Talk:Mizrahi Jews

Invalid Reasons given for a deletion edit

In the article Mizrahi Jews Debresser made an unjustified "undo" with "Latest revision as of 10:22, 3 April 2016". He undid my deletion (bold italic) of the claim that "Mizrahi Jews were either expelled by their Arab rulers or chose to leave and emigrated to Israel". I previously checked the cited resource and confirmed that the claimed word 'expel' did not appear there. Yet as (undiscussed) reason for his 'undo' he claim that it does. So, Debresser please indicate where, in that JVL article, you found (specifically ... not some subjective 'equivalent') the words "expell", "expulsion" or "expelled". If you cannot, please obey Wiki rules and revert to my correct version. Erictheenquirer (talk) 12:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Erictheenquirer, please don't get all worked up about this. The article says: "severe violence against Jews forced communities throughout the Middle Eastern region to flee once again". That sentence supports the statement that Mizrahi Jews were expelled, although I agree that the "by their Arab rulers" part remains implied. I wouldn't mind tagging that part of the statement with a {{Citation needed}} tag. Debresser (talk) 20:22, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mizrahi Jews. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.adva.org/ivrit/ADVA_ISRAEL_2005_HEB.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

3,000,000 really?

It is impossible there are 3,000,000 Mizrachi Jews in Israel, unless we add-count also all the Sephardic Jews (including those from Europe), but Sephardic is not equal Mizrachi - this is a common misconception sometimes also penetrating the media. The origin of the distinction between Mizrachi Jews (Yahud al-Mashriq) and Western Jews (Yahud al-Maghreb) comes from the Islamic period, when the "Islamic world" was roughly divided to East/Mashriq (Mesopotamia), West/Maghreb (North Africa), North/al-Sham (Levant), South/Yaman (Arabia). Mizrachi Jews are most of all Mesopotamian Jews or more historically correct Babylonian Jews. Those Babylonian communities have spread over the centuries to Caucasus, Central Asia and India and of course embraced Sephardic style Judaism, which was developed from Babylonian style Judaism. Today, many confuse all those concepts altogether, but it doesn't mean the confusion is to become the primary definition. Mizrachi Jews are still descendants of Babylonian Jews and there roughly one million of those in Israel.GreyShark (dibra) 12:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

The whole list is not sourced. Agree that obviously the number includes all so-called Mizrachiyim. Debresser (talk) 14:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

There are no 3,000,000 Mizrahi Jews in Israel. There is a source which states the country of origin of those who were born in Israel and those who were born in that country. In my calculation I included: Turkey, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, India-Pakistan, Syria-Lebanon, Morocco, Algeria-Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Ethiopia. I didn't include Asia becuase I was not sure what exactly constitues as "Asia", when most of the Mizrahi Jews of Asia lived in the Soviet Union which has it's own number. I also didn't include the rest of Africa because of the Ashkenazis who moved to British colonies such as South Africa and Nigeria. This is an official source by the ICBS. You can't simply remove it and write "3 million".--Bolter21 (talk to me)

Btw if you assume all of the French and Spannish Jews are originally Mizrahi (If I remember correct, they are the majority of Spannish Jewery and a big portion of the French one) you still don't reach 3 million. Even if you assume that all of the Soviet Jews came from Bukhara, you still reach less than 3 million. At the moument, it seems that the best sources can imply that in Israel there are more than 1,900 thousand Mizrahi Jews.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 19:09, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

In a second calculation I got 1,501,700. I made the calculation anoter two times to make sure. This is the number according to the source.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 19:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Debresser and Bolter21: Come on, don't edit war over this. clpo13_(talk) 19:38, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

The current version has a source, no reason to revert it and write a number without a source. It seems like a complete misunderstanding.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 19:44, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

As I said in the second revert, the figure is not in the source. It is based on some kind of calculation based on the figures in that table, without indication of inclusion criteria, and it is original research from beginning till end. Debresser (talk) 20:28, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

• Comment - Bolter21's inclusion of Sephardic Jews and Beta Israel with Mizrachi Jews suggests original research. This is totally unacceptable.GreyShark (dibra) 17:38, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mizrahi Jews. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120325215129/http://www.ibtauris.com/Books/Society%20%20social%20sciences/Politics%20%20government/Israeli%20Cinema%20East%20%20West%20and%20the%20Politics%20of%20Representation.aspx to http://www.ibtauris.com/Books/Society%20%20social%20sciences/Politics%20%20government/Israeli%20Cinema%20East%20%20West%20and%20the%20Politics%20of%20Representation.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Mizrahim in France

There are certain discrepancies on these pages relating to “World Jewry” Many Jews in France are of mixed Sephardic-Mizrahi heritage sometimes these two groups are even interchangable, a point should be made of that as many of the famous and notable Mizrahi Jews in this page are from France and listed as such but France is not mentioned in the population section. On another matter is the topic regarding Iraqi Jews I regardless of what the article might state, Jews in Kurdistan are almost entirely mixed with Muslims so the families numbering over 100 in Iraq would come from Jewish families mixed with other faiths. Dont belittle245 (talk) 04:00, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Indian Jews (Bene Israel) are also Mizrahi Jews? Why are they not listed in the population table?

