- This topic has 70 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
the goyim i work with sometimes ask me what the difference is between different jewish sects. would it be accurate to describe the differences between orthodox and conservative and reform (or between modern orthodox and regular orthodox) as being similar to the difference between a baptist and a methodist (or a sunni and a shiite), which is something they can understand?
Thanks for getting a screenname.
No, that would not ba accurate for what you are trying to discribe (but would work for the differences between Chassidim & Litvaks). Reform & Conservative literally “reformed” Halacha, and that is the response.
Jews who changed the laws to fit into modern times.
It can’t be stressed enough that there is no difference of religion between Chassid, Litvak and Modern Orthodox. These aren’t “branches of Judaism”. The “Judaism” is the same. The exact same, and is absolutely the same religion.
We all believe in the same essentials. We Daven together and learn each other’s Torah. It is simply an association with a group that emphasizes some aspects (that we all share) more enthusiastically than others (that we all share). People move from one to the other without going through any initiation, and there are degrees all along the way.
In non-essentials there are more differences.
To describe the different sects? Male and Female.
That would be the appropriate answer.
nisht: Wouldn’t that be sectses?
Now I feel like Gollum.
just a member: Either this person is looking for a vague difference, in which case he doesn’t want anything too complicated anyway and would tune you out if you tried to explain the subtle differences between a litvak and a chassid because why should he care?, or he’s looking for something really detailed, in which case, go for it.
Honestly, I think it’s a bit like this: I just read The Chosen, which I happened to like a lot, and I then went on a book review website. All of these reviews were about how now they can understand Jews and their different sects and practices, and I was banging my head against the keyboard. But it would be ridiculous to claim that it doesn’t give even a little bit of insight into Judaism and the Jewish community, and if I decided to be well- meaning and write a whole long diatribe about each of the tiny piddling inaccuracies that made it seem so against what I know to be true, people would tune me out. They don’t care. It’s like when someone tried to show me the difference between a real bill and a counterfeit- the differences are there, but they’re so subtle and I don’t care enough about it to really pay that much attention and care that one of them’s wrong.
I just say that some jews still keep judaism, and some don’t.
pba: Trust me, I’m sure the people in all of these sects of different religions feel EXACTLY the same way.
So I guess by your shittah it’s a good comparison.
I once worked with someone who was convinced that all Jews were either Satmar or not religious. So I was Satmar while I worked there.
I wouldn’t bother to explain too much. Why do they need to know about our differences?
Please please please dont describe our religion through Christianity!
Ummm we just interpret the Torah differently? We stem from different roots so different traditions remain? I dont know but just not the baptist route…makes no difference to them anyways so its imporatant to make sure you give off a positive answer since ultimately thats their understand forever…
Analogies with Xian sects aren’t a good idea — they just don’t work because the religions are so different. I would just say, Judaism has always been a religion of laws, the Orthodox believe the law is eternally binding and follow the laws as set forth in the written and oral Torah (while explaining what that is), while non-Orthodox believe it’s not binding (Reform) or that they can change it or disregard it if they don’t like it (Conservative). On the other hand, if you don’t want to say anything negative about other groups (to avoid seeming preachy or judgmental), you could just tell them about what Orthodox Judaism believes and practices.
If you really, really had to make an analogy with Xian sects, it would be something like this:
Reform — Unitarian
Conservative — very liberal Protestant
Modern Orthodox — Traditionalist Catholic
Charedi — More traditionalist Catholics, or maybe Mennonites
There are many problems with this. One is that there are hardly any traditionalist Catholics left; most are “unobservant,” for lack of a better term. Baptists and other conservative Protestants are too hard to match up with any group, because they’re conservative theologically but made a radical break with tradition after the Reformation. I only mention Mennonites (Amish being the most conservative group) because they try to keep out all outside influences and live separately from other people. Unitarian is a fairly good analogy for Reform, because like them they’ve stripped away all the major beliefs associated a traditional religion and replaced it with basic “universal” morality and liberal politics.
yytz: You’re probably right, but honestly, why would this person care so much for a big explanation? If I were asking someone because I was interested, I’m not sure whether I’d want to sit through a whole long shmuz- it would depend on how much sleep I’d had recently, whether I needed to be someplace quickly, etc. My mom says that I’d try to learn things in an isolation chamber, but even I don’t know if I’d want to sit through a detailed explanation.
