Who is Haredi?
In light of Column 731, it seems to me that some of your claims about the Haredi public are exaggerated and generalizing. The feeling is that you are basing your knowledge on certain groups—perhaps those you met in Bnei Brak a few years ago—and from there you are drawing conclusions about the general public. In practice, the reality I encounter on a daily basis is much broader and more diverse.
However, I agree that it is very difficult to define such broad streams of ultra-Orthodox people.
Indeed, in the Haredi community there are people who are extremists, closed-minded, anti-Zionist, refuse military service, and even those who show tolerance for problematic behavior toward the state and many more… However, alongside these there is a very large group — certainly not a minority — who do not behave this way, alongside many who agree with some. These are people who maintain a distinctly Haredi lifestyle, define themselves as Haredim, and their environment also sees them as an integral part of Haredi society. Are you aware of the matter and only refer to people who are not like that? Do you think that the characteristic is such despite so many (in my opinion) that it is not?
It seems that you are offering your own new definition of “modern religious,” and including many people who define themselves, and actually live, as Haredi. The majority of the Haredi public — both outsiders and Israelis — identifies them as Haredi in every sense. It is possible that only by your personal definition are they not Haredi, and on the extreme side they would even be called “gentiles,” but in reality they are not marginal. Do you think that most outsiders are not Haredi?
Regarding secular studies, for example — I do not believe that most Haredim are opposed to this in principle. Their absence stems mainly from a preference for other values (like you, if I am not mistaken), such as the level of Gemara studies. The preference to send a student with a high level of “sacred studies” creates a situation in which any institution that wishes to be considered “quality” refrains from introducing full core studies. There is also a social phenomenon here of fear of differentiation or exclusion — a real fear that has a basis — but it does not necessarily indicate a deep ideological opposition to general studies. It is difficult to see this as an “essential Haredi characteristic,” but rather as a result of social pressures. Perhaps fear really is a characteristic….
I agree with you that belief in science as an essential value, and not just as a means, is indeed a characteristic that is not Haredi. However, it seems that in your articles in general you tend to exaggerate your criticism in order to sharpen your arguments, and sometimes this exaggeration undermines accuracy and fairness. Do you think this is true?
It is also important to remember that for many Haredim, “leaving the public” or leaving what they grew up with for years entails a very heavy price compared to the reward they receive outside. Therefore, even if a person identifies with some of the things you describe, they may prefer to remain in the Haredi circle. After all, the Third Path still does not have institutions and communities…. Should all these phenomena be included in the definition? (If Harediism is a sociological phenomenon and most of them act and do not think this way, it may have an impact…)
PS If your goal is also to bring people from the Haredi community closer to your perception of the “modern religious movement”, a more gentle and respectful presentation of things may serve this purpose better. Harsh criticism may be discouraging, even when the intention is positive. I think that in a class or an interview, you would present things in a slightly softer way… Is this really an exaggeration for the sake of the argument?
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
1. Right, I meant more at the beginning of my words to columns 720 and 722 and more.
I agree with a significant part of your claims, except that the language you use is a bit harsh.
I wanted to know if you really stand behind every word and every description or if it was more to illustrate things.
2. I didn't fully understand, let's say that the majority of the public doesn't think in a certain way, can it still be defined in essence according to a result of which it is only a victim? And why doesn't this result also enter the definition?
3. Do you think that the utopian, best society is the modern religious. Or is it just the best alternative to the ultra-Orthodox or the national religious?
4. If I manage as an ultra-Orthodox to serve, study in academia and send my children to high-level institutions with reinforcement at home for things that they won't learn there and be part of a very diverse community …. Why should I ”move ” To the third path?
What about the fact that you have no institutions, do you propose to stay in the existing institutions for the time being? To go for institutions on the border, with the price involved?
5. Do you separate the Israeli Haredim from the outsiders? In defining the Haredim, you seem to be ignoring them… Do you agree that if they and the Haredim in Israel define them as Haredim, then they are Haredim in every sense?
Thank you in advance for your time
Everything has been explained. I don't understand what you're asking.
1. I'm not exaggerating anything. My description is completely accurate in relation to the public. The language is not harsh at all. Your behavior is harsh. I'm just describing it. You remind me of the rabbi's rebuke in Yeruham when I came out against the community that was conducting itself in terrible corruption, and he claimed that I was committing slander. I told him that the problem is in the things I'm describing, not the description itself.
2. I've explained it several times. You want to dance at all the weddings. To belong to the Haredi community and not take responsibility for its actions and conduct. You're supposedly forced. You're not forced in any way. You chose to belong there and submit to the norms practiced there. See column 723.
3. I'm not talking about utopias.
4. You decide if you want to belong and where. You choose to belong to a distorted, harmful, and immoral society. Your decision. What do you want from me? Beyond that, the third path is a movement and not a society, at least for now. Those who joined have not left the society to which they belong. Why should I establish institutions for you? You want such institutions, then establish them. Again, the Haredi attitude that everyone should solve your problems. You are just “rapists”. This is the attitude of a little child. Grow up. If you think there is no better option, then you choose to be Haredi (because that is the lesser evil), so don't complain about my descriptions of you.
5. I don't separate anyone from anyone. Whoever belongs to the Haredi community, no matter what their shade is, is the whole point. This is a collective description and not an individual description for each person or group.
I do not claim to be a forcible person. I try to improve myself even though I am Haredi, which is why I serve and study at the academy. I do not think that it counts as dancing at all weddings.
In the end, if I stay in such a society and such a community and use Haredi institutions, only joining the third path, is it not still being Haredi? What is the difference between that and what I am doing now?
In my argument about extraterrestrials, I claim that you define Haredi Israelis at most. In the eyes of a Jew living abroad, these are descriptions of Israelis, and in the eyes of a leftist, these are the rightists, and in the eyes of the secular, these are the religious, etc. And perhaps in the eyes of the Haredi from the north of the country or from certain neighborhoods in Jerusalem, these are the Bnei Barakim, and among the Bnei Barakim, these are the …. In the end, if these are part of the group, it is impossible to blame it on the entire group…
I ask systematically, let's say that most Haredim from all over the world are not like that, is it permissible to define Harediism in general in a way that characterizes only a minority in Bnei Brak or Kiryat Sefer? I agree that Harediism can lead there, but perhaps it is a phenomenon of mixing Harediism with Israeliness?
Are you talking about the core, the hardcore, of the Haredim, and therefore all Haredim from all over the world, when they choose to be part of it, are they partners in it? Is it possible that there is another hardcore than the Bnei Brak hardcore?
I'm curious about your opinion on extraterrestrials in general, can you share it with me?
Thank you again
I don't understand where this discussion is going. If you are Haredi then you are Haredi and if not then you are not. If you are not Haredi then I really wasn't talking about you.
Ner, it seems to me that you attach too much importance to ”what Miki thinks of me” than it really should matter to you. You make your own choices, you and only you should judge the results and decide whether you think they are good or not.
If you don't think like Miki in his claims against the Haredim – after hearing them – or in the conclusions he draws from them (such as being part of this society is bad and corrupt), that's your right. You don't have to try to change his mind to feel good about yourself.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
