Search Results

This chapter describes the new politics that emerged in fin-de-siècle Europe, which challenged liberal democracy and bourgeois society. Zionists and Autonomists espoused the idea that Jews were a nation entitled to its own national life either as a majority in Palestine or a national minority in Europe. Both developed the concept of “assimilation” to denigrate emancipation's pernicious effects. In eastern Europe, all the Jews' political parties—emancipationists, Zionists, Autonomists, Bundist Socialists—embraced a version of national minority rights. Meanwhile, the Bund represented a Jewish socialism that dreamed of a classless society to solve the Jewish Question. Orthodox Jews mobilized to press their own causes and to counter the multiple threats of the organized secular political parties. Ultimately, the developments of the fin de siècle were to shape Jewish life in the first four decades of the twentieth century.

This chapter considers developments indicating significant ritualistic departure not only from ultra-Orthodox norms and values but from what had been traditional Jewish religious behaviour since the last half-century. It examines both organizational and institutional developments and informal sources on the Modern Orthodox sector as a significant component of American Orthodoxy. It also refers to the role of women as the most discussed and pressing concerns for many Modern Orthodox Jews. The chapter looks at the increasing numbers of modern Jewish women who feel that they have a very limited or no place in the Orthodox synagogue or the organized community. It points out the variety of attempts that have been made to expand the educational opportunities available to Orthodox women and give them a greater role in synagogue life since the 1960s.

This chapter focuses on Orthodox Jews. These Jews at the end of the twentieth century are divided into a number of groupings, each following its own specific pattern of religious conduct. It describes the Sephardi Jews that are generally content to have their religious life modelled on the traditional behavioural norms of their ancestors without too much reflection on its theological underpinning. The Ashkenazi Jews have been compelled to become more theologically inclined due to the great impact made on European Jewry by the Emancipation and the Enlightenment. The chapter gives details on the Ashkenazim that are divided into the haredim or ultra-Orthodox and the Modern Orthodox.

This chapter sketches a way in which Orthodox Jews can relate to non-Orthodox Jews and their understandings of Judaism. Furthermore, this must be done in a way which avoids the language of ‘legitimate versus heretical’ without at the same time adopting a pluralist position which sees all (or almost all) expressions of Judaism as equally acceptable. Labelling non-Orthodox Jews and interpretations of Judaism as heretical is too exclusive, while true pluralism is too inclusive. The chapter thus seeks some middle ground which will allow an Orthodox Jew to participate in Jewish unity while still adhering to the doctrine according to which the Torah was given in its entirety to Moses by God on Sinai. In other words, the chapter attempts to arrive at a position of tolerant respect for non-Orthodox Jews and Judaisms without being forced to adopt a position of relativistic approval of them.

This chapter discusses the challenges faced by Rabbi Jehiel Jacob Weinberg and the rest of the German Jewry during the Nazi regime. Aside from the political challenges in Nazi Germany, there were many pressing religious issues brought on by the policies of the regime. It was in this area that Weinberg assumed a prominent role. The chapter thus embarks on a few of the halakhic issues with which he had to deal, to illustrate the difficult circumstances in which Orthodox Jews found themselves. Despite these challenges, however, the chapter also shows that Weinberg and the Berlin Rabbinical Seminary experienced a rather productive period, as the seminary became the focus of German Jews' social, cultural, and intellectual engagement — and all this was accomplished without government interference. The chapter also describes the decline of the Torah im Derekh Eretz ideal among the younger generations, despite Weinberg's attempts to defend it. To conclude, the chapter closes with the events of the Kristallnacht and the closure of the seminary despite Weinberg's persistently optimistic views regarding the Nazis' treatment of the Jews.

This chapter studies the long historiographic tradition in search of a definition of the Haskalah. It suggests reducing the historical parameters of the Jewish Enlightenment so that it can be recognized as a trend in which modernizing intellectuals aspired to transform Jewish society. Despite the obvious diversity and dispersion of the Haskalah, and the difficulty in defining it precisely, the chapter enumerates a number of essential criteria, elaborating on the self-consciousness of the maskilim and paying special attention to their militant rhetoric and awareness of belonging to an avant-garde, redemptive, and revolutionary movement. It also sketches a portrait of the typical maskil, surveys the history of the movement and its various centres, and elucidates the dualistic nature of its ideology, explaining its links to the processes of Jewish modernization and secularization. Ultimately, the Haskalah was the intellectual option for modernization that triggered the Jewish Kulturkampf which, still alive today — especially in Israel — separates modernists and anti-modernists, Orthodox and secular Jews.

