Modern Orthodox Judaism

From Free net encyclopedia

Template:Jew Modern Orthodox Judaism (or Modern Orthodox, also known as Modern Orthodoxy and sometimes abbreviated as "MO") is a movement within Orthodox Judaism that attempts to synthesize traditional observance and values with the secular modern world. It is broadly defined as the effort to adapt Orthodox Judaism to modernity and to avoid the social and/or cultural isolation which living in strict accordance with halakha would seem to impose [1].

In the United States, and the Western world, "Centrist Orthodoxy" is the prevalent form of Modern Orthodoxy — underpinned by the philosophy of Torah Umadda ("Torah and Knowledge/Science"), generally associated with Yeshiva University. In Israel, the Religious Zionist Movement and Mizrachi are dominant. Although Centrist Orthodoxy and Religious Zionism are not identical, they share many of the same values and many of the same adherents [2].

Contents

[edit]

Philosophy

Modern Orthodoxy comprises a fairly broad spectrum of movements each drawing on several distinct, though related, philosophies, which in some combination provide the basis for all variations of the movement today; these are discussed in detail below. In general, Modern Orthodoxy holds that Jewish law is normative and obligatory, while simultaneously attaching a positive value to interaction with the modern world. In this view, Orthodox Judaism can “be enriched” by its intersection with modernity; further, “modern society creates opportunities to be productive citizens engaged in the Divine work of transforming the world to benefit humanity”. At the same time, in order to preserve the integrity of halakha, any area of “powerful inconsistency and conflict” between Torah and modern culture must be avoided. [3].

[edit]

Roots

Modern Orthodoxy traces its roots to the works of RabbiAzriel Hildesheimer (1820-1899) and to the sociological and religious condition of Western European Jewry (led by Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888). Both are regarded as pioneering, having made distinct philosophic and pragmatic contributions; see further discussion in the Hildesheimer article.

[edit]

Torah im Derech Eretz

Hirsch’s Torah im Derech Eretz (תורה עם דרך ארץ – “Torah with the way of the Land”) is a philosophy of Orthodox Judaism which formalises a relationship between halakhically observant Judaism and the modern world. Hirsch held that Judaism requires the application of Torah philosophy to all human endeavor and knowledge compatible with it. Thus, secular education becomes a positive religious duty. "Judaism is not a mere adjunct to life: it comprises all of life... in the synagogue and the kitchen, in the field and the warehouse, in the office and the pulpit... with the pen and the chisel" [4]. Hirsch's vision, although not unqualified, extended to the sciences as well as to (German) literature, philosophy and culture. Torah im Derech Eretz remains influential to this day in all branches of Orthodox Judaism. Note that Neo Orthodoxy, the movement directly descended from Hirsch’s Frankfurt community, regards itself as positioned, ideologically, outside of contemporary Modern Orthodoxy; see further below.

[edit]

Hildesheimer's pragmatism

Hildesheimer, often described as "the pragmatist rather than the philosopher", undertook a variety of actions which position him as a modernizer of Orthodox Judaism, and which have become institutionalized in Modern Orthodoxy [5]. His approach may be defined as "Cultured Orthodox" and as representing "[u]nconditional agreement with the culture of the present day; harmony between Judaism and science; but also unconditional steadfastness in the faith and traditions of Judaism" [6]. He established Jewish education for males and females, which included both religious and secular studies. His was the first Orthodox rabbinical seminary in Germany to incorporate modern Jewish studies, secular studies and academic scholarship in its curriculum. Not being a sectarian, Hildesheimer worked with communal leaders, even non-Orthodox ones, on issues that affected the community, such as anti-Semitism and ritual slaughter. He also maintained traditional Jewish attachments to the Land of Israel and worked with the non-Orthodox on its behalf.

