Who are we? This question plagues every group of people. The issues of identity formation and how one comes to identify with a group are complicated: some aspects of identity are self-imposed and others are clearly the result of outside influences. Furthermore, identity is multi-faceted, and an individual can identify with a group on multiple levels. Issues of identity and belonging to a group are further complicated when the group in question is a minority. This is no less true for affluent minority communities, such as the Jewish community. Jews around the world deal with many questions concerning identity. They grapple with the question of who is a Jew. This is an historic issue which became even more pertinent in light of the Holocaust, the creation of the State of Israel, and the acceptance of patrilineal descent by some factions of Judaism. Furthermore, since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, diaspora Jews have had to forge a relationship with Israel. In the United States, as the prospect of annihilation by assimilation becomes a greater possibility, the question of which comes first, Americanism or Judaism, has become a hot topic. The question of which belongs to the left of the hyphen, American or Jewish (American-Jew or Jewish-American), is frequently discussed in synagogues and Jewish Community Centers around the nation. Additionally, the issue of non-religious Judaism continues to polarize both the diaspora and Israeli Jewish communities.

These questions beg further examination, specifically in terms of the difference between identity and identification, what it means to identify with a group and the difference between identity in Israel and in the Diaspora. Implicit in this discussion, especially prior to 1948, is the question of whether there can be a nation without territory and how this identity changes when the nation suddenly gains territory. These issues and the questions of what factors go into forming Jewish identity and what this new Jewish identity looks like are issues addressed by many authors.

In each of the books of essays that I read, the authors addressed the matter of the formation of Jewish identity. Furthermore, they discussed the concerns which disturb many Jewish leaders today: is it possible to be Jewish without Judaism (religious observance) and can Judaism survive solely as an ethnicity? In Between Tradition and Modernity: Haim Zhitlowski, Simon Dubnow, Ahad Ha-Am, and the Shaping of Modern Jewish Identity, David H. Weinberg examines the problems which faced Russian Jewry at the turn of the century through the visions of each historical figure- Zhitlowski, Dubnow and Ahad Ha-Am. Seemingly the concerns addressed in this book would be irrelevant today. However, I was quite surprised to find that most of the issues with which each man struggled are issues, in some form, with which the Jewish community still struggles. Evelyn Kallen’s book Spanning the Generations: A study in Jewish identity compiles the results of an ethnographic study of the Jewish community in Toronto. She examines changes in the Jewish community over the course of the first three generations of Canadian Jews. In Ethnic Identification among American Jews Arnold Dashefsky and Howard Shapiro detail a sociological study of the Jewish community in St. Paul, Minnesota. By examining the relationships between fathers and sons and between children and their peers, Jewish education and Jewish relationships, the authors discuss the basis for ethnic identification among Jews. In the introduction to Lest Memory Cease: Finding Meaning in the American Jewish Past, Henry L. Feingold considers the formation of Jewish identity in terms of collective memory and the change from religious practice to secularism. Finally, in Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition, Yael Zerubavel details the role of collective and selective memory in the formation of modern Israeli identity/traditions.

Between Tradition and Modernity addresses the issue of Jewish identity through the eyes of three figures, Haim Zhitlowski, Simon Dubnow and Ahad Ha-Am. As members of a "transitional generation" in Russian history they were greatly affected by the changes occurring around them (Weinberg 1-7). The book deals with the problem of creating Jewish identity in a time of transition from traditional to modern life. According to Weinberg, Russian secular Jewish thought historically was an attempt to recapture, not deny, the spiritual aspect of Jewish life. "Unlike their counterparts in western Europe, Jewish modernizing movements in Russia sought not to transform religion but to transcend it in the name of some new personal and collective Jewish identity"(ibid 63). It was the question of how to develop this new Jewish identity and how to transfer Judaism and Jewish values to future generations that Zhitlowski, Dubnow, and Ahad Ha-Am sought to answer. They stressed the value of collective memory and tradition, and the role of deeply rooted ideas in forging a new Jewish identity and preserving it for future generations. Their belief that assimilation would lead to national suicide was balanced by their recognition of the fact that in order for Jews to function in the modern world, some degree of assimilation was necessary; Jewish identity had to incorporate traditional Jewish values and modern life. They also emphasized the inability of most Russian Jews to assimilate completely as a function of the society in which they lived. Even if a Jew were willing to give up all of his beliefs/practices, Russians would always perceive him as a Jew and would not admit him into their society. Furthermore, anyone who was successful in their attempt to Russify was estranged from the Jewish community. The most likely candidates for this drastic life change were intellectuals (of non-Jewish studies) and members of the middle and upper classes.

