@Larry, first of all thanks for your reply.......  Actually, it´s an expenditure survey..... I want to highlight that due to religion within that ethnic group there is difference in living standard....... One of famous ethnic group is Kashmiri´s in Pakistan and India........ but there are three religions in that ethnic group....... I think religion is one of the component of ethnic group but not the compulsory one

@Aon, from 50 years ago anthropologists and historians have been stressing the fact that it's impossible to define ethnic groups by any 'cultural trait' (religion, language, tradition, beliefs, taboos, material culture, customs, and so on). Research has been focusing on how people get to identify as this or that ethnic name and what exactly that means in terms of the social situation different ethnic groups are within in relation to each other. So yes, it's one ethnic group as long as they think so, and as long as others who do not identify as themselves see them as one group, regardless of their internal differences, that can be religious and otherwise. I would refer you to the introduction of a 1960s collective book called Ethnic groups and boundaries, by Fredrik Barth (you can find it easily online), and the debate that ensued.

We have many tribes in India who practice their ancestral totemism as well as modern religions. So the form of the latter is maintained for material benefit that it brings and the substance of the former is practiced, to keep millennia old traditions alive. Everyone is happy. :)

I think there is no contradiction at all in this. A group may be ethno-linguistically homogenous but ethno-religiously divided. We can find examples everywhere in the world: Germans of Protestan v. Catholic religion; Catholic v. Protestant Irish; Christian v. Muslim Arabs... And at times, an ethnic group can be culturally homogeneous but linguistically and religiously heterogenous, e.g. Maronites in Lebanon (arguably, they are ethnically Arab, but they are part of a small Catholic group in the country and strongly emphasize French v. Arabic). 

It clear that an ethnic group can have more than one religion. In fact religion nor language are not the dominant characteristics of an ethnic group. Consider ethny in the sens of Staline's [Marxist] definition of a "nation" as entity and it comes clear that the answer is no.  Along history,  under many different circumstances, subcultures, subgroups emerge, may develop news dynamics, interactions, even migrate far from one own initial settlement, with possibility of undergoing new influences, new interactions and possibly new religious beliefs.

Bon Travail!

Tharcisse Gatwa, PIASS, Rwanda

The Kurds are an interesting ethnic group in this sense that they are divided into a number of different religions: Muslims (both Shias and Sunnis), Yezidis, Shabaks and Kakais. 

I think there certainly can be two religions in one ethnic group. One can support this statement considering the "identification" phenomenon mentioned by Fábio Baqueiro, as well as considering this: "ethnicity" more than a cluster of social interactions or institutions, has to do with a particular aesthetic sensibility that is common to a certain group. The manner of aesthetic approach to every day experiences is, in my opinion, the most relevant issue in this matter. Here, in Chile, we can observe this within Mapuche groups. There are some Catholic Mapuche groups (Williche) as well as some Animist Mapuche groups (Pewenche). But their approximation to nature, social conceptions, tool use and construction, and -especially- to artistic and spiritual life have a common base, very different from the one that characterizes chilean mainstream. Despite there are no serious work on aesthetic sensibility as I have raised here, I would strongly recommend to take a look on Katya Mandoki's work about every day aesthetics (http://mandoki.estetica.org.mx/) and -to understand what I'm talking about by saying "aesthetic sensibility"-, a deep lecture of Ludwig Wittgenstein's aphorisms in "Culture and Value", to see how it works in Jewish ethnicity, from a Christian-raised Jewish point of view. Regards. (I beg pardon for my rusty english)

You might check out the sociological discussion of pillarisation applied to the Netherlands and other societies that are deeply divided on the basis of religion and related cultural factors. I know this literature only peripherally, as  it applies to the Netherlands, my country of origin. You can read an introduction on Wiki at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillarisation where you find examples of several other countries with extensive illustrative charts.

Certainly an ethnic group can have many religions, or the religion can change with time. If we take the Greek "ethnos"as an example the religion changed with the advent of Christianity, but was not affected by the passage of Islam, as the Ancient Greek Gods prepared the coming of Christianity, but were alien to the essentials of Islam. When the Greeks travelled their descendants away from "home" created other religious groups: The Indo-Greeks spread Buddhism and gave Buddha the image of Apollo. When the Ancient Greeks settled in the Balearic Islands they probably introduced some customs - back in Greece the islands are probably the ones called the "Evening Islands" (Hesperides) where the citrus fruits grew. So, your own home ethnos is an aggregate of many ethnic groups each with its own customs and traditions, even its own religion.

