advertisement


Jewish hats

There are many Jews who have no interest or belief that they should be occupants or rulers of Israel
Absolutely.

There is nonetheless the idea of the Promised Land, a deal with God which gave Jews the land of Israel. I don't know to what extent it is fuelling the actions of Israel today.
 
It's Japan it's pretty common for people to consider themselves both Shinto and Buddhist - the classic expression of which is that you have a Shinto wedding and a Buddhist funeral.

Up until the Meiji restoration it was pretty common for Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples to form one intertwined spiritual superstore. It was only with the rise of Japanese Nationalism at the end of the c19th, when Shinto was declared the one true Japanese religion, that efforts were made to untangle it from the 'foreign' Buddhism imported from China. But it's still pretty common to find them sharing a site and if you go out the countryside things are pretty much as they always were.
Would you say that Shintoism is a particularly Japanese, but direct offshoot of Buddhism then? In the way Methodists and Anglicans are branches of Christianity? Or does Shintoism have some kind of roots separate from Buddha? It may be a silly question but I have no idea.
 
I think this is also true to a varying degree for lots of people. Identifying as Catholic or Protestant in Northern Ireland for example. Or the tensions between Buddhist and Hindu communities in South East Asia. There are also periods of British history where religious identity hasn't been solely about religion.
Indeed, you could also make a similar argument in relation to Islam. There are crucial differences however. Neither Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist or Hindu have ever constituted what Abraham Leon characterises as a ‘people class.’ Whilst adherents to those religions cited above have, at different points in history and to greater or lesser degrees, been persecuted, none have been subject to the sort of systematic oppression of anti-Semitism, that determined their economic status (and therefore historical role) by allowing them only one specific occupation (ok, Islam IS subject to systematic oppression, but that is a very recent development).

Additionally, I, as a white (lapsed) Christian male, do not have a Christian ‘cultural identity’ in the manner that some non-observant Jews claim to possess. It makes no sense to claim a ‘Christian culture’ due to the plethora of ethnic, national and social divisions that characterise Christianity. Christians were never systematically persecuted and marginalised to the extent that engendered Leon’s people class’ status of Jews. It is this that negates the anti-Semitic argument that Jews, as Jews, do not experience racism, as Jews are not a ‘race’ (ditto Islamophobia).

“Leon argues that the Jews represent historically a social group with specific economic functions, firstly in commerce and later in usury. They are both a class and a people–the term he uses to describe them is ‘people-class’. It is because the Jews preserved themselves through their activities as a class that they also defined themselves as having a common ethnic identity, based on shared religious and linguistic features.“

 
Indeed, you could also make a similar argument in relation to Islam. There are crucial differences however. Neither Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist or Hindu have ever constituted what Abraham Leon characterises as a ‘people class.’ Whilst adherents to those religions cited above have, at different points in history and to greater or lesser degrees, been persecuted, none have been subject to the sort of systematic oppression of anti-Semitism, that determined their economic status (and therefore historical role) by allowing them only one specific occupation (ok, Islam IS subject to systematic oppression, but that is a very recent development).

Additionally, I, as a white (lapsed) Christian male, do not have a Christian ‘cultural identity’ in the manner that some non-observant Jews claim to possess. It makes no sense to claim a ‘Christian culture’ due to the plethora of ethnic, national and social divisions that characterise Christianity. Christians were never systematically persecuted and marginalised to the extent that engendered Leon’s people class’ status of Jews. It is this that negates the anti-Semitic argument that Jews, as Jews, do not experience racism, as Jews are not a ‘race’ (ditto Islamophobia).

“Leon argues that the Jews represent historically a social group with specific economic functions, firstly in commerce and later in usury. They are both a class and a people–the term he uses to describe them is ‘people-class’. It is because the Jews preserved themselves through their activities as a class that they also defined themselves as having a common ethnic identity, based on shared religious and linguistic features.“

From what I know what you say is absolutely correct. I would add, though, that what has also shaped Jewish identity over the millennia is that they never stood on land that they could consider really their own. They could know that they were living well, or fairly well, depending on period and circumstances, in Portugal, England, Russia, Italy, Morocco or wherever. But always with the knowledge that sooner or later they could be forced to move elsewhere. Something which I think did much to shape and reinforce an identity as Jews.
During the First World War, Jews in Germany, Italy and Austria, countries in which they were firmly and apparently seamlessly integrated into the local middle class, volunteered for military service in far greater proportion than Gentiles. They did so to underline their patriotism, their belonging to The Nation. And we know how that ended, just a few years later. In contrast, a Gentile German, Italian or Austrian can fear many things, but not the threat of being suddenly uprooted and expelled.
 
Would you say that Shintoism is a particularly Japanese, but direct offshoot of Buddhism then? In the way Methodists and Anglicans are branches of Christianity? Or does Shintoism have some kind of roots separate from Buddha? It may be a silly question but I have no idea.
Shinto is the native religion of Japan and encompasses the creation myth of the Japanese nation. At heart it's an animistic religion that worships the natural world and the spirits (kami) that exist in nature - mountains, rivers, trees and so on. It includes a lot of traditional folk beliefs. It was only codified into something resembling an organised religion - sometimes referred to as State Shinto - in the late c19th.

Various schools of Buddhism were brought to Japan between the c6th and c12th and, as Buddhism tends to do when it's introduced somewhere, over time absorbed a lot of local traditional beliefs. So over hundreds of years the two religions remained distinct but became entwined. In the late c19th Buddhism was suppressed by the state and Shinto promoted by the nationalist Meiji administration. Shinto was then in turn suppressed by the US after the war because of it's links to Japanese imperialism.
 
Shinto is the native religion of Japan and encompasses the creation myth of the Japanese nation. At heart it's an animistic religion that worships the natural world and the spirits (kami) that exist in nature - mountains, rivers, trees and so on. It includes a lot of traditional folk beliefs. It was only codified into something resembling an organised religion - sometimes referred to as State Shinto - in the late c19th.

Various schools of Buddhism were brought to Japan between the c6th and c12th and, as Buddhism tends to do when it's introduced somewhere, over time absorbed a lot of local traditional beliefs. So over hundreds of years the two religions remained distinct but became entwined. In the late c19th Buddhism was suppressed by the state and Shinto promoted by the nationalist Meiji administration. Shinto was then in turn suppressed by the US after the war because of it's links to Japanese imperialism.
Thank you!
 
Just when you think you have a handle on this identity and religion duality thing Mexico -- which I believe to be Catholic and not known for it's Jewish population -- has just elected it's first Jewish (and first female) President.
But what is her hat policy? We need to know.
 
If saying someone is a Jew just means that their mother was a Jew, it doesn't seem very important or interesting. Why does anyone care about it? It doesn't say anything about who are.

The matrilineal transmission isn't grounded in anything biological. There is no gene for Jews.

The only thing it can mean is the mother line transmits belonging to "the chosen people" -- if your mum was a Jew it means that God has chosen you too. This is objectionable to me if it means that God has chosen you to be the occupants and rulers of Israel.
I wasn't arguing in favour of matriarchy, simply observing that that is how Jews themselves define Jewishness. Apparently t’was not ever thus.

 
I wasn't arguing in favour of matriarchy, simply observing that that is how Jews themselves define Jewishness. Apparently t’was not ever thus.

The only part I understood is the part about mules mating with horses (but I thought mules did not "do it"), and even that not too clearly. Interesting, though, about the social/professional standing coming from the father, but the underlying "nationality" from the mother.
 
Seems like a choice of standings that reflect the varied gender contributions from the historically typical family unit.

I wonder if it leads to a lower divorce rate?

.......Checks stats, hey what do you know, 5 times less than protestant catholics in the US and lower than atheists...
 


advertisement


Back
Top