I personally see nothing wrong with saying that there are different groups of Jews in a similar way to how there are different sects in other religions, and that mine, Orthodoxy, emphasizes strict adhesion to the Torah, while other groups believe in defining practice differently.
Okay, so actually, that’s pretty much the same thing you said, you just added supplementary detail. SO don’t think that this post is meant negatively at you :).
pba: Trust me, I’m sure the people in all of these sects of different religions feel EXACTLY the same way.
No, I think it’s different. At least most of the different sects of Christianity think they are practicing Christianity. And both shiite and sunni think they are practicing Islam.
But the premise of all the other jewish sects (YCT, reform, reconstructionist) is that judaism is not obligatory–they don’t think they are practicing any religion. YCT people think that all religion is just a silliness, but it has nice cultural meaning so it’s nice to do the parts you like. You can’t compare that to a protestant who believes in a god and believes that there are things incumbent on him as a result.
So maybe to be more accurate, I should have said “there are some jews who still practice a religion and some who don’t”.
(Aside: Another great article by a YCT type guy today. I read it and said ??? ?????? YCT; this is who you worship.)
Writersoul: Yes, I see what you’re saying. But you know some non-Jews are genuinely curious about other religions and want to know detail. Some of them might even be married to Jews, or Jewish themselves (through a maternal grandmother, for example — and they think they’re just “a quarter Jewish.”). In some workplaces people sit and talk about whatever for half the time they’re supposed to be working, so there’s often plenty of time to get into specifics. (Whether it’s permitted to chat during work hours is another question…) But I think you’re right in general that a one or two sentence explanation should be good enough in most cases.
If the non-Jews are interested, I don’t see any problem with describing Yiddishkeit in some detail, since if they like what they hear perhaps they will become Noahides. Even if according to some opinions non-Jews are permitted to practice their religions, I’m sure it’s better to be a Noahide. I’m not saying we should necessarily try to convince everyone to be Noahides — perhaps that’s a task better left for Moshiach — but if that’s a side effect of some conversations that seems like a good thing.
Popa, you really think YCT people think religion is all silliness but it’s nice to do the parts you like? I doubt many YCT rabbis would agree with your statement. Even the vegan activist one says he still uses leather tefillin because it’s a mitzvah that’s required to be done in a certain way.
However, I will say I was disturbed to hear that the new Rosh Yeshivah of YCT envisions a unified campus in which YCT is on the same grounds as the major heterodox yeshivas. A minimal amount of cross-denominational dialogue or cooperation is one thing, but creating one campus for all “progressive” yeshivas? Yikes.
Yes, that is precisely what I think.
Actually just the other day a non-jew asked me if there is different kind of judiasms, and I told her no, that there is just one- that we follow from the Torah.
She asked me why some people are “jews” but virtually assimilated. So I told her that being a jew is a born status. Some people choose to observe the religion, while others don’t.
I did not, however, mention about reform, conservative etc cuz I had no idea what to answer her on that
I did not, however, mention about reform, conservative etc cuz I had no idea what to answer her on that
You did, when you said that some don’t choose to observe.
DY- you are right, in our minds we know that reform etc is not Judaism at all, but a goy will have a very hard time wrapping their mind around the fact that people that call themselves jews, aren’t observing Judaism altogether.
DY- you are right, in our minds we know that reform etc is not Judaism at all, but a goy will have a very hard time wrapping their mind around the fact that people that call themselves jews, aren’t observing Judaism altogether.
So because they will have a hard time wrapping their head around it you want to tell them something else?
