| Part ofa series on |
| Judaism |
|---|
 |
Modern Orthodox Judaism (alsoModern Orthodox orModern Orthodoxy) is a movement withinOrthodox Judaism that attempts tosynthesizeJewish values and theobservance of Jewish law with themodern world.
 RabbiHershel Schachter, a Modern Orthodox Rabbi atRabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary | |
| Total population | |
|---|---|
| Approx. 700,000 to 1 million globally | |
| Founder | |
| Samson Raphael Hirsch,Azriel Hildesheimer | |
| Regions with significant populations | |
| Worldwide | |
 United States | Approx. 250,000 |
 Israel | Approx. 350,000 |
 United Kingdom | Approx. 30,000 |
| Religions | |
 Judaism | |
| Scriptures | |
| Torah,Nevi'im,Ketuvim | |
| Languages | |
| Hebrew,English,Yiddish | |
| Related ethnic groups | |
| Orthodox Judaism,Religious Zionism | |
Modern Orthodoxy draws on several teachings and philosophies, and thus assumes various forms. In theUnited States, and generally in theWestern world,Centrist Orthodoxy underpinned by the philosophy ofTorah Umadda ("Torah and secular knowledge") is prevalent. InIsrael, Modern Orthodoxy is dominated byReligious Zionism; however, although not identical, these movements share many of the same values and many of the same adherents.[1]
Modern Orthodoxy comprises a fairly broad spectrum of movements; each movement draws upon several distinct, though related, philosophies, which (in some combination) provide the basis for all variations of the movement today.
In general, Modern Orthodoxy's "overall approach ... is the belief that one can and should be a full member of modern society, accepting the risks to remaining observant, because the benefits outweigh those risks".[2] Jews should engage constructively with the world that they are in tofoster goodness and justice within both themselves and the larger community, such as by avoidingsin in their personal lives while alsocaring for the unfortunate.
Thus, Modern Orthodoxy holds thatJewish law isnormative andbinding, while simultaneously attaching a positive value to interaction with the modern world. In this view, as expressed by RabbiSaul Berman,[3] Orthodox Judaism can "be enriched" by its intersection with modernity; further, "modern society creates opportunities to be productive citizens engaged in the Divine work oftransforming the world to benefit humanity". At the same time, in order to preserve the integrity ofhalakha, any area of "powerful inconsistency and conflict" between Torah and modern culture must be filtered out.[4]
Modern Orthodoxy also assigns a central role to the "People of Israel".[5] Here two characteristics are manifest: in general, Modern Orthodoxy places a highnational, as well as religious, significance on theState of Israel, and institutions and individuals are, typically,Zionist in orientation; relatedly, involvement with non-orthodox Jews will extend beyond "outreach" to include institutional relations and cooperation; seefurther underTorah Umadda.
Other "core beliefs"[2] are a recognition of the value and importance of secular studies, a commitment to equality of education for both men and women, and a full acceptance of the importance of being able to financially support oneself and one's family.
The specific expression of Modern Orthodoxy, however, takes many forms, and particularly over the past 30–40 years, describes apolitical spectrum.[2] Among the issues have been the extent to which Modern Orthodoxy should cooperate with the more liberal denominations, support secular academic pursuits combined with religious learning, and embrace efforts to givewomen a larger role in Jewish learning and worship;[6] the acceptability of moderntextual criticism as a tool forTorah study is also debated.[7]
To theideological right, the line betweenHaredi and Modern Orthodox has blurred in recent years; some have referred to this trend as "haredization".[8] In addition to increasing stringency in adherence toHalakha, many Modern Orthodox Jews express a growing sense of distance from the larger, secular culture.[8][9] ("Western civilisation has moved from what was once called theJudeo-Christian ethic to aconsumer-driven,choice-fixated culture.... Such a world is notchol, butchiloni, notsecular, butsecularist. It is impermeable to the values ofkedushah."[10]) Here, "the balance has tipped heavily in favor of Torah over madda (secular studies) ... [and many] have redefined 'madda' as support for making one's livelihood in the secular world, not culturally or intellectually engaging with it."[8] Although defining themselves as "centrist", institutions here include theOrthodox Union (Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America), theRabbinical Council of America, and theRabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary.
