Expounding the Construction of Identity of
Bene Israel Jews of India in Esther David’s Shalom India Housing Society
Rakshita
Vashishtha
PhD Research Scholar
Department of English & MEL
Banasthali Vidyapith
Rajasthan, India
&
Dr.
Anupriya Roy Srivastava
Assistant Professor
Department of English & MEL
Banasthali Vidyapith
Rajasthan, India
Abstract: The narrative of Esther David’s Shalom India Housing Society lies
amidst the backdrop of human and natural calamities, coupled with significant
emigrations of the Bene Israelis to Israel that commenced in the 1950s. The
work is an anthology comprising of precisely nineteen interconnected short
narratives, each pertaining to Bene Israel families living within a
distinguished Jewish Housing Society. It unfolds as a tapestry of humour and
tragedy, intricately woven together by the author’s narrative voice. Esther
David, an awarded Bene Israel Jewish writer of India pens works revolving
around the lives of Bene Israel Jews. The study of Jewish identity consists of
intertwined and overlapping aspects of culture, religion, ethnicity,
nationality, psychologically associated elements of education, language,
response to prejudice and connectivity with Israel. The present paper explores
and extrapolates the identity of Jews with the help of Social Identity Theory
developed by theorist Henri Tajfel, a Polish Jew. The theory focuses on the
evaluation of identity within the paradigm of intergroup and intragroup
relations. The research paper will analyse the individual and group identity of
Bene Israel Jews as portrayed in the Shalom
India Housing Society.
Keywords: Bene Israel Jews, Hindu-Muslim riots, Identity
Development, Anti-Semitism, Jewish Identity
The study of Jewish identity is a dynamic,
multi-faceted phenomenon, and can be understood in the context of the different
majority cultures in which Jews live. Erik H. Cohen states:
Jewish identity, unquestionably, has been
indelibly affected and shaped by the history of anti-Semitism and persecution
which Jews have experienced both communally and individually. Again, one could
argue that the impact of anti-Semitism on Jewish identity began in Biblical times.
Pharaoh was the first to recognize and name the national identity of the
Hebrews as such and immediately viewed them as a group to be suppressed;
anti-Semitism thus represents an externally imposed aspect of Jewish identity.
(18)
Anti-Semitism necessarily denotes lingering
animosity, hatred, and fear of the Jews as an ethnic group. Such pervasive
discriminatory and deep-seated ill will against Jews in antisemitic regions
emanate from the age-old accusations targeted against them for being deicides,
‘Christ-killers’. “In committing that arch-crime and all subsequent criminality
they presumably engaged in, Jews were seen as the agents of Satan” (Frederick
Schweitzer 95). This feeling of Anti-Semitism among people all over the world
gives shape to a world full of antagonism against Jews almost everywhere across
the societies. Ritchie Robertson argues that “classical hostility to Jews was
in principle an ordinary example of hostility to minorities, and that
anti-Semitism acquired a special character from the emergence of Christianity”
(104). India, being a slight exception in this regard, has been a safe home to
around 5000 Jews for the past several centuries. Jews in India exist in three
categories — the Bene Israel, the Cochin Jews, and the Baghdadis, as we
chronologically put them in accordance with their arrivals in this country. The
most numerous of these groups are the Marathi-speaking Bene Israel who are
settled on the west coast of India in the Konkan region of Maharashtra. The
Cochin Jews or the Cochinis are settled in Cranganore and Malabar. The third
group of Jews comes from West Asia, mainly from Baghdad, but also from other
places such as Basra, Syria, Aden, Afghanistan and Iran. These Jews are
collectively known as Baghdadis or Iraqi Jews and are settled mainly in Bombay
and Calcutta.