But regarding the difference between some Jews that have sidelocks and black hats and those that don’t have beards, the best short answer is that those like it and the others don’t. Any comparison to outside religious divisions is wrong.
There is only one Judaism, just different approaches to it. Reform, Reconstructionist, Conservative –all are attempts to change Judaism in order to try to assimilate into modern, Western society. Where there is a conflict between Judaism and modern society’s values, they go against Judaism. Conservative tries to be a watered-down version of Judaism. Reconstructionist tries to observe traditions without spirituality. Reform tries to assimilate on all fronts while keeping the semblance of Judaism. Orthodox–all fully observe Judaism. Modern orthodox–tries to observe Judaism while being open to aspects of modern society that do not conflict with it. Charedi/so-called “Ultra Orthodox” –tries to observe and preserve Judaism by shunning most of modern society’s influence. Chassidic- more emotional, esoteric spiritual approach, Litvish –more reserved, serious spiritual approach. Sephardi/Ashkenazi–Different customs based on where the population lived. Ashkenazi- North, Central, East Europe Sephardi-Southern Europe, Middle East, North Africa
ashmorris613:
“There is only one Judaism, just different approaches to it. Reform, Reconstructionist, Conservative –all are attempts to change Judaism…”
I don’t mean to criticize, but this is, of course, absurd; Hashem stated in the Torah that the Torah cannot be changed. For example “Lo Soseif alav viLo Sigra miMenu”. The “different approaches” exist solely within Orthodoxy. These other denominations are not genuine Judaism.
Central to Judaism, unlike, lihavdil, Christianity, is the world’s blueprint, the Torah, and its 613 mitzvos and underlying belief and value system. These other “denominations” tamper with some or all of this so they are, therefore, not legitimate Jewish paths. This ranges from undermining (i.e. Conservative) to “reforming” to “reconstructing” some or all of the central tenets and more of our faith.
Put another way, these “other denominations” are simply different religions that happen to resemble Judaism ranging from somewhat (Conservative) to not at all (Reform and Reconstructionist).
If anyone really wants to frame this in, lihavdil, Christian terms, I would think it’s like this:
The Christian equivalent of Conservative (as in religion, not politics) might hold that Yeshu was a partial savior.
The Reform equivalent might hold that he was only allegorically a savior.
The Reconstructionism equivalent might hold that he was just a nice guy.
I would presume that no Christian theologist would view any of these as a valid approach to Christianity, despite the varying levels of resemblance to Christianity that these approaches may have.
Regardless, lihavdil, the holy Torah cannot be changed.
ashmorris613:
“Modern orthodox–tries to observe Judaism while being open to aspects of modern society that do not conflict with it. Charedi/so-called “Ultra Orthodox” –tries to observe and preserve Judaism by shunning most of modern society’s influence…”
—-
Your list is incomplete since you missed mentioning “Traditional Orthodox”.
As well, its description of MO is inaccurate.
In any society with many values antithetical to ours, it is fairly obvious that one can only “observe and preserve Judaism by shunning most of modern society’s influence”, regardless of how “Modern” you think you may be. So this is certainly a reasonable baseline.
Modern Orthodox (or “Centrists” as they like to think of themselves to justify their “Modernity”), mistakenly ascribe inherent value to modernity and secular culture and, therefore, push beyond acceptable boundaries of halacha in order to be “Modern”.
Traditional Orthodoxy values the Torah’s values above all else. Period. Any conforming societal or other norms that do not conflict with our values are, therefore, acceptable to that extent only.
ashmorris613:
In fact, even Rabbi JB Soloveichik, the founder of MO stated that the less secular culture the better. Whereas one of his students, YU’s Chancellor Lamm referred to traditional Orthodox as (Torah) cavemen. Unfortunately, the talmid’s mistaken view has prevailed.
In practice, however, unlike Lamm’s mistaken opinion, there are, of course, many professionals (many with the highest degrees in their fields) who are traditionally orthodox, not “Centrist”. Whether for parnassa and its required education or for any other legitimate reason, one does not need to compromise their Judaism (as does MO), and this should be (made) clear to both Jew and non-Jew alike.