Because they're not, they're a separate group of Jews entirely.135.23.20.146 (talk) 20:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Original research

The article is a horrible demonstration of OR, to write politely ("making baseless assertions" is more true.) The term "Mizrahim" is an Israeli sociological term, which refers to all Jews descended from Muslim lands who arrived in the 1950s and 1960s, and their descendants. It is contrasted with Ashkenazim in the Israeli sense of the word - not strictly the Yiddish-speaking ethnic group, but rather Israel's hegemonic "white" middle class. Mizrahim is a matter of sociology and subaltern studies, not an ethnic-religious one. To quote Ella Shohat, a leading authority (p. 13 here):

With Zionism, that set of affiliations changed, resulting in a transformed semantics of belonging. But the delegitimization of Middle Eastern culture has boomeranged in the face of Euro-Israel: out of the massive encounter that has taken place between Jews from such widely separated regions as the Maghreb and Yemen emerged a new overarching umbrella identity, what came to be called "the Mizrahim." The term began to be used only in the early 1990s by leftist non-Ashkenazi activists who saw previous terms such as "Bnei Edot ha-Mizrah" ("descendants of the oriental ethnicities") as condescending; non-European Jews were posited as "ethnicities," in contradistinction to the unmarked norm of "Ashkenaziness" orEuro-Israeli "Sabraness," defined simply as Israeli. "Mizrahim" also gradually replaced the term "Sephardim" (literally referring to those of Spanish origin), which was also used oppositionally up until the late 1980s.

A quick survey of the sources cited here will reveal very little support for the style of the article. It anachronistically labels a wide range of groups as Mizrahim from time immemorial, though they certainly did not conceive themselves as such before recently. It also attempts to distinguish Mizrahim from Sephardim, a contentious term in its own right, but virtually all Sephardim in Israel are Mizrahim and vice versa. As always happens, when something horribly wrong appears in English Wikipedia, it is replicated to a host of other ones, multiplying the damage. AddMore-III (talk) 08:05, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

AddMore-III, i agree, 'Mizrahi Jews' is indeed a relatively modern, artificial Israeli term for Jews from the Middle East and North Africa (although today it is widely used to refer to all Jews from those regions). The exclusion of North African Jews is also very odd as Maghrebi Jews are integral part of the 'Mizrahi' community. Apart from Yemenite Jews, all Mizrahi Jews are Sephardi, but not all Sephardic Jews in Israel are Mizrahi, such as Balkan Jews (Greece, Bulgaria, etc). Anyway, I think we should rewrite parts of the article. Infantom (talk) 18:33, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Infantom, thank you for your support. AddMore-III (talk) 17:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

In response to the recent reversion, I'll quote yet another scholar (Yaron Shemer, Identity, Place, and Subversion in Contemporary Mizrahi Cinema in Israel, University of Michigan Press, 2013. p. 50):

As we have seen, Mizrahiness was formed in Israel by the government administration that coined Edot haMizrah (again, a term that connoted plurality and dispersion and emphasizes provenance). Later on, Mizrahi has become a self-designated identity appellation that implies some cohesion and a sense of belonging, and is meant to accentuate shared experiences and traditions, in the case of the New Mizrahim, even common sociopolitical sensibilities and an emerging Mizrahi identity.

