The Centre for Jewish Studies
University of Manchester
Extra-Mural Lectures 1998-99
For the full list of lectures, click here
Feb. 9th: Harry Lesser: Samson Raphael Hirsch and
Modern Orthodox
Abstract:
Samson Raphael Hirsch was perhaps the greatest influence on the style
of Orthodox Judaism that was dominant in Britain and Germany in the late
19th and early 20th centuries. This talk will consider the main features
of this type of Orthodoxy in Hirsch's thought and in its later development -
its acceptance of secular learning and of Enlightenment values, while holding
that it was precisely Orthodox Judaism that embodied these values; its opposition
to metaphysics and theology; its emphasis on moral values; its Romanticism;
and its universalism.
Résumé of talk and discussion prepared by
Irene Lancaster:
Hirsch's brand of neo-Orthodoxy was dominant in Germany and, to some
extent, Britain during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This talk
discussed the style and features of Hirsch's legacy, rather than the man
himself, and was of a speculative, rather than scholarly, nature.
Hirsch lived from 1801-88. From 1851 he was rabbi of the Orthodox community
in Frankfurt, where the Reform dominated. Quite early in his life (1836-8)
he wrote the Nineteen letters of Ben Uzziel and Horeb, a two-volume explanation
of the mitzvot. Later, he wrote commentaries on the Chumash, which he had
translated into German. This is now available in English translation. He
also wrote commentaries on the Haphtorot and Psalms,also translated.
He established the Orthodox community in Frankfurt. German law required
a tax to be paid to one's religious community, but only one Jewish community
was allowed in each town. The German authorities regarded the majority,
Reform, community as the Jewish community in Frankfort; so Orthodox Jews
there were, in effect, paying for the upkeep of the Reform community, which
was not always tolerant towards them. For example, efforts had been made
at one time to prevent Talmud being taught, and there was therefore a need
for Orthodoxy to break away and form a separate community, which Hirsch
managed to achieve.
Interestingly, in the 1840s, Hirsch was considered with Nathan Adler
for the Chief Rabbinate of Great Britain, the first such holder of the post.
Adler was chosen over Hirsch, maybe because he was the Chief Rabbi of Hanover,
a town with obvious links to the Georgian and Victorian monarchy. In addition,
Rothschild was for Adler. Thirdly, Adler was a less polemical figure who,
it was perhaps felt, would get on better with the Jewish and English aristocracy.
It is also interesting that three of George III's sons, including one
who was governor of Hanover, had become interested in Judaism, first for
commercial reasons, and later from more genuine religious motives. They
visited Bevis Marks synagogue; one learned Hebrew and incorporated it into
his own daily reading of the Psalms.
Hirsch supported the practice of strictly Orthodox Judaism, but in an
environment which took account of the progressive, liberal approach to secular
studies and of the values and political stance of the Enlightenment. He
felt that Judaism was the ideal way to promote to the intellectual, moral
and spiritual progress of humanity as depicted by Enlightenment thought.
He coined the term Mensch Israel: to be human is to be Jewish. His approach
was essentially moral. He maintained that all mitzvot had a moral or spiritual
meaning,and that the ones which appeared more purely ritualistic to us were
those whose spiritual meaning was harder to fathom, though no less important.
The observance of all mitzvot is mandatory, and contributes to spiritual
progress. He used symbolism to explain the more morally obscure mitzvot.
In addition, although he was a universalist, he insisted on the necessity
of keeping one's way of life pure, which, for a Jew, meant strict adherence
to the mitzvot.