We just recently read parshas Kedoshim. As in “vihyisem li sigula miKal haAmim”, and not diminishing that kedusha as a fulfillment of an erroneous “value” of being “Modern”. Not to mention the Avoda Zara of Zionism to which they also (incredibly) elevated (a massive rebellion against the Torah that is Zionism) to a religious obligation, also due (in part), it seems, to this modernity.
See also this thread:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/becoming-chareidi-or-mo/page/2
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/becoming-chareidi-or-mo/page/3
If you really wanted to make a Christian comparision, you could compare the liberal Jewish groups to liberal Catholics and mainline Protestants, who tend to give their religion lip service, but follow popular culture in terms of values and day to day life.
You could compare Orthodox Judaism to traditional Catholics and Evangelical Christians, who actually follow their religions’ teachings in their day to day lives.
As far as Litvaks and Chasidim go, you could compare Litvaks to Baptists in their spiritual approach and Chasidim to Pentecostals.
In terms of Islam, the Sunnis are best compared with Litvaks, and the Shiites are best compared with Chasidim in terms of their approach to spirituality.
(L’havdil)
Torah613Torah: I know plenty of people who think all Jews are either Satmar or not religious. Most of them live in either Kiryas Joel or Williamsburg.
As for differences between groups of Jews, I think that Modern Orthodox has the closest to the way Judaism has been practiced for thousands of years. Chassidus is a relatively new invention. The Besht felt that the common Jew needed a different way to serve Hashem, and so he created chassidus. It was not our mesorah to do things that way, the Besht just felt it was either that or lose all the common people.
The yeshivish mentality as it exists today is also a new derech. The Chazon Ish said after the Holocaust that people should be pushed to sit and learn in kollel, in order to try and replace the Rabbonim who were killed by the Nazis yemach sh’mom. He said this should be for 3 generations. Again, it was a new thing, not our mesorah, and was done because he felt the times needed it.
Modern Orthodoxy is called Modern because it deals with how halacha applies in the modern world – where the Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah don’t tell us what to do, because the circumstances didn’t exist yet at those times. Jews going out to work and learning in the evenings, or going to a gemara (daf yomi?) shiur early in the morning, is how it was done for centuries.
Just to throw a wrench to one of the posters above: there is probably a greater difference between chassidim and nons, than there is between nons and MO, as far as Jewish hashkafah and practice. Also, since when I’d this something to discuss with non jews?
I retract my response and agree with yytz.
I retract my response and agree with yytz.
???? ?????
Modern Orthodoxy is called Modern because it deals with how halacha applies in the modern world – where the Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah don’t tell us what to do, because the circumstances didn’t exist yet at those times. Jews going out to work and learning in the evenings, or going to a gemara (daf yomi?) shiur early in the morning, is how it was done for centuries.
That explanation is about as accurate–but has about has elegant a flow–as saying that Conservative Judaism is called that because they believe in conservative politics.
Modern Orthodoxy is called Modern because it deals with how halacha applies in the modern world – where the Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah don’t tell us what to do, because the circumstances didn’t exist yet at those times.
In fact, it was only Modern Orthodox rabbis who dealt with issues such as electricity and advanced medicine in halachah.
Also, since when I’d this something to discuss with non jews?
If you go out in the real world. people will ask you questions like it or not, and its considered rude not to answer.
Best is try to answer diplomatically instead of your personal feelings.
just a member: Actually, Chassidus was the response to many Jews discontinuance of practicing Judaism.
Modern Orthodoxy was not a new movement. It just had a name given to it after years of being around. Were/are there people who didn’t/don’t follow halacha? Yes, just as there are among the chareidim, chassidim, sefardim, and every other group. There will always be people who don’t feel like doing what is right. Still, the basic beliefs of Modern Orthodoxy are closest to how Judaism was practiced for centuries.
that isnt correct. see my explanation to mr. gavra above about this. (threads third post.)