Nobody is disputing that Mizrahim was a recently coined term within Israel. That is already established history. However, this doesn’t warrant rebranding a page representing an identity millions connect to. In the present-day, millions have been raised as Mizrahim, sociologists pointing out the artificial roots of this identity does not change that or make Mizrahim illegitimate today. This article should be about Mizrahim in general, not just the ones who live in Israel. Nor should it be centered around Israeli politics when we already have Mizrahi Jews in Israel. --Gruzinim (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't know how you deduced that anyone is trying to make Mizrahi identity "illegitimate", though from what I read many do not primarily identify as such (or don't identify at all). It is more an outside label. I was not aware of Mizrahi Jews in Israel, which is indeed more correct than the one here but is redundant, for Mizrahim are a definitely Israelo-centric issue. In Hebrew wikipedia, where resources on the matter are far more accessible, the parallel article he:מזרחים to the one here defines Mizrahim without qualification (not "Mizrahim in Israel", just Mizrahim) as I defined it. The broad category of non-European Jewries in Muslim lands is referred to in Israeli academic circles simply as such, he:יהדות ארצות האסלאם, which is a far more correct term. I suggest that Mizrahi Jews in Israel will become simply Mizrahim and expanded, and the article here merged with History of the Jews under Muslim rule. AddMore-III (talk) 22:55, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I got that from the way you re-wrote the article originally. Currently it starts out describing what Mizrahim refers to, then goes into the history of the term. You changed it to "Mizrahim is an Israeli sociological term denoting the Jews who immigrated to Israel en masse," which is reducing the existence of Mizrahim as a group to just a term within Israel. I disagree on combining Mizrahi Jews with Mizrahi Jews in Israel because one should focus specifically on Israeli politics, Black Panther party, etc. While Mizrahi Jews should focus Mizrahi Jews in general, explaining the different languages and peoples which make up the sub-group. The "non-European Jewries in Muslim lands" page doesn't apply to all Mizrahim, considering not all come from Muslim lands. Gruzinim, for example, come from Georgia which is a Christian country and are still Mizrahi. When Mountain Jews, Georgian and Bukharan Jews were under Soviet rule, it wouldn't count as "Jews under muslim rule" but it is still relevant for this page. Also, Mizrahim is by definition not an "outside label." Even your quote from Ella Shohat recognizes it's current use is an evolution pushed by Mizrahim because the previous term was seen as condescending. --Gruzinim (talk) 23:38, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I would focus on the modern label use, in the article, rather than on the historic communities which we in any even have individual sub-pages for. The term (as is the Israeli morph of Ashkenazi) is indeed a rather horrible synthesis - however - it is a notable label and synthesis. I will note that recently ultra-progressive (or per some - anti-Israel) groups outside of Israel have embraced this label (as a surrogate/parallel for "African American" or "black" it would seem), and thus we have JVP (see here - using "Jew of Color" as well, which extends into Anusim in the New World) - so use isn't just Israeli anymore. Icewhiz (talk) 07:39, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree with that, however I feel it should still list the historical communities being referenced. This article is missing how "Mizrahim" evolved from the term "Edot HaMizrah" which was used prior to the establishment of Israel. Here is a source for “Edot HaMizrah” being used in Mandatory Palestine: ([1] Oriental Neighbors: Middle Eastern Jews and Arabs in Mandatory Palestine p. 7):

The demographic composition of the Yishuv and the place of Sephardi and Oriental Jews in it can be found in the statistical data of the Jewish Agency. Overall, the most common ways to refer to this community during the Mandate period and within the Yishuv were Sephardi Jews and Edot HaMizrah or Yehudei HaMizrah. The statistical department of the Jewish Agency used the ethnic categories of Sephardim, Yemenites, and Mizrahim. In December 1936, for example, it was reported that the Yishuv numbered 404,000 people, of whom 94,000 were defined as Sephardim and Oriental Jews, according to the following breakdown: 37,000 Sephardi Jews, 18,000 Yemenite Jews, and the others Edot HaMizrah.

Another tidbit from that same page:

Therefore, the term “Sephardim” included the Sephardi Jewish community and the communities of Oriental Jews (Yehudei HaMizrah), which were also called Edot HaMizrah. The English term used for Yehudei HaMizrah by the leadership of Sephardi and Middle Eastern Jewish communities, in their official documents, was “Oriental Jews.” --Gruzinim (talk) 17:18, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

There is a history for this bulk labelling in the Yishuv context - but that's still an eretz yisrael labelling of outside groups / broad classes of people in eretz yisrael. Icewhiz (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

It still contradicts the idea that Mizrahim refers to just the Jews who immigrated to Israel en masse during the 50s and 60s, which is how this article was rewritten. It applies to the Jews who had remained in the region prior to Zionism as well. It should be acknowledged that this term has evolved since the Mandate period, rather than being invented post-1948.--Gruzinim (talk) 22:24, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Concerning Jacobson and Naor's book, please note, immediately after your quote, that the authors acknowledge that a variety of names was used for Middle Eastern Jews. It is also written that the statistical dept. of the Jewish Agency used three different categories: Sephardim, Yemenites and Edot ha-Mizrah. Perhaps you missed the lines I wrote in my version of the intro: The term is a complex one, and was linked with the Sephardi rite and religious customs practiced by many though not all of those so named – Sephardi in Israel is almost interchangeably used for Mizrahi – with their common heritage as Jews of Muslim lands, and somewhat with the older designation "Jews of the East" which referred only to those of the Mashriq.