Throughout the introductory chapters, Weinberg focuses on the secularization of Russian Jews. He emphasizes that while it may appear that this sudden wave of secularization at the end of the nineteenth century was the result of the pogroms that shook the community in 1881-2, in fact it was an ongoing process which was just as attributable to problems from within the Jewish community as it was to problems with the Russians. A breakdown of social and institutional framework on which Orthodoxy rested led to a decline in the general religious commitment of the community. This breakdown, along with the influence of other nationalist movements throughout the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires, was a fundamental cause of secularization and the rejection of traditional Jewish practices. It was because of this secularization that Zhitlowski, Dubnow and Ahad Ha-Am sought to find a new Jewish identity.

For Zhitlowski, this new identity was found in Yiddish, the language of Russian and Eastern European Jews. He believed that because all Russian Jews already knew Yiddish, it could unify the factions among them. Furthermore, Zhitlowski emphasized the importance of Jewish distinctiveness based on its social and moral ideals. These were embodied in the writings of the Biblical prophets and the Essenes- a second temple period group whose "moral" lifestyle is said to have impacted Jesus’ teachings. He suggested that a revival of ancient ethical ideas could preserve Judaism and help to integrate the Jewish people into mainstream progressive human history (ibid 116-18). Accompanying his emphasis on ethical Judaism, Zhitlowski’s believed that if Jews were part of the Russian proletariat, they would be integrated into the host community. He therefore emphasized what he saw as a natural connection between Yiddishism and socialism. This link would allow Jews to develop an autonomy over their national affairs within the Diaspora, a plan to which Zhitlowski strongly adhered. For a large part of his life, Zhitlowski believed that while it was not necessary for the Jewish people to have their own territory to survive, having one would protect Jews from anti-Semitism and oppression. Toward the end of his life however, he conceded that a Jewish state was necessary for the continuation of the Jewish people. Here, again, he emphasized the need for socialism to build Jewish autonomy. Yet, even having made this concession, Zhitlowski asserted the importance of Yiddish in unifying the Jewish community. "For [him], Yiddish language and literature seemed a clear alternative to both Orthodox Judaism and Zionism as the basis for Jewish identity...he argued [that] Yiddish was a progressive tool that could incorporate both ancient Jewish traditions and new values in contemporary life" (Weinberg 138).

Just as Zhitlowski rejected "Orthodoxy and Zionism as the basis for Jewish identity," so Dubnow found them reprehensible as a way of life (ibid). History was the key for Jewish survival and the new Jewish identity, he claimed. Dubnow believed that Jewish national consciousness was based on common historical experience, which he said began with enslavement by the Egyptians. This history also led to national identity by the mere fact that the Jewish people was the only "nation to...[survive] after defeat and dispersion" (ibid 186). Implicit in Jewish survival, was the ability to change. According to Dubnow, the center of the Jewish world began in the political realm, during the time of the Prophets, and gradually shifted to the social and spiritual realms. Important to this argument is the opinion that the "spiritual nation" appeared during the first exile (Dubnow as quoted by Weinberg 187). This proved that Judaism could flourish outside of its homeland. Dubnow used this historical change in emphasis (from political to spiritual) to justify "what he called evolutionary Judaism" (ibid 193). Evolutionary Judaism maintained that Judaism needed to adjust to new and changing cultural atmospheres. Despite his apparent rejection of traditional Jewish beliefs and practices, Dubnow recognized their importance as the source of Jewish distinctiveness and thus their role in maintaining Jewish identity. Still, he strived to unite Russian Jews under the auspices of history, rather than religious belief and practice because he realized that not everyone could live such a strict life. Also, in order to survive, the Jewish people needed to follow the example of their ancestors, who were exiled from their homeland, and change the focus of the group’s identification. In this belief, Dubnow, like many other historians and sociologists, expressed his opinion that Jewish identity is formed as a reaction to outside forces. Like, Zhitlowski, Dubnow was aware of the need to put the group before the individual.

