Ezzie’s “Excellence�
Ezzie, a popular right-wing Modern Orthodox blogger who enjoys good relationships with select truly modern and even secular bloggers (though not me), is a fundamentalist. This is what he terms an “excellent� post by another one of his fundie friends.
“I was sitting next to the parents of a girl that Fudge had met during her brief involvement in NCSY (the National Conference of Synagogue Youth), and whom she had kept contact with for a short time afterwards. I hadn’t heard anything about the girl, who went to Public School, for a few years, and had (to my discredit) already mentally written her off as another casualty of the American Jewish Holocaust.â€?
This is not a “Holocaust.� You are insane. This is people leaving. People have a right to leave. This is not a crime against humanity.
See comments section – Jewish Atheist lets him have it, and Ezzie actually defends PsychoToddler’s term.
I think it is important to have this discussion. Not because we are going to get anywhere, we are not getting anywhere with these people. But it shows how fundie the RWMO people really are. And as Godol HaDor has frequently noted as has Tzemach Atlas, this must not be overlooked. These guys are a real problem.
I would argue they are the biggest problem in terms of domestic Jewish fundamentalism. The right-wing Modern Orthodox are the most dangerous, as you let them get closer than you should, and then they stab you in the back, kidnap your children, and sell them to the haredim for a few shekels, or even for free, in hopes of gaining their always elusive approval.
Pictured Above: A concentration camp of the American Jewish Holocaust known has Harvard. Ezzie and his partisans try to rescue victims and bring them through the heimeishe underground to safehouses such as Touro, where public school survivors need not worry their pretty little heads on such things as challenging secular academics.
47 comments
so he cant use the word “holocaust” but you can say things like “infestation”….double standard? (forgetting of course that more jews have assimilated to the point of their children not considering themselves jews since 1990 that by 2010 the number will exceed that of the holocaust)
LOL and wow. That’s the most blatant misinterpretation of what I said I’ve seen in a while. Nice.
Also, what does “select truly modern” and “even secular” mean? Is it a surprise that an Orthodox blogger has a good relationship with a secular blogger?
Also, I didn’t know I was MO. Thanks for letting me know.
Oh, and FWIW, my grandfather studied in those hallowed halls back in the 1920s. Nice picture!
The closest we got to the war was my other grandfather’s Air Force service.
While I’m at it:
What does these people mean?
How sick is this comment? “they stab you in the back, kidnap your children, and sell them to the haredim for a few shekels, or even for free”
What does Harvard have to do with anything? Or Touro? Or college at all?
That ’select’ term really bothers me. Are you implying I’m elitist?
Would you assume that more public school “survivors” go to Harvard or Touro?
What do baseless accusations against Touro have to do with anything?
(Clearly, I’m pretty bored today. Sigh. What a waste of time.)
Ezzie,
“Also, I didn’t know I was MO. Thanks for letting me know.”
Oh, right. I forgot how many RWMO guys hate being classified as “Modern.”
“What does these people mean?”
It was meant as in, “these people all secular people need to become exactly alike.”
“Would you assume that more public school “survivorsâ€? go to Harvard or Touro?”
Clearly if they go to Harvard, they are probably victims of the “Holocaust.”
“What do baseless accusations against Touro have to do with anything?”
Because you went to Touro — like most NCSY fanatics. Touro hearts NCSY. NCSY hearts Touro.
It is not that the secular world is so seductive (it is) it is that the religious world is so f###ing boring. No talking to girls, no fast food restaurants, everyone dresses the same black and white, no good music, no literature, no comics, no fast food restaurants, no fun on Saturday.
Who wants that shit?
not me.
I forgot to mention no tv either.
LOL. Actually, more like I grew up in a black/white community (Cleveland Hts.) and spent most of my years in pretty RW yeshivos. I definitely am not “yeshivish”, but I’ve never been called modern before.
Clearly if they go to Harvard, they are probably victims of the “Holocaust.�
Like my grandfather? Man, it’s amazing he then sent his kids to yeshivos, YU and Case Western, and his grandkids are all affiliated, isn’t it!?
Because you went to Touro — like most NCSY fanatics. Touro hearts NCSY. NCSY hearts Touro.
LOL. Yes, Touro gave me a full ride. YU wouldn’t.
Of course, I’ve never been to an NCSY event in my life as far as I can recall, so I don’t know how I’m a fanatic.
