![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can someone offer sources about RSH opposition to Zionism? Was there really an organized Zionist movement for him to oppose during his lifetime? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dc3736 ( talk • contribs) 13:42, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Now that JFW and Danny bring this up, this is worth getting into. The more right-wing of Hirsch's supporters agree with Danny's translation and JFW's views. However, I do not understand why. The Mishna was written nearly 2,000 years ago. Hirsch wrote only 200 years ago, in a totally diffeerent historical situation and society. In any case, people who support this POV hold that Rabbi Hirsch only wanted Jews to combine observant Jewish lifestyle (including lifelong Torah learning) with learning the surrounding gentile society's language, history, science, etc., so that a religious Jew could earn a living in the surrounding gentile society. In this Orthodox view, learning of these "gentile" subjects is not considered problematic, since it doesn't encroach on gentile philosophy, music, art, literature or ethics. RK
However, many other of Hirsch's supporters say that this understanding of Hirsch's philosophy is misguided; they have even gone so far as to call the bad historical revisionism. This issue has been discussed in articles in Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Thought, published by the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA). In this Orthodox view, Rabbi Hirsch wanted more than just the study of the surrounding gentile society's language, history, science. He also thought that it was permissible, and even productive, for Jews to learn gentile philosophy, music, art, literature or ethics. Hirsch himself studied gentile philosophy, and so did many of his later adherents, including Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik and many other rabbis in the RCA. However, this view is considered forbidden by many Orthodox Jews; they generally refuse to study such subjects. As this is an important issue of discussion in the Orthodox Jewish community even today, both sides should be represented in this article. RK
On this subject, see Revisionism and the Rav: The Struggle for the Soul of Modern Orthodoxy, published in Judaism, Summer, 1999, by Lawrence Kaplan.
The author of this article notes that some promimnent rabbis warn that there is a tendency for those on the right-wing of Orthodox to rewrite modern Orthodox thinkers, such as Hirsch and Soloveitchik. In the attempted revisionism, the person is presented as being less modern and more Haredi. For example
Firstly, do not falsify history by ascribing Modern Orthodox Judaism to Rav Hirsch. Secondly, the sources you quote above are all about Joe Soloveitchik. Can we stick to Rav Hirsch, please?
There is indeed a struggle about his legacy. This has been dealt with extensively in the article (at the bottom) and it the seperate article Torah im Derech Eretz. JFW
Torah im Derech Erezt has a narrow and a wide definition, and the wide definition (incorporating all of secular culture in a Jewish framework) has been largely abandoned. Yes, Rav Hirsch praised Schiller at school ceremonies, but if you take the care to read his polemics with Graetz, Frankel and other contemporaries, you might arrive at an understanding why Rav Hirsch cannot be described as the father of Modern Orthodoxy. Just read his writings - he does not encourage the fields of study you refer to.
If you have problems with this, just edit the article to reflect that "some say..."... "others say....", and don't try to convince me that Hirsch would endorse present-day modern orthodoxy. JFW | T@lk 12:10, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
RK's edits are on the whole well taken, but here are some points:
The article states "While being a yeshiva student in Eastern Europe, Rabbi Shimon Schwab obtained the views of various poskim (authorities in Jewish law) on the required level of secular knowledge (Levi 1990). On this basis, many Ultra-Orthodox adherents of Hirsch's philosophy have preferred the natural sciences over the humanities as a subject of secular study."
In like vein, Rabbi Dr. Yehuda (Leo) Levi says (at http://www.hra.jct.ac.il/judaica/dvarTorah/dt11.html; Levi is not quoting Hirsch, but he is known to be a staunch Hirschian),"Judaism is most anxious to make its adherents aware that all the phenomena of nature are subject to certain unchanging laws. Since Judaism itself is a system of laws through and through, it attaches a profound ethical value to the study of the natural sciences. Judaism considers it vitally important for its adherents to become aware that their entire universe is governed by well-defined laws, that every creature on earth becomes what it is only within the framework of fixed laws, and that every force in nature can operate only within specified limits. Not by his whims of the moment but only by his own detailed knowledge of, and regard for, these laws can man make nature serve his purposes. Man himself, then, can exercise power only if he, in turn, obeys the laws set down for him and for his world.
Sevendust62 ( talk) 15:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)The fulfillment of the Torah demands a world and rules that control it. To convince ourselves of the need for these laws, we need only try to imagine a world operating in an arbitrary fashion, without rules. Imagine if, when you sow seeds, you would have no idea whether wheat or weeds will come up. Or whether a particular effort will cause your hand to go up or down. Clearly, in such circumstances you would have no control, either of the world around you or of your own actions. You would feel like a puppet; your life would be totally passive. The laws of nature, then, are a condition for the commandments of the Torah to be operational. If God wants us to keep His commandments, He must give us the necessary tools, including reliable laws of nature. This may have been one of the prophet's meanings when he said in God's name: "If not for My covenant, day and night, I would not have established the laws of heaven and Earth."
