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.
This essay is badly mistaken and full of logical fallacies, straw men, and stereotyping.
I hope to write a full rebuttal when I have chance, but there is a strong case to be made for the hashkafah of Modern Orthodoxy, which is different in many ways from Chareidi Orthodoxy.
An obvious first difference is that even rightwing Modern Orthodox people would not think that Torah learning is "the most important thing ever" especially when it comes at the expense of secular knowledge. (Rabbi Lamm wrote a whole rebuttal of Nefesh Hachaim, precisely on tgis point). In their view, Torah is extrmely important, perhaps even more important than secular knowledge, but someone Modern Orthodox would look at them like eating and sleeping - one needs both and one cannot come at the expense of another.
Another difference would be the understanding of Torah Lishma. Someone Modern Orthodox would view Torah Lishma as looking to apply Torah to our everyday lives, as a path to be a better person, but not as a magical book that God wants us to learn all day in depth with no apparent goal.
Actually, looks like WE will have to write a post about why YOUR attitude is mistaken 😁
How can one even think to compare the Torah to secular studies? Any familiarity with Chazal would immediately put such a thought to rest. If MO think secular knowledge is important for its own sake (as opposed to a way to understand Hashem, or the Torah, or l'havdil make a parnasa), they are sorely, grievously in error.
The goal of Torah is immediately apparent to anybody with the most rudimentary Torah knowledge - it is to connect to Hashem. Of course that only comes through ללמוד על מנת לקיים, learning and actually fulfilling the Torah. I don't see the chareidim lacking that part compared to the RW MO at all. Forget about LW MO, they're not even in the parsha.
What do you mean by the 'goal of torah'? And whatever you mean, the answer is not 'immediately apparent'. Like most other things is going to be a big machlokas.
See my comments on "Real issues vs fluffy spirituality" for lots of sources on this matter It's not a big machlokess what the general goal of the Torah is.
What do you mean by 'big' preciscely? What is a 'big' machlokas and what is a 'little' machlokas? And your sources are of course carefully cherry picked anyway and taken out of context. You know, like the source that the ideal if for everybody to learn all day and demand support from others, who have to give, (at the cost of any other genuine expense like school fees or real tzedokoh), is, wait for it "talmud torah k'negged kulom'. Yawn.
There is NOT a single source that states the goal is 'connection to Hashem'. Real sources, like rishonim and acharonim, are never as vague as that. What do you mean by 'connection' here? Be precise man, its the sign of somebody that knows what they are talking about.
Connection to Hashem is by its very nature a vague concept. Real sources are indeed as vague as that. All the sources say that, see my above referenced comments.
My point is you have this very yishivish style of treating complex issues as 'immediately apparent' and very black and white Complex works and ideas spanning thousands of years are covered in leitzonishe blog posts. Great advertisement for the chareidi way. Not.
How can one even think to compare the Torah to secular studies?
It's not compared to it at all. They are both important, each in their own way. One is a divine gift from God telling us morality and how to live our lives. The other is getting a better appreciation for God's worlds. Both illuminate each other.
Again, I hope to write that Modern Orthodoxy is a real hashkafa. You clearly feel its wrong - but it is out there. This post, in contrast, pretends its not real at all.
If you have a defense of the haskafa you wrote -by all means, we would love to see it. I never saw a good defense of it yet, but you may be the first!
Vast majority of secular knowledge is not gaining an appreciation of Hashem's world. It...just ... isn't. If it was, then physics professors would be the greatest yorei shamayim. Maybe you mean like Rabbi Avigdor Miller? That is not MO!
It's hard for me to find something in that essay that is not like my own hashkafa
"In practical terms, this translates into trying to find those opportunities which enable you to maximize the time devoted to the significant things in your life. This is an important consideration for a person who is choosing a career. I don’t want to get involved for the moment in the question of whether one should look for a secular career or a Torah career. Even if a person is choosing a secular career, certainly one of the factors to bear in mind is giving priority to a career which will enable him to have more “free leisure time” during which he can learn Torah and pursue spirituality, as opposed to one which is more demanding of his time..."