It was meant as in, “these people all secular people need to become exactly alike.�
So it should read “Not because we are going to get anywhere, we are not getting anywhere with these people all secular people need to become exactly alike.” That’s kind of a weird sentence, ya know?
It sounds more like you meant “these people” in a nasty way, especially when you consider the italic emphasis. Ya know, like when white supremacists say about blacks “these people”, or when Christians or Muslims say about the other (or Jews) “these people”. That’s what it really sounded like you meant. Just saying.
Oh, and sorry for all the “ya knows” and poor diction. I did, after all, attend Touro.
“No talking to girls, no fast food restaurants, everyone dresses the same black and white, no good music, no literature, no comics, no fast food restaurants, no fun on Saturday.”
Uh first of all there are kosher fast food places such as subway nowadays and that makes it even funnier that you mention it twice.
I love how you consider spending time with your friends “no fun”. Is tv the only way you can have fun? what a shock…you have no social skills!
“I spent most of my years in pretty RW yeshivos.”
Yikes!
“It sounds more like you meant “these peopleâ€? in a nasty way, especially when you consider the italic emphasis.”
Of course I did. But it was also meant intentionally over the top, as it is generally meant in regards, as you noted, to mean those of a different race specifically. Even when it is used against those of another religion, it often contains racial overtones. It just seemed appropriately inappropriate to insert in a faux Holocaust post.
“This is not a ‘Holocaust.’ You are insane. This is people leaving. People have a right to leave. This is not a crime against humanity.”
“The Right to Leave” (www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?RightToLeave) and “The Right to Fork” (www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?RightToFork) are probably the two most dangerous aspects of modernity’s challenge to Judaism. They can’t be defeated by simply sputtering at the damage those rights are inflicting on the community. Instead the community’s going to have to find ways of demonstrating to young Jews that these rights aren’t worth exercising.
And I can tell you this: if the defection of young American Jews from the community is a Holocaust (batshit, but let’s run with it), then Ezzie and her lot are the Eichmanns administering that Holocaust. You couldn’t come up with a more effective way to persuade ambivalent young Jews that Judaism is a ridiculous little tradition than to tell them that defecting from one community to another is morally equivalent to incinerating children.
I used some raid on an infestation of ants and caused an ant holocaust.
Let’s see how far we can devalue the term?Actually, I believe you can find the term holocaust referring to assimilation and intermarriage on the far right sites. Stormfront, KKK, etc.
Are you a racist, Ezzie?
From a rwo perspective, a jewish convert to christianity who then converted to islam or budhism didn’t change his status at all.
Also from a rwo perspective, conservadox, conservative, reform, reconstructionist, christianity, islam, and athiesm are all basically the same.
So what assimilation are you talking about?
Is Judaism a religion or a race?
And if it’s a race, what right does it have to exist, what intrinsic value does it have, and why shouldn’t we let it go follow the dinasaurs?
By what right do you ask someone to sacrifice his individuality for some abstract concept of racial purity?
>> Is tv the only way you can have fun? what a shock…you have no social skills!
It is rather arrogant to think that only people who keep shabbat have social skills. And fran, you don’t know me so you can shut the F### up. XD
And there is one kosher subway in avenue j in brooklyn. btw, the rabbis are all against it because its “goyish.”
“also from a rwo perspective, conservadox, conservative, reform, reconstructionist, christianity, islam, and athiesm are all basically the same.”
Then why do these “evil” kiruv organizations exist only to reach out to jews and dont go after the non-jews? Make up your mind…either they dont think they are all the same or they arent run by the rwo.
“It is rather arrogant to think that only people who keep shabbat have social skills.”
I wasnt the one who said observing shabbat was “no fun”. Personally reading, talking to my friends, eating with people i like are all fun, and the kinds of things i do on shabbat. Im not saying we do have social skills but to imply that only by doing things like tv, concerts and others can one have fun?…do you notice a string of activities that involve no actual communication with others?
“And fran, you don’t know me so you can shut the F### up. XD”
ANd yet you know ncsy and the rwo othrodox enough to comment? Every one of us is different and not the sheep u make us out to seem. So if you are able to bash us, its equal oppertunity time my friend
Fran
these evil kiruv organizations DO reach out to jews who have converted to either christianity or islam.
Have you ever heard of Lev L’achim or Yad L’achim?
Their criteria is anyone born of a jewish mother, not which form of heresy you choose to believe in.
but alex wasnt refering to them. He was saying that they treat ALL non-jews and non-frum jews the same and thats just not true
Organizations may or may not reach out. Regular orthodox jews sure as hell treat secular jews and gentiles the same, especially when it comes to dating.
