Heresy of a ‘Hebrew Palestinian’: the first Jew elected to the Fatah Revolutionary Council.

He is Muslim.

to a Muslim woman, if a Jew can be an atheist and still be considered a Jew because their family background is Jewish, is there a reason why someone who has a Jewish family background but becomes through conversion a Muslim or a Christian would not still be considered Jewish?

Mr. Davis is still registered as a Jew on his Israeli I.D. cared

If one can be considered Jewish and atheist, why not Jewish and Christian or Jewish and Muslim?

Mr. Davis apparently converted to Islam in 2008 immediately prior to his marriage to a Palestinian Muslim woman from Ramallah:

"2008 marriage
Davis met Miyassar Abu Ali, a Palestinian, in Ramallah in 2006. They signed their Certificate of Marriage ('Aqd al-Zawaj) there in 2008, after Davis converted to Islam"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uri_Davis


I'm not arguing. I simply have never heard an explanation for that.

.

Uri Davis was born a Jew, born to Jewish parents in Jerusalem, and he converted to Islam. He still is a Jew, his religion is Islam. He describes himself as a Palestinian Hebrew.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uri_Davis

again not arguing, just curious - since I seem to hear the term used that way and I am under the impression that modern Zionism does for the most part make that assumption.

There was a time I could see the "racial" component; common diseases, looks, behaviors. I don't know. I have never seen a disease which affects a religious group, except for Jews. I am not sure why that is. One thing I do see, one is a "Jew" when it is needed to "attack" Israel, defend anti-Semitic remarks, or, in this case, report a Jew is on Fatah's council. No. There isn't a "Jew" on that council, there is another Muslim.

"...since I seem to hear the term used that way and I am under the impression that modern Zionism does for the most part make that assumption." How so?

Edit to add: The "ethnic" component might still come into play.

guided by modern secular notions that saw Jewish people primarily as an ethnicity, rather than an a religious community. Prior to the 19th Century, I gather that being a Jew always meant that someone practiced the Jewish religion.

I also gather that modern European anti-Semitism that developed in the 19th Century also defined Jewishness as an ethnicity. The Nazis didn't care whether the people they identified as Jews had been baptized as Christians or not or what they believed religiously or what religion they practiced. While some historians would say that earlier forms of European anti-Jewishness were based on religious persecution.

I gather that for a person to qualify for immigration to Israel, it is not now nor has it ever been the case that they be a practicing religious Jew, provided they come from Jewish parents.

There is a difference between ethnic and racial (and religious). The use of this person's "Jewishness" is nothing more than political fodder.

I know one thing for sure though; after spending some time in Israel, most Jews see it as an insult when they are called Jews, the prefer to be called Israelis.

I had a patient though who insisted he was a Jew even after he converted to Christianity. He passed away and at his own request was buried in the Jewish part of the cemetery. (It was NOT called the Israeli section).

Jews are an ethno-religious group that includes those born Jewish and converts to Judaism. According to traditional Jewish Law, a Jew is anyone born of a Jewish mother or converted to Judaism in accord with Jewish Law. Traditional Judaism maintains that a Jew, whether by birth or conversion, is a Jew forever. Thus a Jew who claims to be an atheist or converts to another religion is still considered by traditional Judaism to be Jewish. However, the Reform movement maintains that a Jew who has converted to another religion is no longer a Jew.

regardless of religious heritage or ethnic identity. In addition to Israel, Israelis and people of Israeli descent can be found internationally. Jews define themselves as Israeli Jews, Ashkenazi Jews, Mizrahi Jews, Sephardi Jews, etc, which are ethnic divisions.

Jews are an ethnicity based on a set of ideas. Some of those ideas are religious, and some are cultural/national. The American nation is very similar in that way.

I quoted what Uri Davis said of himself. He knows better what he is than you or I do.

ethnic identity? You used the term "racial" which is not only inflammatory but also inaccurate as Jews have a number of racial identities but unless converted also have an ethnic ancestry in common

Did you read your own post?

Do you believe that "Jew" is not an ethnic identity?

"Jews have a number of racial identities but unless converted also have an ethnic ancestry in common"

which you are very obviously avoiding and big font hardly impresses

the Jewish identity has a dual meaning it can be religious or it can be ethnic or both when I said "unless converted" Sammi Davis Jr came to mind who converted to Judaism but was not ethnically a Jew, but was still a Jew none the less

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

What they define themselves to be. If they want to call themselves the Jewish race, it is no skin off my back.

You are in a ba-a-ad mood, it seems, and ready to fight. Well, I am not playing along.

Pretty disgusting stuff.

"Jewish" is a really stupid word. I'm Jewish, and half Jewish, but not Jewish.

Which is to say, I'm Jewish under halachic law, half ethnically Jewish, but not a follower of the Jewish religion.