Dear Aon

In terms of ethnic Tibetan lay people they are animists and Tibetan Buddhists, the former is this-worldly and the latter is other-worldly. So if they are concerned about their crops health or livestock they perform rituals to their animistic divinitiesbut if they are concerned about their karma they go to a Lama

I hope this helps

Dr John Studley

posiblemente la investigación religiosa en poblaciones migrantes represente un tema de frontera en la investigación sobre los cambios culturales puesto que se trata de una población enormente dúctil a necesidades de invención o recreación de sentido de su vida en circunstancias siempre sorpresivamente nuevas y desafiantes para la subsistencia del grupo.  Visto desde las necesidades espirituales del grupo migrante no cabe duda de que se amasa una identidad multi-cultural aunque halla siempre un sustrato cultural de arraigo con el grupo étnico de pertenencia.  Muy acotado el tema en términos de percepciones y conceptos de Dios, para el  caso Mesoamericano, está ofrecido en esta investigación de nuestro CENTRO DE INVESTIGACIÓN EN CULTURA Y DESARROLLO (CICDE) de la Vicerrectoría de Investigación de LA UNED (Universidad Estatal a Distancia: Costa Rica-Mesoamérica). http://investiga.uned.ac.cr/cicde/index.php/menudoccicde/54-icecu

The theories religious ecology or/and religious syncretism (I prefer hybridity to ‘syncretism’ due to the negative connotations that syncretism has assumed of late) may be one of the approaches that you can use. is what some scholars refer to as ‘syncretism’. For instance, some scholar see syncretism as involving confusion, but in the worldview of indigenous Africans for instance, there is no confusion involved in combining their indigenous faiths with Islam or Christianity or both so long as it supplements their indigenous religious values and solve their existential problems. For instance, among the indigenous Akan people of Ghana, they do not have any problem with combining different faiths, inasmuch as the marriage of faiths caters for both their spiritual and physical needs. This is expressed in their local proverb: ‘ɛnam dodoɔ nsei nkwan’ [which literally means ‘plenty of meat does not spoil the soup]. Olupona observes that ‘African religious experience supports and encourages pluralism. Such eclectism produces an attitude of tolerance and peaceful co-habitation towards other traditions and cultures (Olupona, 2000, p.xviii). This mindset is embedded in the African worldview. Mbiti and Burleson contend that Africans ‘come out of African Religion but they don’t take off their traditional religiosity. They come as they are. They come as people whose world view is shaped according to African Religion’ (Mbiti and Burleson, 1986, p.12). Similarly, Aylward Shorter has argued that the African Christian does away with ‘remarkably little of his former non- Christian outlook.’ (Shorter, 1975, p.7). It is therefore not uncommon to see African Christian or Muslim combining beliefs from his or new faith with those traditional religious beliefs.

Thanks to all of you...

The issue is that the people that belong to their own religión they are not allowing converted-one (Muslims) to enter in their holy places or tourist spots...... that create difference among them e.g. if their is an international tourist there, only tourist guide will be from their own religión..... due to all these things, difference among them is very big......... their dresses are different, their festivals are different, etc. The similarities are that they live together and they have same language. So, If I consider them as one ethnic group and compare the difference among them due to religión..... Will it be appropriate????

The name of that Ethnic group is KALASH.... they are descendants of Alexander the great

Yes they belong to the same ethnic group but to different faiths. Among the Afro-Americans there are both Christians and Muslims. Their ethnicity is constant - it cannot change, but they could belong to a number of different religions. In India among ethnic Indians we have Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Muslims, Christians, etc.  

This is a fascinating subject.  I am American, born and raised in a conservative Christian area, German-speaking in central Pennsylvania ( among the Amish, Mennonites, and Church of  the Brethren). I converted to Islam many years ago when Caucasian Muslims were utterly rare and nearly unheard of. I as not easily accepted by anyone--Christians felt I betrayed them; Muslims were shocked that I wasn't married to an Arab and wasn't interested, in general, in marrying anyone. I was often met with levels of hostility from all sides. One of the common Arab complaints was that I should be "first a Muslim and second an American."  But this complaint came from those who inevitably saw themselves as Egyptian, Palestinian, etc. Their culture/ethnic classification took dominance over any religious consideration of the "community of believers." I am Caucasian, American, mixed ancestry (biologically), but my faith is Islam.