Mizrahi music is Israelocentric, Mizrahi Hebrew is ridiculous as it purports to cover both Yemenite and Sephardi pronunciation. It also includes the absurd statement "The Sephardim were expellees from Spain and settled among the Mizrahim", when the Sephardim mainly settled among Maghrebi (who pointedly refer to themselves as "Western" even in Hebrew) and other communities which never considered themselves as "Mizrahi". That's exactly the problem when trying to designate such disperse group under an umbrella term which is only "useful" when contrasted with Ashkenazim.

I barely found the term "Mizrahi Hebrew", and where I did (Raciolinguistics: How Language Shapes Our Ideas About Race, p. 187; The Israelis: Ordinary People in an Extraordinary Land, p. 122) it was specifically in the Israeli context, where it is identified as the vulgar lower-class manner of speech. The same problem applies to Cuisine of the Mizrahi Jews, which again mixes cuisines which are barely related.

In conclusion, I'm willing to add a sentence that the term "Mizrahi" also gained some foothold outside Israel, and to add the Yishuv before the 1950/60 immigration, but to retain present format is ludicrous. Again, this is a sociological term, not an etho-religious one. AddMore-III (talk) 08:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Mizrahi Hebrew is indeed quite ridiculous (though Development town vernacular/dialect/accent does exist - spoken BTW also by the progeny of 1990s Russian immigrants who settled in these towns). Cuisine of the Mizrahi Jews is also quite bad, though "Mizrahi restaurant" (מסעדה מזרחית) does exist (basically referring to Meze salads + Pita + meat skewers) - but with the exception of this very particular Israeli institution - Tripolitan food does not meet Baghdadi, Yemenite and Persian food are a class unto themselves - with very little cross influences (pita variants do exist in Egypt eastwards (but not so much in Persian cuisine, I think) - but doesn't go west (Tripoli and onwards) where they use bread in pure cuisine)... In the wider Levant (Turkey, Syria and Lebanon, Iraq, Israel, Egypt (but not Yemen) there is a bit of continuum - e.g. Kibbeh exists in all of them). Icewhiz (talk) 09:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

This source - summarizes Mizrahi Cuisine well - Mizrahi cuisine, just like the Mizrahi ethnicity, is tehrefore a modern Israeli invention, the outcome of a process whereby the varied Jewish cuisines of many cultural regions in North Africa and the Midde East (and to a lesser extent Asia Minor and the Balkans) were stripped of their uniqueness and complexity and simplified into a limited set of emblematic dishes, cooking techniques, spices, aromas, and tastes ...." (and goes on to describe how this is associate with red and spicy food).Icewhiz (talk) 09:22, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The quote I gave acknowledged that too, AddMore-III. The point isn't what the term itself was (it points out Mizrahi/Sephardi leaders used the term Oriental Jews to describe themselves), but that it existed as a concept. Yemenite + Sephardim + Edot HaMizrah were all subcategories of the "Oriental Jews" label. I also have a source for Edot HaMizrah being used back then to refer to Caucasian Jews, which contradicts the claim that Mizrahim is specific to Muslim lands. ([2] Sephardic Jewry and Mizrahi Jews p. 239):

In general, relationships between Caucasian Jews and the Zionist movement were shot through with ambivalence, as became evident, for example, with regard to the individuals who sought to emigrate to Palestine after 1918 and to those who, a decade later, wished to be accepted in agricultural settlements, but were told to wait for settlements meant especially for Edot Mizrahiyot.

It's wrong to reduce and minimize Mizrahim. I see Mizrahi Hebrew was deleted in favor of a Sephardim reduction of non-Sephardi Mizrahi Jewish groups. I don't see how pronunciation differences between Persian Jews (Bukharim, Juhurim and Parsim) or Levantine Jewish groups would fit on an article about Sephardi Hebrew. Gruzinim (talk) 10:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Persian (in the greater sense - greater Persia, not modern day Iran) Hebrew is quite different AFAICT from Sephardic Hebrew - being influenced from Persian, the existence of Judeo-Persian. The accent, in Hebrew, of Persian Jews (first/second generation, local born Israelis speak with an accent that varied mildly by locale, less by parenthood) is radically different from any of the Arabic speaking countries. Icewhiz (talk) 10:56, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Exactly. That was my point originally, and with Mizrahim in general. Mizrahi Hebrew should include the pronunciation of Arabic-speaking Levantine Jews and Persian-speaking Jews. Neither constitute their own page (neither does the pronunciation of Caucasian Jews), although they don't really fit on the same page as Sephardim either. If Mizrahi Hebrew is too broad of a term, then pushing all these groups onto Sephardi Hebrew is just as absurd. Gruzinim (talk) 11:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