As a Zionist, Ahad Ha-Am contended that Jews were linked through space and time and that this would allow them to develop a collective memory and a common dream for the future. He firmly rejected the idea that Jewish identity was a response to crises and national problems. Rather, he asserted that Jewish knowledge was the key to forming a modern Jewish identity. The intellectual elite would lead the masses in their pursuit of this knowledge which would aid in the pursuit of a common memory and in the development of a collective dream to reclaim the Jewish state. Ahad Ha-Am further asserted that over the course of the Diaspora religious belief and practice had become the core aspects of Jewish life and that as these declined throughout the nineteenth century, Jewish identity significantly declined. The solution to this problem was to redefine what made someone Jewish and to re-embody the Jewish spirit. He saw Zionism as the way to heal the Jewish people and that by settling in Israel (then Palestine) and adopting a Hebrew culture, the Jewish "national revival" could begin (Weinberg 252). Most importantly, Ahad Ha-Am’s utilization of Zionism was not out of a religious belief that Jews belonged in Israel or in messianic redemption; instead, it was formulated based on historical precedent and the collective memory of being a political nation.

Although Weinberg addresses the question of Jewish identity in the context of pre-Revolutionary Russia, the issues with which he, along with the figures whose biographies he utilizes, deals are the same issues which we will find in the other books and essays. The question whether to define Judaism as a religion or as an ethnicity, drove Zhitlowski, Dubnow and Ahad Ha-Am crazy. They were all raised with some degree of religious observance in their homes, yet when they reached maturity they all sought alternate means for the Jewish people to formulate their group identity and ensure their survival. These three historical figures demonstrated that it is possible for there to be secular Jewish ideologies, which are independent of Jewish religious belief and practice.

The focus of Spanning the Generations is the dynamic nature of Jewish identity. Jews, like all minority groups, can be defined as objects of discrimination. Kallen claims that this is because identity is defined, at least in part, by how one is perceived/identified by other people (Kallen 2-3). Furthermore, she maintains that ethnic group boundaries are social, and thus easily changed in varying social climates. Kallen identifies five factors which effect boundary maintenance and ethnic integration: the degree of disparities, social distance, social organization, social integration and institutionalization of ethnic status difference. The degree of disparities refers to differences within the ethnic community. The degree of social distance, organization and integration refer to the distance between insiders and outsiders, the self-sufficiency of the community and the cohesiveness of the community, respectively. The degree of institutionalization of ethnic status difference alludes to techniques of domination and separation which are employed by the larger society. These components of boundary maintenance are expressed and discussed throughout Kallen’s analysis of the changing face of Jewish identity (ibid 12-15).

She contends that there are three central elements of Jewish identity: religion, an ancestral homeland, and common ancestry. These aspects of Jewish identity can be seen as the self-imposed parts of identity, although for those who choose to dissociate from the group the latter can be imposed by an outside influence, as Hitler clearly demonstrated. Kallen follows the changes which occurred in Jewish identity from the shtetls of Eastern Europe and Russia to the third generation of Canadian Jews (roughly the descendants of those from the shtetls) in Toronto, Ontario. It is important to note that Kallen does not believe that Jews had a nationality prior to the formation of the modern state of Israel. Rather, she contends that the Judaism was an ethnicity which gained a nationality in 1948, thus refocusing the attention of the group members and redefining Jewish identity.

Kallen identifies two general trends which lead to changes in Jewish identity. First, she points out that in host societies where there is a greater emphasis on individual freedoms and liberty, Jews tend to assimilate faster and more effectively. In states where there are laws providing for equal protection, Jews tend to be more welcomed and more readily assimilated than in states where there is a national ethnic majority and/or a great deal of anti-Semitism. Secondly, Kallen identifies increased wealth as both a measure and a cause of assimilation and loss of Jewish identity. In her study of Jews in Toronto, it is obvious that Jews with more money tended to be on the fringes of the traditional community, which in the first and second generations still defined Jewish identity. These wealthy Jews, predominantly of Western European descent, were usually Reform, and thus did not perform many of the rituals, such as adherence to dietary laws or the observance of the Sabbath, which helped maintain Jewish distinctiveness. Also, they tended to live away from the core community, where Jewish socialization took place. In contrast, the Eastern European immigrants and their children generally remained isolated from their Canadian neighbors. The most changes occurred in the third generation when it became obvious that traditional Jewish identity, that is religious practice and the use of Yiddish as the spoken language, would only survive in the Orthodox community. Moreover, the new Jewish identity was quite different from the identity which had immediately preceded it. Contemporary Canadian Jews, Kallen claims, base their identity on their relation to Israel and their fear of anti-Semitism and a recurrence of the Holocaust. Identification with Israel is only one aspect of Jewish identity in the second and third generations. Prior to 1948, it remained a collective dream of the Jewish people to return to their homeland. It was not until the creation of the state of Israel that this dream could be fulfilled. Most Jews, however, remain in the Diaspora and identify with Israelis through their financial support of the state.