As for Aon's question, I think a study of the varieties of religious belief within an ethnic group or culture to be a fascinating study. I am particularly thinking of Samuel's answer about the African mixture of animism, Christianity and/or Islam.  Anthropology is loaded with studies of these cultures that easily  mix what appear to be contradictory belief systems. I think that mixture is brilliant and can satisfy the human, social, and spiritual needs of people who don't like to be pigeon-holed into a set of rigid belief systems (rarely those that are directly out of the teaching of the prophets of the faith). Or they refuse to betray the belief systems that have formed the core of their culture for time immemorial.  I must also thank Samuel for the mention of Mbiti, whose texts I have studied extensively to work with my research in oral tradition and the role of the griot/prophet/priest/king in African cultures alongside similar viewpoints in Celtic culture.

I remember when studying Ancient Germanic Cultures in graduate school that one of the reasons the ancient Saxons were the last to convert to Christianity was that the new religion taught that the pagan Saxon ancestors would go to hell but these younger Saxons could be saved by conversion.  The problem was that the Saxons didn't want to live eternity without their ancestors; they also didn't want political domination to be a prerequisite to conversion (and it often is, even today).

Thanks to all

I wonder whether to "this is an interesting question full of interesting ramifications" you have reached any possible conclusion. Are you looking to the Arab, African and South Asian world, or are you interested in the European history past and present.

Obviously extremely vicious religious wars were fought in countries where one ethnic culture was and is split among two religious denominations (Germany, Switzerland, Belgium among others). Then you have Albania where there are 4 religious denominations Sunni Muslims, Bektashi-Alevi, Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox.

The issue of Ukrainians was raised by Larisa Fialkova.

You mentioned the Kalash, an interesting point. Please refer to GREECE IN CENTRAL ASIA by Amanullah Ghilzai (www.archive.gr/news.php?readmore=189 )

Your point that people who belong to the other religion may not be allowed to enter in their holy places or tourist spots is an important on. Well,... this is (often or sometimes) the case of deserted christian shrines  in Turkey, if the visit has a religious purpose, if it is simply for tourism there is no problem ... Elsewhere you must be "properly dressed" to be admitted in a shrine or church. (In both Florence-Italy and Damascus-Syria) a sort of cover-up is provided at the entrance.

Finally, two religions in one ethnic-linguistic group had in the past (...??) raised issues of crimes against humanity, when the minority religion was negatively perceived by the majority's clergy and political leadership. In these countries "religious tourism" today often equals a sort of mourning visit to cemeteries ....

Still puzzled as to whether you gained any valuable insight from our suggestions and thank you for the stimulating question.

Similar question arise here in the Eastern Himalayan Indian province were people form different origin, language, religion and nationality exist.

In Islam Muslims are not allowed to have two religions at one time. But Muslims have no problem if they want to married with a differnce ethnic as long as they are Muslims. 

It's years old and I no longer know the source, but there was once a poll of "religious affiliation" in Japan, with somewhat entertaining results: around 3% reported that they were Christian; something like 65% reported that they were Confucian; 68% said they were Buddhist; and 72% said they were Shinto.

What affiliation means can be different in different cultures. A Buddhist priest in Japan may only identify as Buddhist, but it is quite common for many Japanese to go to a Taoist or Confucian astrologer on the occasion of the birth of a child, a Shinto shrine ceremony as part of a wedding, and a Buddhist temple ritual for their funeral.

Religion has that propensity of altering the ethic beliefs and culture. What you need to do is to know that aspect of the culture that is not affected by the religion, if this is possible. The combination of religion and culture is always resulted in syncretism. At the point of syncretism there is intersection between the two. The original culture always emerges at the point of intersection between religion and culture.

However, since the same ethnic group is affected by two different religious groups, try and find out the intersection between the two religions and culture of the people and you will be able to know which of the culture that belongs to ethic group you are investigating. If not it is very difficult to detect. There is no need to group them into two ethic groups they are the same but altered by different religious beliefs. It is important to know the real culture of the people before the coming of religion and the culture after the acceptance of religious beliefs.

Many of the ethnic groups in the Philippines have their own indigenous beliefs of deities, at the same time they are also affiliated to religions of mainstream population. In such conditions, it is noteworthy to find out how they have retained their indigenous religious influences and how they have been affected by their second religious affiliation. The important thing is how they have adapted themselves given their circumstances and how they continue to uphold their ethnic identity and culture in spite of other cultural influences.

Certainly, the ethnic identity is just a very complex phenomenon.This means that religious factor[s] are among the many. However relevant, they contribute also to ethnic identity of the group in different ways; they sometimes produce single effects, and sometimes because of interaction of them. I realize that the research on the ethnic identity is extremely difficult, but also fascinating. The syncretic character of the factual religion is observable with regard to perhaps any social group, no matter if single ethnic minority, or large society. This  is however another issue.

Come to India. You will find many religions in one ethnic group.