Shalva Weil notes that “Indian Jews today can
be divided into two subgroups: those who remain in India because of their
overriding attachment to India, and those who immigrated to Israel and reunited
with their families and the majority of their community” (1208). The dichotomy
of their existence in India lies in the fact that their recognizability majorly
concentrates around their status as Jews and they have an unflinching
admittance of this, nevertheless, as they move to their promised land Israel
their recognition gets conversed as Indians with a further solidification of
their identities as Bene Israel, as Cochinis or as Paradesis. This could be
pinching and alienating, especially as “Relations between Hindus and Jews have
always been characterized by mutual respect and affection. Jewish-Hindu
dialogue may go back nearly 3,000 years when luxury goods from India were
exported to ancient Israel, which was then ruled by King Solomon” (Nathan Katz
1213). Thus, their interrelationships were not merely confined to trades,
rather each Jewish community in India has enjoyed complete freedom of religion,
affection, respect, and in cases where the community members did well, a high
social position.
For the Jewish community, which had
experienced a tranquil existence for several centuries in India, the idyllic
scenario began to deteriorate due to the pervasive Hindu-Muslim schism that
afflicted the nation. These tensions emerged after India’s independence and the
establishment of Pakistan. The Bene Israelis found themselves at the epicentre
of this animosity, witnessing their once amicable neighbours forcibly engaging
in conflict. This situation fostered their apprehension regarding the
sustainability of a peaceful existence in India. Consequently, with the
establishment of the sovereign state of Israel in 1948, many opted to immigrate
to Israel, a territory specifically earmarked for Jews.
In 2001, the earthquake that shook and
trembled Gujarat, caused horrible damage to the land, lives and property. Just
as people were beginning to rebuild their lives and renovating their properties
with national and international support, another human catastrophe struck in
2002 and Gujarat was shaken by the Hindu-Muslim riots. Ahmedabad was at the
epicentre where a substantial Bene Israeli population resided and had refused
to travel to Israel despite available opportunities to emigrate given the
hardships prevalent in the aftermath of tremors. During the time when Esther
David was living in Ahmedabad, the city was in a state of chaos due to the
presence of rioting crowds everywhere. Jael Silliman states in the Afterword:
Shalom India Housing Society is set after the Gujarat riots of 2002, when
for the first time in all the centuries they lived in India, Jews began to feel
unsafe. They did so, not from fear of persecution, but rather out of fear of
being mistaken for Muslims. Mass violence erupted that year when two carriages
of a train containing Hindu activists were set on fire by what were believed to
be Muslim militants. (222)
Shalom India Housing Society is Esther David’s deeply personal and
cathartic response to the riots, which she witnessed firsthand. This fiction is
based on personal observations in life with some interpersonal literary element
that makes it quite comprehensible that despite inhabiting in that part of
India, Jews still lack the condition of being the same as their such
counterparts who belong to different ethnicity hold. It also makes explicit
that their identities are undistinguishable, and their individualities are
vulnerable to be identified with such other community members who have
developed a perception of being militia because of despicable activities of a
segment of their brethren. The psychological identification with other
majoritarian communities by the minuscule Jewish ethnicity members insufficient
to be considered even as a minority by the official account depicts yet another
identity crisis, aside the case of stolen and misperceived identity, despite
hardly holding any sameness of generic character with Muslim community members
who were at the receiving end post carnage. The fear of oneness with the
community whose cultural components never had any harmony with their own speaks
volumes about the misperceived concord and actual discord among the two
unrelated communities that the natives wrongly advanced based on a solitary
similarity of circumcision maintained by both the communities as their timeless
practice.
