I’m reading a 2007 essay by Marc B. Shapiro:
The Torah im Derekh Erez philosophy [Torah with the way of the land], which was shared by virtually all German Orthodox Jews in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, began to be challenged in the years following World War I. This came about through a combination of factors. To begin with, the ideology had grown stale, with no new developments in its thought. New anti-religious philosophical trends, developments in science, biblical criticism, resurgent anti-Semitism, and Zionism also contributed significantly to the transformation of German Orthodoxy, and in the post-war years many of the German Orthodox no longer viewed themselves as part of cultured German society. Not surprisingly, this led many to turn away from the Torah im Derekh Erez philosophy which was taken for granted in previous years, and which was so tied in with Western, i. e., German, culture.
For much of the younger generation, the post-war disillusionment
meant that German culture was no longer viewed as relevant, and was in
need of replacement by “true” Jewish values such as Torah study,
Hasidism, and Musar. Although in previous years it was the Orthodox of
Eastern Europe who often felt somewhat inferior when confronted with
the pious and cultured Orthodox of Germany, the tables had turned and
it was now the German Orthodox, especially the young, who were often
embarrassed by their form of Orthodoxy. Their cultural superiority no
longer counted for much, and they felt inferior when comparing their
level of Torah knowledge with that of their East European brethren. Many of the young Orthodox were no longer interested in intellectually
grappling with religious and philosophical problems. Rather, they were
looking for an easier solution, which they found in East European
Orthodoxy. The Orthodoxy of the East, with its mystical or Talmud-cen-
tered approach, was much simpler than German Orthodoxy, lacking as it
did all the intellectual and cultural baggage of the latter.With the coming to power of the Nazi regime, and the governmental determination to remove Jews from all aspects of German culture
and public life, Torah im Derekh Erez took another hit. Here was a phi-
losophy that was so tied to German society and culture, and now Jews
were being told that they were not welcome in Germany. Could R.
Samson Raphael Hirsch’s philosophy still have a future in such circum-
stances? Many thought no, and this certainly pushed young German
Orthodox Jews in different directions, such as to the yeshiva world and
religious Zionism.
The chronology given in this essay indicates that first Modern Orthodox Jews in Germany increasingly lost interest in feeling part of German culture and then the Nazis rose up and decided to rid themselves of the Jews. So did the German Jews overall reject making Germany their primary identification and instead choose to identify primarily as Jewish and then as a consequence, the Nazis reacted against an alien people in their midst?
Marc Shapiro writes further:
R. Schwab was a native of
Frankfurt who had studied in Lithuanian yeshivot. There he became close
to a number of East European sages, whose opposition to secular studies
influenced him. In 1934, when he was only twenty-five years old, he published his book Heimkehr ins Judentum (Coming Home to Judaism). This
was the first detailed rejection of the Torah im Derekh Erez philosophy by one who had grown up in the Hirschian environment.In this book one sees clearly the disillusionment with German culture in general and R. Hirsch’s Torah im Derekh Erez philosophy in particular. R. Schwab argued that the Hirschian vision was “meant to be nothing more than a temporary emergency measure, not an ideal state of affairs.” It was designed for nineteenth-century circumstances that were no longer applicable.
R. Schwab also described the Hirschian approach as utopian. Since it was almost impossible for people to achieve greatness in both Torah and secular studies, something had to be given up. Reflecting the Nazi era, R. Schwab added that his critique takes on added cogency when there is no connection between the religious and the cultural. In such times, it is only the Torah that can provide comfort and fulfillment.
So the Torah im Derekh Erez philosophy of combining Torah with the best of German culture was “meant to be nothing more than a temporary emergency measure, not an ideal state of affairs.” So if the goyim catch on to that attitude, I suspect they will feel less kindly toward the Jews.
Let’s say that American Jews, who probably love America more than any other American minority, increasingly decide to not identify as American but solely as Jewish. Surely this will lead non-Jewish Americans to increasingly not identify with the presence of an alien group in their midst?
