What is Modern Orthodoxy?
Guest post by Deborah Waxman
The following is a submission we received from a reader. The author throws a lot of kudos my way. Clearly, as those initiated with Irrationalist Modoxism are aware, Dr. Happygoluckypersonage and Rational Traditionalist are in fact the deserving recipients of the lion’s share of that praise. Towards the end, the author suggests we rename our blog to something less offensive. The truth is that this is something we have already taken into serious consideration, but for the time being we are keeping the name as it is. We welcome input from our readers on all topics which can be submitted to mecharkerbcholoz@gmail.com - MBO
“There’s this new blog that’s basically ‘Contra Slifkin,’”1 a polished intellectual friend told me this past Shabbos. “This guy who’s been shredding Slifkin on his blog started his own blog, where he demolishes all of Slifkin’s craziness.”
I was puzzled. What does Slifkin have to do with anything? The little I know about him strongly suggests he’s not a serious player one should waste their breath on. And it’s not just Slifkin. The whole anti-chareidi element of the Modern Orthodox movement really strikes me as a bad joke one shouldn’t think too much about. Actually, the entire “Modern Orthodox” enterprise, even its not so anti-chareidi elements, calls for a great deal of examination.
Practically, no one can articulate what exactly Modern Orthodoxy means. Different definitions have been put forth, but they all seem like contrived nonsense. Respecting secular knowledge? Well, Orthodoxy can do that too, without being modern. Obviously, the yeshivas attempt to inculcate young impressionable boys with a desire to learn Torah and nothing else. Of course, Torah knowledge is more important than anything, and a strong devotion and commitment to Torah study is necessary to properly absorb Torah wisdom and to integrate it into one’s life (see for example, Rambam, Hilchos Talmud Torah 3:12). Historically, many gedolim opposed college and still do, but my experience suggests that this concept is supremely overrated. There are quite a few Lakewood people currently studying at Ivy League colleges. It’s not something overtly endorsed and pushed in most Orthodox circles, but the contemporary chareidi establishment emphatically does not reject secular knowledge. Sure, there’s healthy skepticism of scientific knowledge (like in much of the country, especially after Covid and the rapid spread of “trans kids”), and there’s also an understanding that it’s not okay to send your 18-year-old son or daughter to a coed dorm. Yet the bald fact remains that chareidim do not reject secular wisdom.
And the idea that secular knowledge shouldn’t just be respected, but embraced and put on par with Torah knowledge? Well, that’s just some queer theory thought up in the 1950s and 60s to give people who wanted to remain “Orthodox” a justification to do whatever they wanted. Rabbi Lamm is a venerated figure in the MO world even today, but his theory has died long ago. No serious self-identifying MO person actually speaks about this theory in a coherent and scholarly manner or believes it to be true.
Some might say that Modern Orthodoxy is more about accepting or even embracing the broader culture. Maybe it’s fine for kids to be familiar with movies, and trying to isolate your community from the larger non-Jewish culture just creates backlash. Maybe by exposing kids to the non-Jewish world we can inoculate them from bad influences and reduce some the natural xenophobia that comes from being frum. Maybe it’s even a positive thing to be exposed to non-Jewish culture from the perspective of developing one’s humanity, like Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein believed.
Such claims, aside from sounding remarkably forced and biased, are also quite flimsy material for creating an ideology with. In terms of a backlash because of excessive rejection of non-Jewish culture, this theory is largely nonsense. First, kids who grow up extremely sheltered, such as many chassidim, generally do absolutely fine when they become exposed to the non-Jewish word. Those who don’t do fine often had or have severe issues not particularly connected to growing up sheltered, such as a dysfunctional home or biological disabilities. Many people can actually go through life without even having to be exposed to the non-Jewish world. Because of the internet, no one can say he’s safe and secure from non-Jewish influences. But although the death and destruction wrought by the internet is vastly underrated, the ability to abstain and distance oneself from the internet is also vastly underrated.