The fact that a great many people conflate the different meanings causes a great many problems. The recent kerfuffle over discrimination in admission to Jewish state schools in the UK was one obvious example; another is the way that Israel has been able to get away with claiming that being "a Jewish State" is not racist, while retaining clearly racist immigration laws.

It boils down to the "ethnic" vs. "religious" arguments. In this case, it is used as political fodder.

'If one can be considered Muslim and atheist, why not Muslim and Christian or Jewish and Muslim?' Though, I don't see the first statement as congruent with the last two.

To be honest, the only time I have ever heard the use of "atheist" and a religion is when the religion has been "Jewish." I have never heard of or met a "atheist Muslim," "atheist Christian," or "atheist Buddhist."

atheist-Muslim. However, I have heard of many Western Jews defining themselves as atheist.

Frankly this is one of the issues that confuses a lot of Middle Eastern people. The concept of being a Jewish-atheist to most Middle Eastern people would sound as much a non-sequitor as suggesting someone is a Muslim-atheist or Christian-atheist.

However, I have understood that outside of orthodox circles, most Western people, including many Israelis who define themselves as Jewish mean so as an ethnicity, not a religion - although their parents or grandparents were usually practicing religious Jews.

"Jew" is one of the only identities I ever see people claim to their own advantage, especially in regards to this topic.

I would describe myself as an atheist Jew; but I don't think Mr. Davis would identify as a Jew (he uses the term 'Hebrew', disliked by most Jews except when referring to the language, apparently to avoid claiming Jewish identity).

By the same token,anyone who was born in the Middle East and speaks Arabic as a first language could technically call themselves an 'Arab'; but there are Israeli Jews who fit that description and would almost all reject the 'Arab' identity.


BTW, I *have* heard people calling themselves 'secular Muslims' or 'non-practicing Catholics', thus identifying with the culture while not believing in the religion: similar to 'atheist Jews'.

It's from Wiki, but it is clear that he does identify himself as Jewish. 'Uri Davis, an Israeli citizen, academic, activist and observer-member in the Palestine National Council living in the Arab town of Sakhnin, identifies himself as an "anti-Zionist Palestinian Jew".<7><8> Davis's explains, "I don’t describe myself as a Palestinian Jew, I actually happen to be a Palestinian Jew, I was born in Jerusalem in 1943 in a country called Palestine and the title of my birth certificate is 'Government of Palestine'.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Jew#cite_note-6


Being Jewish isn't solely a religious thing. There's a Jewish ethnicity, and seeing Mr Davis' mum was Jewish, I'm really finding any attempt to argue that he isn't to be politically motivated more than anything else...

If you meant Dr. Uri Davis, then your info is out of date.

From a 2009 article on his website:

His own self-description is a case in point, fine-tuned over the decades. "It has gone through a number of stages. In my autobiography in the mid-1990s I described myself as a Palestinian Jew. That has now changed to a Palestinian Hebrew of Jewish origins.

<end of citation>

Since he converted to Islam just prior to his most-recent marriage in 2008 to a Palestinian Muslim, he has stopped identifying himself as a Palestinian Jew.

A BBC news article from August of 2009 includes the following:

Dr. Davis said he did not define himself as Jewish but as "a Palestinian Hebrew national of Jewish origin, anti-Zionist, registered as Muslim and a citizen of an apartheid state - the State of Israel".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8203989.stm

Sorry that my obvious typo seems to have caused some confusion...

btw, it's not *my* info. I posted what I read at wiki. If you have a problem with it, feel free to go and change it...

Larry David is one of the creators of Seinfeld and the creator of Curb Your Enthusiasm. His Jewish identity is often played upon for comical effect.

In any case, Uri Davis has clearly given a lot of thought to how he wishes to identify himself. And that identification seems to continue to be evolving over time.

I myself know several people who have Jewish mothers but who most certainly do not themselves identify as being Jewish regardless of what any other outside entity might want to claim.

fwiw, I think self-identification is pretty important, and if Uri Davis identifies himself as Jewish, then people should respect it, and if he doesn't, they should also respect that.
Just about yr last sentence, would you also believe that people whose mothers aren't Jewish but identify as Jewish should have their self-identification respected regardless of what any other outside entity might want to claim?

I was unaware that the Grand High Jewish Council of Magnificent Poobahs had vested in you the authority to declare a person Jewish or non-Jewish.

Are you also casting Albert Einstein, Golda Meier, Woody Allen, Sigmund Freud, Bill Maher, John Stewart, and many others the fuck out of the jewish camp, because of their non-religiosity? Or is it something you reserve exclusively for those Jews who associate with Muslims, or disagree with your view of the Israel-Palestine conflict?

I guess what I'm asking, Aegis, is whether you use your authority to strip Jewishness from Jews in a fair and evenhanded way, or do you use your authority only to score cheap political points against those Jews who piss you off?