This chapter provides some tentative explanations for Chabad messianism. One of these explanations is the ideal of unity and the avoidance of communal strife. Every practising Jew has heard countless sermons about the imperative to love one's neighbour, particularly one's Jewish neighbour. While rhetoric about this value cuts across all Orthodox—and Jewish—lines, it is especially compelling for Modern Orthodox Jews who maintain cordial, even formal relations with other denominations and pride themselves on embracing an ideal of tolerance. No Orthodox Jew believes that everyone committed to the Jewish community has the right to serve as an Orthodox rabbi because of the value of unity. The appeal to this principle is relevant only after one has concluded that Lubavitch messianism is essentially within the boundaries of Orthodoxy. Since this is precisely what is at issue, the argument begs the question. The chapter then considers the explanations concerning orthopraxy, the balkanization of Orthodoxy, and Orthodox interdependence.

This chapter shows the construction of a more coherent and popular form of Jewish anticlericalism in the aftermath of the Mortara affair of 1858. The affair began as papal authorities removed a Jewish boy from his parents after their maid claimed she had baptized him in secret. In the aftermath of this scandal, which marked a turning point in Jewish polemics against the Catholic Church, Jewish periodicals and Jewish intellectuals increasingly accepted the vision of a world divided into two camps: one progressive and liberal and the other, Catholic and anti-modern. This language also penetrated inner-Jewish conflicts, as reform-oriented Jews increasingly denounced Orthodox Jews for “resembling” Jesuits or conservative Catholics. The few Jews who expressed sympathy with the papacy during this period were increasingly isolated. Secularist understandings of religion and critiques of improper religiosity were now, more than ever, identified with opposition to Catholicism.

This chapter disputes the common assumption that media-driven popular culture has weakened ethnic-religious ties of community with each advance in communication technology and has been detrimental to tradition-centred groups such as Orthodox Jews. It mentions popular-culture theorists who have long asserted the notion of popular works against the survival of ethnic-religious groups. It also talks about Russel Nye, who claimed that the idea of popular culture, associated with urbanization and industrialization, depends on artists and agents who exploit media and create cultural standards. This chapter discusses how the process of popularization depends on a mass audience that consumes secularized cultural expressions that became accessible in Western societies through communication media. It analyses the advent of popular culture purportedly that diminishes the need for public space and peer pressure.

This chapter ethnographically traces the contemporary crisis of authority to the Jewish blogosphere or “Jblogosphere” in the mid-2000s, which created an alternative, anonymous heretical public both online and in person. It analyzes the public that referenced an earlier crisis of authority, the Jewish Enlightenment from mid-eighteenth to mid-nineteenth centuries in Europe. The chapter describes the generation of Jewish men that were exposed to the European Enlightenment and used innovations in print culture to take on traditional Judaism and its leadership. It looks into the connection between secret life-changing doubt and the internet that began roughly in 2002 or 2003 when disillusioned Modern Orthodox and ultra–Orthodox Jews began to blog. It also discusses the Jblogosphere that gave anonymous public voice to a range of private interior life-changing doubt.

This chapter focuses on formerly secular Jewish women who have become Orthodox Jews, baalot teshuvah, through the outreach efforts of Chabad Lubavitch Hasidism. Despite the emphasis in our culture on self-actualization and freedom of choice, Orthodoxy—even Chabad-style Orthodoxy, which involves great sacrifices in personal autonomy—is staging something of a return. For increasing numbers of Jews, Jewishness has become a focal element of their identity. The chapter explores identity formation, a process that usually takes place below the level of consciousness. It looks at people who undergo radical life changes, since in such cases the process of identity formation and negotiation becomes conscious, as it also does for those living in cultural margins. The baalot teshuvah typically experienced a sense of “not fitting in” in their earlier lives. They report a sense of betrayal and/or disillusionment before finding their new Orthodox lifestyle. For these people, embracing Chabad-style Orthodoxy made the difference; they found a home and the beginnings of a meaningful identity.

This chapter explores how Lubavitcher hasidim, based in Brooklyn, New York, have used broadcasting, video, and the Internet, among other media, to advance their distinctive mission during the past half of the century. Unique among ultra-Orthodox Jews, the hasidim deploy media extensively in their outreach campaigns, which strive to encourage other Jews to become more observant of traditional religious precepts. Media also play a provocative role in the group’s messianism, which has become more complicated since the death, over a decade ago, of the last Lubavitcher rebbe, who left his followers without a successor to his leadership. Consequently, the extensive inventory of media documentation of his public appearances has come to serve many of his followers as a “virtual rebbe,” providing them with a source of devotional inspiration and solidarity as an international religious community.

This introductory chapter contains reflections on Jewish legitimacy in response to a growing crisis looming within the Jewry and Judaism. This crisis refers to the growing number of mutually exclusive and mutually intolerant Judaisms, primarily expressed through the conflict between Orthodox and non-Orthodox movements. The chapter also discusses Maimonides at length. Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (1138–1204), known in English as Maimonides and in Hebrew by the acronym Rambam, is a major topic of discussion in the following chapters. It considers Maimonides' thoughts on inclusion and provides a brief exposition of Maimonides' understanding of the nature of human perfection and the criteria which must be satisfied for inclusion in the world to come.