The narration of riots in the work under
reference and portrayal of stripping and disrobing an innocent child who is
unaware of the societal consideration and its parameters of determining a foe
or a friend, not based on deeds but on physical characteristics, makes the
depiction heartrending about the identity leading to a decisive moment for
defining humanity, seemingly a paradox. The usage of weaponry against a hapless
and blameless kid by the members enraged with hatred and hellbent on exacting
revenge is not only an instance of paroxysmal attack of pain over the bearer
and the reader alike but also an emotionally significant event for the Jews who
are already lofting around and inside in quest of their identity. The appalling
blazing incident of the kid by the revenge seekers, holding criterion of circumcision,
arouses pain and dread among the Jews already dismayed and feeling secluded by
the communal acts, compel them to develop some visible solidarity within the
community members, leading to a communal abode, restricting externals with
separate identity and entity and holding exclusivity for the Jews. Thus, comes
up a private housing society strictly meant for Jewish abode, and more
specifically for the Bene Israel Jews of Ahmedabad, giving them a bit of sense
of security based on community living and holding membership with the same
identities. This arrangement is unlike their previous pattern prior to riots
when they were scattered around in the vicinity of their synagogue. David
writes:
After the riots, Ezra, a contractor by
profession, had decided to build apartments exclusively for Jews. “Just Jews,”
he had specified when inviting tenants at the synagogue, “so that people know
we have a separate identity from other minority communities.” Whether they
liked it or not, it was the truth. (Shalom India Housing Society 8)
This episode is in tandem with the
distinctive principles offered by Tajfel in Social Identity Theory (SIT) that
he propounded after surviving a life-saving incident of misconceived identity
by the perpetrators of mass manslaughter of Jewish war prisoners, post-World
War-II in which his French identity overpowers his identity of being a Jew and
he is spared unlike scores of his counterparts who were brutally murdered for
being Jews. Prompted by losing all his beloved family members to the holocaust
Tajfel intended to have a deep understanding of the intergroup conflict,
discrimination, and prejudice prevalent in societies, leading to construction
of SIT in which he informs:
‘Social identity’ of an individual can be
conceived as consisting of those aspects of his self-image, positively or
negatively valued, which derive from his membership of various social groups to
which he belongs. In social systems which are and/or are believed to be
strongly stratified and inflexible, behaviour relating to social identity will
be in some ways parallel to actions ‘in terms of a group’ aimed at preserving
or defending one’s own interests through those of a group, since individual
actions have very little chance of success. (Tajfel 443)
Usage of local languages has been a universal
practice among the Jews wherever they are located and their dialect has
necessarily intermingled in these during communicative use. Such languages have
been punctuated by them with their colloquial phrases and prominent words of
Hebrew that denotes their perennial connectivity with their tradition as it has
been their mother language since ages. Similar impact can be witnessed in the
very title of the work and its eponymous housing society that has been started
with a Hebrew word Shalom whose one meaning is peace and the other is a general
greeting. Its English version also denotes prevalence of amicability and
concord between two communities or entities leading to safe and secure
intergroup relationships. The very christening of the fiction with this initial
word Shalom and that of the dwellings exclusively meant for Jewish community
members at such hard times when the society is in a state of confusion and
commotion and its inhabitants terrified by the viciousness of turmoil that
prevails all around, speaks volumes about the necessary components of identity
process. Shalom has been very thoughtfully inducted to permeate the message in
the neighbourhood and across the society that the Jewish community members are
secluded from the commotion and that they want peace, they are not part of the
rampant violence or hate crimes and that they need exclusivity even while
welcoming the relationships with other community brethren whom they continue to
greet with their noble gestures.
The fiction incorporates the Jewish intent to
integrate into the dominant culture through assimilation, an essentiality for
identity formation by the diaspora and unlike R. Parks’ initial version of
‘‘race relations cycle’’ encompassing four stages, namely contacts,
competition, accommodation and assimilation, depicted by Esther in her Jewish
diasporic work (Abercrombie 20). Nevertheless, it is not unidimensional, one-way process
that Park initially described, foreseeing the migrant community relinquishing
their own culture to imbibe that of the host community or communities. In Shalom
India Housing Society, the diaspora is not only willing but determined to
preserve its culture, its language, dress pattern, food habits, rituals,
intragroup marriage pattern and above all its identity. It is a case of
acculturation that may not be uniform but, for sure, profound with a sense of
belonging and humble intent of penetration in prominent ethos while retaining
its exclusivity, its personhood, sense of self and a perfect awareness of
sameness and difference, of which the ethnic community is proud of.
Nevertheless, the hindering aspects do occur in this process of acculturation
as the diasporic community is negligible in number and while its members do get
sufficient exposure to the dominant culture through interaction as well as by
the means of mass media of communication that has ample coverage of the native,
the Jewish culture hardly gets any space on social platform because of their
minuscule presence in the society as well as maintenance of low profile and
thus the other communities hardly get any exposure to the ethnic culture. Thus,
the process of identity formation through acculturation is unable to attain
perfection, especially due to lack of capability to modify the dominant culture
by letting them insert some of the components of their Jewish culture into
their own.