[edit]

Torah Umadda

Torah Umadda (תורה ומדע - "Torah and secular knowledge") is a paradigm somewhat related to Hirsch's Torah im Derech Eretz. Torah Umadda entails a philosophy encouraging the synthesis between the secular world and Judaism, and in particular between secular knowledge and Jewish knowledge,whereas Torah im Derech Eretz stresses the domination of Torah knowledge over all wordly affairs and the religious duty to apply Torah philosophy to all secular knowledge. In Torah Umadda there is a personal (as opposed to theoretical) "synthesis" between Torah scholarship and Western, secular scholarship, entailing, also, positive involvement with the broader community. The resultant mode of Orthodox Judaism is referred to as "Centrist Orthodoxy". The philosophy, as formulated today, is to a large extent a product of the teachings and philosophy of Joseph Soloveitchik (1903-1993), Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva University. In "Rav Soloveitchik's" thought, Judaism, which believes that the world is "very good", enjoins man to engage in tikkun olam. "Halakhic Man" must therefore attempt to bring the sanctity and purity of the transcendent realm into the material world [7]. Centrist Orthodoxy is the dominant mode of Modern Orthodoxy in the United States, while Torah Umadda remains closely associated with Yeshiva University.

[edit]

Religious Zionism

Religious Zionism is a third movement within Modern Orthodoxy - the movement, and its adherents, are also described via the adjective "Dati Leumi" (דתי לאומי, "National Religious"). The ideological basis for the National Religious was largely founded by, and based on the teachings of Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook (1864 – 1935) [8]. “Rav Kook” saw Zionism as a part of a divine scheme finally to result in the resettlement of the Jewish people in its homeland, bringing salvation ("Geula") to the Jewish people, and the entire world. In Rav Kook’s thought Kodesh and Chol (sacred and profane) play an extremely important role. Here, Kodesh is the inner taam (reason) of reality and the meaning of existence while Chol is that which is detached from Kodesh and is without any meaning; Judaism, then, is the vehicle "whereby we sanctify our lives, and attach all the practical, secular elements of life to spiritual goals which reflect the absolute meaning of existence - God Himself" [9]. Those to the right - sometimes referred to as "Chardal" (חרד״ל: an abbreviation for "charedi dati leumi") [10] - limit this paradigm to the practical, as opposed to the philosophical, viewing engagement with the secular as permissible, and encouraged, but only insofar as this engagement benefits the State of Israel. Religious Zionism is the dominant Modern Orthodox paradigm in Israel. See also Mizrachi; Bnei Akiva; Mafdal; Hesder; Gush Emunim.

[edit]

Comparison with other movements

Various, highly differing views are offered under the banner of Modern Orthodoxy, ranging from traditionalist to revisionist. In addition, some elements of Haredi Judaism ("Ultra-Orthodox Judaism") appear to be more receptive to messages that have traditionally been part of the Modern-Orthodox agenda. At the same time, Modern Orthodoxy’s left wing may appear to align with more traditional elements of Conservative Judaism. Thus, in clarifying its position, it is useful to discuss Modern Orthodoxy with reference to other movements in Judaism.

[edit]

Haredi Judaism

See also under Centrist Orthodoxy and Divine Providence for further elaboration of the differences discussed here.

Although there is some question as how precisely to define the distinction between Modern Orthodoxy and Haredi Judaism, there is basic agreement that they may be distinguished on the basis of three major characteristics: [11]

  • Modern Orthodoxy adopts a relatively inclusive attitude stance towards society in general, and the larger Jewish community in particular.
  • Modern Orthodoxy is, in comparison, accommodating, “if not welcoming” to modernity, general scholarship and science.
  • Modern Orthodoxy is almost uniformly receptive toward Israel and Zionism, viewing the State of Israel (in addition to the Land of Israel) as having inherent Jewish significance.

A fourth difference suggested, relates to the acceptability of moderation within Jewish law. Both Modern Orthodoxy and Ultra Orthodoxy regard Halakha as Divine in origin, and as such, no position is assumed without justification in the Shulkhan Arukh and in the Acharonim. The movements differ, however, in their approach to strictures (chumras) and leniencies (kulas), with Modern orthodoxy tending to adopt the latter, and Haredi Judaism the former. In the Modern Orthodox view "severity and leniency are relevant only in circumstances of factual doubt, not in situations of debate or varied practice. In the latter situations, the conclusion should be based solely on the legal analysis". In the Haredi view, on the other hand, "the most severe position... is the most likely basis for unity and commonality of practice within the Orthodox community and is therefore to be preferred". Further, "such severity... results in the greatest certainty that God's will is being performed." [12]. Note that, in recent years, many Modern Orthodox Jews are described as "increasingly stringent in their adherence to Jewish law" [13]. (As to the contention that Modern Orthodoxy's standards of observance of halakha are, in fact, "relaxed," as opposed to moderate, see below under Criticism.)