Characteristics of Hirsch's approach
1 Anti-metaphysical and anti-theological. He regards metaphysics and
theology as beyond the remit of the Orthodox Jew. Torah study is about our
duty, not about the nature of God. He felt that theology was a technical
discipline, whereas Torah study is the heritage of every Jew. He espoused
the views of Kant in his metaphysics, even though Kant was not well disposed
to Judaism. In fact Hirsch's grandson is reputed to have said: Blessed be
God, who in His wisdom created Kant. Kant believed that we do not see the
world as it really is, but only as it appears to our perception in space
and time and our awareness of causality, from which, as humans, we cannot
free ourselves. We can therefore only understand reality through practical
reason, when we act morally; observation and theory can only be about the
world as it appears. As there are limits to our knowledge , science cannot
damage the religious position: thus this " anti- metaphysical metaphysic
" protects religion. Following Kant does not prove the revelation at
Sinai, but shows that the revelation of God to man would have had to have
been done in some similar manner, as a revelation of our duty.
2 Moral. This was his dominant approach to the mitzvot, and was taken
up by the English Orthodox establishment in the early 20th century. For
example, Epstein's The Jewish Way of Life is two-thirds full of moral insights,
and only the final third deals with Shabbat, tephillin etc. Hertz's Chumash
takes a similar approach, as does the now little-read The Golden Thread,
once much used in cheder. This approach is not dissimilar from the Anglican
approach: wie es christelt, so judelt es.
3 Universalist. He advocated secular learning and playing a full part
in the wider community. Herman Adler, one of the people he influenced, once
gave a sermon, in Yiddish of a kind, but actually bearing more of a resemblance
to High German, in which he exhorted his congregation to learn English,
be good subjects, and fit in to society. Although Adler denounced employers
of sweated labour, he opposed forcible resistance to them.However, Jews
should not fully assimilate, but should take advantage of the wide education
on offer.
4 Romantic. Hirsch wrote a thesis on Wordsworth,and believed in encouraging
the development of noble emotions. His Bible commentary, and that of Hertz,
is steeped in this language, with much feeling for morality, ceremony, nature
and history. All these topics were actually in vogue much earlier in the
century, and by Hertz's time the style, though not necessarily the content,
may already have had a old-fashioned ring.
5 Positive. His approach was evolutionary and optimistic in a way that
is perhaps impossible post- Shoah. In his Bible interpretations, for instance,
he always takes the most positive approach. " Ish pereh", applied
to Ishmael, is translated by him not as " wild man", the usual
interpretation, but as "free man". Similarly, the image "
Sin couches at the door "is explained by him as an animal ready to
be mastered, rather than to pounce. This view led to an elaborate theory
of the Hebrew language, where words which sounded similar were said to be
linked; eg" na" meaning "please "is linked to"
raw", both being regarded by him as types of interruption-of attention
and of cooking [the appearance of the latter in Exodus 12:9 appears to be
a hapax legomenon; Irene].
6 Bible-centred. This phenomenon is much more prevalent in Hirsch's
followers than in himself. Hirsch did however introduce the vernacular sermon
based on the sedra, as part of the service, copying Christian mode. Before
then preaching took place on Shabbat afternoon. This feature was taken up
in England and directed attention to the Bible. In Hertz there is very little
Talmud or midrash, less than in Plaut, a Reform commentator
!Conclusion Hirsch's approach was to be open to the outside world, both
to learn from it and to contribute to it. It was not always a tolerant approach,
but it could be. It was centred on morality, being romantic and optimistic,
looking to improvement and being, in its later development, bible-centred.
Post-Shoah and post State of Israel, it is seen to be a child of its times,
but could still play a useful role in Orthodoxy, and Judaism generally,
today.
Question/Answer Session
Q It is interesting to see Hirsch depicted as a neo-Kantian romantic,
whereas we normally hear of him as a champion Reform basher. Nowadays he
appears to be a bit of a dead end. Although he opened himself up to the
Enlightenment, he drew the line at historico-critical scholarship. Hildesheimer,
his contemporary, was willing to work with the whole community. Even modern
Orthodoxy today has no truck with Hirsch. A Rabbi at Riskin's former synagogue
in the USA was more interested in the development of halakhah than in theology,
but Hirsch is not a solution. Is he in fact a dead end? A He would appear
to appeal to English Orthodoxy, because it itself is anti-theological, as
is Reform. It must be an English characteristic. The fact Hirsch talked
about practice rather than belief is relevant to your question.