These circumstances change the way in which
the Jews categorise themselves in Indian society. With a focus on how people
feel about their ethnic group, SIT has offered a sociological and
social-psychological framework for comprehending ethnic identity. The idea that
people work to establish a strong social identity for preserving a positive
self-concept is the foundation of the construction of the ethnic identity
affirmation which mostly has emerged from this theory. Having a favourable
attitude towards the social groupings one belongs to, is one method to
cultivate such a positive social identity. Therefore, whether people feel good
or bad about belonging to an ethnic group is a common aspect of ethnic identity
affirmation.
Only by acting as a member of the group can
an individual under these stratified conditions maintain a psychologically
fulfilling group environment or alter a psychologically unpleasant one.
Numerous instances or artistic behaviour or even extreme sacrifice for the
benefit of a group demonstrate the severity of social attitudes and behaviour
that these non-utilitarian affiliations can result in, while on the other hand
of the spectrum they may also lead to heinous acts of prejudice against an
outgroup such as in certain interracial or interethnic disputes for which there
are frequently no obvious explanations if one looks solely at the more
utilitarian facets of a person’s social behaviour. The nefariousness of such
acts gets multiplied by the generation of hatred among the hearts and minds of
dominant community members and this has been exhibited in Shalom India
Housing Society wherein riots get sparked by the deeds of an unrelated
community but Jews, despite not being a part of any such wrongdoing become
suspects because of their single similarity with the community of perpetrators
with whom their identity is confusedly mixed by the natives, thereby making it
a case of mistaken identity and putting them at the vulnerability of receiving
end of inhabitants’ wrath. This literary narration by the author lays stress
over the requirement of completion of social identity process through
assimilation and accommodation in such a generational timeframe that may lead
to their identification as a separate entity by the dominant groups without any
susceptibility of perplexity that in an otherwise case can lead to severity of
consequences.
Social categorization involves the cognitive
process of classifying oneself and others into social groups thereby
delineating boundaries between in-groups and out-groups. Within the novel, the
Jewish residents of the Shalom India Housing Society perceive themselves as a
distinct community separate from the broader Indian socio-cultural milieu. The
characters emphasise their Jewish identity through religious and cultural
practices, positioning themselves in contrast to Hindus, Muslims, and
Christians; even though this definition remains incomplete until the other communities
can make a distinction. Yet, non-Jewish individuals are implicitly positioned
as members of outgroup reinforcing the Jewish communities’ collective
self-perception as marginalised yet cohesive minority. ‘Self-identification’
occurs when individuals internalize the norms, values and behaviours associated
with their group, integrating them into their self-concept. Anna Guttman
writes:
Indeed, the multivocal character of Shalom
India Housing Society—each of the 19 chapters is told from the perspective of a
different character who inhabits the housing estate—makes this text far more
dialogic than David’s other novels, and also makes the community seem less
isolated and isolating. Here, too, Jewish ritual is depicted as enriching,
because of, not despite, the fact that all the families concerned in the
opening chapter celebrate Passover differently. The collection centers around a
series of communal celebrations, including Passover, Purim, and a joint
Chanukah/Christmas party. At the same time, this is a community in flux, which
is continuously threatened by disintegration. (147)
The
residents reinforce their Jewish identity through adherence to religious
customs. Observance of the Shabbat and practices and participation in communal
ritualistic festivals such as Hanukkah, Simhat Torah and Purim serve as focal
points for collective identity reinforcement, fostering a sense of
cultural-continuity. However, generational differences emerge with younger
members experiencing ‘identity dissonance’ as they navigate the tensions
between cultural preservation and social integration. The struggle for
maintenance of identity does not remain confined to ethnicity, it prevails in
every single aspect of identity that matters in avoidance of conflict and
remaining in the mainstream with acceptability through fulfillment of
expectations and conservation of social values. This aspect gets highlighted
through the psycho-sociological abhorrence of any deviation by a fraternity
member that further gets tormenting in case of a blood relation. The episode of
Yehuda’s family that is inhabiting in one of the apartments of the society
comes to the fore in this aspect as Leon, who is just a child, shows
inclination towards feminine stuff and his parents are unable to bear the
thought that the son could turn into a Jewish-gay, given his inclination
towards female stuff. “She had been very upset about Leon’s attraction to her
things. It was still worse telling her husband anything. At first he listened
quietly, his eyes crazed, and then he caned Leon. Holding the battered child in
her arms, Rivka suffered silently” (David 28). This feeling of terror and shame
in their heart highlights how a penchant for preservation and protection of
social identity not only engenders belongingness but also procreates
psychosocial conflict particularly in the context of a minority group operating
within a dominant culture. Thus, David’s conception and narration has
determined semblance with the essential elements in Social Identity Theory
propounded by Tajfel, making it a perfect illustration to comprehend SIT
through this fictional work and vice versa.