Since doing so, he no longer describes himself as Jewish.

Check his website for more information on the topic, if interested.

I think most would say that is close enough as far as Jewish identity is concerned.

I suppose it all oomes down to whether or not one considers Jewishness an ethnicity. I gather that most ultra-orthodox Jews do not. I gather some, but by no means all and probably not most secular anti-Zionist Jews do not.

I understand that many of the founders of the modern Zionism and the modern Israeli state were secular minded people, few were religious and most saw Jewish people primarily as an ethnicity, rather than an a religious community. Prior to the 19th Century, I gather that being a Jew always meant someone practiced the Jewish religion.

I also gather that modern European anti-Semitism that developed in the 19th Century also defined Jewishness as an ethnicity. Some historians would say that earlier forms of European anti-Jewishness were based on religious persecution. The Nazis didn't care whether the people they identified as Jews had been baptized as Christians or not or what they believed religiously or what religion they practiced.

I gather that for a person to qualify for immigration to Israel, it is not now nor has it ever been the case that they be a practicing religious Jew, provided they come from Jewish parents.

If Jewishness is an ethnicity or even both a religion and an ethnicity - then it does not seem logical to me that someone preferring to identify themselves as "a Palestinian Hebrew national of Jewish origin" would make them a non-Jew - if they come from Jewish family origin, regardless whether they become an atheist or Muslim or Christian or whatever.

If someone holds that being a Jew requires at least a nominal belief and practice of the religion of Judaism, then I can see the point that a conversion to another religion or becoming an atheist or non practicer of Judaism would make them a non-Jew. However, if one believes this, they are eliminating a large portion of people who identify themselves as Jewish:




If one holds that Judaism is not an ethnicity as normally defined, but it is an identity that can either be secular or religious - then I suppose one can decide for themselves if someone who had two Jewish parents who defines themselves as,"a Palestinian Hebrew national of Jewish origin" is close enough or not.

Clearly, he has given a lot of thought to this and specifically indicates that he does not consider himself to be a Jew, but rather the appellation mentioned.

From the BBC, 2009:

Dr Davis said he did not define himself as Jewish but as "a Palestinian Hebrew national of Jewish origin, anti-Zionist, registered as Muslim and a citizen of an apartheid state - the State of Israel".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8203989.stm

If he does not define himself as Jewish, who are you (or anyone else) to say otherwise?

It hardly seems fair for other people to determine that his self-description is "close enough" when he makes a point to present such a distinction.

But one should remember that to say that someone whose entire family background of both parents is Jewish is not themselves Jewish is to imply that Jewishness is an identity and a obviously a religion - historically one of the most important of all world religions, but not strictly speaking an ethnicity.

I recently read Shlomo Sand's controversial book, "The Invention of the Jewish People", which is exactly what Professor Sand argues in his book which was for 19 weeks at the top of the bestseller list in Israel. Professor Sand is a Professor of History at Tel Aviv University. I don't personally have a strong opinion about this whole issue myself.

Amazon Link:

http://www.amazon.com/Invention-Jewish-People-Shlomo-Sand/dp/1844674223?SubscriptionId=0TBPMRS0W3G0CB5F0902&tag=afncaie-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=1844674223

youtube video of a lecture Dr. Shlomo Sand gave in 2009 at NYU:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EmvANgw9Mk

.

First, regarding your larger statement - many people of Jewish origin, whose entire family background of both parents is Jewish, do not consider themselves Jewish.

Conversely, many people with no Jewish origin, whose entire family background of both parents is not Jewish, very much consider themselves to be Jewish.

Of course, there are people who define themselves as Jewish athiests, Jewish agonstics, secular Jews, non-observant Jews, and others who do not in any way follow the religion of Judaism but who still self-identify as Jewish because of their family background.

There are also people who were born into a Jewish family who have, for example, converted to Christianity or Islam, and, as a result, in some cases, do not consider themselves to be Jewish, and do not self-identify as Jewish, although they acknowledge their Jewish origins or background.

Would it be fair to call these people Jewish simply because their parents were Jewish even if they themselves do not identify as such? I do not believe so.

Second, with respect to Uri Davis in particular, I have tried to learn more about what he means by "Palestinian Hebrew" as this is not a phrase I had ever seen before.

If you know more about this term, or have seen it used by other people in other contexts, please share any helpful information you might have.

From my understanding, it appears to be a term that Davis himself is the only one currently using. In an essay he authored in 2000 called "Who is a Hebrew?" Davis writes:

"The purpose of this attempt at a reading of my personal identity construct as a Palestinian Hebrew anti-Zionist Jew of dual Israeli and British citizenship is to suggest that a possible resolution to the above-mentioned difficulties could be developed on the basis of reviving the term Hebrew as an appropriate designation of the people originating from the Zionist immigration to Palestine."