Second, exposing kids to the non-Jewish world does not inoculate them from bad influences. Hard data, in fact, suggests the exact opposite2. Exposing kids to the non-Jewish world generally leads to a more permissive and transgressive attitude towards anti-Torah trends. Basically, the simple equation is that the more you expose kids to the non-Jewish world the weaker they’ll be in their commitment to Torah.
And the natural xenophobia that comes from being frum might actually be a good thing. According to the Torah, Jews are extraordinarily unique and are supposed to segregate from the goyim. Maybe that’s why it’s so natural for ordinary frum Jews to be xenophobic.
In terms of developing one’s humanity through exposure, no one can believe that this could apply to contemporary pop culture. Perhaps one could believe it might apply to very specific elements of secular culture that can lead to a fuller human development (see for example, Making of a Godol p. 265), But besides the fact that this is not really a matter of ideology, and certainly not a basis for embracing secular culture wholesale, it’s also quite difficult to believe in humanity at all after the events of the past century. Prior to World War I and World War II and countless modern-day atrocities it was less hard to believe in ideas of secular humanities, which include the idea that humanity naturally improves.
Perhaps some might say that Modern Orthodoxy is all about money and work. The Modern Orthodox believe in playing by the rules and supporting their families. Anyone familiar with the contemporary chareidi scene knows how overrated this claim is. The restaurants in Lakewood are doing quite well, thank you. Some might call it “Torah Vegashmius,” but I’ve never heard this described as “Modern Orthodoxy.” And in terms of “playing by the rules and supporting their families,” most chareidim believe in this too. The proliferation of kollel, in accordance with the position of Tashbetz and Rama, does not negate this rudimental truth, as anyone familiar with the matter knows.
And what about support of Israel? There’s nothing inherently modern about believing that according to the Torah you have to support Israel. In many circumstances there’s something inherently wrong with believing that, but nothing that should be characterized as “modern.” There’s a lot to discuss here, and lots of politics involved which can complicate things, but this unambiguously has nothing to do with being “modern” or not.
In truth, Modern Orthodoxy is going away. Look at the younger generation and you’ll see what I mean. At a time when chareidi communities are blossoming, Modern Orthodox communities are disappearing. Perhaps this has to do with the inherent incoherence of Modern Orthodox ideology. Saying that Orthodoxy is not enough, we need to be Modern Orthodox is like saying that you have an inherent gender inside that you have to figure out. Maybe you could convince yourself of the need to be “modern,” but maintaining such a belief long term is impossible. The saga of Yeshiva University and the LGBTQIA+ club, which I believe is still ongoing, starkly illustrates the insolvent conundrum of Modern Orthodoxy.
While it might be a worthwhile endeavor to work on stamping out the remnants of this monster, how worthwhile is it? If it’s just a matter of accelerating Modern Orthodoxy’s inevitable demise, how much time and effort should you put into it? Even with a dork like Slifkin, how many people are really impacted by him? You have to make a very careful cost/benefit analysis. You have to say to yourself, “Maybe I can eliminate Slifkin, but it will take a lot of time and some effort (not much).” Is it really important to have this blog of yours?
Thinking back to my friend I mentioned, I think I might have the answer. His pleasure and enjoyment while relating the contents of your blog were notable. After reading some of the blog myself, I too came away genuinely uplifted and inspired. Here you have intelligent and sophisticated people unabashedly supporting “Chareidism.” One gets the message that you’re absolutely not missing out on any of the MO academic fun by being chareidi. “Chareidism” is rational and progressive, Modern Orthodoxy is irrational and backwards.
There’s so much negativity out there. Aside from frum media constantly criticizing frum people, there’s a lot of harshness going on in everyday life. Sometimes you can feel like everyone’s yelling at you, and you’re just not getting enough of those pats on the back. Maybe you, Rabbi Bchol Oz, could turn all that negativity outwards at a perfectly legitimate target (i.e., Slifkin) in a way that would create a force of positivity amongst those unabashedly proud chareidim. One tactic of our enemies has been to unite their people by vilifying us as an external threat. “Mei’oivei Techakmeinei” (Tehillim 119:98). By producing sharp scholarly criticism of the lost and perplexed, you are essentially creating a beautiful force of achdus for shlumei emunei Yisrael. Instead of the negative sounding “Irrationalist Modoxism,” consider renaming your blog the more positive sounding “Unite the Right.”