[edit]

Neo-Orthodoxy

Neo Orthodoxy, the movement directly descended from Hirsch’s Frankfurt community, is often regarded as positioned, ideologically, outside of contemporary Modern Orthodoxy. In general, both communities have combined Torah and secular knowledge in contemporary western life. Neo-Orthodoxy, however, has done so in a more qualified fashion, emphasizing that followers require a strong basis of faith and knowledge, and must exercise caution in engagements with the secular world. Neo-Orthodoxy differs further from Modern Orthodoxy on three counts.

  • As regards the relative emphasis of Torah versus secular: the two are distinct in that in the Hirschian view, the acquisition of secular culture and knowledge is solely for the sake of applying the Torah to all wordly matters, whereas here, secular culture and knowledge are encouraged for their own sake as a compliment to Torah, not as a religious duty.In sum, in Modern Orthodoxy it is held that Judaism can be enriched by interaction with modernity. In Neo-Orthodoxy it is held that modernity and all human experience must be enriched by the application of Torah thought and outlook.
  • As regards the degree of supremacy accorded Torah: not unconnected to the first variance, this dissimilarity says that in the Hirschian view, Torah is the sole barometer of truth by which to judge secular disciplines.Thus, "[w]e are confident that there is only one truth, and only one body of knowledge that can serve as the standard... Compared to it, all the other sciences are valid only provisionally."(Hirsch,commentary to Leviticus 18:4-5).In contrast, in the view of Modern Orthodoxy although Torah is the preeminent center, secular knowledge is considered to offer "a different perspective that may not agree at all with the first (Torah) ... both together present the possibility of a larger truth." (Torah Umadda, p. 236).

These distinctions, though conceptually subtle, manifest in markedly divergent religious attitudes and perspectives. As such, Shimon Schwab, second Rabbi of this community in the United States, is described as being "spiritually very distant" from Yeshiva University and Modern Orthodoxy.

[edit]

Conservative Judaism

In some areas, Modern Orthodoxy’s left wing appears to align with more traditional elements of Conservative Judaism — some on the left of Modern Orthodoxy have even allied with the formerly Conservative Union for Traditional Judaism. Nonetheless, the two movements are completely distinct. Modern Orthodoxy, in line with the rest of Orthodoxy, holds that Jewish law is Divine in origin, and as such, no underlying principle may be compromised in accounting for changing political, social or economic conditions. By contrast, Conservative Judaism holds that Poskim should make use of literary and historical analysis in deciding Jewish law, and may reverse decisions of the Acharonim that are held to be inapplicable today. "Conservative rabbis have great respect for the Shulkhan Arukh, but do not view it as the ultimate authority because it was written over 400 years ago and much has changed since then in the halakhah, in society and in our outlook on life" [15]. Further, "[t]he Conservative Movement maintains that the purpose of the law in the first place is largely to concretize moral values, and so the specific form of the law can and should be changed if it is not effectively doing that" [16]. (Within the context that "[t]he halakhic system, historically considered, evinces a constant pattern of responsiveness, change and variety. Conservative Judaism did not read that record as carte blanche for a radical revision or even rejection of the system, but rather as warrant for valid adjustment where absolutely necessary" [17].) In general, Modern Orthodoxy does not, therefore, view the process by which the Conservative movement decides halakha as legitimate. In particular, Modern Orthodoxy disagrees with many of Conservative Judaism’s halakhic rulings, particularly as regards issues of egalitarianism. See further on the Orthodox view and the Conservative view. Modern Orthodoxy clearly differs from the approach of Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism, which do not consider halakha to be obligatory.