Even though the society lays great stress
over parenthood with varied reasons such as continuation of society or giving
birth to an offspring as the prospective inheritor, the intellect suggests that
childlessness ought not be considered the keystone of a family identity.
However, visualizing and assessing a family as complete or incomplete entails
parameters encompassing parenthood. While conception and giving birth may not
be the only method whereby parentage could be attained to develop a complete
family identity, the concepts of purity and pollution and sacred and profane
impede adoption of alternatives. This is further compounded by the feeling of
distinctiveness and superiority in a couple having faith that historically
their traditions are unique. This ordeal becomes prominent as a childless
couple living in the society ponder over the alternative method to have a kid
in the family but unable to settle the thought of having an orphan from a
non-Jewish family. “Although, he argued with himself, religion was given to
children by their parents. Then he would start thinking about profound matters
like purity of blood in the Jewish race and wondered why Indian Jews looked
like Indians, Russian Jews looked like Russians, and Chinese Jews looked like
Chinese people” (David 47). This illuminates the idea of retention of blood
purity and original identity instead of allowing contamination through
adoption, despite being unconcerned with genetic identity. This is another
instance of Tajfel’s social identity formation in David’s work supported by
psychological elements.
Another similar and yet stronger aspect of
purity can be found in the novel as Juliet faces the scary probability of
systematic marginalization which reinforces community’s perception of
exclusion, maybe superiority, and strengthens their need for internal
solidarity, as can be sensed from the storyline of Juliet and Rahul. When
Juliet, a resident of the society and obviously a member of the Jewish
community, shares her desire to marry Rahul who happens to be a member of
outgroup, her aunt Hannah advises her to go for the option of conversion. Even
as both the lovebirds are ready and willing to convert to each other’s
religion, it figures that conversion from Judaism to any other religion is way
more tedious than converting to Judaism. Also, the preferential conversion for
the community members is for the prospective groom so that their dwindling number
may not recede further, and their intracommunity purity could be retained even
after marital ties of Juliet with a henceforth non-community member. Thus,
their preference and persuasion for Rahul to get converted to Judaism is far
stronger than Juliet to Hinduism. After the conversion and the marriage, the
residents of the society happily accommodate the young couple as far as they
have a mezuzah on the door, and they say their Sabbath prayers. Guttman says,
“Several characters marry outside the community, and struggle to find a place
for themselves either in India or outside, though converts and those who marry
non-Jews are still embraced by their families and immediate community. Israel
and India in particular offer conflicting pulls” (148). Such conflicts make the
members of a minority community feel ambiguous about the idea of being at home.
In the novel, Juliet says: “We are aware that India is not easy after the
earthquake of 2001 and then the riots of 2002. But keeping all possibilities in
mind, we plan to keep both doors open. The two countries are like the sun and
moon for us. As a Jew, sometimes I wonder, are we coming or going? Where are we
going? Where is home? Is our home within us or somewhere else?” (David 206).
Intergroup comparisons also manifest within
the Jewish community itself with individuals negotiating their Jewish identity
based on their level of religious observance and socioeconomic positioning.