Q What do you mean by theology? A It includes the historico-critical
approach, which impinges on belief [Jonathan Davis] A Hirsch says that what
there is in Written Torah is so meagre that there must have been an Oral
Law as well [Harry].This is a theological point, but Hirsch is interested
in it because it has practical consequences.
Q Despite what the speaker said, there are references to Oral Law in
Hirschs commentary on the Humash. He introduces some new and original ideas
and translations in the narrative sections, but he does make use of the
oral tradition in the legal section. He often says that the plain sense
accords with the Oral Tradition. He rejects such Christian interpretations
as" eye for an eye = revenge", etc. A I was talking about Hertz
rather than Hirsch. Q But Malbim wrote eight sermons without using midrashic
or Talmudic explanations.
Q Was Hirsch the first to press for Orthodoxy in German Judaism? A No.
There was a struggle with Reform in Germany, because of the authorities'
system. The Orthodox had to pay Reform communities; therefore they had to
get permission to break away, the opposite of the case in most communities.
Q Even in this day in this town, the Orthodox are terribly forceful
and pernicious. A This is irrelevant to Hirsch [Irene].
Q The speaker has polarized too much. The communities did work together.
Hirsch in fact wanted to strengthen Orthodoxy at the expense of Reform;
that is why he interceded. A Grunfeld does cite the prevention, by Reform,
of teaching of the Talmud in one town.
Q How do you rate the work of Hirsch? Was it just confined to Frankfurt?
A There is a mood of Orthodoxy in Germany and England which owes something
to Hirsch, although this may also be the mood of the times.
Q In all religions where ultra-Orthodoxy takes over there is no tolerance.
A From Hirsch's case it is obvious that he was not ultra-Orthodox, in that
he espoused secular learning and contributed to the wider community, and
that Reform can also be intolerant [Irene and Harry ].
Q Did Hirsch abolish Kol Nidre in his community? If so why? Was he also
lax about the covering of one's head? A It might be misunderstood by non-Jews.
Also it may have been only introduced by the Sephardi Jews in the Middle
Ages to counter the effect of vows forced on them by Christianity. A People
in Germany did not cover their heads. The Vilna Gaon also said that one
need not cover ones head all the time, although the Chofetz Chaim said that
one must today [Mr. Abel]. A Hirsch also wanted to shut down shuls and bring
Judaism more into the home [Harry].
Q Why has the mood of our times brought about the enormous religious
extremism and polarization we see today? A The combined effect of the Shoah
and the State of Israel. A The collapse of liberalism and the idea of progress.
The Haskalah and modernity failed the Jews [Jonathan]. A Extremism from
the outside has defied the middle way, and this has percolated down to the
Jewish community. We also see this in other religions.
Q But Judaism rebuts trends and stands firmly on the ethics of Judaism.
Q Doesn't Agudat Israel stem from Hirsch? He was ambivalent towards
Israel, but Agudah seems to be his brain-child?
Q Thinking of Hirsch I also think of Rosenzweig. Rosenzweig says of
Hirsch: magnificent but unlovely.
Q I do regard Hirsch as ultra -Orthodox, not in the sense of black hats
etc. In a lot of frum communities the extremism comes from the grass roots,
not the top. Rabbis give lenient decisions in private, but do not wish to
be quoted. At the moment a Talmud Chacham teaching for Yeshivah University
in Jerusalem teaches only from home and not on campus, in case this leads
to his windows being smashed. A Yes, even on question of contraception and
abortion, for instance, rabbis have often been very flexible down the ages.
---------
Dr. Harry Lesser is Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, in the Department
of Government, University of Manchester. His publications include: "Levinas
and the Jewish Tradition" in Facing the Other (1996); "S.R.
Hirsch" in Encyclopedia of Jewish Philosophy (1997).
The Centre for Jewish Studies
The Department of Religions and Theology
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
United Kingdom
Tel +44 (0)161 275 3614; Fax +44 (0)161 275 3613
e-mail: Bernard.Jackson@man.ac.uk