As above, Modern Orthodoxy comprises various approaches, ranging from traditionalist to revisionist, and the movement apparently overlaps with Conservative Judaism and with Haredi Judaism at its respective boundaries. At its centre too, the movement appears to share practices and values with Neo Orthodoxy and with Religious Zionism. Therefore, in clarifying what Modern Orthodoxy in fact entails, its positioning must be discussed with reference to these movements.
Haredi Judaism Although there is some question as how precisely to define the distinction between Modern Orthodoxy and
Haredi Judaism, there is basic agreement that they may be distinguished on the basis of three major characteristics: "severity and leniency are relevant only in circumstances of factual doubt, not in situations of debate or varied practice. In the latter situations, the conclusion should be based solely on the legal analysis." See . Note though, that in recent years, many Modern Orthodox Jews are described as "increasingly stringent in their adherence to Jewish law". As to the contention that Modern Orthodoxy's standards of observance of
halakha are "relaxed", as opposed to moderate, see
below under
Criticism. In the Haredi view, on the other hand, "the most severe position ... is the most likely basis for unity and commonality of practice within Orthodox community, and is therefore to be preferred". Further, "such severity ... results in the greatest certainty that God's will is being performed".
Haredi Judaism thus tends to adopt
chumras as a norm. Related to this is the acceptance of the concept of
Da'as Torah - the extent to which Orthodox Jews should seek the input of rabbinic scholars not just on matters of Jewish law, but on all important life matters. Most rabbinic leaders from
Haredi communities view the concept as inextricably linked to the centuries of Jewish tradition. Within Modern Orthodox Judaism, many rabbis and scholars view the matter as a modern development that can be traced to changes in Jewish communal life in the nineteenth century. Thus, while the notion of da'as Torah is viewed by
Haredi rabbis as a long-established tradition within Judaism, Modern Orthodox scholars argue that the Haredi claim is a revisionist one. According to Modern Orthodox scholars, although the term "da'as Torah" has been used in the past, the connotations of absolute rabbinic authority under this banner occurs only in the decades that follow the establishment of the Agudas Yisrael party in Eastern Europe. See for further elaboration of these differences. Modern Orthodoxy's efforts to encourage religious observance among non-Orthodox Jews has been likened to similar efforts by the
Chabad movement. The similarity between the two groups in their relationships towards the non-Orthodox, and its adoption by some Haredi groups, has blurred the lines between the modern and Haredi segments of Orthodoxy.
Neo-Orthodoxy/Torah Im Derech Eretz Both Modern Orthodoxy and
Neo Orthodoxy, the movement directly descended from Hirsch's Frankfurt community, have combined Torah and secular knowledge with participation in contemporary
Western life, and thus some maintain that there is a degree of practical and philosophical overlap between the two. The movements are nevertheless distinct, and in general, Neo-Orthodoxy has taken a more qualified approach than Modern orthodoxy, emphasizing that followers must exercise caution in engagements with the secular world. Differences between the movements may be more than a question of degree: some Hirsch scholars argue that Hirschian philosophy is at odds with that of Modern Orthodoxy, while some Modern Orthodox scholars maintain that Modern Orthodoxy accords with Hirsch's worldview. These philosophical distinctions (though subtle), manifest in markedly divergent religious attitudes and perspectives. For example,
Shimon Schwab, second rabbi of the Torah Im Derech Eretz community in the United States, has been described as being "spiritually very distant" from Yeshiva University and Modern Orthodoxy. • The role of secular life and culture: In the
Hirschian view, interaction with the secular and the requisite acquisition of culture and knowledge is encouraged, only insofar as it facilitates the application of Torah to worldly matters. For Modern Orthodoxy, on the other hand, secular culture and knowledge are seen as a complement to Torah, and, to some extent, encouraged for their own sake. Some would suggest that in Modern Orthodoxy, Judaism is enriched by interaction with modernity, whereas in Neo-Orthodoxy human experience (and modernity) are enriched by the application of Torah outlook and practice. • Priority of Torah versus Secular knowledge: In the Hirschian view, Torah is the "sole barometer of truth" by which to judge secular disciplines, as "there is only one truth, and only one body of knowledge that can serve as the standard.... Compared to it, all the other sciences are valid only provisionally." (Hirsch, commentary to
Leviticus 18:4–5; see also
Rashi ad loc.). By contrast, in the view of Modern Orthodoxy, although Torah is the "preeminent center", secular knowledge is considered to offer "a different perspective that may not agree at all with [Torah] ... [but] both together present the possibility of a larger truth". (
Torah Umadda, p. 236). • Broader communal involvement: Neo-Orthodoxy, influenced by Hirsch's philosophy on
Austritt (secession), "could not countenance recognition of a non-believing body as a legitimate representative of the Jewish people", and is therefore opposed to the
Mizrachi movement, which is affiliated with the
World Zionist Organization and the
Jewish Agency. Modern Orthodoxy, on the other hand, is characterised by its
involvement with the broader Jewish Community and by its
Religious Zionism.
