I ask Grok to critique this book by Marc B. Shapiro:
Marc B. Shapiro’s Changing the Immutable: How Orthodox Judaism Rewrites Its History is a meticulously researched and provocative exploration of how segments of Orthodox Judaism have engaged in self-censorship and historical revisionism to align the past with contemporary values and theological commitments. Published in 2015 by the Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, the book reflects Shapiro’s dual identity as a historian and an Orthodox Jew, offering an insider’s perspective paired with scholarly rigor. Below is a critique that examines its strengths, weaknesses, and broader implications.
Strengths
Erudition and Depth of Research
Shapiro’s command of Jewish texts—spanning Talmudic literature, medieval commentaries, and modern rabbinic writings—is nothing short of impressive. He draws on an extensive array of primary sources, often presenting original texts alongside their censored versions to illustrate his points vividly. This approach not only bolsters his credibility but also makes the book a valuable resource for scholars of Jewish intellectual history. His examples range from luminaries like Maimonides and Samson Raphael Hirsch to lesser-known figures, covering topics as diverse as Zionism, attitudes toward women, and biblical interpretation.Exposing a Hidden Phenomenon
The book’s central thesis—that parts of the Orthodox world deliberately obscure or rewrite history to preserve an idealized narrative—is compelling and well-supported. Shapiro highlights striking instances, such as the removal of controversial opinions from rabbinic works or the alteration of photographs to conform to modern standards of modesty. These examples reveal a tension between historical truth and religious ideology, a dynamic that Shapiro argues is particularly pronounced in the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) community. His work shines a light on a practice that might otherwise remain unnoticed by outsiders or even some insiders.Balanced Tone
Despite the potentially incendiary nature of his subject, Shapiro maintains an evenhanded tone throughout much of the book. He positions himself as a historian rather than a polemicist, claiming his goal is to document rather than judge. This restraint enhances the book’s academic integrity, allowing readers to draw their own conclusions about the ethics and implications of the censorship he describes.Broader Relevance
Beyond its focus on Orthodox Judaism, Changing the Immutable contributes to broader discussions about the nature of history, truth, and authority in religious traditions. Shapiro’s analysis of how some Orthodox leaders prioritize a “truth” that fosters faith over factual accuracy resonates with similar tendencies in other religious and ideological communities, making the book relevant to a wider audience.Weaknesses
Lack of Conceptual Framework
While Shapiro’s examples are豊富 (abundant) and meticulously detailed, he offers little in the way of a cohesive theoretical framework to tie them together. The book reads more like a collection of case studies than a sustained argument, with chapters functioning as standalone essays rather than building toward a unified conclusion. Critics, such as Zev Eleff in his H-Judaic review, have noted that Shapiro could have enriched his analysis by drawing comparisons to censorship in other religious or cultural contexts, which might have clarified whether Orthodox Judaism’s practices are unique or part of a broader phenomenon.Ambiguity of Intent
Shapiro insists he is merely presenting facts without aiming to reform or critique the Orthodox community, yet the book’s very existence suggests a simmering disapproval of the practices he documents. This tension—between his stated neutrality and the implicit challenge posed by exposing these acts—can leave readers uncertain about his ultimate purpose. Does he hope to provoke change, or is this truly just a historical record? The lack of clarity weakens the book’s impact, as it neither fully embraces its potential as a critique nor provides a robust defense of its neutral stance.Writing Style and Accessibility
Shapiro’s prose, while clear, often digresses into tangents that disrupt the flow of his argument. Some reviewers have pointed out that his writing could be tighter, with fewer detours into minutiae that, while fascinating to specialists, may overwhelm or alienate a general readership. Additionally, the book assumes a significant level of familiarity with Jewish texts and history, limiting its accessibility to those outside the field of Jewish studies or the Orthodox world.Incomplete Scope
While Shapiro focuses heavily on Haredi censorship, he gives less attention to similar tendencies in Modern Orthodoxy or other Jewish denominations. For instance, the selective presentation of figures like Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook by Modern Orthodox writers could have provided a useful counterpoint, broadening the discussion. This omission risks giving the impression that historical revisionism is solely a Haredi issue, when it may be more widespread across Jewish communities.Broader Implications
Changing the Immutable raises profound questions about the relationship between history and faith. Shapiro quotes Rabbi Shimon Schwab, who argued that Orthodox Jews “do not need realism” but rather “inspiration from our forefathers,” encapsulating the mindset that drives much of the censorship he documents. This perspective challenges the historian’s commitment to unvarnished truth, suggesting that for some, the past is a tool to be shaped rather than a reality to be uncovered. Shapiro’s work thus invites reflection on whether such an approach undermines intellectual honesty or serves a legitimate purpose in sustaining religious identity.
The book also touches on the paradox of a tradition that prides itself on fidelity to an immutable law yet feels compelled to alter its own narrative. This tension is particularly acute in the final chapter, where Shapiro examines “lying in pesak” (rabbinic rulings), suggesting that even halakhic decisions—supposedly the bedrock of Orthodoxy—can be subject to misrepresentation. This revelation could unsettle readers who view Orthodox Judaism as a bastion of consistency, though Shapiro stops short of fully exploring its theological ramifications.
Conclusion
Marc B. Shapiro’s Changing the Immutable is a fascinating, if imperfect, contribution to Jewish scholarship. Its strengths lie in its exhaustive research, its exposure of a little-discussed practice, and its nuanced handling of a sensitive topic. However, it falls short in providing a clear analytical framework, resolving its own ambiguities, and broadening its scope beyond the Haredi world. For those interested in Jewish history, religious censorship, or the interplay of truth and tradition, it is an essential read—albeit one that leaves some questions unanswered and some potential unrealized. Shapiro has opened a door to an important conversation, but he leaves it to others to step through and push the discussion further.