To be very frank, most Haredim who study secular sciences do so to gain a livelihood. I don't know if the situation is the same in Modern Orthodox circles. I do not disagree that it is a mitzvah to Love God, and that this may be achieved by admiring His handiwork, but this was not the context of Rav Schwab's question. Rabbi Bloch (of Telz/Tilsiai), Rabbi Wasserman, Rabbi Leibovitz and Rabbi Rosen gave various answers, but none seriously dealt with the point you've raised. In recent years, study of science has been replaced with Torah study, and that's that. JFW | T@lk 21:09, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Do you think that the article is ready to become a FA? Tomer T 20:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
¶ I am keenly aware of the Wikipedia rule that everything must have a published source - but I violated that by providing what I thought was important information based on my own experience. The Hirsch Siddur: The order of prayers for the whole year, published in English translation by Feldheim Publishers, of NY, in 1969 and reprinted with corrections in 1978, for the Samson Raphael Hirsch Publications Society, uses the translations of the prayers and the commentary written by Hirsch in German, but the facing Hebrew pages are NOT edited by Hirsch at all, but are simply reprinted from a very ordinary public-domain Orthodox siddur. This fact was personally conveyed to me, circa 1994, by one of the surviving Feldheim brothers, who remembered doing the cut-an-paste on the galley proofs on his parents' kitchen table back in 1969. Although (as far as I know) this fact has not been printed anywhere, I thought it worth perpetuating, lest someone suppose that a reading in the Hebrew pages had the particular approval of Hirsch. Sussmanbern ( talk) 13:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC); I have restored my comment after it was deleted, evidently by someone who hadn't read this note. I believe that this is significant information, as otherwise a peculiar rendering of the Hebrew pages in the siddur might be thought to possess Hirsch's approbation. There are instances where Hirsch's translation clearly departs from the Hebrew pages; e.g. Hirsch omits (as does Hertz, Singer, et al.) Al tiro following Aleinu (page 211). Sussmanbern ( talk) 01:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
No mention at all in the article of his marriage/wife. 69.118.3.165 ( talk) 03:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Samson Raphael Hirsch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can someone offer sources about RSH opposition to Zionism? Was there really an organized Zionist movement for him to oppose during his lifetime? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dc3736 ( talk • contribs) 13:42, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Now that JFW and Danny bring this up, this is worth getting into. The more right-wing of Hirsch's supporters agree with Danny's translation and JFW's views. However, I do not understand why. The Mishna was written nearly 2,000 years ago. Hirsch wrote only 200 years ago, in a totally diffeerent historical situation and society. In any case, people who support this POV hold that Rabbi Hirsch only wanted Jews to combine observant Jewish lifestyle (including lifelong Torah learning) with learning the surrounding gentile society's language, history, science, etc., so that a religious Jew could earn a living in the surrounding gentile society. In this Orthodox view, learning of these "gentile" subjects is not considered problematic, since it doesn't encroach on gentile philosophy, music, art, literature or ethics. RK
However, many other of Hirsch's supporters say that this understanding of Hirsch's philosophy is misguided; they have even gone so far as to call the bad historical revisionism. This issue has been discussed in articles in Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Thought, published by the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA). In this Orthodox view, Rabbi Hirsch wanted more than just the study of the surrounding gentile society's language, history, science. He also thought that it was permissible, and even productive, for Jews to learn gentile philosophy, music, art, literature or ethics. Hirsch himself studied gentile philosophy, and so did many of his later adherents, including Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik and many other rabbis in the RCA. However, this view is considered forbidden by many Orthodox Jews; they generally refuse to study such subjects. As this is an important issue of discussion in the Orthodox Jewish community even today, both sides should be represented in this article. RK
On this subject, see Revisionism and the Rav: The Struggle for the Soul of Modern Orthodoxy, published in Judaism, Summer, 1999, by Lawrence Kaplan.
The author of this article notes that some promimnent rabbis warn that there is a tendency for those on the right-wing of Orthodox to rewrite modern Orthodox thinkers, such as Hirsch and Soloveitchik. In the attempted revisionism, the person is presented as being less modern and more Haredi. For example
Firstly, do not falsify history by ascribing Modern Orthodox Judaism to Rav Hirsch. Secondly, the sources you quote above are all about Joe Soloveitchik. Can we stick to Rav Hirsch, please?