But there's nothing common between Persian (and Georgian) Hebrew pronunciation and Levant (and North African) Hebrew pronunciation - the only thing in common is "not Ashkenazim". It is furthermore questionable whether the small accent variations (of local Israeli born Hebrew speakers - not immigrants) are even a dialect e.g. per this source - "Generally speaking, Modern Hebrew lacks dialects, though there are sociolects, ethnolects, relgiolects, and many other varieties of the language" (going on to give maatayim (מאתיים) as an example in Jerusalem). Icewhiz (talk) 11:14, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

This goes back into the false argument that Mizrahim is a strictly sociological term which only exists in opposition to Ashkenazim. There is more to Jewish language than just Ashkenazim, Sephardim and Mizrahim. Romaniote Hebrew, for example. What is in common is the general region they emerged in, that some of the sub-groups linguistically cluster with one another (Levantine, Persian), and that the people speaking them belong to a Jewish ethnic identity which exists today regardless of it's artificial origin. I don't see why accents were brought up. Gruzinim (talk) 11:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Reading the entire section "who were the Oriental Jews?" (pp. 6-9) in Naor/Jacobson will not substantiate your claim. A variety of terminologies and cross-identities is discussed there, and even you state that in a the very narrow context of the Yishuv, the leadership chose the English term "Oriental Jews" when dealing with outside agencies. Only the smallest of these three sub-groups was directly labeled "Mizrahi". The second source you quoted only confirms that the Ashkenazi Zionists referred to Caucasians as "Eastern". I wholly reject your linguistic argument in "this goes back". It is akin to stating that the various dialects spoken by the remote ancestors of African-Americans should somehow be labeled "African-American". Judeo-Iranian languages are wholly distinct from Judeo-Arabic languages, and the Yevanic language is an entirely different story (Romaniotes are barely relevant here anyway). That some of those labeled "Mizrahim" (in the Israeli sense, not of Mashriq Jews which have some actual affinity to it) began to identify with it, does not make this an ethnic identity. Ethnicity is rooted in authentic language and culture, and cannot be assigned post factum. AddMore-III (talk) 12:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You just made an assertion which is not backed up by the sources. You claimed that Mizrahim were the smallest group. If you read again at ([3] Naor/Jacobson p. 7), you will notice it says "94,000 were defined as Sephardim and Oriental Jews, according to the following breakdown: 37,000 Sephardi Jews, 18,000 Yemenite Jews, and the others Edot HaMizrah." 94,000 - 37,000 - 18,000 = 39,000. That makes Mizrahim the largest group. I will agree that the label wasn't strictly "Oriental Jews," it was a mixture of labels which changed over time depending on the context. I brought up Yevanic because it was being argued that "Mizrahi Hebrew" referred to any Hebrew pronunciation that was "non-Ashkenazi" therefore it's illegitimate. Romaniote Hebrew is neither Ashkenazi nor one of the various Mizrahi pronunciations. How can you declare millions of Jews who your own sources say identify as such not a legitimate ethnicity? At it's core, ethnicity is people who identify with each others based off of similarities. That is what Mizrahi Jews are, they identify with each other based off of being descendants of Jews who remained in the Middle East and North Africa since antiquity. It doesn't have to be rooted in language, they don't all have to have the same exact history. Gruzinim (talk) 13:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

and the others (neiter Sephardim nor Yemenites) Edot HaMizrah. But even if I accept that the term was a primary means of identification (rather than just a term; btw I don't) recognized in Mandatory Palestine, it was so only there. Your other claims about "identification" of "millions" are baseless. Shas, probably the most prominent Mizrahi political force ever, pointedly embraced the term "Sephardim." Moroccan Jews, both traditionally and nowadays, insist they are "Western" (Ma'araviim). Many Mizrahi intellectuals actually prefer "Arab Jews". I ask User:Icewhiz and User:Infantom to state their opinion. This debate is becoming rather regurgitative. AddMore-III (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Exactly, and the others counted for 39,000, meaning there were more Mizrahim then there were Sephardim (37,000) and Yemenites (18,000). Thank you for atleast acknowledging your bias against Mizrahim as a group in your latest post. Claiming you reject them as anything more than a "term." Even though they identify as such, you reject it regardless of the evidence backing up the fact that it exists today as an identity. Shas is a religious party, it's well known the term is rejected by the religious Jews who prefer Sephardim. This is acknowledged in the article. Sephardim is rejected by non-Sephardi Mizrahi who don't like to see their culture diminished. "Arab Jew" as a term is mostly pushed by Ella Shohat, and gets little support among most Mizrahim. Most see it as a tactic to divide Mizrahi Jews considering a lot of Mizrahim never spoke Arabic. (Persian Jews, Bukharan Jews, Georgian Jews, Mountain Jews) Gruzinim (talk) 09:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