Thank you for addressing me as Mr. However, Mr. Gavra is like saying Mr. Mr. 🙂
The only reason the sides agree is because the Chassidim adapted Limud from the Litvaks, and the Yeshivish adapted Rebbe-“worship” (not AZ CV, but submission in mundane matters) from Chassidim (they just call their Rebbes “Gedolim”). From your comments in the Gadol thread, there would be very significant differences between what you hold and what they (Chassidim or “Yeshivish”) hold regarding central authority, since you still believe in individual P’sak from your own Rov.
Rav Belsky & Rav Shachter are jointly responsible for the OU. Many would consider the former “Yeshivish”, and the latter “MO”.
DaMoshe: I think this person got that impression from TV.
lol at the MO argument.
Jam, MO and TUM are not the same thing.
It is not helpful to compare differences among Jews by comparing them to differences among Christians, unless you actually understand the differences among Christians. (You also have to understand the differences among Jews.) And you won’t learn the differences among Christians by studying Torah.
A Protestant Christian once told me that the differences among mainstream Protestant denominations are so slight that most Protestants select their sects based upon the personalities of the church ministers in their neighborhoods, which implies that the doctrinal differences, if any, are insignificant. My informant may be right about some Protestant sects, but the fundamentalist Protestant sects seem to genuinely believe that mainstream Protestants sects are so doctrinally wrong that they do not regard them worthy of the name “Christian.”
I for one do not consider it appropriate to consider Jews to be divided into “sects”. I think the concept of “sect” is alien to Torah. Jews differ in the ways they interpret Torah and in their understanding of what Hashem expects from us. Reform Judaism seems to think Hashem wants us to be nice to everyone everyday and go to shul twice a year. Some Orthodox think the opposite: go to shul everyday and be obnoxious to everyone twice a year.
DaMoshe: Since the only response to your MO argument so far is a “LOL,” maybe that’s a sign you should (perhaps on a new thread) present evidence (citations from historical accounts or whatever) for your argument? Sometimes I think this site’s discussions would be more fruitful if it were organized like Mi Yodea (Stack Exchange), where they require or strongly encourage people to cite sources in support of whatever they say.
In any event, I think the answer to the question of which Orthodox stream is more in line with historical practice is more complex than many people assume, since it may be necessary to consider various aspects of hashkafa and halachic individually, and document the prevalence of antecedents of each approach with objective evidence. You also have to distinguish between different versions of MO (LWMO, RWMO, Centrist) and of charedi Judaism. It’s not as simple as saying, “All Jews before the year X were MO (or charedi).” Each side has been innovative in its own way.
Jam, most MO would most likely be classified as TIDE not TUM.
yytz:
Non-Chassidic and Non-MO Jews whose members happen to work in all sorts of fields in addition to, lihavdil, klei kodesh and value the Torah’s values and lifestyle above all else, including ashkenazim, sefardim and TIDE Germans, are the ones who believe in the same Judaism that has always been practiced.
MO, according to no less than Rabbi JB Soloveichik himself, is a new innovation, which, especially in hindsight, was based on a faulty premise and whose premise is even more clearly not relevant today. But it seems people are either not educated well in matters of their faith, or else they like kulos even when those are really issurim, one would guess…
truthsharer:
The nations should know clearly that traditional Orthodox Jews are loyal to and grateful to our host country as our neviim long ago exhorted us to be loyal and, other than MO and other misguided Zionists, not to (the avoda zara that is) the Zionist State of Israel.
This “dual-loyalty” canard/concept has to stop. We care about our brethren living everywhere, not about their host governments, and certainly not Zionism/Israel which is against our Torah; we care only for its Jews.
They should also know that we (try to) remain 100% true to our faith and, like other faiths, maintain a faith-based culture and community as we live “normal” lives working in many different fields. Yet our hard work, as productive and grateful citizens and like that of everyone else, obviously benefits our host country’s economy and everyone regardless of community.