[edit]

Right and Left

[edit]

Modern forms of textual criticism

Some Modern Orthodox scholars may acknowledge insights provided by some tools of modern textual criticism into Judaism's sacred works and rabbinic literature. However, it also maintains that the Torah is of divine origin, and has been transmitted with almost perfect fidelity from the time of Moses until today. Modern Orthodox Jews often study academic biblical criticism but rely on traditional authorities for normative interpretation of the Torah. The documentary hypothesis is only of academic interest for observance. Modern Orthodoxy is ambivalent, at best, about the use of academic criticism for other books of the Hebrew Bible because if one allows these techniques to be used here, one might then be tempted to eventually look at the Torah in this light as well. Orthodox Judaism makes clear distinctions between the books of the Hebrew Bible, holding that the first five books - the Torah - are of a special nature, being directly dictated by God to Moses on Mount Sinai. The rest of the books of the Bible, the Neviim ("Prophets") and Ketuvim ("Writings") are also considered holy, but are less direct transcriptions of God's will. As such some forms of higher criticism of these book are sometimes considered acceptable. A certain amount of Modern Orthodox acceptance of higher criticism for non-Torah books of the Bible can be found in the Soncino Books of the Bible series, and in the Pentateuch and Haftarah by Rabbi Joseph H. Hertz, both works which are widely used in the Modern Orthodox community.

[edit]

Criticism

Generalisations concerning Modern Orthodoxy are difficult to draw, and, as such, any criticism may be aimed at a straw man. This section deals with criticism relating to standards of observance and to social issues; as regards its philosophy see "Criticism" under Torah Umadda.

[edit]

Standards of observance

There is an often cited contention that Modern Orthodoxy has lower standards of observance of traditional Jewish laws and customs than other branches of Orthodox Judaism [18]. This view is largely anecdotal, and is based on individual behaviour, as opposed to any formal, institutional position [19]: “There are at least two distinct types of Modern Orthodox.. One is philosophically or ideologically modern, while the other is more appropriately characterized as behaviorally modern… [The] philosophically Modern Orthodox would be those who are meticulously observant of Halakhah but are, nevertheless, philosophically modern….The behaviorally Modern Orthodox, on the other hand, are not deeply concerned with philosophical ideas... by and large, they define themselves as Modern Orthodox [either] in the sense that they are not meticulously observant [or] in reference to… right-wing Orthodoxy.” [20]; see also [21].

[edit]

Introduction of "reforms"

Whereas the Modern Orthodox position is (generally) presented as "unquestioned allegiance to the primacy of Torah, and that the apprehension of all other intellectual disciplines must be rooted and viewed through the prism of Torah," [22] Haredi groups have sometimes compared Modern Orthodoxy with early Reform Judaism in Germany: Modern Orthodox Rabbis have been criticised for attempting to modify Jewish law, in adapting Judaism to the needs of the modern world.

Note that claims of this nature has been current within Orthodox Judaism since the first "reforms" of Samson Raphael Hirsch and Azriel Hildesheimer. In Europe of the early 1800s, all of Judaism that differed from the strictest forms present at the time was called "Reform". As such, early Modern Orthodoxy took pains to distance its "reforms" - those which could be justified as based on the Shulkhan Arukh and poskim – from those of the Reform movement, which could not. As above, this difference persists more than a century later.

"It is foolish to believe that it is the wording of a prayer, the notes of a synagogue tune, or the order of a special service, which form the abyss between [Reform and Modern Orthodoxy]... It is not the so-called Divine Service which separates us, [rather it] is the theory - the principle (of faithfulness to Jewish law...) The subordination of religion to any other factor means the denial of religion: for if the Torah is to you the Law of God how dare you place another law above it and go along with God and His Law only as long as you thereby "progress" in other respects at the same time?" (Religion Allied to Progress, Samson Raphael Hirsch)
See further under Torah im Derech Eretz; Torah Umadda.
[edit]

Difficulties inherent

Some observe that the ability of Modern Orthodoxy to attract a large following and maintain its strength as a movement is, ironically, inhibited by the fact that it embraces modernity - its raison d'être - and that it is highly rational and intellectual.