There is indeed a struggle about his legacy. This has been dealt with extensively in the article (at the bottom) and it the seperate article Torah im Derech Eretz. JFW
Torah im Derech Erezt has a narrow and a wide definition, and the wide definition (incorporating all of secular culture in a Jewish framework) has been largely abandoned. Yes, Rav Hirsch praised Schiller at school ceremonies, but if you take the care to read his polemics with Graetz, Frankel and other contemporaries, you might arrive at an understanding why Rav Hirsch cannot be described as the father of Modern Orthodoxy. Just read his writings - he does not encourage the fields of study you refer to.
If you have problems with this, just edit the article to reflect that "some say..."... "others say....", and don't try to convince me that Hirsch would endorse present-day modern orthodoxy. JFW | T@lk 12:10, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
RK's edits are on the whole well taken, but here are some points:
The article states "While being a yeshiva student in Eastern Europe, Rabbi Shimon Schwab obtained the views of various poskim (authorities in Jewish law) on the required level of secular knowledge (Levi 1990). On this basis, many Ultra-Orthodox adherents of Hirsch's philosophy have preferred the natural sciences over the humanities as a subject of secular study."
In like vein, Rabbi Dr. Yehuda (Leo) Levi says (at http://www.hra.jct.ac.il/judaica/dvarTorah/dt11.html; Levi is not quoting Hirsch, but he is known to be a staunch Hirschian),"Judaism is most anxious to make its adherents aware that all the phenomena of nature are subject to certain unchanging laws. Since Judaism itself is a system of laws through and through, it attaches a profound ethical value to the study of the natural sciences. Judaism considers it vitally important for its adherents to become aware that their entire universe is governed by well-defined laws, that every creature on earth becomes what it is only within the framework of fixed laws, and that every force in nature can operate only within specified limits. Not by his whims of the moment but only by his own detailed knowledge of, and regard for, these laws can man make nature serve his purposes. Man himself, then, can exercise power only if he, in turn, obeys the laws set down for him and for his world.
Sevendust62 ( talk) 15:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)The fulfillment of the Torah demands a world and rules that control it. To convince ourselves of the need for these laws, we need only try to imagine a world operating in an arbitrary fashion, without rules. Imagine if, when you sow seeds, you would have no idea whether wheat or weeds will come up. Or whether a particular effort will cause your hand to go up or down. Clearly, in such circumstances you would have no control, either of the world around you or of your own actions. You would feel like a puppet; your life would be totally passive. The laws of nature, then, are a condition for the commandments of the Torah to be operational. If God wants us to keep His commandments, He must give us the necessary tools, including reliable laws of nature. This may have been one of the prophet's meanings when he said in God's name: "If not for My covenant, day and night, I would not have established the laws of heaven and Earth."
To be very frank, most Haredim who study secular sciences do so to gain a livelihood. I don't know if the situation is the same in Modern Orthodox circles. I do not disagree that it is a mitzvah to Love God, and that this may be achieved by admiring His handiwork, but this was not the context of Rav Schwab's question. Rabbi Bloch (of Telz/Tilsiai), Rabbi Wasserman, Rabbi Leibovitz and Rabbi Rosen gave various answers, but none seriously dealt with the point you've raised. In recent years, study of science has been replaced with Torah study, and that's that. JFW | T@lk 21:09, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Do you think that the article is ready to become a FA? Tomer T 20:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
¶ I am keenly aware of the Wikipedia rule that everything must have a published source - but I violated that by providing what I thought was important information based on my own experience. The Hirsch Siddur: The order of prayers for the whole year, published in English translation by Feldheim Publishers, of NY, in 1969 and reprinted with corrections in 1978, for the Samson Raphael Hirsch Publications Society, uses the translations of the prayers and the commentary written by Hirsch in German, but the facing Hebrew pages are NOT edited by Hirsch at all, but are simply reprinted from a very ordinary public-domain Orthodox siddur. This fact was personally conveyed to me, circa 1994, by one of the surviving Feldheim brothers, who remembered doing the cut-an-paste on the galley proofs on his parents' kitchen table back in 1969. Although (as far as I know) this fact has not been printed anywhere, I thought it worth perpetuating, lest someone suppose that a reading in the Hebrew pages had the particular approval of Hirsch. Sussmanbern ( talk) 13:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC); I have restored my comment after it was deleted, evidently by someone who hadn't read this note. I believe that this is significant information, as otherwise a peculiar rendering of the Hebrew pages in the siddur might be thought to possess Hirsch's approbation. There are instances where Hirsch's translation clearly departs from the Hebrew pages; e.g. Hirsch omits (as does Hertz, Singer, et al.) Al tiro following Aleinu (page 211). Sussmanbern ( talk) 01:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
No mention at all in the article of his marriage/wife. 69.118.3.165 ( talk) 03:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Samson Raphael Hirsch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)