Fran
this was my comment, not Alexs
““also from a rwo perspective, conservadox, conservative, reform, reconstructionist, christianity, islam, and athiesm are all basically the same.â€?”
I was referring to the beliefs, not the people. Notice that I said christianity, not christians.
**sigh**
I’ll ask you the same thing that I have put to JewishAthiest:
What COULD someone do that would warrant their exclusion from and such enmity from the general community? Does anything meet this standard, in your opinion?
In the eyes of orthodox judaism upon marrying a non-jew one does in a way end their status as “jew” and takes up the status of “person”. Right or wrong you act differently to a member of your faith then to one who is not a member of your faith and anyone who is being honest with themselves knows that they draw that same line somewhere based on some criteria. It does not give another the right to act more negatively toward that person then they would any other person, but it would be foolish to think that one will be treated as if nothing had happened.
G
Are you asking me?
Define “general community”. Explain enmity.
Community is a fuzzy, illogical feeling which is totally arbitrary, and everyone feels it different and defines it for himself.
Someone who feels a sense of community based on faith, will exclude unfaithfaul people. Someone who feels a sense of community based on race, may feel that intermarriage breaks that sense of community. Someone who feels that brown hair and green eyes, socio-economic status, or whatever else is what defines his community, may not focus on either faith or race at all.
The only halachic standard I know is the Shulchan Oruch.
המחלל שבת בפרהסי×? הרי הו×? כגוי לכל דבר.
מומר לכל התורה כולה הרי הו×? כגוי לכל דבר.
×?פיקורס הרי הו×? כגוי לכל דבר.
G- No orthodox Jew (or any other Jew) has the power to judge that someone has altered their status as a Jew in any way. They may think that they do, but that is an illusion resulting from blurred, myopic vision (many haredim do wear glasses…). Intermarrieds may have left the “Jewish people” (in quotation marks because I think it’s a cheesy term, but I can’t think of another at the moment), but they will always have the right to call themselves Jewish.
This suggestion that there are legitimate ways of treating different people, as you said,
“…you act differently to a member of your faith then to one who is not a member of your faith and anyone who is being honest with themselves knows that they draw that same line somewhere based on some criteria.”
makes me ill, quite frankly. And not just because I’m a feel-good, anything goes kinda gal. But because, even in hallowed orthodoxy, you’ll find people cheerfully looking down on other people- because they haven’t attained a high enough level of spirituality (that one always makes me laugh, btw, and I suspect Hashem gets a little giggly when He hears it, too), or they eat the “wrong” kind of meat, or habitually and brazenly sit in the front of the bus…
Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but the attitude you described is discrimination (and, I’d argue, antisemitism)- even when you wrap it in a big, dirty tallis.
Good Shabbos!
C-Girl
Can you define the word Jew?
Probably no better than anyone else can. But the S”A that you cited, even in its day, probably raised the bar higher than many communities would achieve. Which might even mean that we’re not even really Jewish by lineage anymore. I’m gonna go shamor & zachor now, anyway. See ya.
Wow. See Joey’s comment # 14, just moderated (sorry about that! It had 2 links) and dead on.
let it be clear….he called u guys eichmans not us
Fran - learn to read. To paraphrase Joey’s point, the idea that the orthodox jews put forward, namely that leaving the religious community is morally equivalent to incinerating children, functions as the biggest turn off to Judaism. Thus, it is the Orthodox Jews who put forward this conception of moral equivalancy who are the Eichmans, because of how it furthers disenchantment among Jews towards orthodoxy.
While the idea certainly is a fallacious argument, and does not serve to make one want to be orthodox more, there are other things about Orthodox Judaism that I would say are more effective in turning people off from it, as I have mentioned in previous comments.
C-Girl
I’m not looking for a Wikipedia definition, but I think it’s reasonable to assume that you don’t write meaningless sentences. So what did you mean when you used the word “jew” in this context?
“No orthodox Jew (or any other Jew) has the power to judge that someone has altered their status as a Jew in any way.”/quote
I’m assuming you didn’t mean jew:someone born to a jewish mother, unless you think that orthodox people deny that irreligeous people have jewish mothers.
“But the Sâ€?A that you cited, even in its day”
When exactly do you think was the S”O’s (we rwo say so, not sa)expiration date?