  • The very term “Modern Orthodoxy” is, in some sense, an oxymoron. One of the characteristics of all religious orthodoxies, is the submission to the authority of its tradition - authority and tradition are a prerequisite for orthodoxy, and within an orthodoxy, the individual is expected to perceive himself as not having any choice but to conform to all of its dictates. Modernity, by contrast, emphasizes a measure of personal autonomy as well as rationalist truth [23]. Some implications are that Modern Orthodoxy is, almost by definition, inhibited from becoming a strong movement, because this would entail organization and authority to a degree "which goes against the very grain of modernity". A related difficulty is that Modern Orthodox rabbis who do adopt stringencies may, in the process, lose the support of precisely the "Modern" group which they sought to lead.
  • Modern Orthodoxy’s "highly intellectual and rational stance" presents its own difficulties. Firstly, the ideology entails built-in tensions and frequently requires conscious living with inconsistency [24] (for instance, modernity vs. orthodoxy). Secondly, there are also those who question whether "the literature... with its intellectually elitist bias fails to directly address the majority of its practitioners" [25]. The suggestion here is that Modern Orthodoxy may not provide a directly applicable theology for the contemporary Modern Orthodox family; see further discussion under Torah Umadda.
[edit]

Important figures

Many Orthodox Jews find the intellectual engagement with the modern world as a virtue. Examples of Orthodox rabbis who promote this worldview include:

  • Marc D. Angel - former president of the Rabbinical Council of America, and rabbi of Shearith Israel, a Spanish Portuguese synagogue in New York.
  • Yehuda Amital - A Hungarian survivor of the Holocaust, Rabbi Amital emigrated to Israel in 1944, and resumed his yeshiva studies in Jerusalem. During the War of Independence, he served in the Hagana armored corps, taking part in the famous battle of Latrun. Subsequently, he took an active role in the development of Yeshivat Hadarom, where he was involved in the formulation of the idea of Yeshivat Hesder. Following the Six Day War, Rabbi Amital founded and assumed leadership of Yeshivat Har Etzion. He is a dominant public figure in Israel who is widely respected on matters of religious and national concern.
  • Eliezer Berkovits - philosopher, author of many works including Not In Heaven: The Nature and Function of Halakha and Faith after the Holocaust.
  • Tsvi Blanchard - Director of Organizational Development at CLAL.
  • Benjamin Blech
  • Shalom Carmy - professor of Jewish Studies and Philosophy at Yeshiva University; a prominent Modern Orthodox theologian
  • J. Simcha Cohen, presently rabbi in West Palm Beach, Fl., formerly rabbi of the Melbourne, Australia, Mizrachi community. Author of a series of Modern Orthodox response collections.
  • Barry Freundel, Rabbi of Kesher Israel Congregation in Washington, DC, author of several works including 'Contemporary Orthodox Judaism's Response to Modernity.' Rabbi Freundel appeared on television as a panelist on religion in an early episode of Da Ali G Show.
  • Shmuel Goldin, Congregation Ahavath Torah, Englewood, N.J.; Chair, Shvil Hazahav
  • Irving "Yitz" Greenberg - Founder of CLAL; engaged in creating a pluralistic theology and inter-denominational cooperation; is increasingly viewed as belonging to the fringe left-wing of the movement.
  • Steven Greenberg - Senior Teaching Fellow at CLAL. He received his B.A. in philosophy from Yeshiva University and his rabbinical ordination from Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary. He is the first openly gay Orthodox rabbi.
  • Donniel Hartman
  • Norman Lamm - Rosh Yeshiva, Yeshiva University ; Orthodox Forum; author of Torah U-Maddah. One of the leading voices for the validity and importance of Modern Orthodoxy.
  • Daniel Lapin involved in the Pacific Jewish Center in Venice Beach, California and the founder of Toward Tradition, a group promoting stronger ties between observant conservative Christian and Jewish communities.
  • B. Barry Levy - former professor at Yeshiva University, now professor at McGill University. His work attempts to reconcile modern day biblical scholarship with Orthodox theology.
  • Mendell Lewittes - Author of Jewish Law: An Introduction.
  • Aharon Lichtenstein - Lichtenstein grew up in the United States, earning Semicha at Yeshiva University, and a Ph.D. in English Literature at Harvard. He is committed to intensive and original Torah study, and articulates a bold Jewish worldview that embraces modernity, reflecting the tradition of his teacher and father-in-law, Rabbi Joseph Dov Soloveitchik. In 1971, Lichtenstein answered Rabbi Amital's request to join him at the helm of Yeshivat Har Etzion. He is a source of inspiration for a wide circle of Jewry, for both his educational attainments and his intellectual leadership. Author of Leaves of Faith - The World of Jewish Learning, and By His Light: Character and Values in the Service of God.
  • Haskel Lookstein - Congregation Kehilath Jeshrun, NY
  • Michael Melchior - Affiliated with Meimad
  • Adam J. Mintz - Former Rabbi of Lincoln Square Synagogue, New York, NY
  • Emanuel Rackman - Chancellor Bar Ilan Univ, Israel ; member of Edah; former president of the Rabbinical Council of America, and author of One Man's Judaism. A leader in defending the rights of agunot, women who are prevented from receiving a divorce under Jewish law.
  • Shlomo Riskin - Formerly rabbi of the Lincoln Square Synagogue in Manhattan, he emigrated to Israel to become the Chief Rabbi of Efrat.
  • Herschel Shachter - one of Rabbi Joseph Dov Soloveitchik's most prominent students, dean of the Katz Kollel at the Yeshiva University-affiliated Rabbi Isaac Elchanon Theological Seminary (RIETS). Has published several works attempting to establish a definitive view of Rabbi Soloveitchik's Weltanschauung.
  • Rabbi Saul Berman - director of Edah, a Modern Orthodox advocacy organization.
  • Marc Schneier - Rabbi of The Hampton Synagogue, NY
  • Joseph Dov Soloveitchik - Known as "The Rav", he was effectively the spiritual and intellectual guide of Modern Orthodoxy in America for the mid-20th century. He is the author of "The Lonely Man of Faith" and "Halakhic Man," an outspoken Zionist, an opponent of extending rabbinic authority into areas of secular expertise, and a proponent of some interdenominational cooperation, such as the Rabbinical Council of America participation in the now-defunct Synagogue Council of America. He was known as a stern, even severe, leader who described in his writings the spiritual loneliness and internal isolation of the modern religious "man of faith".
  • Joseph Telushkin - Author, teacher, lecturer.
  • Avi Weiss - Rabbi of the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale Bronx, NY. Author, teacher, lecturer, and perhaps the Jewish community's best examplar of activism.
  • Dr. Joel Wolowelsky - Yeshiva of Flatbush; Orthodox Forum
  • Dr. Michael Wyschograd - Prof. Religious Studies, Univ. of Houston
  • Rabbi Alan Schwartz - Rabbi of Congregation Ohab Zedek (OZ) on the UWS (Upper West Side, Manhattan) and professor of Jewish Studies at Yeshiva University's undergraduate colleges
[edit]

Modern Orthodox advocacy groups

There are a few organizations dedicated to furthering Modern Orthodoxy as a religious trend: The largest and oldest are the Orthodox Union (Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America), which sponsors youth groups, kashrut supervision, and many other activities and its rabbinic counterpart, the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA). Both have Israel and diaspora (outside the land of Israel) programs.

  • Edah,with its slogan of: The Courage to be Modern and Orthodox, is a non-membership advocacy operation. It is seen as representing the left wing of Modern Orthodoxy.
  • Meimad is a political/intellectual alternative to Israel's highly nationalistic religious parties or those hostile to modern secularist values
  • The Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance (JOFA) a forum for enhancing the roles of Orthodox Jewish women within the Orthodox community, and reducing Orthodox religious disabilities against women. Considered a far-left organization by centrist-Orthodox mainstream.
[edit]

See also

[edit]

Selected Modern Orthodox Congregations


[edit]

External links and references

[edit]

Resources

nl:Modern-orthodox jodendom

Retrieved from "http://www.netipedia.com/index.php/Modern_Orthodox_Judaism"