I don't disagree. The point was to highlight Ash's comment that (true) MO hashkafa maintains that the secular/mundane has value insofar as it illuminates the spiritual, and the spiritual illuminates the secular/mundane activities. As far as secular knowledge in particular goes, the point is much the same: R' Lichtenstein writes elsewhere that his understanding of Tanach would be "shallower in every respect" were it not for his general education. Link: https://etzion.org.il/en/philosophy/great-thinkers/harav-aharon-lichtenstein/centrist-orthodoxy-spiritual-accounting
Someone going through a non-theistic educational system where the facts are not tied to their larger theistic context knowing the facts and coming out atheistic does not imply that the subject itself, per se as opposed to per accidens, is non-theistic in character.
But I don't think physics, or biology, or American Anthropology, or basket weaving, as taught in *YU* is tied to the theistic context! Am I wrong? Is there a paper from the YU Physics department that ties Maxwell's equations into an understanding of Hashem?
YU also doesn't have solely frum professors. I think they do that in some Christian and Muslim universities. Also, they're often publishing for the larger academic community and including religious references in the research papers as opposed to YU community discussions is a turn-off for everyone else. Just try reading physics papers that cite the Quran (which I've stumbled across before).
MO is a stance, not a coherent hashkafa. It is a reaction to the zeitgeist of the world around us. Some aspects of Charedi life could also be considered reactionary too, albeit in the opposite direction. Where it differs is that the reaction is justified by the hashkafa, and not the other way around.
If you actually studied secular knowledge from first principles, your point would make more sense. You, specifically and generally, do not. You outsource all discernment to (your chosen) authority, and appeal to us to do the same.
Nasa was founded by a Nazi and JPL a Satanist, which is not mere irrelevant trivia for a Jeopardy! question, and these two organizations are at the top of your list for "getting a better appreciation for God's worlds". If that's the only choice, we can get all we need to appreciate Hashem's creation by delving into our mesorah and gazing at the sky in the Negev.
Ash, you retard, what conspiracy did I bring up? None. It is an established fact that what I said is 100% true. Nasa was founded by a Nazi and JPL by a Satanist. There is no sugarcoating this. My point is, when confronted with this, Charedim writ large do the correct thing and check out. You on the other hand consider what emanates from them holy writ on a higher level than the Torah.
Do you have anything besides for "argument from authority"?
It's no secret that the Nefesh Hachaim redefined the meaning of the word Lishma in Torah Lishma. Rabbi Lamm merely points it put - correctly. Maybe rebuttal is the wrong word, rather that Nefesh Hachaim is a chiddush and not mainstream hashkafa. Someone modern orthodox would not go with the Nefesh Hachaim's redefinition.
Ash, I told you this already in an email, but I'll say it again here. While I agree it's possible that there are some bones to pick with author's portrayal of MODOX, I do think that overall, she has a good point. In general, MODOX is not characterized by a distinct ideology, but rather by a tendency towards permissiveness and leniency when it comes to observing Torah and Mitzvos. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the RW MODOX do offer a valid path of avodas Hashem, with most differences between them and Charedim being sociological in nature. One notable difference between the two groups, however, is R' Hirsch's stance on secular knowledge. While it is true that Charedim do possess secular knowledge, especially today in the age of information, they tend to view it primarily as a means to an end (e.g., for business, health, or even curiosity), rather than as an end in itself.
That being said, it is worth considering that there are many ma'amarei chazal that seem to be at odds with R' Hirsch's perspective, as well as the ruling of the Rama. Additionally, as pointed out by HGL, there is little evidence to suggest that secular knowledge leads to greater yiras shomayim.
"there are many ma'amarei chazal that seem to be at odds with R' Hirsch's perspective"
Would you care to list them? (And I don’t mean the odd out of context unelucidated soundbites so beloved by you) My guess is you know as little of Rabbi Hirch's writings as you do of everything else. And unlike yeshivish hashkofo which is completely unwritten (relying on the 'mesorah') he left us 20 or so seforim setting his views out clearly.
There are. But there are also pockets of the other extreme. My post was not to defend Modern Orthodoxy, but rather to disagree with the authors conclusions of their being no such thing.