This epitaph argues that the classical messianic faith of Judaism is dying. Most Orthodox Jews may still adhere to it, but their willingness to grant full rabbinical, institutional, educational, and ritual recognition to people who proclaim the messiahship of a dead rabbi conveys the inescapable message that such a proclamation does not contradict an essential Jewish belief. Mainstream Orthodoxy now appoints heads of rabbinical courts, teachers, and principals who conclude their prayers on the Day of Atonement with the twin affirmations, ‘The Lord is God! May our Master, Teacher, and Rabbi, the King Messiah, live for ever!’ By extending this recognition, Orthodox Jewry has repealed a defining element not only of the messianic faith but of the Jewish religion itself. However, there is still hope that Judaism's criteria for identifying the Messiah can still be rescued from the brink of extinction.

This chapter examines the persistence of the Jewish Question or Problem in the state that aimed to liberate Jews. For example, many people expected the ultra-Orthodox, or Haredim, to “assimilate” to Israeli culture and become the “new Jews” of the Zionist project. In other places such “progress” that undermines local cultural groups often results in liberal expressions of outrage. But the case of ultra-Orthodox Jews has not produced the same reaction. The ultra-Orthodox are seen as part of the Israeli hegemon in opposition to Palestinian Arabs who are the indigenous under threat of elimination. This chapter again suggests that the definition of indigeneity be expanded beyond geographical ties to include forms of social organization and ways of life that might be threatened. Thus, both Palestinian Arabs and Haredi (and other) Jews are at risk—one facing elimination through Zionist territorial expansion, the other through the forces of Zionist assimilation.

Oscar Haber, born in BrzeŹnica, Poland in 1910, was one of ten children raised in a family of devoutly Orthodox Jews. He and his wife Fryda were the only survivors of their family. They both speak perfect Polish so they were able to live clandestinely as non-Jewish Poles with the help of a priest. Oscar and Fryda were able to conceal their true identities even after the liberation. They tried to start a new life in Belgium and Israel, and then had a son. The three of them then moved to the United States, became American citizens, and were able to exercise their faith and rights. Oscar has friends of another faith who accept him for who he is.

This chapter traces the response to an educational endeavour initiated by the philanthropist Baron Maurice de Hirsch for the Jews of Galicia. It shows how the Polish press expressed a good deal of suspicion towards the proposed gift, despite the goal of productivization that was favoured by so many social reformers and the fact that some of the schools envisioned would serve both non-Jewish and Jewish students. It also illustrates the important place of education in social and political debates of the time. The chapter refers to Orthodox Jews that were wary of the advancement of secular Jewish education, which they saw as endangering traditional religious teaching, and Poles that were afraid of Hirsch's foundation on engaging in a large-scale process of buying land belonging to Poles. It analyzes Bolesław Prus's attitude to the issue of vocational education for Jews to understand his critical reception of Hirsch's initiative.

This chapter describes how, in the autumn of 1995, the author published an article in Jewish Action, the journal of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, which decried the silence of rabbinic leaders about the declaration on the part of many Lubavitch hasidim that the late Rebbe is the Messiah. This silence, the author argued, combined with the treatment of messianists as Orthodox Jews in good standing, fundamentally transforms Judaism, betrays the messianic faith of the ancestors, and grants Christian missionaries victory with respect to a key issue in the millennial debate between Judaism and Christianity. At its annual convention in June of 1996, the Rabbinical Council of America responded to this challenge with a declaration that ‘there is not and never has been a place in Judaism for the belief that Messiah son of David will begin his messianic career only to experience death, burial, and resurrection before completing it’. In the aftermath of both the article and the RCA resolution, defenders of Lubavitch presented sources which allegedly demonstrate the acceptability of this patently un-Jewish doctrine. They argued that Lubavitch hasidim, unlike Christians, observe Jewish law and do not regard their Messiah as the Deity.

The last chapter showed how struggles to be Jewish in Israel seem like a narrowing maze with no exit. This chapter considers the nature of that maze. It focuses on two cases of observant Jewish Israelis who come into conflict with the state over what it means to live according to their understandings of Jewishness. It shows that what appears as a religious-secular divide is far more complex. It is sometimes a religious-religious divide and is always part of a process of producing a national majority of sovereign citizens through disaggregation and conflation of modern categories of identity—religion and nation. Framed with Kafka’s “City Coat of Arms,” it shows how alliances of convenience can undermine political positions, in this case strengthening nationalism and territorial expansion at the expense of traditional Judaism.