Adherents on theideological left have begun to develop new institutions that aim to be outward looking while maintaining a discourse between modernity andhalakhah. The resultant "Open Orthodoxy" seeks to re-engage with secular studies, Jews of all denominations and global issues. Some within this movement have experimented with orthodox egalitarianism where gender equality solutions are found throughhalakhah. This has led towomen taking on more leadership roles. Others in this movement are increasingly re-engaging withsocial justice issues from a halakhic point of view.Tikun Olam ("repairing the world") is re-mapped onto the values of social justice and basic Judaism is increasingly abandoned.[11] SeeYeshivat Chovevei Torah,Shalom Hartman Institute,Hebrew Institute of Riverdale,Partnership minyan,Shira Hadasha,Maharat.
It is also noted[1][12] that many Modern Orthodox are "behaviorally modern" as opposed to"ideologically modern", and, in truth, fall outside of "Modern" Orthodoxy, at least in the philosophical sense; seebelow. This phenomenon is sometimes termed "Social Orthodoxy".[13]
The distinction is as follows: The ideologically modern are "meticulously observant of Halakha",[12] and their interaction with the secular comprises a tangible expression of their ideology, wherever it may lie on the spectrum described. The "behaviorally modern", on the other hand, define themselves as "Modern Orthodox" only in the sense that they are neither Haredi ("Ultra-Orthodox") norConservative: these, in other words, are "not deeply concerned with philosophical ideas",[12] and, often, are not as careful in their observance.
This "Orthodoxy of convenience" has maintained a certain stability over time: as long as these don't seek to legitimize their behaviour in halakhic terms, the leadership of the (Modern) Orthodox world have no particular difficulty with them.[1]
Various highly differing views (or non views) – ranging from traditionalist to revisionist – are thus offered under the banner of "Modern Orthodoxy". In fact, even among its leadership, there is limited agreement "on the philosophical parameters of modern Orthodoxy".[2] The boundaries here, with respect to Haredi and Conservative Judaism, have therefore become increasingly indistinct. At the same time, some elements ofHaredi Judaism appear to be more receptive to messages that have traditionally been part of the Modern-Orthodox agenda. Similarly, at Modern Orthodoxy's left, many appear to align with more traditional elements ofConservative Judaism. In discussing "Modern Orthodoxy", it is thus also important to clarify its position with reference to other movements in Judaism: see§ Comparison with other movements below. Further, given this wide range of views, some see the possibility that, in fact, "[t]here is no longer a cohesive, singular Modern Orthodoxy";[14] see furtherbelow.
Modern Orthodoxy traces its roots to the works ofRabbisAzriel Hildesheimer (1820–1899) andSamson Raphael Hirsch (1808–1888). While Hildesheimer's role is not disputed—comprising distinctphilosophic andpragmatic contributions—Hirsch's role is less clear, with some Hirsch scholars arguing that his "Torah im Derech Eretz" philosophy is in fact at odds with that of Modern Orthodoxy; see furtherbelow andin the Hildesheimer article. Today, the movement is additionally, and particularly, influenced by the philosophy of RabbiJoseph B. Soloveitchik and the closely relatedTorah Umadda, as well as by the writings of RabbiAbraham Isaac Kook. (Religious Zionism, strictly speaking a distinct philosophy, has an indirect influence.)
Hirsch'sTorah im Derech Eretz (תורה עם דרך ארץ – "Torah with the 'Way of the World'/Society") is a philosophy of Orthodox Judaism that formalizes 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."[15] Hirsch's vision, although not unqualified, extended to thesciences as well as to (German) literature,philosophy and culture. Torah im Derech Eretz remains influential to this day in all branches of Orthodox Judaism.