Who said They could,Assuming they are even intended to taken literally?However their distinguished distinction in other spheres granted them leeway to hold innapropriate value systems
Besides extend it to the nth degree & cherrypick who you wish to heed for Jewish Law as well
Much of those crowds-while using the vocabulary-operate by keeping their heads in the sand to avoid the absurd paradoxical realities of the zeitgeist.Almost marrano-like these days?
I think a major defining factor of the Modern Orthodox community is critical thinking. Are we taught what to think or are we given the tools to think for ourselves. Is our Torah something which is narrow, and limited or does it incorporate within it all of the חכמות.
I believe Rav Lamm and Rav Lichtenstein held like the Rambam that secular wisdom is not equal to Torah but rather a critical tool to gaining the proper perspective on the world Hashem created. More similar to the שער הבחינה of the חובות הלבבות and the Rambams learning of Aristotle.
It's a mistake to call the approach of the Rambam or Shaar Habechina "critical thinking", in the common usage of the term. Their thinking is narrowly prescribed and is designed to lead to a predetermined outcome- the existence/nature of God. They would never approve of thinking that leads to atheism, corporealism, or denial of the Torah, which could be a very plausible outcome according to the common usage of "critical thinking". To the extent that MO embrace true critical thinking, they weaken belief and observance of the Torah.
There is a stark difference between the goal of modern orthodoxy and a weakness in the Hashkafa. It's Like the saying that the goal of chareidiism is to be a shnorer and look down on those less observant. The goal of the critical thinking in our yeshivot is meant to enhance our avodat Hashem within a Torah framework. I went to a charedi yeshiva years ago where on was merely expected to follow and preserve, never to lead or innovate.
That may be the goal, but it's very hard for me to see how true, free critical thinking is consistent with the Torah, that has some very specific beliefs. How can encouraging people to question those beliefs (like belief in Hashem, Torah m'Sinai, the morality of the Torah) be a good thing? How is it not against what the Torah tells us, לא תתורו?And practically speaking, I don't see that such a mehalech is actually successful in enhancing avodas Hashem. Maybe you mean something else by the term critical thinking?
Im referring to questioning in order to get a full comprehensive understanding of the world and of the Torah. I agree that the rishonim were thinking within a Torah framework. But they also didn't shy away from philosophy(at least some of them). Rav soloveitchik, Rav kook rav Hirsch, rav Lamm, and Rav Lichtenstein were just following in their footsteps. They didn't doubt Torah Misinai. One must be carefull to have a proper grounding in emunah but the מצוות are there for us to understand G-d and his ways. They just realized that one also needs to understand G-d through the שכל he gave us and through his בריאה as well. The path is complex and the rishonim have many מחלוקות on Emunah just like any other topic. As long as one begins with the starting point of משה אמת ותורתו אמת there should be nothing to fear.
But if you are starting from משה אמת ותורתו אמת that is not critical thinking in regular sense of the term. Then the chareidim are doing critical thinking in the Bais Medrash all the time.
Perhaps by critical thinking you mean worldliness, especially secular learning. I believe that is the real issue here, as commenter MK referenced from an essay from RAL.
As I said in a previous comment to Choker, I don't see how you can compare the philosophy of the Rambam, which he wrote a whole sefer about to understand Hashem, to modern day secular learning in a college setting, which is not learned in reference to God at all. If I am wrong and you have examples of modern day secular learning in reference to Hashem, I would love to see it.
I will go at this at length in a post, but two excellent works on Torah have appeared recently that could only have been written in a modern orthodox paradigm, The Anatomy of Jewish Law and Architectorah. Both those works use extensive, professionally trained secular knowledge and Torah to produce real scholarship. A person educated in Chareidi paradigms would have been unable to produce such works, if only for the simple reason of lacking the knowledge how to produce scholarship.
In hashkafa chareidim just ask a Rebbe. We look into the sefarim as well. We hold that one is not obligated to agree with a rebbe in all matters. Our Rabanim don't want us to be dependent on them. I can send you a מאמר I wrote in yeshiva on It if you're interested. Aristotle didn't believe in a G-d involved with the world but that didn't stop Rambam and others. Theories like evolution and the big bang are not necessarily כפירה. Rav Kook says it fits with Kabala and Rav Rabinovitch brings rishonim like chizkuni which explain the creation of Adam as a process. Not everything in the Torah is literal. Especially not deep concepts authority as מעשה בראשית. If we use science to understand how Hashem dreamed the world and human beings why not?