The problem with the current version is that it ignores the historical context. 'Mizrahim' was a generic term for a collection of non-European Jewish communities in Israel, that apart from their greater Jewish ethnic identity and heritage, many had very little in common with each other. It doesn't conflict with the fact that Mizrahi identity have developed in the course of time and, as i stated earlier, became a general name for all Jews from those regions. Infantom (talk) 13:18, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Mizrahim meant more than just non-European. There are non-European and non-Middle Eastern Jewish groups who nobody considers Mizrahi. I don't think the current version is good, I want to find a resolution which explains the historical context but still accurately describes what Mizrahim refers to. I agree with your overall assessment though. --Gruzinim (talk) 17:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Don't know why you think I assert all MZ spoke Arabic, I'm telling what not a few intellectuals prefer. User:Icewhiz, I apologize for tagging you again, but I'm actually waiting for all parties to comment. AddMore-III (talk) 17:37, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Uncited ethnic cleansing

There is no citation for "From 1940 to 1980, over 1.1 million Mizrahi Jews were ethnically cleansed from the Arab states, Iran, and Turkey. Some of the factors behind this ethnic cleansing were antisemitism and the Arab-Israeli conflict." This seems like a controversial statement and needs a citation. Wiki user wiki (talk) 00:20, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

The uncited material you refer to was just added by an IP editor. Here is a link to their Talk page. IP editors in particular are subject to having their uncited edits reverted, but having a little discussion is more politic.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:31, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