Another significant change in Jewish identity occurred with regards to the space in which identity is formed and preformed. Traditionally, Kallen says, Jewish identity was formed in the home and influenced all aspects of an individual’s life. In contrast, for the vast majority of contemporary Jews, Judaism is relegated to the synagogue. Jewish education is no longer the responsibility of the family, and for many now takes place solely in the Hebrew school after secular school.

For the Toronto Jews in Kallen’s study there can be Jewish ethnic identity without religious Judaism. They base their identity on their relationship to Israel and on their collective memory of the Holocaust and its victims. The question remains whether this is a viable form of identity. In a couple of generations the memory of the Holocaust will be faint, and should Israel be destroyed, this bond of ethnic identification would be precarious, at best.

Here again collective memory is recognized as a huge part of Jewish identity. In the introduction to Lest Memory Cease, Feingold asserts that American Jewish identity is based on Jewish collective memory and the Jewish value of altruism (Feingold 17). He, like Kallen, claims that Jewish immigrants based their identity on their European experience, but that this identity did not survive much past the first generation. Rather, a strictly American Jewish identity formed. It was based on being American and being part of the modern world. Further, he claims that in America, Jews experience "philo-Semitism" rather than anti-Semitism, which leads directly to acculturation and loss of distinctiveness (Feingold 8). American-Judaism is a secular entity which bases its existence on a commitment to liberalism and altruism. As a block, he notes, American-Jews vote democratic and give large sums of money to charity. It should be noted that this group of people does not include the very Orthodox, who frequently remain isolated from the host society. For Feingold, Jewish identity is continually evolving and the current phase of secularism is far from a death wish; it is just the next step in the formation of a modern Jewish community. He believes that it is possible for Jews to be Jewish without having any Jewish beliefs, and he maintains that a traditional collective memory is not necessary for people to do Jewish things (ibid 18). The question then remains, what makes an act Jewish, if the person performing it does not know that it is Jewish?

Ethnic Identification among American Jews is the report on a sociological study that took place in St. Paul Minnesota in 1969. The study focused on what influenced Jewish identification among a group of fathers and sons (not all of subjects were related but were of the same two generations). The specific results of the study are not important here, rather I will focus on the general conclusion which can be drawn from it. The authors of the study, Dashefsky and Shapiro make a point to differentiate between identity and identification. For them, identity is an individual’s sense of who he is. There are two sources of identity: (1) identity is formed from "social roles that constitute the shared definitions of appropriate behavior, and [2] the individual life history" (Dashefsky, Shapiro 4). Furthermore, these sources of identity can be subdivided into four facets: social identity, self conception, personal identity and ego identity. Social identity refers to how others describe an individual in terms of broad social categories. Self conception is defined as the attitudes an individual holds about himself; it is created by the internalization of definitions imposed by other people. Personal identity refers to how other people define an individual in terms of a unique combination of traits that are associated with him. Finally, ego identity describes the psychological core of what the person means to himself. Identification, comparatively, is a means by which identity is generated. Group ethnic identification is not solely imposed by other people, but is also the result of a desire to identify with the group because doing so is pleasurable (ibid 4-8). Furthermore, if a group is seen or treated as a community by the outside world, then its members are more likely to behave as such. This is obvious in the Jewish community’s response to anti-Semitism.

According to Dashefsky and Shapiro, Jewish identification is based on the following variables: education, parents’ identification and participation, positive Jewish experiences with friends and parents during adolescence, and current socialization with other Jews (ibid 37). Generally, as the amount of each variable increases, so does Jewish identification, which in turn leads to a stronger Jewish identity, and vice versa. Additionally, it is noted that traditional Jewish values lead to greater Jewish identification. These values, represented by Torah (study), tzedakah (charity), simcha (value of life), are just as important to the American Jewish experience as they were in other places and times. However, in the United States more emphasis is placed on tzedakah and simcha, as there is not an intellectual tradition in America (ibid 94-100). It is noted that despite these internal aspects of group identification, outside influences play a large role in determining an individual’s relation to the group. During times of crisis, in their own community or in Israel, the Jews of St. Paul were more likely to identify closely with the group. This type of identification, based on Jewish marginality, can be perceived of as negative identification (ibid 3), which has been identified by all of the authors whom I have read as an important factor in the formation of Jewish identity. A final point which Dashefsky and Shapiro emphasize, is that religion is necessary for the maintenance of Jewish ethnic identity. However, they point out that it is not necessary for every individual in the group to identify through religion. Rather, it is necessary for that option to be there. Further, the group must exist in order for the individual to preserve his own Jewish identity.