Nobody is encouraged to question 'belief in Hashem'. But you can question the parameters of Hashem. The Ramchal did not write da'as tevunos or derech hashem in a vacuum. Or maybe he is 'not from our beis hamedrash' and studying those works is 'not part of the mesorah'. Bit like nach, not clear why all those prophecies were ever recorded according to contemporary yeshivish thinking, nach is for haskalaniks, no?
The purpose of Deborah's submission seems more to give you guys chizuk, the whole arichus about MO is just sort of a filler. They themselves is not actually so concerned with defining MO. I could be wrong.
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.
So true, and awareness to these two opoosite attitudes can serve as a powerful tool for every Yid in his own Avodat Hashem
Well said!
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.
Keep the present name
This essay is badly mistaken and full of logical fallacies, straw men, and stereotyping.
I hope to write a full rebuttal when I have chance, but there is a strong case to be made for the hashkafah of Modern Orthodoxy, which is different in many ways from Chareidi Orthodoxy.
An obvious first difference is that even rightwing Modern Orthodox people would not think that Torah learning is "the most important thing ever" especially when it comes at the expense of secular knowledge. (Rabbi Lamm wrote a whole rebuttal of Nefesh Hachaim, precisely on tgis point). In their view, Torah is extrmely important, perhaps even more important than secular knowledge, but someone Modern Orthodox would look at them like eating and sleeping - one needs both and one cannot come at the expense of another.
Another difference would be the understanding of Torah Lishma. Someone Modern Orthodox would view Torah Lishma as looking to apply Torah to our everyday lives, as a path to be a better person, but not as a magical book that God wants us to learn all day in depth with no apparent goal.
Actually, looks like WE will have to write a post about why YOUR attitude is mistaken 😁
How can one even think to compare the Torah to secular studies? Any familiarity with Chazal would immediately put such a thought to rest. If MO think secular knowledge is important for its own sake (as opposed to a way to understand Hashem, or the Torah, or l'havdil make a parnasa), they are sorely, grievously in error.
The goal of Torah is immediately apparent to anybody with the most rudimentary Torah knowledge - it is to connect to Hashem. Of course that only comes through ללמוד על מנת לקיים, learning and actually fulfilling the Torah. I don't see the chareidim lacking that part compared to the RW MO at all. Forget about LW MO, they're not even in the parsha.
What do you mean by the 'goal of torah'? And whatever you mean, the answer is not 'immediately apparent'. Like most other things is going to be a big machlokas.
And what do you mean 'connect to hashem'?
See my comments on "Real issues vs fluffy spirituality" for lots of sources on this matter It's not a big machlokess what the general goal of the Torah is.
"...It's not a big machlokess what the....."
What do you mean by 'big' preciscely? What is a 'big' machlokas and what is a 'little' machlokas? And your sources are of course carefully cherry picked anyway and taken out of context. You know, like the source that the ideal if for everybody to learn all day and demand support from others, who have to give, (at the cost of any other genuine expense like school fees or real tzedokoh), is, wait for it "talmud torah k'negged kulom'. Yawn.
There is NOT a single source that states the goal is 'connection to Hashem'. Real sources, like rishonim and acharonim, are never as vague as that. What do you mean by 'connection' here? Be precise man, its the sign of somebody that knows what they are talking about.
Connection to Hashem is by its very nature a vague concept. Real sources are indeed as vague as that. All the sources say that, see my above referenced comments.
My point is you have this very yishivish style of treating complex issues as 'immediately apparent' and very black and white Complex works and ideas spanning thousands of years are covered in leitzonishe blog posts. Great advertisement for the chareidi way. Not.
Yes. So it's not "immediately apparent to anybody with the most rudimentary Torah knowledge".
Precisely my point.
As per the latest Nishma Survey, RW MO (-exclusively) did better than some segments of millenial charedi societies
So A bit more complicated than that
Problem is ,How many authentic unapologetic anti-PC RW MO are there still out there?