Neo Orthodoxy, the movement descended from Hirsch'sFrankfurt community, regards itself as positioned, ideologically, outside of contemporary Modern Orthodoxy; see furtherbelow.
RabbiAzriel Hildesheimer, along with Rabbi Hirsch, was insistent that Orthodox Jews living in the west should not segregate themselves behind ghetto walls. On the contrary, modern Jewish education must teach Jews how best to confront and deal with modernity in all of its aspects.[16] His approach, "Cultured Orthodoxy", was defined as representing "unconditional agreement with the culture of the present day; harmony between Judaism and science; but also unconditional steadfastness in the faith and traditions of Judaism".[16]
He was, however, "the pragmatist rather than the philosopher", and it is his actions, rather than his philosophy, which have become institutionalized in Modern Orthodoxy,[12] and through which his influence is still felt.
Torah Umadda (תורה ומדע – "Torah and secular knowledge") is a philosophy concerning the secular world and Judaism, and in particular secular knowledge and Jewish knowledge. It envisions apersonal—as opposed tophilosophic—"synthesis" between Torah scholarship and Western, secular scholarship, entailing, also, positive involvement with the broader community. Here, the "individual has absorbed the attitudes characteristic of science, democracy, and Jewish life, and responds appropriately in diverse relations and contexts".[17] The resultant mode of Orthodox Judaism is referred to as "Centrist Orthodoxy".
This philosophy, as formulated today, is to a large extent a product of the teachings and philosophy of RabbiJoseph B. Soloveitchik (1903–1993),Rosh Yeshiva atYeshiva University. In Rav Soloveitchik's thought, Judaism, which believes that the world is "very good",[18] enjoins man to engage intikkun olam. "Halakhic Man" must therefore attempt to bring the sanctity and purity of the transcendent realm into the material world.[19] Centrist Orthodoxy is the dominant mode of Modern Orthodoxy in theUnited States, whileTorah Umadda remains closely associated with Yeshiva University.
Modern Orthodoxy draws on the teachings of RabbiAbraham Isaac Kook (1864–1935), as well as the writings and interpretations of his son RabbiZvi Yehuda Kook (1891–1982), both as regards their views onJewish peoplehood and as they regard the (related) interaction with the secular world.
InIsrael, theReligious Zionism of theDati Leumi (דתי לאומי, "National Religious") dominates Modern Orthodoxy. Here too, the ideological basis is largely drawn from the teachings of Rav Kook,[9] and there is therefore much overlap; philosophical differences, as well as other "non-modern" forms of Religious Zionism, are discussedbelow.
See alsoMizrachi;Bnei Akiva;National Religious Party;Hesder;Mechina;Gush Emunim;Torat Eretz Yisrael.
As above, Modern Orthodoxy comprises various approaches, ranging from traditionalist to revisionist, and the movement apparently overlaps with Conservative Judaism and with Haredi Judaism at its respective boundaries. At its centre too, the movement appears to share practices and values with Neo Orthodoxy and with Religious Zionism. Therefore, in clarifying what Modern Orthodoxy in fact entails, its positioning must be discussed with reference to these movements.
Although there is some question as how precisely to define the distinction between Modern Orthodoxy andHaredi Judaism, there is basic agreement that they may be distinguished on the basis of three major characteristics:[12]
A fourth difference suggested, relates to the acceptability of moderation withinJewish law. Both Modern Orthodoxy and Ultra Orthodoxy regardHalakha as divine in origin, and as such, no position is assumed without justification in theShulchan Aruch and in theAcharonim. The movements differ, however, in their approach to strictures (chumras) and leniencies (kulas).Modern Orthodoxy holds that strictures are notnormative, rather, these are a matter of personal choice;[21] "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." SeeTorah Umadda § Moderation.Note though, that in recent years, many Modern Orthodox Jews are described as "increasingly stringent in their adherence to Jewish law".[8] As to the contention that Modern Orthodoxy's standards of observance ofhalakha are "relaxed", as opposed to moderate, seebelow underCriticism.In the Haredi view, on the other hand, "the most severe position ... is the most likely basis for unity and commonality of practice within Orthodox community, and is therefore to be preferred". Further, "such severity ... results in the greatest certainty that God's will is being performed".[21][22]Haredi Judaism thus tends to adoptchumras as a norm.