You will note that in this essay, he refers to himself both as a Palestinian Hebrew and as an anti-Zionist Jew.

More recently, he has stated that he no longer defines himself as a Jew (you will see this part of his identification absent in any self-description from 2008 and beyond) but still considers himself a Palestinian Hebrew.

I conclude that, in doing so, he is still acknowledging that he is a descendant of (whom he considers to be) the "colonial people" originating from the Zionist immigration to Palestine, but no longer considers himself to be Jewish.

There is a difference in the way Davis has defined himself since his conversation to Islam prior to his marriage in 2008. The "Palestinian Hebrew of Jewish origins" component of his self-identity has not changed - this was part of how he defined himself before and after 2008.

What has changed is that he used to call himself Jewish, and now no longer does. He has, in fact, made a point of noting this change in some of his most recent interviews.

I do not believe it would be fair then for others to call him Jewish when he himself clearly no longer identifies that way.

I think it would be fair to guess that he might mean by "Palestinian Hebrew."

Davis's explains, "I don’t describe myself as a Palestinian Jew, I actually happen to be a Palestinian Jew, I was born in Jerusalem in 1943 in a country called Palestine and the title of my birth certificate is 'Government of Palestine'. That is neither here nor there, though. It is significant only in a political context in which I am situated, and the political context that is relevant to my work, my advocacy of a critique of Zionism. I'm an anti-Zionist Jew."<8> He has since converted to Islam in 2008 to marry a Palestinian Muslim woman Miyassar Abu Ali whom he met in 2006.<9><10><11>

I'm not actually disputing what you say. I would only point out that this implies that Jewishness is an identity and not strictly speaking an ethnicity. If a person born to two Filipino parents or to two Irish parents or two Italian parents decided that they are not themselves Filipino, Irish or Italian - one would simply say that they are being delusional. Because that is their ethnicity whether they like it or not.

For some reason this is not considered the same for Jewishness as it is with any other ethnicity that I am personally aware of. It may very well be the case that Jewishness is an identity and a Judaism is a religion, but not an ethnicity. You may very well be right about that. I don't have a firm opinion about the whole matter.

I believe that the quotation you've provided in bold comes from Wikipedia. It appears to be taken from the "Palestinian Jew" entry on Wikipedia.

Putting aside the fact that the paragraph begins with an obvious typographical error (i.e. "Davis's explains"), the footnote that the Wikipedia entry presents as the source of the quote you've bolded does not actually contain that quote.

Reference 8 links to a listserv archive of a 2004 article from Catholic New Times:

http://lists.portside.org/cgi-bin/listserv/wa?A2=ind0411c&L=portside&T=0&P=1486

In that piece, Davis does talk about Jewish identity and refers to himself as a Jew, but nowhere in that article can the quote cited in the Wikipedia entry be found.

After doing a bit of online research, I have found where Uri Davis has indeed made the remarks quoted in the Wikipedia entry.

They appear to come from a paper he wrote in 2006.

In any case, I think that Wikipedia is not the best source of information for this kind of thing.

As to your other point, aren't there Jewish people of many different ethnicities? Is a Yemeni Jew of the same ethnicity as a Russian Jew? Also, aren't there Jewish people whose parents are not Jewish and do not come from any "Jewish origins"? Would you not consider these converts to be Jewish?

If you are saying it would be "delusional" for a person with two Italian parents to say that they are not themselves Italian, wouldn't it be similarly delusional for someone to say that they are Italian even though neither of their parents are? By extension, then, wouldn't someone who converts to Judaism and claims to be Jewish even though neither of their parents are be considered "delusional" by the standards you've provided?

then of course there is nothing delusional about them considering themselves a Jew. Of course they are. That would be essentially the same as if a non-Muslim converted to Islam or a non-Christian converted to Christianity and thus considered themselves a Muslim or a Christian. I don't see however how one can convert to an ethnicity. Although, I suppose one can adopt an identity and certainly one might adopt nationalized citizenship of a given country.

I would tend to agree with you that a Yemeni Jew and a Russian Jew are different ethnicities. That was a major point Shlomo Sand tried to make in his book. Since I have only read one academic work on the subject, I hesitate to form a strident opinion about the whole matter.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I do think that my original post in this sub-thread, which was a response to a post made by a poster named Chulanowa, at least provides some support for the claim made by the poster Behind The Aegies, whom Chulanowa appeared to be mocking.

I will say that you might find some of is views a little far out and not agree with him on some major points. Although he does argue strongly in favor of the two-state solution and rejects the single-state solution on matters of pragmatism:

youtube video of a lecture Dr. Shlomo Sand gave in 2009 at NYU:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EmvANgw9Mk

It's this post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=300046&mesg_id=300156

to the utter stupidity of creating negative distinctions based on race, religion and ethnicity.

Great OP, DC.

:thumbsup: