Unlike social circles or fanclubs, Judaism stresses not what the person thinks about themselves as regards identity, but sets certain benchmarks instead.For Goyim to become Jewish, the bar should be high. For those people whose fathers were Jewish, the bar should be lowered. But one cannot arbitrarily chuck the standards aside, even for someone who has talked himself into believing that he is Jewish. Just because someone calls me brother does not mean that he is my kin.
That being said, I'm a little baffled by the people who take an all or nothing approach. Is there anything wrong with being not a Jew, but nevertheless being 'Jewish'?
While I despise the term 'Ben Noach' (an invented term if ever there was one), and the term 'Ger' has only a limited applicability, what about the term 'fellow traveler'?
How perfect a description for the Erev Rav! And how equally perfect for 'God-fearers' (the converts and unconverted fellow travellers in the Roman Empire - by extension in this context, their equivalents in the modern age)!
Plus it suggests a certain snarky rejection of any opprobrium that might adhere to being a Jew, Jewish, Judeo-phile, or pro-Israel.
On the other hand, if someone considers themselves a Jew and clearly has reasons to consider themselves so, is considered to be a Jew by other Jews, and conforms to a certain level of Yiddishkeit, it makes little sense to question their Jewishness, outside of matters pertaining to marriage, burial, and certain employments. There has always been a level of 'take it on faith' regarding the Jewishness of most Jews.
[But I still can't accept the 'Lesbian Womyn's Empowerment Wicca Minyan' as being Jewish. That is a case where I will insist that my definition of Jewish trumps their definition.]
The Halacha is that one is a Jew if one converts to Judaism, like Avraham and Sarah, or is descended from someone who did so, consistently along the female line (in some case all the way back to Sarah, or the wives of the men of Avraham's household).
Technically this could make someone Jewish who does not even have a clue. In practice, however, such people do not identify as Jews, and are not usually known as Jews. Still, Jewish observance or lack thereof is not the ultimate determinant, inheritance is.
--- --- --- --- ---
Please note: People who claim to be descendants of the lost tribes are insane, not Jewish. Though they might have a Jew in the woodwork somewhere - most people probably do.
Jews for Jesus, if born of Jewish mothers, are Jews. But they are not Jewish. And having rejected any semblance of normative Judaism, are......., erm...., eh...., let's just say 'beyond the fold', and leave it at that. But they do have much in common with the people who claim descent from the lost tribes.
9 comments:
Please note: People who claim to be descendants of the lost tribes are insane, not Jewish.
You don't consider the Beta Israel to be Jews?
That's actually a very good point. I assume that by Beta Israel you mean the Ethiopean Jews, whose ancestry predates the exile (if I remember correctly).
They are an exception to what I said above. I do not consider them originally full Jews, as we understand the word Jew. But they aren't Gentile either (again, if I remember correctly, genetic relationship to other Jews has been established). [?]
Clearly they are not insane.
And in any case, it is somewhat moot, as they have undergone a conversion process.
If a whole generation is born into this, the individuals are probably not insane, but might simply be historically wrong. (The idea might still be insane.)
But people in Peru etc.? Probably one guy with a manifest personality disorder, and good in marketing, comparable to a Bible Belt televangelist. I'm not sure why there are always rabbis who buy that, invariably still demanding a conversion. They're probably just not so convinced we don't missionise.
Then there are those who claim their ancestors were all Jewish because grandpa once used a candle to light his cigarette (Majorca "marranos") or because great-auntie's first name was Hanna (Germany).
There is no common agreement as to the origin of Beta Israel. Some think they predate the exile, others think they are descended from converts, still others believe they are descended from Christians who began to see themselves as Jews.
That last possibility seems unlikely, in my opinion. They have just a bit too much in common with historical Judaism to have arisen independently.
Genetically, the evidence of their relationship to other Jews is weak or inconclusive. On the other hand, Ethiopians as a whole, not just Beta Israel, have so many Semitic features that there is a distinct possibility they're all of Jewish descent.
Not all Beta Israel did a formal conversion. They were accepted to Israel because R. Ovadia Yosef ruled that they were Jews by default.
The fond fancy that one is Jewish, or descended from the lost tribes, among people who are manifestly not Jewish and who know nix about Judaism, is probably a variant on the same imagination that inspires believers in reincarnation to 'remember' past lives in which they were Inca warriors, Egyptian princesses, Brahmin priests writing Upanishads, or Chinese Emperors.
Fortunately, with some groups, such ego-boosting fantasies are not really necessary, and therefore perhaps rarer - all Irish can claim descent from kings, all Scandinavians can claim descent from adventurers, and all Dutch can claim descent from homicidal maniacs.
It's a blessing.
Very good post.
others believe they are descended from Christians who began to see themselves as Jews.
That last possibility seems unlikely, in my opinion. They have just a bit too much in common.
I think this is historically the most convincing possibility. They have just a bit too little in common. :-) Really, the common things are easily explained by Christian traditions and secondary tidings about Jews, but the differences aren't easily explained.
The (small) genetic overlap is related to the connexion between Æthiopia and South Arabia, I think.
BOTH, the comparison to reincarnated Napoleons is very fitting. Could become independent a the next generation, of course.
And with 15000 or 20000 European Jews in Rashi's times, and more than 10 million today, chances are every Ashkenazi Jew really descends from Rashi.
...with 15000 or 20000 European Jews in Rashi's times, and more than 10 million today, chances are every Ashkenazi Jew really descends from Rashi.
Which would have to mean that every Ashkenazi Jew is also a descendant of Dovid HaMelech.
There are at least two lineage chartings that show Yitzhok Ben Shloime's generations back to Dovid.
Wasn't it also shown a while back that most Jews are descended from four women who lived three plus millenia ago?
Wasn't it also shown a while back that most Jews are descended from four women who lived three plus millenia ago?
Nah, I think that was every human being.
Post a Comment