Related to this[23] is the acceptance of the concept ofDa'as Torah - the extent to which Orthodox Jews should seek the input of rabbinic scholars not just on matters of Jewish law, but on all important life matters.Most rabbinic leaders fromHaredi communities view the concept as inextricably linked to the centuries of Jewish tradition. Within Modern Orthodox Judaism, many rabbis and scholars view the matter as a modern development that can be traced to changes in Jewish communal life in the nineteenth century.[24][25] Thus, while the notion of da'as Torah is viewed byHaredi rabbis as a long-established tradition within Judaism, Modern Orthodox scholars argue that the Haredi claim is a revisionist one. According to Modern Orthodox scholars, although the term "da'as Torah" has been used in the past, the connotations of absolute rabbinic authority under this banner occurs only in the decades that follow the establishment of the Agudas Yisrael party in Eastern Europe.[26]SeeRabbinic authority § Orthodox Judaism and da'as Torah for further elaboration of these differences.
Modern Orthodoxy's efforts to encourage religious observance among non-Orthodox Jews has been likened to similar efforts by theChabad movement. The similarity between the two groups in their relationships towards the non-Orthodox, and its adoption by some Haredi groups, has blurred the lines between the modern and Haredi segments of Orthodoxy.[27]
Both Modern Orthodoxy andNeo Orthodoxy, the movement directly descended from Hirsch's Frankfurt community, have combined Torah and secular knowledge with participation in contemporaryWestern life, and thus some maintain that there is a degree of practical and philosophical overlap between the two. The movements are nevertheless distinct, and in general, Neo-Orthodoxy has taken a more qualified approach than Modern orthodoxy, emphasizing that followers must exercise caution in engagements with the secular world.
Differences between the movements may be more than a question of degree: some Hirsch scholars argue that Hirschian philosophy is at odds with that of Modern Orthodoxy,[28] while some Modern Orthodox scholars maintain that Modern Orthodoxy accords with Hirsch's worldview.[29] These philosophical distinctions (though subtle), manifest in markedly divergent religious attitudes and perspectives. For example,Shimon Schwab, second rabbi of the Torah Im Derech Eretz community in the United States, has been described as being "spiritually very distant" from Yeshiva University and Modern Orthodoxy.[12]
From the viewpoint of Neo-Orthodoxy, that movement differs from Modern Orthodoxy (and particularly Centrist Orthodoxy) on three main counts.[28][30]
Broadly defined,Religious Zionism is a movement that embraces the idea of Jewish nationalsovereignty, often in connection with the belief in the ability of the Jewish people to bring about aredemptive state through natural means, and often attributing religious significance to the modernState of Israel. The spiritual thinkers who started this stream of thought include RabbiZvi Hirsch Kalischer (1795–1874) and RabbiYitzchak Yaacov Reines (1839–1915). Thus, in this sense, Religious Zionism in fact encompasses a wide spectrum of religious views including Modern Orthodoxy.
Note, however, that Modern Orthodoxy, in fact, overlaps to a large extent with"Religious Zionism" in its narrower form ("Throughout the world, a 'religious Zionist day school' is a synonym for a 'modern Orthodox day school'"[32]). At the least, the two are not in any direct conflict, and generally coexist,[1] sharing both values and adherents. Further, in practice, except at their extremes, the differences between Religious Zionism and Modern Orthodoxy in Israel are not pronounced, and they are often identical, especially in recent years and for the younger generation.[33]
Nevertheless, the two movements are philosophically distinct on two broad counts.
