Actually, I think the term ‘ultra-Orthodox’ fits you people just fine
Abbot Katz joins the black-hatters who cunningly object to the term “ultra-Orthodox.” What do they want? What they really want is to be identified as the real “Jews,” nothing less. They will complain at every other possible term until everyone else is deemed treif/insufficiently frum (that’s you, Modern Orthodoxy), until and unless they are accepted as the standard, despite their ever-expanding new stringencies and radicalism.
Katz writes in the Forward that,
“Orthodox Jews seem to be seen as marking the spiritual baseline, while the “ultras” are typed as a kind of fanatic insurgency, sparse but dangerous.”
Oh, no one is saying you people are “sparse.” Your numbers and power grows everyday.
“In fact the Chasam Sofer is very much of a piece with his rabbinic predecessors and successors. Nowhere in the yeshiva world is he credited with striking a stance at any fundamental remove from his forebears.”
Why is this about the Chasam Sofer? He is hardly considered the father of ultra-Orthodoxy. Let us be clear. Katz is avoiding the true areas of significant change, from traditional Judaism to quiescent fundamentalism.
The two substantial quiescent fundamentalist movements are the Chassidic movements and the contemporary yeshiva movements respectively. These movements have changed, and their creations were both departures from normative Judaism. Additionally, many sectors of each group became more radical over time, particularly in the post-war period. That is to say, more fahfrumpt, with a greater interpretative stringency in Jewish law aimed at maximum disengagement with the secular world.
“Again, this peculiarly binary view suggests that those rabbinic giants who predated the Chasam Sofer were by definition something less, or other, than “ultra.”
No. This is to say that the normative pulpit rabbis who preceded the likes of “gedoylim” like Rabbi Ahron Kotler and the Chazon Ish were by definition something less, or other, than “ultra.”
Yaakov Menken weighs in on the ULTRA_ORTHODOX blog Cross-Currents, where he displays a profound ignorance of the difference between activist and quiescent fundamentalist classification.
“Most complaints about the use of the “Ultra” modifier stop there — pointing out that the term is both inaccurate and pejorative, and seems to lump Satmar Chasidim together with Kahanists and Yigal Amir.”
This is SUCH nonsense. Kahanists, like Rabbi Kahane himself, are rightly considered to be radicals stemming from the Modern Orthodox camp. And both Baruch Goldstein and Yigal Amir attended the flagship right-wing Modern Orthodox universities, Yeshiva University and Bar Ilan respectively. A full embrace of religious-Zionism is outside the tenants of ultra-Orthodoxy. Menken clearly doesn’t know what he is talking about. I’m shocked, just shocked, at his ignorance. Who would think that the creator of Cross-Currents and “The Everything Torah Book,” would get these basic sociological classifications so terribly wrong?
The big lie of the ultra-Orthodox is that they are normative traditional Judaism. And this is one of the reasons they prefer hagiography to history. History is not their friend. And the entire haredi-kiruv industry would fall apart if their lies were exposed.
I hope, over time, they will be.
17 comments
this is not a binary equation. it isn’t a choice between ultra or normative. ultra is not a neutral term. neither is fundamentalist of fanatic. call us chicken soup or any other neutral modifier which isn’t insulting is the point they were making.
“The big lie of the ultra-Orthodox is that they are normative traditional Judaism. And this is one of the reasons they prefer hagiography to history. History is not their friend. And the entire haredi-kiruv industry would fall apart if their lies were exposed.
I hope, over time, they will be.”
I second that motion.
Bingo!
History is not their friend.
Yaakov Elman of YU was up here at Harvard recently. His talk was about Persian influence on Rabbinic thought, but (God bless him) he took a couple of swipes at the Haredim in the process. One of them concerned the ban on gentile music. He commented that much (probably most) of what is today considered to be Jewish music is actually of gentile origin - but the Haredim get around that by “ignoring history”.
But who cares what he says? At YU, they’re all apikorsim anyway.
I just posted a comment over there too, DK.
cipher, if it was on cross-currents, they won’t publish it, or even worse, they will “edit” your comment.
No - The Forward. Cross-Currents I wouldn’t bother with.
Yaakov Menken isn’t wrong. He is not referring to how overheated intellectual Jewish hipsters who use BS terms like “quiescent fundamentalism” use the term “ultra-orthodox.” He’s referring to people with far less understanding use the term, as well as those, such as Peace Now, who absolutely know better but wish to direct existing animus towards haredim to their political opponents as well, just as you, DK, routinely elide the difference between RWO in the U.S. and Israeli haredim.
I wasn’t at Yakov Elman’s talk, and I don’t know who he is, but there is no one who is not aware of the gentile origin of the vast majority of Jewish music. That origin is in fact woven into many hasidic stories and traditions. So it is ironic that this Elman speaks publicly about “ignoring history” in such a profoundly historically ignorant fashion, but I suppose such red meat is always appreciated nonetheless. The “ban” has nothing to do with the sources of melodies, but rather the cultural mileau and associations of today’s music scenes, both Jewish and gentile.
“He is not referring to how overheated intellectual Jewish hipsters who use BS terms like “quiescent fundamentalism” use the term “ultra-orthodox.””
Of course not. If he did, he would have to admit that yes, he and his ilk are indeed ultra-Orthodox.
I shot an ilk in my bekeshe the other night. How he got in my bekeshe I’ll never know!
R. Elman teaches at YU in the History and Philosophy departments. I understand he’s an authority on the Persian period.
Ron, you’re giving the Hareidim a free pass again. Besides - you’ve told me that you don’t consider yourself to be Hareidi!
So if they don’t like the term “Ultra,” they should be given a new one. How about “Psychopathologically Degenerate Idolatrous Judaism”? Or is that too lenient?
How about “super orthodox”. Every loves superheroes so no negative vibes
Just because I’m not haredi doesn’t mean I’ll give DK a pass on his inaccuracies, Cipher. Besides, some of my best friends are… that way.
Whatever the elative used to collocate with orthodox, it’ll be semantically ridiculous. Either they dokein (= teach) orthos (=correctly) or they don’t; ‘correct’ can only be compared grammatically, not semantically. The fact that there are lots of Jewish ultra-, neo-ultra-, classical-, Old World-, ortho-, vot is a ochtodoks?-, traditional-, anachronistic-Orthodox that disagree on many matters of (peripherally) religious teaching tells me that there isn’t anything like a genuinely Orthodox branch of Judaism. Orthodoxy in Christianity at least sticks to the old rites established during the first few centuries of the Church; Orthodoxy, as in ultra-Orthodoxy, in Judaism reflects an Americanized perception of a then radically new interpretation, kindly put, of Judaism and Jewish teaching and learning in Eastern Europe a couple of centuries ago.
please H’, that you will be healed of your own self hatred and hatred of your people.
maybe reb nachman of breslov can help you.
I commented on cross-currents that I found ‘ultra’ insulting because it seemed to imply that I was not acting like a good Jew should. Personally I think you have to be a fanatic for that which you believe is correct and right ,otherwise your not really standing up for your faith. For example, If you believe that Global Warming is a real threat to the Earth, and you think it is your duty to combat it, then you would I suppose proceed to attack car factories and stop carbon emmisions. Cccchhharedim are the same way. We believe in putting on teffilin, even if George W. Bush and Barak Obama possiably don’t. In fact if the whole world would laugh at us for wearing our teffilin we would carry on since we know in our hearts that this is what God wants. I know I have succeeded in convincing you. My work hear is done. I must go now.
Leave a Comment