I am referring to a low seated position – not on a chair – which has several versions, such as crouching down on your heels, with bent limbs drawn up closely beneath the body, or a kind of relaxed semi-lotus position, resting entirely on your backside with legs crossed in front. In all its versions, this is a posture in which the body’s center of gravity is close to the ground, or even in contact with it.The sitting posture described here commonly expresses an unmediated relationship between a person and his body and his place.

1. GIDEON ARAN – SITTING POSTURE,
NATIVE ISRAELINESS AND ULTRA-
ORTHODOXY
Gideon Aran is a professor of Sociology & Anthropology at the Hebrew
University, Jerusalem. He studies both religion and extremism, and
particularly their intersection, in Israel, in past and present Judaism, and in
comparative perspective. Aran's research is based mainly on ethnographic
fieldwork. In recent years his writing and teaching focus on fundamentalism,
sects, cults and radical groups, religious violence, terrorism. Aran's
forthcoming book concerns suicide bombing, especially in the Middle East.
contact:
Professor Gideon Aran
Dept. of Sociology & Anthropology
Hebrew University
Jerusalem
Israel 91905
Email: gideon.aran@mail.huji.ac.il
Phone: 972-2-5883331 (Office)
972-2-5345801 (Home)
Fax : 972-2-5324339 (Office)

3. American readers of a certain age will no doubt
have come across this phenomenon at the time
of the ‘flower children’, and it still may be
possible to find it in enclaves of 1960s sub-
culture, or among New Age holdouts.

4. Taken from “Denial Does Not Make The Haredi
Body Go Away Ethnography of a Disappearing
(?) Jewish Phenomenon”, By Prof. Gideon Aran

6. I am referring to a low seated position – not on a
chair – which has several versions, such as
crouching down on your heels, with bent limbs
drawn up closely beneath the body, or a kind of
relaxed semi-lotus position, resting entirely on your
backside with legs crossed in front.

7. In all its versions, this is a posture in which the
body’s center of gravity is close to the ground, or
even in contact with it.The sitting posture described
here commonly expresses an unmediated
relationship between a person and his body and his
place.

8. Moreover, this posture is usually interpreted as
embodying stability and calm, simplicity and
naturalness, a feeling of homeliness, authenticity,
and perhaps exoticism as well. It is seen as
a strong sitting posture. It is not surprising, then,
that this posture often signals a native status;
sometimes defined as a “native sitting”.

10. In the US it is associated with the Native
Americans, and a similar pattern can be found in
South and East Asia, as well as other places
around the world. The same has been true in Israel,
mainly in its formative years and during the heyday
of the modern Jewish national movement. This
sitting posture became one of the trademarks of the
Zionist awakening, focused on the land and state
building.

11. In a way, the Zionist project can be summed up as
an attempt to restore Hebrew autochthony, or rather
to create Jewish indigenousness. The sitting
posture under discussion became a test and a rite
for the Jewish natives in their old-new country.

12. While Zionism’s early leaders and activists were of
European extraction; upon settling in Palestine they
cultivated this posture, charged it with symbolism
and called it by the loaded name of yeshiva
mizrachit (Oriental Sitting).

13. There is a paradoxical dimension in the ideology of
Jewish nativism, or, native-ness Being indigenous –
native – implies that the feeling of belonging to a
place is taken for granted, rather than something to
yearn for, argue about or deliberate over.

14. Feeling comfortable and confident in a place, as if it
were your own – this should be natural, a given,
something that sits in the back of the mind, and not
a topic to be focused on or a subject that needs to
be clarified or contested in any way. The status of
the native might be a bone of contention between
one group and another, but it is not supposed to be
an issue within a group. Being conscious of one’s
nativeness, and being socialized to become a
native, these are contradictions in terms. It reflects
a fundamental tension inherent in Israeliness.

15. Early in their attempts to turn themselves into
natives, the Zionists realized that there were
already natives in the area – local Arabs, who
would come to be known as Palestinians. Ever
since, a bitter struggle has been waged over who is
the true, legitimate and senior native, with each
side making competing claims for authenticity and
exclusivity.