Salaam Aleikum, Mohammed,
I meant it as I wrote it. As you, yourself, pointed out:
“from a rwo perspective, conservadox, conservative, reform, reconstructionist, christianity, islam, and athiesm are all basically the same.
Not True! If a Jew chooses to practice as conservadox, conservative, reform or reconstructionist, they are still Jewish, not Christian or Islamic. Geez, you make rwos sound like petty, messed-up, superiority complex- obsessed, fellow-Jew-resenting clods! Thanks be to Allah (and Mary) that I have hareidi & rwo friends whose minds are not so addled that they consider me to be Christian or Islamic (…not that there’s anything wrong with that).
Look, you, as an rwo or hareidi may not like the way I, a lWO/c-dox, conduct my Jewish life. But I resent the message that my Jewishness is on a different, lower level, or perhaps isn’t Jewishness at all. And who are YOU to be making these allegations? Did Hashem appoint you His gate-keeper?
Joey K- you rock.
ps- re: s”o/ s”a- Complete heresy, I know, but much of it was intended for a different era. Yes, there appears to be an expiration date on some halachot. Sorry to be the one to break the news, but that’s why we don’t always posken from the s”a.
Aleikum as salaam C-Girl
“I meant it as I wrote it.” How informative. I must be really stupid for having no idea wtf that means.
If a jew practices christianity or islam, he’s no less jewish than a jewish athiest, a jewish reform, conservative etc. It really is hard to have a conversation about more or less jewish when you won’t define your basic terms.
But would you agree with this statement?
Orthodoxy, like most rigid belief systems, does not recognize the validity of alternate belief systems?
How about this one?
Orthodoxy does not recognize any belief system which does not accept the torah as god given and halacha as obligatory as a valid jewish belief system?
Is that petty or superior? It’s an intrinsic part of orthodox jewish faith.
I personally don’t give a damn what you believe. Orthodoxy uses the terms jewish and orthodox as interchangeable in some contexts. I’m sure you’ll agree your beliefs aren’t orthodox, and I would easily be able to make the point that this whole argument is just a question of semantics, if you would just define your terms.
And no, we don’t always pasken from s”o. This, however, is one of those cases where we do. You can ask your local orthodox rabbi, or I could quote from mishna brura, igros moshe, and twenty or thirty other sources with a couple of minutes research.
What’s an IWO?
mohammed and C-girl, which angel was it who dictated the shulchan aruch to Rabbi Caro?
“I must be really stupid for having no idea wtf that means.”
Maybe, leaning towards yes.
“Orthodoxy, like most rigid belief systems, does not recognize the validity of alternate belief systems?”
Perhaps, but most orthodox Jews I know do not believe it to be so and are not so arrogant as to say so.
“Orthodoxy does not recognize any belief system which does not accept the torah as god given and halacha as obligatory as a valid jewish belief system?”
Halacha is not a monolithic entity. It has changed over time. Or so it says in my gemara.
And as far as Torah being God-given, I’ve heard many rwo’s dance around what that really means.
“Is that petty or superior?”
Yes, it is.
“It’s an intrinsic part of orthodox jewish faith.”
Orthodox with a big “O” as defined by haredim, or orthodox with a little “o”, as practiced by many non-hareidi orthodox Jews? There’s a difference. Seems like you need to get out more.
“Orthodoxy uses the terms jewish and orthodox as interchangeable in some contexts.”
Pure arrogance. Have they also trademarked the terms?
“if you would just define your terms.”
You just don’t like my definition. Oh, well.
“I could quote from mishna brura, igros moshe, and twenty or thirty other sources with a couple of minutes research.”
I have no doubt. Knock yourself out.
“What’s an IWO?”
Ah, an actual question! Actually, it’s lwo, didn’t realize that I had caps on for 2/3’s.
Y’know, if you keep yelling at me like this, I’m going to start thinking that you like me
I just don’t like your definition?!
You’ve been tapdancing around that question for five posts now.
Your opinion of my intellect is worth it’s weight in gold to me, so let’s just assume for the sake of this argument that I’m stupid. NOw can you give me a definition, in the form jew/jewish means: whateverthefuck?
I don’t need an objective, or all encompassing definition. Subjective, what you mean in this context, is fine.
Do you think christianity, islam and judaism are all arrogant for not recognizing each other as equally valid?
(even granting for the sake of the argument that that would be true in your opinion, it would be institutional arrogance as opposed to personal arrogance)
“most orthodox Jews I know do not believe it to be so” How many orthodox jews DO you know? perhaps you need to get out more.