While describing the duality of Bene Israel members in India, Egorova notes
that:
The rules regulating the relations between
the members of different castes affected the relations between the Bene-Israel
and their Hindu neighbours. Interestingly, some members of the community
attempted to raise their status in the local hierarchy by trying to become
associated with higher castes; Some Bene-Israel did not attempt to change their
position in the caste hierarchy but preferred to support the movements that
challenged the dominance of higher castes and struggled for equal educational
opportunities for everybody irrespective of caste affiliation. Some Bene-Israel
preferred to dissociate themselves from the caste system completely, arguing
that as they were Jewish, they did not belong to it at all. (1216)
This underscores the bi-directional nature of
social identity formation wherein the Jewish community asserts its uniqueness
while simultaneously grappling with external pressures that challenge its
cohesion. Social identity theory also accounts for the fluid and context
dependent nature of identity. Certain characters in the novel navigate shifting
identities based on situational demands. Some seek integration into mainstream
Indian society by assimilating local customs or engaging in interfaith
relationships. Others respond to external pressures by intensifying their
adherence to Jewish traditions, reaffirming their distinctiveness. As a coping
mechanism, this fluidity demonstrates the negotiated nature of identity,
highlighting how social belonging is neither static nor absolute but rather an ongoing
process of adaptation and resistance. Novel illustrates the dialectical tension
between cultural preservation and social integration, showcasing both the
resilience and vulnerabilities inherent in maintaining a distinct identity
within a pluralistic society. Esther David’s novel serves as a compelling
intersection of social-psychology and minority identity formation. Tajfel
states:
We came to the conclusion that the
requirements of social identity, related to the nature of the objective and
subjective relations between groups, to the functioning of intergroup social
comparison, and to the significance of perceived legitimacy in this
functioning, enables us to consider inter-group behaviour in genuinely social
contexts, above and beyond its determination by individual needs or motives
which are assumed to operate somehow prior to, or independently of, the social
systems in which all human beings live.(444)
The novel illustrates how minority
communities navigate through the elements of belongingness, identity, and
legitimacy towards their existence on a land that they consider their very own
but a foreign land. It captures the complex interplay between tradition and
modernity, in-group unity, internal divisions, inclusion, and exclusion.
Tajfel’s framework helps to contextualize the Bene Israel Jews’ historical
marginalization, their self-perception as a distinct ethnic religious group and
their evolving identity negotiations in response to external pressures. In
doing so, Esther David’s work not only provides an intimate portrait of a
unique Jewish diaspora but also engages with broader themes of transnational
belonging identity politics and cultural hybridity in the contemporary world.
Works Cited
Abercrombie,
Nicholas, et al. The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology. 5th
ed., Penguin Books, 2006.
Cohen,
Erik H. “Jewish Identity Research: A State of the Art.” International Journal of Jewish Education Research, vol. 1, 2010,
pp. 7-48.
David,
Esther. Shalom India Housing Society: A
Novel. Feminist Press, 2009.
Egorova,
Yulia. Encyclopedia of the Jewish
Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture, edited
by M. Avrum Ehrlich, ABC-Clio, 2009, pp. 1216-1217.
Guttman, A. Writing Indian and Jews:
Metaphorics of Jewishness in South Asian Literature.
Katz,
Nathan. “Jewish- Indian Contacts over the Ages.” Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora:
Origins, Experiences, and Culture, edited by M. Avrum Ehrlich, ABC- Clio, 2009, pp. 1213-1215.
Robertson,
Ritchie. “Varieties of Anti- Semitism.”
Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora: Origins,
Experiences, and Culture, edited by M. Avrum Ehrlich, ABC-Clio, 2009, pp. 103-106.
Schweitzer,
Frederick. “History of Jewish Persecution.”
Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora:
Origins, Experiences, and Culture, edited by M. Avrum Ehrlich, ABC- Clio, 2009, pp. 95-102. Springer, 2013.
Silliman,
Jael. Afterword. Shalom India Housing
Society: A Novel. Feminist Press, 2009.
Tajfel,
Henri. “Intergroup Behaviour: II Group Perspectives.” Introducing Social Psychology: An
Analysis of Individual Reaction and Response. Pelican Books, 1987, pp.
423-444.
Weil,
Shalva. Encyclopedia of the Jewish
Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture, edited
by M. Avrum Ehrlich, ABC-Clio, 2009, pp. 1204-1212.