Religious Zionism And Modern Orthodoxy - Rav Yosef Blau (English)Entered: 20/Jun/2004 |
In 1902 Rabbi Yitzchak Reines founded Mizrachi and three years later he started a yeshiva in Lida that included secular studies in the curriculum[1] . This past summer at the World Zionist Conference the spokesman for religious Zionism in honor of its centennial was Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm, president and rosh hayeshiva of YeshivaUniversity. Like Rabbi Reines, he saw a natural connection between the commitment to religious Zionism and combining Torah and secular studies in a single school.
Throughout the world a "religious Zionist day school" is a synonym for a "modern Orthodox day school." The LieblerYeshivaCollegein Melbourne, Australiaand the FuchsMizrachiSchoolin Cleveland, Ohioare similar modern Orthodox schools, both serviced by a Kollel Mitzion. The Mamlachti Dati school system, the Bnei Akiva yeshiva high schools, the Ulpanot (for girls), the Yeshivot Hesder and Bar-IlanUniversityin Israelare rejected by the haredi world as too modern while the secular community considers them Orthodox.
From its beginnings Mizrachi was willing to work with the secular Zionist leadership. In contrast to Agudat Israel, which focuses on protecting the rights of Orthodox Jewry, religious Zionism has consistently worked to maintain the religious character of the state. As an example it ensured that the entire Israeli army be minimally kosher instead of demanding a high standard of kashrut for observant soldiers while ignoring the non-observant. This involvement with the broader Jewish community and its needs is also a characteristic of modern Orthodoxy.
Another component of modern Orthodoxy is encouraging a public role for women in Jewish life. Modern Orthodox women are getting an advanced education in both religious and secular studies, working as professionals and becoming leaders in the community. In the religious kibbutzim women have been treated as equals to the men. Some religious Zionist women are serving in the army while the rest are in sherut leumi. In Israelwomen serve as toanot in Beit Din and yoatzot in hilchot nida. In this area, both in the modern Orthodox and religious Zionist communities, there are internal disagreements about boundaries.
The emergence in Israelof the term Chardal (Haredi Dati Leumi) raises the question whether religious Zionism and modern Orthodoxy are intrinsically linked or essentially independent of each other, even though there are many adherents who support both. The answer seems to depend on whether we examine religious Zionism only in Israelor include the Golah as well.
If we examine the history of Mizrachi in Americastarting with its founder Rabbi Meir Berlin(Bar-Ilan), all of the major figures reflected a combination of the two with YeshivaUniversitythe primary institution combining both. Rabbi Berlinplayed a significant role in the early development of Yeshiva. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik's spiritual leadership of Mizrachi and of the Rabbinical Council of America flowed from his being the Torah giant who gave credibility to the world of modern Orthodoxy and religious Zionism. Support for the state of Israeland its non-religious leadership played a significant role in differentiating Y.U. from others who approved of secular education. Rabbi Joseph Breuer, the leader of the Hirschian Torah Im Derech Eretz community in New York, stated that he opposed YeshivaUniversitybecause it honored Ben Gurion, a secular prime minister of Israel.[2] The most recent campaign for the religious Zionist slate for American delegates to the World Zionist Congress featured a letter of support signed by the roshei hayeshiva of Y.U.
While there has been a significant change in the attitude of the traditional Orthodox community in Americatoward Israel, very few hassidic or yeshivish Jews would describe themselves as Zionists of any type. Support for Israelin its struggle with Arab enemies is separated from approval of the state, and its symbols and holidays are ignored. It is the modern Orthodox community that identifies fully with Israel.
In the first third of the twentieth century, in what was then called Palestine, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook was the dominant rabbinical authority who found a religious basis for approving the actions of the mostly irreligious chalutzim in building the land. He saw the Zionist enterprise as the beginning of the ultimate redemption. His speaking at the dedication of the HebrewUniversitywhere he advocated a synthesis of religious and secular studies[3] seemed to put him in the modern Orthodox camp. The fact that he never actually joined Mizrachi, that his yeshiva did not incorporate any secular studies and that he had a traditional position about women's role (opposing women's voting) seemed less significant.
Rabbi A. Y. Kook's writings are poetic and complex and are subject to differing interpretations. After the Six-Day War the followers of his son, Rabbi Tsvi Yehuda Kook, who accepted his interpretation of his father's writings as authoritative, introduced an alternate approach to religious Zionism. In Mafdal today this is the dominant view. This vision is in many ways incompatible with modern Orthodoxy.
The phrase Atchalta D'geula, which had been interpreted as the initial stirrings of a redemptive process of indeterminate length, is now understood as the actual beginning of an irreversible messianic redemption. The involvement of irreligious Jews in the settling of the landof Israelwas a necessary preliminary stage in this process. The messianic element in Zionism is what justifies working with secular Zionists. Rabbi A. Y. Kook in a letter[4] to the Ridvaz justifies his involvement with the irreligious settlers in terms of it being the period that immediately proceeds the coming of Mashiach. Based on sources in kabbala, he argues that the inner holy nature of the Jew emerges in those who play a role in the building of the land (which is a necessary part of this process) even when they express openly anti-religious feelings.
Universalistic elements in Rabbi Kook's thought have been de-emphasized. A nationalistic coloration is given to traditional religious concepts.[5] In contrast, modern Orthodoxy as reflected in the thought of Rabbi Soloveitchik includes a greater balance which includes openness to the non-Jewish world.[6]
This active role in bringing the Messiah through conquering and settling the land of Israel and the corresponding denigration of galut Judaism are non-traditional ideas but are not the concepts of the modern western world. These concepts are part of a mystical approach to Judaism[7] which is appealing to many who have turned away from rationalism but does not fit with a modern Orthodoxy which is westernized and rational. Rabbi Kook's personal religious life was in many ways indistinguishable from that of other rabbis in the old yishuv and two and three generations later many adherents of his thought are returning to that way of life.
Our initial question about the relationship between religious Zionism and modern Orthodoxy has two opposing answers, which depend on differing understandings of the bases of religious Zionism. When it represents a sharing of the Zionist dream of a return of the Jewish people to their home to live a full national life, defining that life in Torah terms, then modern Orthodoxy is the natural approach to fulfilling this vision. However if it is fundamentally a manifestation of active messianism then there is no necessary connection between the two.
_________________________________________________________
[1] Encyclopedia Judaica Vol.14 pp58,59
[2] Said to me in a private conversation when I asked why the two communities couldn't work together.
[3] Encyclopedia Judaica Vol.10 page 1185
[4] Igrot Haraiah Vol 2 pp186-189 This is the letter where the misunderstood reference to Chamoro shel Mashiach (the donkey of the Messaih) appears.
[5] See "Ploughshares Into Swords: Contemporary Religious Zionists and Moral Constraints" By Rabbi Yitzchak Blau Tradition Vol.34 No. 4 Winter 2000
[6] Reflections of The Rav By Abraham R. Beisdin "A Stranger and a Resident" pp169-177
[7] It is likely that the denigration of the Golah is a religious adaptation of ideas of early secular Zionists such as Brenner and Berdyczewski but it is understood today as flowing from the thought of Rabbi Ttsvi Yehuda Kook.
Comments on this news item:
uneia esmoizb by ygvw qbxiep| 2: ambien by ambien | (Thu, 10 April, 2008) |
| 3: lexapro by lexapro | (Thu, 10 April, 2008) |
| 4: ephedrine by ephedrine | (Thu, 10 April, 2008) |
| 5: xenical by xenical | (Thu, 10 April, 2008) |