How can one even think to compare the Torah to secular studies?
It's not compared to it at all. They are both important, each in their own way. One is a divine gift from God telling us morality and how to live our lives. The other is getting a better appreciation for God's worlds. Both illuminate each other.
Again, I hope to write that Modern Orthodoxy is a real hashkafa. You clearly feel its wrong - but it is out there. This post, in contrast, pretends its not real at all.
If you have a defense of the haskafa you wrote -by all means, we would love to see it. I never saw a good defense of it yet, but you may be the first!
Vast majority of secular knowledge is not gaining an appreciation of Hashem's world. It...just ... isn't. If it was, then physics professors would be the greatest yorei shamayim. Maybe you mean like Rabbi Avigdor Miller? That is not MO!
It is not simply "secular knowledge," but rather how one expresses himself through secular or mundane activities that are not strictly Torah-related. I refer you to this address by R' Aharon Lichtenstein, "In All Your Ways Know Him" where he explains this well. Link: https://etzion.org.il/en/philosophy/great-thinkers/harav-aharon-lichtenstein/all-your-ways-know-him-two-modes-serving-god
It's hard for me to find something in that essay that is not like my own hashkafa
"In practical terms, this translates into trying to find those opportunities which enable you to maximize the time devoted to the significant things in your life. This is an important consideration for a person who is choosing a career. I don’t want to get involved for the moment in the question of whether one should look for a secular career or a Torah career. Even if a person is choosing a secular career, certainly one of the factors to bear in mind is giving priority to a career which will enable him to have more “free leisure time” during which he can learn Torah and pursue spirituality, as opposed to one which is more demanding of his time..."
Indeed. Amen.
I don't disagree. The point was to highlight Ash's comment that (true) MO hashkafa maintains that the secular/mundane has value insofar as it illuminates the spiritual, and the spiritual illuminates the secular/mundane activities. As far as secular knowledge in particular goes, the point is much the same: R' Lichtenstein writes elsewhere that his understanding of Tanach would be "shallower in every respect" were it not for his general education. Link: https://etzion.org.il/en/philosophy/great-thinkers/harav-aharon-lichtenstein/centrist-orthodoxy-spiritual-accounting
Someone going through a non-theistic educational system where the facts are not tied to their larger theistic context knowing the facts and coming out atheistic does not imply that the subject itself, per se as opposed to per accidens, is non-theistic in character.
But I don't think physics, or biology, or American Anthropology, or basket weaving, as taught in *YU* is tied to the theistic context! Am I wrong? Is there a paper from the YU Physics department that ties Maxwell's equations into an understanding of Hashem?
YU also doesn't have solely frum professors. I think they do that in some Christian and Muslim universities. Also, they're often publishing for the larger academic community and including religious references in the research papers as opposed to YU community discussions is a turn-off for everyone else. Just try reading physics papers that cite the Quran (which I've stumbled across before).
MO is a stance, not a coherent hashkafa. It is a reaction to the zeitgeist of the world around us. Some aspects of Charedi life could also be considered reactionary too, albeit in the opposite direction. Where it differs is that the reaction is justified by the hashkafa, and not the other way around.
If you actually studied secular knowledge from first principles, your point would make more sense. You, specifically and generally, do not. You outsource all discernment to (your chosen) authority, and appeal to us to do the same.
Nasa was founded by a Nazi and JPL a Satanist, which is not mere irrelevant trivia for a Jeopardy! question, and these two organizations are at the top of your list for "getting a better appreciation for God's worlds". If that's the only choice, we can get all we need to appreciate Hashem's creation by delving into our mesorah and gazing at the sky in the Negev.
"Nasa was founded by a Nazi and JPL a Satanist, which is not mere irrelevant trivia for a Jeopardy! question"
Your constant conspiracism is annoying.
Ash, you retard, what conspiracy did I bring up? None. It is an established fact that what I said is 100% true. Nasa was founded by a Nazi and JPL by a Satanist. There is no sugarcoating this. My point is, when confronted with this, Charedim writ large do the correct thing and check out. You on the other hand consider what emanates from them holy writ on a higher level than the Torah.