Can you find me anyone to the right of YU who will agree that conservative is an equally valid form of jewish belief? And while we’re at it, how does someone who accepts that conservative and orthodox are equal define the differences between them?
Are there right wing orthodox-with-a-little-“o�, as-practiced-by-many-non-hareidi orthodox Jews?
Looks like you’re playing semantics again.
“Pure arrogance. Have they also trademarked the terms?” they don’t have to. it’s contextual, subjective, and meaningless. Playing semantics is an exercise in mental masturbation. I prefer more substantive arguments.
Why do you think I’m yelling, and why would you care if I liked you?
Hi DK-
The way I learned, the angel was never identified by name, only as “the maggid” (although I’ve read it also went by the name of The Mishnah”) and the work it kissed to Rav Karo’s mouth (not whispered into his ear) was the Maggid Meisharim, not the Shulchan Aruch.
Although perhaps according to some who believe halacha is the same today as it ever was, the S”O was whispered into Moshe Rabeinu’s ear on Sinai, along with Mishneh, Zohar and the guitar lines to Stairway to Heaven.
c-girl
it looks like you got bored in middle of our discussion
I’m frustrated. A dialogue gets boring when the topic is no longer interesting or relevant. This is interesting and relevant, but you have presented a construct which asserts that what you say is true, and therefore what you say is true. I cannot go anywhere with that.
You and I are very different. We see Judaism differently, perhaps enough that for each of us it is a different religion. Your definitions do not make sense to me and your arguments seem rigid and dogmatic. My arguments, to you, are all semantics.
I live in a religious, yet secularly influenced, world. I see halacha as a dynamic process. You asked me to find someone to the “right of YU who will agree that conservative is an equally valid form of jewish belief”. Why would I waste my time? That’s a straw man, if there ever was one. How about if I could find someone at YU who’d agree that JTS halachic scholars were (especially) and are as good as any you’ll find? I could probably find some of those at the JTS library if I went right this moment! You want to throw down mishna brura, iggros, whatever? Great, but don’t try to tell me that everything, verbatim, relates to whatever the circumstances present. That is disingenuous.
I truly believe that my definition of a Jew is irrelevant because it is not for me to define who is a Jew. I can choose to daven with certain groups, eat from certain kitchens, but I am obliged to take on faith, that someone who says they are a Jew, is a Jew.
As far as Torah, apikoros, Shabbat- those are guideposts for *my own personal behavior, not a yardstick by which I am to judge all others*. It is suggested that the Beis hamikdash was destroyed because of zealotry. I was taught, by some very smart people, that halacha is a guide for your life, not a stick with which to beat others.
You asked for my definition of a Jew. There, you’ve got it.
It certainly looks like we are talking past each other, although I’m not sure what you mean with this “you have presented a construct which asserts that what you say is true, and therefore what you say is true.”
The basis of any argument is shared premises, and I’m still trying to define basic premises.
To me, rwo starts to the right of YU and the mishna brura and igros moshe are accepted as authoritory by rwo.
I also believe that orthodoxy defines jewishness by halachic standards.
Those are (some) of my basic premises. What are yours?
I’m still not sure what you mean when you say halacha is dynamic, not monolithic, or how it’s relevant to this discussion.
You say anyone who says they’re a jew is a jew.
That basically renders the term meaningless, with absolutely no objective definition, shared characteristics or commonalities.
But that’s also semantics. I can’t argue the point of whether anyone is jewish according to your definition, and wasn’t trying to. I believe anyone who accepts halachic judaism defines jewishness by halachic standards, and I can argue what those standards are. (or if that’s true.)I can accept almost any sort of definition of judaism that has some standards as the basis of your argument and continue from there.
But all my arguments are using certain words in the context of my understanding. Whether it’s the correct usage or not, if you’re using the same words to mean something different we’re not arguing at all. We’re playing word games until we can agree on some definitions.
Way up there you wrote ““No orthodox Jew (or any other Jew) has the power to judge that someone has altered their status as a Jew in any way”
Accepting the definition you just gave, jew=anyone who says he’s a jew, no orthodox or any other person will argue that someone is not jewish.
OTOH, accepting the definition jew=someone who meets certain halachic standards, and assuming we can prove those standards exist, I don’t believe you can argue whether someone is jewish either. either he meets the standards and he is or he doesn’t and isn’t. If you’ll agree with the second half of my statement and I agree with the first half, then there’s no argument. The only question is what the word jew is being used to mean, and that is semantics, not a meaningful argument.