Applying the above distinction, inIsrael today, Modern Orthodoxy—as distinct from (right-wing) Religious Zionism—is represented by only a select group of institutions: theReligious Kibbutz Movement,Ne'emanei Torah Va'Avodah,[35] theMeimad political party, and theShalom Hartman Institute,Yeshivat Har Etzion /Migdal Oz andYeshivat Hamivtar/Ohr Torah Stone Institutions/Midreshet Lindenbaum (some would includeYeshivat Hesder Petach Tikva,Yeshivat Ma'ale Gilboa, and theTzohar Foundation[36]).
In some areas, Modern Orthodoxy's left wing appears to align with more traditional elements ofConservative Judaism, and in fact some on the left of Modern Orthodoxy have allied with the formerly ConservativeUnion for Traditional Judaism. Nonetheless, the two movements are generally described as distinct. RabbiAvi Weiss, from the left of Modern Orthodoxy, stresses that Orthodox and Conservative Judaism are "so very different in ... three fundamental areas:Torah mi-Sinai, rabbinic interpretation, and rabbinic legislation".[37] Weiss argues as follows:
In general, Modern Orthodoxy does not, therefore, view the process by which the Conservative movement decideshalakha as legitimate—or with the non-normative weighting assigned to halakha by the Conservative movement. In particular, Modern Orthodoxy disagrees with many of Conservative Judaism'shalakhic rulings, particularly as regards issues ofegalitarianism. See further on theOrthodox view and theConservative view.
Modern Orthodoxy clearly differs from the approach ofReform Judaism andHumanistic Judaism, which do not considerhalakha to benormative.
This section deals with criticism relating to standards of observance and to social issues. See"Criticism" underTorah Umadda for discussions ofphilosophy.
There is an often repeated contention that Modern Orthodoxy—beyond its approach tochumrahs ("strictures")described above—has lower standards of observance oftraditional Jewish laws and customs than other branches ofOrthodox Judaism.[42] This view is largely anecdotal, and is based on individual behaviour, as opposed to any formal, institutional position;[43] seeabove re "the behaviorally modern":
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.[1]
[This] group is appropriately described as "modern" in the sense that those who see themselves as part of it are committed to the tradition, in general, but feel free to pick and choose in their observance of rituals. In contrast to the more traditional Orthodox, they do not observe all of the rituals as deemed obligatory by the traditional community. Their sense of "freedom of choice", although never articulated theoretically, is as evident as it is among many other contemporary Americans who view themselves as religiously traditional, but, nevertheless, are selective in their religiosity.[12]
Additionally, 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",[44]Haredi groups have sometimes compared Modern Orthodoxy with earlyReform Judaism inGermany: Modern Orthodox rabbis have been criticised for attempting to modifyJewish law, in adapting Judaism to the needs of themodern world.[citation needed]
Note that claims of this nature have been commonplace within Orthodox Judaism since the first "reforms" ofSamson Raphael Hirsch andAzriel Hildesheimer. Thus, inEurope of the early 19th century, all ofJudaism that differed from the strictest forms present at the time was called "Reform". Then, as now, Modern Orthodoxy took pains to distance its "reforms", which were consistent with theShulkhan Arukh andposkim, from those of the Reform movement (and the Conservative movement), which were not.[citation needed]
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 Orthodoxy].... It is not the so-called Divine Service which separates us, [rather it] is the theory—the principle [of faithfulness to Jewish law] ... 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)
Some observe[12] that the ability of Modern Orthodoxy to attract a large following and maintain its strength as a movement is inhibited by the fact that it embracesmodernity—itsraison d'être—and that it is highlyrational andintellectual.
Many Orthodox Jews find the intellectual engagement with the modern world as a virtue. Examples of Orthodox rabbis who promote or have promoted this worldview include:
There are a few organizations dedicated to furthering Modern Orthodoxy as a religious trend:
Others include:
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link), wzo.org.il{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)Judaism; Fall 1997