Rabbi Lamm wrote a rebuttal of Nefesh Hachaim?!?!?
Do you realize how silly that sounds? My 4 year old nephew totally demolished Newton's three laws, and all before breakfast.
Do you have anything besides for "argument from authority"?
It's no secret that the Nefesh Hachaim redefined the meaning of the word Lishma in Torah Lishma. Rabbi Lamm merely points it put - correctly. Maybe rebuttal is the wrong word, rather that Nefesh Hachaim is a chiddush and not mainstream hashkafa. Someone modern orthodox would not go with the Nefesh Hachaim's redefinition.
Ash, I told you this already in an email, but I'll say it again here. While I agree it's possible that there are some bones to pick with author's portrayal of MODOX, I do think that overall, she has a good point. In general, MODOX is not characterized by a distinct ideology, but rather by a tendency towards permissiveness and leniency when it comes to observing Torah and Mitzvos. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the RW MODOX do offer a valid path of avodas Hashem, with most differences between them and Charedim being sociological in nature. One notable difference between the two groups, however, is R' Hirsch's stance on secular knowledge. While it is true that Charedim do possess secular knowledge, especially today in the age of information, they tend to view it primarily as a means to an end (e.g., for business, health, or even curiosity), rather than as an end in itself.
That being said, it is worth considering that there are many ma'amarei chazal that seem to be at odds with R' Hirsch's perspective, as well as the ruling of the Rama. Additionally, as pointed out by HGL, there is little evidence to suggest that secular knowledge leads to greater yiras shomayim.
"No serious self-identifying MO person actually speaks about this theory in a coherent and scholarly manner or believes it to be true"
It sounds like you too disagree with this statement. (Besides for being incorrect, it's also a no true scotsman.)
"there are many ma'amarei chazal that seem to be at odds with R' Hirsch's perspective"
Would you care to list them? (And I don’t mean the odd out of context unelucidated soundbites so beloved by you) My guess is you know as little of Rabbi Hirch's writings as you do of everything else. And unlike yeshivish hashkofo which is completely unwritten (relying on the 'mesorah') he left us 20 or so seforim setting his views out clearly.
There is little evidence to suggest that a yeshivish life leads to more yiras shomayim either. Packed minyan factories bein hazmanim.
Fair enough for new generation .
That is alarm bells
Though on the other hand who they umbrella with does proclaim massive difference vs.CO/MO
The old sly mantras again?Who is kidding ? How many are applying unimpeachably ,without liberal fraudulent compromises, in their everyday lives?
There are very shtark subcommunities in Teaneck and Efrat for example. Not that large, but there are definitely many.
Efrats a very bad example. Lots of OTD and not very religious.
There are. But there are also pockets of the other extreme. My post was not to defend Modern Orthodoxy, but rather to disagree with the authors conclusions of their being no such thing.
Baltimore
has as well ,or used to
Excellent post. I think we have exactly the same goals. I apologize for misunderstanding the other post
Indeed. But happy and mecharker will tell you 'the mesorah' is no longer to be involved in these matters. They could, we cannot.
Who said They could,Assuming they are even intended to taken literally?However their distinguished distinction in other spheres granted them leeway to hold innapropriate value systems
Besides extend it to the nth degree & cherrypick who you wish to heed for Jewish Law as well
ahh..They could, we cannot.
Ash,
Much of those crowds-while using the vocabulary-operate by keeping their heads in the sand to avoid the absurd paradoxical realities of the zeitgeist.Almost marrano-like these days?
I think a major defining factor of the Modern Orthodox community is critical thinking. Are we taught what to think or are we given the tools to think for ourselves. Is our Torah something which is narrow, and limited or does it incorporate within it all of the חכמות.
I believe Rav Lamm and Rav Lichtenstein held like the Rambam that secular wisdom is not equal to Torah but rather a critical tool to gaining the proper perspective on the world Hashem created. More similar to the שער הבחינה of the חובות הלבבות and the Rambams learning of Aristotle.