Recovered Roots deals with the formation of collective memory and the use of memory formation to build a nation. Zerubavel describes the ways in which the stories of Bar Kokhba, the fall of Masada, and the Battle of Tel Hai were utilized by the leaders of the Yishuv, the Jewish settlers in pre-Israel Palestine, to promote a sense of national identity among their fellow settlers. Furthermore, she demonstrates that a story can be manipulated to revise history and attain a specific goal. In this case the goal was to foster a sense of national pride in a group of people from diverse backgrounds. In addition to story manipulation, Zerubavel details the process by which selective memory is used to give an historic episode a new meaning. She points to the story of the Bar Kokhba revolt as an example. In this instance the Yishuv selectively forgot that the rebels lost and instead focused on Bar Kokhba’s heroism. Zerubavel also chronicles the use of existing Jewish traditions such as the commitment to help a fellow Jew and the holiday cycle to create a national character. The commitment to help fellow Jews was evident in the formation of the Jewish National Fund, an organization which funded a great deal of the Yishuv’s activity (Zerubavel 64). Israelis celebrate all Jewish holidays as national holidays and create new meanings for them. Many Israelis celebrate national holidays, which in the Diaspora have religious significance, as commemorations of historic events. She points out that Lag B’Omer, traditionally a day to remember the end of a plague which killed 24,000 of Rabbi Akiba’s students, was transformed into a commemoration of the Bar Kokhba Revolt (ibid 96-100). Using the previously mentioned legends, Zerubavel argues, the Yishuv transformed the Jewish immigrants and their children into the ideal Jew: strong, proud, and willing to fight for his freedom. This was in stark contrast to the exilic Jew who was characterized by his weakness, studiousness and inability to defend himself. The diaspora Jew was later exemplified, in the Yishuv’s mind, by the European Jews who went "like sheep to the slaughter" during the Holocaust (as quoted by Zerubavel 72).

While all of the arguments are compelling, I found that Yael Zerubavel and David Weinberg most effectively addressed the issue of what forms ethnic identity, as opposed to religious identity, among Jews. Both authors dealt with the issue of collective memory, which seems to be the principal determinant of ethnic identity. Zerubavel’s analysis of how Israeli national identity and tradition were formed as a result of the deliberate decisions and actions by the pre-state Yishuv and the government (after the formation of the state), exemplifies the point that ethnic identity is based on collective memory, not religious practice. The vast majority of the people who Zerubavel describes as Zionists and key players in forging a new identity for Israelis were not religious people. Many of them went so far as to reject Jewish religious beliefs and practices.Yet, they still considered themselves Jews, and they built a Jewish state. David Weinberg’s use of the three historic figures to confront a variety of issues centering on preserving a nation through common language and collective memory, among others, similarly aided in my understanding of the "ethnic Jew." From Tradition to Modernity gave me a clear understanding of what was being described when speaking of an ethnic Jew, and it introduced the idea that collective memory could be utilized in multiple ways. These books effectively addressed the issue of how someone can be an ethnic, or secular, Jew; that is, how someone can consider himself Jewish and reject Jewish belief and observance.

Jewish identity is clearly based on many things. It can be seen as both a response to outside pressures and the internalization of imposed definitions, or it can be viewed as self-defined. Outside pressures manifest themselves in the form of anti-Semitism and attacks on Israel. Furthermore, imposed definitions are those definitions which the outside world places on the Jewish community. An example of this is evidenced in a common stereotype which assumes that people with big noses are Jewish. Self-defined aspects are defined as those parts of Jewish identity which are imposed from within the Jewish community and by the individual. Some examples of this are the result of Jewish education, relationships with other Jews and Jewish collective memory. Most likely, it is a combination of outside pressures and internal factors which lead to the formation of modern Jewish identity. Specifically, collective memory seems to be the strongest influence on the formation of Jewish identity.