“Torah-True” (Orthodox) Judaism In Historical Context

Before there was Orthodox Judaism there was only Judaism and you either believed and followed or you did not.

This is not to say that we lacked for ideological divisions. But as a rule, Jews would see a rebellion or a schism occur, and either G-d would “take care of it” or consensus would crystallize around one group or another. For example, just in last week’s Torah portion, Korach, we learned about a man who insisted that Moshe and Aharon were not the rightful leaders of the Jews. According to the Bible, G-d made the Earth swallow them up alive.

This continued around the first century C.E. (simultaneous with Jesus’ birth) as a split developed between the Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Essenes were more or less monks who retreated from the community to live a “pure” lifestyle. The Sadducees focused only on the Written Law (the Bible) and disregarded the Oral Law. The Pharisees (the “Prushim”) stuck with both the Written Law and the Oral Law tenaciously.

Jesus, for his part, condemned the Prushim as self-righteous hypocrites. However, he still followed Jewish law. After he died, his followers stopped following even the Old Testament. Today, Christianity is considered a form of idolatry among most Orthodox Jews.

This is not to say that observance is monolithic. The divergent cultures and halachic approaches of Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews go back to about 1000 C.E. and both are accepted as legitimate by “Torah-true” Jews.

In the 1600s, a man named Sabbatei Zevi fooled many into thinking he was the Messiah, but was ultimately reviled by all after he converted to Islam.

Similarly, observant Jews ultimately supported the legitimacy of the Chassidic movement in the 1700s. Initially it was the target of significant opposition because of the emphasis on following a rebbe instead of personally being immersed in constant Torah study. However, the continued devotion to Torah rendered it an acceptable version of Judaism.

During the same century, however, Orthodoxy found itself under siege as the Enlightenment encouraged people to throw off the chains of duty to Church and embrace individual, independent, secular reasoning. Within Judaism, the Haskalah (literally, “reasoning”) took hold.

Not everyone stayed religious. Among the Orthodox, there were those (the “neo Orthodox,” what we would call today the “modern Orthodox”) who embraced secular subjects while staying religious. Others, the Haredim, adamantly opposed such studies and treated them as a severe spiritual threat.

By the 1900s, Orthodoxy found itself under siege as the Reform movement did away with the idea that the Torah was Divinely created. Religion became a matter of personal conscience. The Conservative movement tried to offer a balance between the two.

In postwar America, different communal approaches to observance developed specifically as a reaction to the Holocaust. Hasidic communities attempted to recreate the prewar insular “safe spaces” for religion that promoted religious observance, while the Modern Orthodox movement led by R’ Joseph Soloveitchik encouraged Jews to remain observant while incorporating knowledge the secular world as appropriate.

Throughout the 20th century, a number of influences offered a competing vision of the world and of social justice and “right living” in particular. The Zionist movement, the labor movement, the civil rights movement, the feminist movement and the gay rights movement all offered ways of existing as moral people, without necessarily conforming to halacha.

Not surprisingly, today, there are now many different subgroups within Judaism that embrace some form of religious observance, while distancing themselves from the binding nature of halacha. In fact, the vast majority of Jews are either atheist or subscribe to one of these groups.

Additionally, many Jews have gone “off the derech” so to speak, meaning that they reject the insular Orthodox lifestyle they were raised with.

So it is not surprising that within Orthodoxy, a variety of sects have arisen that offer a rightwing, fundamentalist approach that “safeguards” religion against intrusion. Any attempt to “compromise,” even within the bounds of Halacha, is viewed as suspect — as with the so-called “Open Orthodox” movement — because “OO” has a social agenda that is seen as competing with halacha.

The above is a view of the turbulent environment within Orthodoxy finds itself under siege. It is not surprising that in response, the movement has adopted a kind of siege mentality. But any model of living that is based on fear and defensiveness is doomed to fail.

There is a better way: Future posts will explore some healthier alternatives.

________________

All opinions my own. Photo by Chany Crystal via Flickr (Creative Commons).