It's a mistake to call the approach of the Rambam or Shaar Habechina "critical thinking", in the common usage of the term. Their thinking is narrowly prescribed and is designed to lead to a predetermined outcome- the existence/nature of God. They would never approve of thinking that leads to atheism, corporealism, or denial of the Torah, which could be a very plausible outcome according to the common usage of "critical thinking". To the extent that MO embrace true critical thinking, they weaken belief and observance of the Torah.
There is a stark difference between the goal of modern orthodoxy and a weakness in the Hashkafa. It's Like the saying that the goal of chareidiism is to be a shnorer and look down on those less observant. The goal of the critical thinking in our yeshivot is meant to enhance our avodat Hashem within a Torah framework. I went to a charedi yeshiva years ago where on was merely expected to follow and preserve, never to lead or innovate.
That may be the goal, but it's very hard for me to see how true, free critical thinking is consistent with the Torah, that has some very specific beliefs. How can encouraging people to question those beliefs (like belief in Hashem, Torah m'Sinai, the morality of the Torah) be a good thing? How is it not against what the Torah tells us, לא תתורו?And practically speaking, I don't see that such a mehalech is actually successful in enhancing avodas Hashem. Maybe you mean something else by the term critical thinking?
Im referring to questioning in order to get a full comprehensive understanding of the world and of the Torah. I agree that the rishonim were thinking within a Torah framework. But they also didn't shy away from philosophy(at least some of them). Rav soloveitchik, Rav kook rav Hirsch, rav Lamm, and Rav Lichtenstein were just following in their footsteps. They didn't doubt Torah Misinai. One must be carefull to have a proper grounding in emunah but the מצוות are there for us to understand G-d and his ways. They just realized that one also needs to understand G-d through the שכל he gave us and through his בריאה as well. The path is complex and the rishonim have many מחלוקות on Emunah just like any other topic. As long as one begins with the starting point of משה אמת ותורתו אמת there should be nothing to fear.
But if you are starting from משה אמת ותורתו אמת that is not critical thinking in regular sense of the term. Then the chareidim are doing critical thinking in the Bais Medrash all the time.
Perhaps by critical thinking you mean worldliness, especially secular learning. I believe that is the real issue here, as commenter MK referenced from an essay from RAL.
As I said in a previous comment to Choker, I don't see how you can compare the philosophy of the Rambam, which he wrote a whole sefer about to understand Hashem, to modern day secular learning in a college setting, which is not learned in reference to God at all. If I am wrong and you have examples of modern day secular learning in reference to Hashem, I would love to see it.
I will go at this at length in a post, but two excellent works on Torah have appeared recently that could only have been written in a modern orthodox paradigm, The Anatomy of Jewish Law and Architectorah. Both those works use extensive, professionally trained secular knowledge and Torah to produce real scholarship. A person educated in Chareidi paradigms would have been unable to produce such works, if only for the simple reason of lacking the knowledge how to produce scholarship.
In hashkafa chareidim just ask a Rebbe. We look into the sefarim as well. We hold that one is not obligated to agree with a rebbe in all matters. Our Rabanim don't want us to be dependent on them. I can send you a מאמר I wrote in yeshiva on It if you're interested. Aristotle didn't believe in a G-d involved with the world but that didn't stop Rambam and others. Theories like evolution and the big bang are not necessarily כפירה. Rav Kook says it fits with Kabala and Rav Rabinovitch brings rishonim like chizkuni which explain the creation of Adam as a process. Not everything in the Torah is literal. Especially not deep concepts authority as מעשה בראשית. If we use science to understand how Hashem dreamed the world and human beings why not?
Nobody is encouraged to question 'belief in Hashem'. But you can question the parameters of Hashem. The Ramchal did not write da'as tevunos or derech hashem in a vacuum. Or maybe he is 'not from our beis hamedrash' and studying those works is 'not part of the mesorah'. Bit like nach, not clear why all those prophecies were ever recorded according to contemporary yeshivish thinking, nach is for haskalaniks, no?
False. But neither is it supposed to be for nursery toddlers-of any age grouping or demographic
The purpose of Deborah's submission seems more to give you guys chizuk, the whole arichus about MO is just sort of a filler. They themselves is not actually so concerned with defining MO. I could be wrong.