Religious Zionism Broadly defined,
Religious Zionism is a movement that embraces the idea of Jewish national
sovereignty, often in connection with the belief in the ability of the Jewish people to bring about a
redemptive state through natural means, and often attributing religious significance to the modern
State of Israel. The spiritual thinkers who started this stream of thought include Rabbi
Zvi Hirsch Kalischer (1795–1874) and Rabbi
Yitzchak Yaacov Reines (1839–1915). Thus, in this sense, Religious Zionism in fact encompasses a wide spectrum of religious views including Modern Orthodoxy. Note, however, that Modern Orthodoxy, in fact, overlaps to a large extent with
"Religious Zionism" in its narrower form ("Throughout the world, a 'religious Zionist day school' is a synonym for a 'modern Orthodox day school'"). At the least, the two are not in any direct conflict, and generally coexist, Nevertheless, the two movements are philosophically distinct on two broad counts. • Firstly, (
the more conservative) Religious Zionists differ with Modern Orthodoxy in its approach to secular knowledge. Here, engagement with the secular is permissible, and encouraged, but only insofar as this benefits the
State of Israel; secular knowledge (or, at the least, an extensive secular education) is viewed as valuable for practical ends, though not in and of itself. See
further under Torah Umadda. • Secondly, under Religious Zionism, a "nationalistic coloration" is given to traditional religious concepts, whereas, by contrast, Modern Orthodoxy includes "a greater balance which includes openness to the non-Jewish world"; the
Meimad political party, and the
Shalom Hartman Institute,
Yeshivat Har Etzion /
Migdal Oz and
Yeshivat Hamivtar/
Ohr Torah Stone Institutions/
Midreshet Lindenbaum (some would include
Yeshivat Hesder Petach Tikva,
Yeshivat Ma'ale Gilboa, and the
Tzohar Foundation).
Conservative Judaism In some areas, Modern Orthodoxy's left wing appears to align with more traditional elements of
Conservative Judaism, and in fact some on the left of Modern Orthodoxy have allied with the formerly Conservative
Union for Traditional Judaism. Nonetheless, the two movements are generally described as distinct. Rabbi
Avi Weiss, from the left of Modern Orthodoxy, stresses that Orthodox and Conservative Judaism are "so very different in ... three fundamental areas:
Torah mi-Sinai, rabbinic interpretation, and rabbinic legislation". Weiss argues as follows: •
Torah mi-Sinai ("Torah From
Sinai"): Modern Orthodoxy, in line with the rest of Orthodoxy, holds that Jewish law is Divine in origin, and as such, no underlying
principle may be compromised in accounting for changing political, social or economic conditions, whereas Conservative Judaism holds that
Poskim should make use of literary and historical analysis in deciding Jewish law, and may reverse decisions of the
Acharonim that are held to be inapplicable today. • Rabbinic legislation: Since the (Modern) Orthodox community is ritually observant, rabbinic law legislated by (today's) Orthodox rabbis can meaningfully become binding if accepted by the community (see
minhag). Thus, although Conservatism similarly holds that "no law has authority unless it becomes part of the concern and practice of the community" communal acceptance of a "permissive custom" is not "meaningful", and, as a result, related rabbinic legislation cannot assume the status of law. In general, Modern Orthodoxy does not, therefore, view the process by which the Conservative movement decides
halakha as legitimate—or with the non-normative weighting assigned to halakha by the Conservative movement. In particular, Modern Orthodoxy disagrees with many of Conservative Judaism's
halakhic rulings, particularly as regards issues of
egalitarianism. See further on the
Orthodox view and the
Conservative view. Modern Orthodoxy clearly differs from the approach of
Reform Judaism and
Humanistic Judaism, which do not consider
halakha to be
normative. ==Criticism==