by Dr. William Gewirtz
Years ago, I received some valuable advice: If you want to escape from a hole, first stop digging. In the hareidi case, it is misinformation about how Jews lived coupled with “they could, but we cannot” when indisputable evidence of the past exists, that must stop if one is to escape from the hole. If such beliefs subsist entirely unchallenged, ending up yet deeper in the hole is inevitable. Hareidi society maintains ingrained, distorted views about our history and regularly demeans gedolai olam. Rav Kook ztl and the Rav ztl, for example, who lived outside of strictly hareidi circles. Attention to those basic views is required before trying to deal with any single consequence of such attitudes be it fulltime learning for all or eschewing secular education.
There are many other reasons why haredi leaders, who profit from the current situation are not forthright; ve’hamaivin yavin. Do not expect the current leaders to lead. Throughout our history, change almost always came bottom-up, with some rabbinic strictures applied later to delimit the practice and align it more acceptably with halakhic parameters. This fact, an anathema to hareidi theology, is amply documented with multiple significant examples by the late Prof. Yaacov Katz and his students. I would not expect this to be readily believed given the prevalent historic beliefs that have permeated haredi society.
The four pillars Rav Pfeffer references based on the gemara in berakhot are the three pillars in Avot on which the world subsists with the addition of derech eretz as a fourth pillar. The latter is presumedly tacitly understood/assumed or as hareidim might argue a rather debatable addition. In any case, I believe that beyond the belief set, there is another critical point: one cannot abandon any one of the four pillars without detrimental impact on the other three.
In Israel, Jewish learning in both the Religious Zionist and academic communities has had noteworthy output. I will leave it to others to cite countless but perhaps contentious examples. I know where I can find the best Talmud shiurim in Jerusalem.
Furthermore, hareidi gedolim most regrettably, often dispense with well-reasoned, lengthy teshuvot, which are replaced with pashkevallim, which merely declare the position advocated. Perhaps attributable to a notion of daat Torah, which values the intuitive thinking of gedolim, this trend is yet another example of ahistorical behavior. If Rav Yeḥeskel Landau or Rav Moshe Sofer felt the need to justify their positions, how have unsupported positions gained such credence? Were the walls of Prague or Pressburg covered by such announcements?
Furthermore, what Rav Pfeffer suggests is akin to jumping out of a 20th story window and hoping/expecting a smooth landing. Traditional Jewish societies have been similarly challenged before in history; sadly, the reactions often led to complete secularization of significant parts of the population. It would take enormous siyyatah de’Shemayah and forthright leadership to do much better now.
In the last century, the secularization that swept most parts of eastern Europe prior to WWII was staggering. Perhaps the openness to rational thinking, greater openness to reading available books, searching for new insights, etc. accelerated the pace of secularization. The newly available knowledge that the enlightenment provided had dramatic impact before the entrenched leadership realized what was happening and began to ban the new books and otherwise react. Ironically, the absence of the above openness may contribute to slowing the secularization process today. Nonetheless, why uncontrolled secularization would not reoccur, albeit more slowly, would require at least a credible explanation; I cannot even conceive how such an explanation might be formulated.
Change in a traditional religious society is rarely, if ever, a gradual, continuous process. The deep-rooted tradition and the vested interests of the old establishment would react to prevent or at least limit gradual change. Change is more likely to occur in response to seismic events whose results are not easily controlled and directed.
Hareidim, perhaps for good reason, have rewritten history. The works of historians recounting Jewish life often receive significant scorn; cries of bias are not uncommon. Equally troubling is the dual standard applied to academic versus traditional scholarship. The slightest error in an academic work is seized on as evidence that disqualifies the author; traditional rabbinic errors of yet greater magnitude are accorded tzarich iyun status.
It would have been ideal if there were a lengthy period to experiment, plan, and prepare. Usually, such an interval is absent. Without such time to prepare, grand steps are ill-advised. Let dozens of small efforts flourish, all targeted to address the fundamentals of what needs attention in hareidi society. Many korbanot later, what works will hopefully be discovered.
In Germany, better ways (those developed by either R. Hildesheimer or R. Hirsch) took many generations to unfold. (BTW, those efforts were often incorrectly and with intended malice labeled bi’de’avad by hareidi leaders.) In much of eastern Europe, the shoah came before effective methods of response were discovered. In that case, the lack of developed efforts to combat assimilation is cited as evidence of the preferred way forward; the degree of assimilation is often either denied or tragically given as the reason God chose to bring about the Shoah.
Israeli Society has been magnanimous in accepting the burden that haredim impose on the nation and its economic well-being, abetted (in part) by the “special privileges” demanded by ḥaredi parties, as payment for their critical support, which has been required to form a ruling coalition. Perhaps the IDF does not really need hareidim, although it is hard to say the same about she’ai’rut leumi.
The economic burden has been absorbed by the combination of a robust economy and charity; the cost is not yet overwhelming, and few predictions of the future are accorded the credence that they deserve. But hareidi behavior during COVID -19 has overwhelmed the healthcare infrastructure causing many unnecessary deaths.
Any changes that reduced tolerance of hareidim would cause are likely to be more abrupt than hareidi society can absorb. Behavior during COVID-19 coupled with an ever-increasing economic burden generates a yet more uncertain future.