And in addition to the chizuk you give to those who identify as chareidi, your blog is also an excellent, glatt kosher source of entertainment. The gemarah (Taanis 22a) relates the story of Rabi Berukah Chuzaah who was informed by Eliyahu Hanavi that two individuals whose job was to uplift the spirits of the downtrodden were uniquely meritorious for Olam Habah. See also Rashi Devarim 16:11, “If you gladden those who are mine, I will gladden those who are yours.” An elevating lighthearted parody of excellent quality can be something valuable indeed.
Ashrechah, Reb Mecharker! Chazak ubaruch, and keep up the great work!
“Contra Slifkin” may be how we are perceived, but we see our mission as something far beyond that - Ed.
See, for example the Arutz Sheva study and the 2023 Nishma study
I would tend to group Orthodox Jews into 2 broad categories. Many chareidim fit into one of these categories, and many MO (but not all by a long shot) fit into the other.
1. Jews who put up with their Judaism.
2. Jews who embrace their Judaism.
Jews who put up with their Judaism, do exactly that, they put up with it. It is something that they have to do, but they don't do it enthusiastically. They do it because they have to, and they do it with a frown (metaphorical) on their face. Since they put up with it, they naturally do only the bare minimum. They will seek to cut corners when they can. They will seek exemptions when they can find them. These people will blur the boundaries of what is permitted and what is forbidden. They will certainly not put in the effort to learn more about the Laws and the Torah that they put up with. They seek to get their Judaism over and done with so they can get on with what they consider their 'real' lives, their job, their career, their education, or having a fun time. When push comes to shove, and their Judaism gets in the way of one of the above, these people face a difficult challenge. Some will do what Judaism demands, albeit apologetically and not at all wholeheartedly. Some will simply do what they find meaning in, and let their Judaism slowly slip away. Others will attempt to find some middle ground, and try to do both. They will find creative ways to 're-interpret' things to fit their own ideals, or they will give themselves the license to allow what is forbidden. They will give themselves the credentials to argue with whomever they need to, all in order to justify their non compliance.
Jews who embrace their Judaism can't get enough of it. This is their life. Nothing else takes precedence over Torah Judaism. They will teach their children from a very young age the supreme value of Torah and Mitzvos, and how nothing else in the world can compare. They are not satisfied with the bare minimum, and when it comes to Judaism and its laws, they can never get enough. The more the better! A job, career, education, 'having a good time' all come secondary to Torah Judaism. These people have the utmost respect for the great Torah sages, and it is the Torah leaders that they seek guidance from.
By and large, the MO fall into the first category, and the chareidim into the 2nd category. I say 'by and large' because there are many many in betweens. I personally know people who would never identify themselves as chareid, but practically speaking, they live their lives very similar to the chareidim. They spend tears learning Torah, they seek guidance from Rabonim, and they are scrupulous with their observance of the MItzvot. I personally know many people who identify as chareidi, but practically, they live their lives like an MO. Their Torah knowledge is scanty. They constantly seek ways to get out of things, and sometimes blur the line between the permitted and the forbidden.
I have also observed, that those in the first category, regardless of what label they apply to themselves, often have children who are less observant than they are. If this continues, in the span of a few generations, their children will be totally non-observant. People in the second category, also regardless of the label they place on themselves, have families that are strongly committed to the Torah and its ideals.
The truth is, many people have some of both attitudes. Many people who are MO do some things whole heartedly and with enthusiasm (the Pesach Seder comes to mind here). Many people who are chareidi sometimes do things because they fee; forced and are not excited about it. In general, these are the 2 categories of Observant Jews that I have noticed.
There is one defining feature of MO that differentiates them from Charedim.
Charedim ascribe extrinsic importance to secular knowledge and the MO ascribe intrinsic importance to secular knowledge. and the secular world.
Everything is a product of this difference.