I have fixed this and added relevant refs--Shrike (talk) 09:17, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Following the discussion in Talk:Mizrahi Jews#Original research, I believe it was quite thoroughly demonstrated that the term Mizrahim as used in the article is an Israelo-centric term, with a bit of background in Mandatory Palestine and limited influence outside Israel. Furthermore, it is sociological rather than ethnic, used as an umbrella term for widely disparate groups which have almost nothing in common except their labeling as Mizrahim in Israel. Virtually every single serious source will concur (cf. for example: Sammy Smooha, "Mizraḥim", in the Brill Encyclopedia of Jews in the Islamic World). Therefore, implying the term before or outside the Israeli context, as is done in the article, is plainly wrong. Ergo, it is redundant to have two separate articles, the one here and Mizrahi Jews in Israel. We should have a single article termed "Mizrahim" ("Mizrahi Jews" implies ethnicity, like Yemenite Jews who are an actual ethnic group with a real common culture) concentrating on the Israeli context. It must make it clear that the subjects are not "descendants of local Jewish communities in the Middle East from biblical times into the modern era... Maghrebi Jews from Tunisia, Algeria, Libya and Morocco who lived in North Africa prior to the arrival of Sephardim" (the latter statement, differentiating between Sephardi exiles and "native Maghrebi" who are supposedly "Mizrahi" is extremely nonsensical). Additionally, all the so-called "Mizrahi Jews topics" in the template named thus must be sifted through. Most may be definitely included in a template named "Jews under Muslim rule" or something along this. The arbitrary application of "Mizrahi" to communities as far as Morocco and Bukhara already sprouted preposterous articles like the now-merged Mizrahi Hebrew. AddMore-III (talk) 17:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with this, "Mizrahim" as an article has no place in English wikipedia. It reduces the existence of any Mizrahi Jews and Mizrahi organizations outside of Israel. JIMENA is a legitimate Mizrahi Jewish organization, which exists in America and not in Israel and speaks on Mizrahi issues. "Jews under Muslim rule" does not apply to some Mizrahi Jewish groups and reduces their history to after the 7th century. Again, I will repeat because you have repeatedly ignored it: Ethnicity is not synonymous with language and you have no right to subjectively say a group "is not a real ethnic group." Ethnicity is a group of people identifying with each other based off similarities. That is what Mizrahi Jews are. Your own sources concur that this identity exists today regardless of its origins. Making a single article called "Mizrahim" is makes no sense outside of Hebrew wikipedia. I will continue to reject any resolution to this article which completely negates the existence of Mizrahi Jews outside of Israel. Or any resolution which is inaccurate with regards to what Mizrahi refers to.--Gruzinim (talk) 17:44, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Anecdotal evidence are no match for academic sources. Identity is not ethnicity, especially not one originally imposed from the outside and explicitly rejected by many. Your claim that all Mizrahim "identify" as such is completely unfounded. Shas denies it, preferring "Sephardi" (Sammy Smooha,writes very clearly (p. 417 here)), and that's just one case. There is an emerging positive Mizrahi identity, itself subject to intense intellectual debate, but that cannot be conflated with ethnicity. AddMore-III (talk) 18:31, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Shas is a religious party, and Sephardi (Sephardi Judaism) is used as a religious term. That has no connection to anything we are discussing. Please stop citing sources which have no relation to anything then claim I am giving anecdotal ones. This is not anecdotal. Your own sources you've cited in our discussions above acknowledge that Mizrahi Jews exist, they just point out the origins. I never claimed all Mizrahim identify as such, that has never been a requirement to be recognized as a people. There are some considered Palestinian who don't identify as such, that doesn't mean that Palestinians aren't a people. You seem to be fixated on your own made up definition of ethnicity. I'll quote you on what you think it means: "Ethnicity is rooted in authentic language and culture." It doesn't have to be, not to mention it's subjective what you consider "authentic culture." Ethnic groups are people who identify with each other based off of similarities that can be as meaningless as what you look like. --Gruzinim (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're aiming at. Please answer my questions: do you acknowledge that the term was imposed from the outside? That not a few of the supposed 3,5 million claimed here as "Mizrahim" either reject the title explicitly, or aren't aware of it at all (Sephardim in Argentina, for example)? That all academics describe "Mizrahim" more or less as I describe it, as a sociological label in the specific context of Israeli discourse? If so, then the article should reflect that. AddMore-III (talk) 07:40, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Your own sources contradict your claim that it was imposed from the outside. This is from the post that started this whole mess: "what came to be called "the Mizrahim." The term began to be used only in the early 1990s by leftist non-Ashkenazi activists who saw previous terms such as "Bnei Edot ha-Mizrah" ("descendants of the oriental ethnicities") as condescending." According to your own sources, Mizrahim was an evolution of the term which they found to be condescending. As I stated before, people within an group rejecting the identity doesn't change the legitimacy of that group. I don't see what connection Spanish Jews in Argentina have with our discussion of Middle Eastern Jews. You are misrepresenting what the academics say, Mizrahi Jews are a ethnicity by definition not just a "sociological label." --Gruzinim (talk) 08:31, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

• Support. Mizrahi is an Israeli-centric label (even if the term has wandered a bit out of Israel). There is no need for two separate articles here. Icewhiz (talk) 07:49, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

  I strongly disagree. Mizrahi Jews exist outside of Israel whether or not the term is Israeli-centric. Having Mizrahi Jews and Mizrahi Jews in Israel is no different than having Yemenite Jews and Yemenite Jews in Israel. One is to discuss what Yemenite Jews are, the other is specifically focused on their experience within Israel. To reduce Mizrahim as a people to experiences in one country 1948–present is wrong. --Gruzinim (talk) 08:15, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose for the reason mentioned by Gruzinim, that the term may have originated in Israel, but there are Mizrahi people in Israel and Mizrahi people outside Israel, and for that simple reason, Mizrahi Jews in Israel can not discuss the Mizrahi people outside Israel. Debresser (talk) 19:31, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
• Partial support. Merge 'Mizrahi Jews in Israel' (redundant article) with Mizrahi Jews under the current title. Although 'Mizrahi Jews' is a generic sociological definition, it is still the most common name for this population. BTW, Mizrahi Jews cannot be an ethnic group; many communities included in this group have nothing in common apart of their greater Jewish ethnic background. For instance the common ground between Georgian and Yemenite Jews is the same common ground between them and German or Polish Jews (unlike Syrian and Lebanese Jews for example). It was only in Israel that these communities have been attached together. Infantom (talk) 13:28, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - the Mizrahi Jews article is an umbrella article for Mizrahi Jews in Israel, but also other Mizrahi communities and their history outside of Israel. Unlike what is said in the proposal, the origin of the term Mizrahim is Middle Ages division of the Arab empires into East, West, North and South - Sharq, Maghreb, al-Sham and al-Yaman. Accordingly, the Jewish communities of Mizrahi, Maghrebi, Shami (Levantine) and Yemeni were defined.GreyShark (dibra) 07:40, 27 September 2019 (UTC) GreyShark (dibra) 07:37, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Greyshark09, you just conflated two very distinct subjects. The origin of the term "Mizrahim" is well documented, and it is in modern-day Israel. As the communities in Iraq, Persia etc., which were sometimes referred to as "Mizrahi" they have their own articles. Do you have sources to back your claims about Shamis etc.? AddMore-III (talk) 14:33, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Percentage of Mizrahi Jews