16. From the outset, the baffled Zionists tended to
adopt elements of Palestinian nativeness, which
they naively perceived as representing archaic
Hebraism, thus complicating the story of the Middle
East and diverting it into a tragic catch.

18. In the attempt to link the new Israelis with the
ancient Israelites, indigenousness was shaped
whose foundations repeatedly point to its very rival.
The Jewish native’s nickname – tsabar (Sabra) –
derives from the bush that adorns the grounds of
the Arab villages in the disputed territories. Note
also that local Jews borrowed from local Arabs
distinctive items of clothing (e.g. kafiyah), gestures
(e.g. dugri,), dialect (e.g. ahalan) and other
identifying marks.

19. One of the ironic and fatal consequences of this
appropriation is that every genuine attempt to get
closer to the Zionist ideal of nativeness inevitably
leads to the heart of Palestinian entity. Rocky hills,
olive trees, wells and donkeys – a seemingly
biblical panorama – are the present-day
characteristic vistas of the lands inhabited by the
Palestinians, the very same landscapes in which
the Jewish settlers, waving the flag of Zionism, are
trying to strike root.

20. Yeshiva mizrachit would seem to present a similar
case. Like eating falafel and dancing the debka –
prototypical images of
authenticmizrachiut (“oriental-ness”) – this sitting
posture is an icon of healthy true Israeliness.

21. The Zionist ideal was reflected in an upright,
healthy, athletic and aggressive body. Suntanned
muscular Judaism was the aim, as well as the
medium, of the revolution. In the Zionist fantasy –
followed by the Zionist program and ultimately by
Zionist practice – body image, the body’s
appearance, performance and its language, all
have an important role.

22. There is a repertoire of bodily postures and
movements that are considered correct, exemplary
and obligatory. Yeshiva mizrachit is a crucial
element of this repertoire. The champions
of yeshiva mizrachit embody Zionism – initially the
pioneers of the early aliyot, and later the tsabarim,
the first generation of native born Israelis.

24. Yeshiva mizrachit is hegemonic. Of course, not
everybody adopts it, and there are those who
positively reject it. Certain groups of Jewish citizens
from the pre-state yishuv, as well from today’s
state, can be singled out for not practicing yeshiva
mizrachit. In the past they were the bourgeois
immigrants from Germany and Poland (the Fourth
& Fifth aliyot), and more recently they include
immigrants from the former Soviet bloc.

25. The former describedyeshiva mizrachit as primitive
and impolite; the latter see it as infantile and
ostentatious. Throughout the years, however, there
has been another Jewish sector in Israel that has
consistently refrained from yeshiva mizrachit,
namely the local ultra-orthodox, the Israeli
Haredim.

26. The latter are unable, or unwilling, to sit like that.
Indeed, the Haredim have never been “caught”
sitting yeshiva mizrachit. Systematic observations
and interviews confirm the incompatibility between
Haredi-ness and yeshiva mizrachit. This
incontrovertible fact is the starting point for the
present research on the Haredi body. The issue of
Haredim and yeshiva mizrachit will also close this
research report.

28. GIDEON ARAN IS A PROFESSOR OF SOCIOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY AT THE HEBREW
UNIVERSITY, JERUSALEM. HE STUDIES BOTH RELIGION AND EXTREMISM, AND PARTICULARLY
THEIR INTERSECTION, IN ISRAEL, IN PAST AND PRESENT JUDAISM, AND IN COMPARATIVE
PERSPECTIVE. ARAN'S RESEARCH IS BASED MAINLY ON ETHNOGRAPHIC FIELDWORK. IN
RECENT YEARS HIS WRITING AND TEACHING FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALISM, SECTS, CULTS
AND RADICAL GROUPS, RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE, TERRORISM. ARAN'S FORTHCOMING BOOK
CONCERNS SUICIDE BOMBING, ESPECIALLY IN THE MIDDLE EAST.
CONTACT:
PROFESSOR GIDEON ARAN
DEPT. OF SOCIOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY
HEBREW UNIVERSITY
JERUSALEM
ISRAEL 91905
EMAIL: GIDEON.ARAN@MAIL.HUJI.AC.IL
PHONE: 972-2-5883331 (OFFICE)
972-2-5345801 (HOME)
FAX : 972-2-5324339 (OFFICE)