Btw, what do you think of the black hebrews, who claim they’re the real jews and we’re khazars. Are they jewish according to your definition?
Okay, granted this is much simplified when you can apply the easy, unyielding rule that only someone who accepts halacha is Jewish, end of story.
But what about a hypothetical family that is Jewish by lineage, attends a Conservative shul, is not Shomer Mitzvot (lights candles but watches a dvd later, doesn’t keep kosher, thinks mikveh is the name of a card game zaide used to play) but comes to shul on Shabbos, observes all chagim, sends $ to Israel and would never, ever eat ham (bacon’s okay, though…).
Is this family Jewish? The guys have all had a bris, a rabbi married the parents under a chuppah… Are they merely Jewish-ish? “Jewish-style”? Using the rwo opinion, they are simply not Jewish. Correct?
As much as I may disagree with their practices, as much as I may not eat at their house, I cannot ascribe to a means of definition that strips them of their Jewish identity.
Of course, my point of view is problematic, as well. You ask a good question- are black hebrews , in my opinion, Jewish? I guess it depends. Do they give weight to the new testament, as many groups that call themselves black hebrews do? I guess that would put them out of the running for inclusion in a minyan. Perhaps, like some African groups claiming Jewish ancestry and already keeping halacha for longer than anyone can remember, they’ve hired a rabbi to do official conversions, but are denied “official” recognition nonetheless. In some cases, acceptance of halacha does not = Jewish.
I could also remind you that this goes beyond the refusal to accept “questionable” black Jews- there is an ongoing issue in Israel with the acceptance of RCA rabbis’ converts as Jews.
As for the khazar allegation, I finally have a solid, factual, non-semantic, free of all doubt basis to give you an answer. With my background in science and access to and the understanding of population genetics studies, I can tell you with absolute certainty that there is a very, very good chance that if you are descended from Askenazim, you could well be a khazar.
Ok Now we’re getting somewhere.
Do me a favor, and reread our conversation, if you can, from my perspective.
From a halachic standpoint, there are jews who are part of the jewish community with all responsibilities and benefits, i.e. practicing jews, and jews whos jewisness consists of an unfulfilled obligation to practice, and the fact that they’re going to a jewish hell i.e. someone who was born to a jewish mother or converted and is not practicing.
As far as I know, all orthodox jews, at any rate rwo, theoretically accept these standards.
Most other groups which call themself jewish have other standards, although to the best of my knowledge all of them have some definition, nothing as vague as yours.
From your perspective, what’s wrong with accepting the new testament if they call themself jews? Why aren’t jews for jesus as legitimate as anything else?
“As much as I may disagree with their practices, as much as I may not eat at their house, I cannot ascribe to a means of definition that strips them of their Jewish identity.”
A: they don’t need your, or my validation.
B: Every group has some group of characteristics, commonalities, or whateverthefuck, that define what jewish means to them. The ARE part of the group that share those commonalities. They are NOT part of a smaller group, whos commonality is orthodox practice. The concept of a group based on any arbitrary terms you care to make is perfectly valid, as long as it’s accepted by the people of that group. What name to use to describe which concept is a question of semantics. Personally, I don’t care if you call your concept jewish and ours rutabaga.
What about the inverse side of your definition? Is anyone who chooses to call themself non jewish not a jew?
With my background in science and access to and the understanding of population genetics studies, I can tell you with absolute certainty that there is a very, very good chance that if you are descended from Askenazim, you could well be a khazar.
What’s this? Is there now genetic evidence to validate the old story? And has it also been determined that we aren’t also of Middle Eastern ancestry? If I remember correctly, Koestler claimed that virtually all Jews of Eastern European extraction are descended from the Khazars, not from the ancient Israelites, and therefore have no “hereditary” claim to Israel. I never believed that; I’ve always figured that, even if the story is true, the Khazars married into the existing Eastern European Jewish population - there have been Jews throughout Europe at least since the days of the Roman Empire, and possibly since the Babylonian exile.
There’s also the Cohen Modal Haplotype, which supposedly confirms the descent of Cohanim and Levim from an ancient Israelite ancestor - presumably Aaron. And it’s been found among other groups who claim Israelite descent - the Lemba come to mind - but I know that this is controversial.
–Using the rwo opinion, they are simply not Jewish. Correct?
No, incorrect.
Leave a Comment