pride by Jews. Nowadays, however, it’s rarely even mentioned because it weakens our argument that our ancestors are from the Holy Land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then there are the Khazars, a Caucasian nation who converted to Judaism. This explains how the Ashkenazi population quickly grew larger than the Sephardi, who had always been the majority before. This conversion of a nation used to be spoken of with pride by Jews. Nowadays, however, it’s rarely even mentioned because it weakens our argument that our ancestors are from the Holy Land.

This has been debunked through genetic testing https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the-scientist.com/%3Farticles.amp/articleNo/37821/title/Genetic-Roots-of-the-Ashkenazi-Jews/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then there are the Khazars, a Caucasian nation who converted to Judaism. This explains how the Ashkenazi population quickly grew larger than the Sephardi, who had always been the majority before. This conversion of a nation used to be spoken of with pride by Jews. Nowadays, however, it’s rarely even mentioned because it weakens our argument that our ancestors are from the Holy Land.

1. The khazars did not all convert - it appears the conversion was mostly limited to the upper classes, and was not that important demographically.

2. The ashkenazi population took centuries to pass the sephardi population - it was mostly due to better health and food conditions in early modern, europe, at a time when population was stagnating in the middle east in general.

3. Close to half the genetic inheritance of Ashkenazi Jews appears to be not from the Middle east - but it was not the conversion of a nation, but of individuals in Roman era Italy and France.

4. What is your source that we used to speak with pride about converting nations?