I'e taken a look at the source by Ducker, claiming 61% Mizrahi ancestry Jews in Israel and cannot find any mention of this number. Moreover, the author fails to distinguish Mizrahim from Sephardi Jews and puts all non-Ashkenazi background under Mizrahim (notably including Indian and Ethiopian communities which are not Mizrahim). It also wrongly claims that "many of the immigrants of the Soviet Union are Sephardic Jews", which is of course incorrect - some of those Jews are Mizrahi who use Sephardi liturgy, but not Sephardics proper. From a deeper analysis, it looks that the paper is an M.A. thesis, which is frankly a very low level of academic paper, certainly not a strong source, if used at all.GreyShark (dibra) 07:49, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Yemeni and Ethiopian communities

There is an unsourced claim that Yemeni Jews and Ethiopian Beta Israel were absorbed into Sephardi rite. This however is quite dubious, as many Yemenis do identify more with the Ashkenazim upon similarity of the customs. Beta Israel is a complex story - they are recognized as Jews by the Sephardic rabbinate, but not "absorbed" proper.GreyShark (dibra) 08:01, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Opening Paragraph

The opening paragraph contains a number of allegations that are either flatly false (the name of the Mizrachi Religious Zionist movement and the other bodies, for example, has nothing to do with Eastern Europe) or tendentious and at least debatable ("orientalism" and the like). The former do not belong on this page; the latter do not deserve to be so far up, if anywhere.Nelamm (talk) 07:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Demographics

The column of the right is a mess: 1. It is written 4.6 millions when the sum of all the countries is 3.6 millions. 2. The source of the 4.6 millions is an opinion article written by a twitter activist who has no academic knowledge of the issue. So this is not a serious source. 3. Obviously the Israel figure counts mizrahim and sefaradim together since all non ashkenazi Jews are around 50% of the Jewish population in Israel and this is what this number gives us. But after that the other countries includes only Edot Hamizrah communities and not sefaradim. So that's not coherent. 4. The figure for the USA is not sources and unrealistic. In the sefaradim article they give the same number for sefaradim in the USA, a figure also unrealistic and unsourced. Basically this column needs to be erased because it is unsourced and incoherent. 109.186.86.184 (talk) 06:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Evidence? The Banner talk 11:09, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Jews in Kazakhstan

There are no Mizrahim-Jews in Kazakhstan. All Kazakhstani Jews are Ashkenazim. 109.206.14.252 (talk) 20:55, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Not true at all. The cited sources make clear that only 1/3 of current Kazakh Jews are of Russian/Ashkenazi ancestry. 2/3 of Kazah Jews are of Bukharan and Mountain ancestry, which - while a stretch to include them into the larger Mizrahi subgroup - is a far closer definition then saying they’re Ashkenazi, which they’re not.

Overall, the Jewis in Kazakhstan article requires significant clean up and refreshing of citations. Mistamystery (talk) 20:02, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

% in Israel

The lead says: As of 2005, 61 percent of Israeli Jews were of full or partial Mizrahi/Sephardi ancestry. but the infobox gives: 44.9% of Israeli Jewish population

Which one is correct? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 18:42, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Neither. They’re different stats. The 44.9 percent derives from self-reporting/self-identifying as part of the census. The 61 percent does not factor from the same grouping or factor in self-identification - merely ancestry pools (as in there are fewer Israelis of Mizrahi descent that identify as such than the total number). Mistamystery (talk) 18:51, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

That said, there could be a clarification added in the article lead to clear this up. (I.e. “44% self-report as mizrahi as per census etc etc, but the number of Israelis with full or partial ancestry is upwards of 61%” etc etc Mistamystery (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, I tried something to make it clearer. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 19:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

# in Turkey

The infobox gives 3k Mizrahi in Turkey. Does this include Sephardic Jews as well? History of the Jews in Turkey gives 15k Jews in Turkey, most of them being Sephardic. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 19:10, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

4 Million Jews Mizrahi, Footnote 48

The article quoted in footnote 48 does not give any evidence of the number 4 million. This claim is currently therefore unsubstantiated and requires a source. KxLondon (talk) 13:47, 15 March 2024 (UTC)