Part of this gratitude we have to them is due to them enabling us to keep our faith, unlike the Zionists who even until today seek to replace our faith with Zionism and unlike so many of the countries that we have been to in our long exile which persecuted us.
This would be a tremendous Kiddush Hashem.
tsharer: TIDE is the German Breuer kehila. They are chareidi/yeshivish. TIDE is an integral part of the yeshivish community. TIDE gedolim and community members are part of the same infrastructure and organizations as all other Chareidim. Whether Chareidi Litvish/Yeshivish, Chareidi Chasidish or Chareidi TIDE/Yekke. The MO are TuM, not TIDE. (And, in fact, TIDE is the polar opposite of what MO represents.)
I don’t get it Joe. Do you get your kicks making up random things about groups of people so as to facilitate less Achdus in Klal Yisrael? What’s your goal? There is no one, and I mean no one, in the YU camp (whose slogan is Torah Umadah) that believes anywhere near that Torah and science have equal value. The Yeshivah student in YU spends at least 8 hours in Seder/shiur a day while a maximum 5 hours in classes (maybe some science labs involve a little more class time, I’m not sure). You’re being stupid and Motzi Shem Ra on hundreds, if not thousands, of B’nei Torah (not to mention the tens of thousands of graduates and Baalei Batim that support YU’s Derech). The Mada in those who believe in Torah Umada is that the Mada enhances the Torah, nothing else. Math, history, sciences, etc. can all be used to understand Torah. If you’re actually interested in knowing what the people you needlessly hate so much believe (I doubt that you are, but if you are) then read some of R’ Aharon Lichtenstein’s works. You might realize that the people you so bluntly and casually dismiss are actually living the same Torah lifestyle you are.
But this whole thing is stupid. It is a semantics game played by those looking for a reason and excuse to dismiss other Jews. That’s why I always try to remember to put the words, “MO”, “Yeshivish”, “Chareidi”, etc. in quotes. They are pejorative terms that, unless necessary to describe one of the minute cultural differences, do nothing but massive harm to Hashem’s nation.
You’re right, it is only semantics. But why do you refer to the “YU camp”? Why and how are they a “camp”? And why have they camped themselves seperate from traditional Orthodoxy. The MO gave themselves and use that label for themselves. So-called “Chareidim” didn’t apply that label to themselves (outsiders did) and rarely use it for themselves. You can go from Kindergarten through Kollel without once hearing “We are a Chareidi Yeshiva.” Even the label Orthodox is a semantical and meaningless term that, also, was applied by outsiders. (“Chasidim”, too, is a name sarcastically applied to them by outsiders who didn’t like them.) A Jew is a Jew.
I think the comparison between the different Protestant denominations and the different types of Orthodoxy is apt. The differences, at so far to my limited knowledge – it does not particularly interest me – are in nuances and shades which is also true among the different shades of Orthodoxy. In addition, Protestants move from denomination to denomination with ease depending on what is more convenient to their homes and socially appropriate for them. Similarly, all Orthodox Jews will daven in each others shuls and if someone moves to a community where there is a different type of Orthodox shul he will join it. As for assimilated Jews, I would compare them to expatriate Americans, who continue to be American citizens while being part of other countries.
But why do you refer to the “YU camp”? Why and how are they a “camp”?
Because they have barbeques and sing songs and play baseball.
The Yekkes in Washington Heights are yeshivish/charedi because they have assimilated.
TUM is YU’s motto, it is not the derech of MO. MO would be TIDE.
That is precisely why the difference between yeshivish and MO is much smaller than yeshivish and chassidish. There are extreme fundamental differences in hashkafah between litvish and chassidish Jews.
I also think this discussion has no place at all in the workplace. The two things never to discuss at work are politics and religion.
Add to that that you may run into issurim of discussing religion with your coworkers. Add to that that many people have only a kindergarten understanding of religion and would most likely not do too well in a discussion.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.