Fundamentalist or Religious Nationalist: Israeli Modern Orthodoxy (original) (raw)
Related papers
This article addresses the transition of a fundamentalist confrontational religious ideology into an assertive, religio-nationalist ideology by the case of the ethno-Ultra-Orthodox (haredi) Shas party in Israel. Alongside the haredi proclivity towards insularity, we also detect, in recent decades, two new trends within the haredi mainstream. First, we see increasing numbers of haredim (Ultra-Orthodox Jews) integrating into different frameworks that are situated outside of the haredi enclave: the job market, the army, welfare and charity organizations, and more. A second trend, which I will elaborate upon here, is a fundamentalist religious interpretation of elements of Israeli national identity. This trend seeks to view Jewish law, in its orthodox interpretation, as a source for the conservation and maintenance of Jewish identity in Israel: firstly, through the turning of haredism into a dominant factor in the religio-communal arena in Israel; and secondly, through assuming responsibility for demarcating the boundaries of the Jewish collective. This article addresses the transition of a fundamentalist, confrontational religious ideology into an assertive, religio-nationalist one. Setting aside for the moment the political connotations of the word 'fundamentalism' as a label that plays a role in the struggle between fervently religious forces and secular forces in modern society (Ruthven 2004), we might describe fundamentalism as a family of modern religious ideologies which have a restorative goal (Zeidan 2003). These ideologies have as their aim to restore the conservative religious order-at least as they perceive it. So long as this has not yet been achieved, the fundamentalists take care to separate themselves from general society, creating a sort of counter-society (Sivan 1995). Naturally, this produces a permanent tension between fundamentalists and the frameworks of the modern nation-state. * Dr Nissim Leon teaches in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Bar-Ilan University. He specializes in religious society in Israel, with an emphasis on Orthodox groups and ethnic and class relations.
Journal of Political Ideologies The socio-economic ideology of religious Zionism in
During the past two decades religious Zionists have developed several different approaches regarding social justice. The middle class among them have tended to identify with neo-liberal policies. Many nationalist Zionists chose compartmentalization and adaptation, i.e. they accepted the prevalent capitalist outlook without a deep understanding of its religious implications. The 'strong' nationalists and strictly Orthodox have had little to say about socioeconomic issues. This derives from their emphasis on the spiritual calling of the people of Israel and its general disregard for material life. There is also a connection between their messianic, rightist, religious and political orientation and a right-wing socio-economic outlook. The moderate nationalist, Torahoriented (Torani) wing tends either towards a 'third way' or towards a more moderate leftist direction. The liberal religious sector has both liberal religious and liberal welfarist economic views.
Biblical narratives,messianic hopes and religious radicalism:Jewish fundamentalism in our time
Thepaper examinesthe contemporary scene of Jewish fundamentalism, focusing on its two major wings:the separatist Ultra-Orthodox, and the more culturally accommodating but politically radicalZ ionist OrthodoxS ettlers and would-be Temple Builders.B oth those segments of Judaism have been demographically and institutionallyonthe rise in the last generation and have made their impact on the political scene,c hanging the character and image of Judaism as awhole.T he essay comes to offer an historical and sociological context to the formation, development and growth in numbersa nd importance of the two camps.Itpoints to the diversity within the two camps and relates to major institutions,leaders and theological concepts.Italso examines the meaning of the term fundamentalisminlate modern Judaism and points to the fact that while there are obviousdifferences between the Ultra and the Zionist Orthodox, there are also striking similarities.T hese demonstrate themselves,a mongo ther features,i nt he centralityo f scriptural narratives to the two groups,i ncluding the idea of holding as pecial place in Godsplans for humanity,and the idea of the imminent or eventualarrival of the mes-sianic times. Ag raduate of the Hebrew University and the University of Chicago,Y aakovA riels research focuses on messianic, hybrid, or radical movementsinc ontemporary Judaism and Christianity,a sw ell as on Christian-Jewish relations in the Modern Era.H eh as published numerous articles as well as an umber of books on these topics.H is book,
We hear much about the Islamic Fundamentalists, and Islamic radicals, nowadays from Medias and public places, especially after the 9/11attacks on USA. But very rarely, we heard of Christian Fundamentalists, Jewish Fundamentalists, Buddhist Fundamentalist, Hindu Fundamentalists, Sikh Fundamentalist and etc. in general, all the religious fundamentalists almost has the same characteristics, definitions, and goals which is to preserve their identity, traditions and basics of their religions. We can name the religious fundamentalists, the anti-modernist movements. By the rise of the globalization, development of technology, communications, Medias, modernization, and the most important and dangerous one for all religions, is the rise of secularism, and separation of religion from politics. The religious populations in different parts of the world and in different countries, tried to form different groups and special ways to keep their religion, language, and traditions, and identities alive, and almost in every religion we can find the fundamentalists who look at others as strangers and the enemies of their divine, who are tasked to destroy their religion. There are two kind of religious fundamentalists: the first one is Active fundamentalists, who choose to use force and violence against anyone who is not like them and does not think the same way as they do, and they call them all enemies and their task is to destroy the enemy in order to remain alive and keep their faith untouched. The Second group of religious fundamentalist is Passive fundamentalists, who prefer to remain silent, in peace, and not to use force or violence, and be always in them, not to have contact out of their circle of community with outsiders. In this way they try to save their faith and religious traditions. The focus of this paper is on the Jewish Fundamentalism which is not covered by the news and medias, and very few people around the world know that what is going between the communities of Jews in Israel, and how will be the future of this country in a few years, which is linked directly to the security situation of the Middle East region, Israel and the issue of the West bank settlers which is the heart of the conflict between Israel and the Arab (Palestinian) world. After reading of the findings of this paper, you will have an idea about the roots and the reasons of the conflicts in the region, and how long it will take to reach peace and how would look Israel tomorrow from inside and how would be the International Relations of Israel.
“Religious-Zionism”: Signifier without Signified? Or—Is Religious-Zionism Still Alive?
Religions
In the public discourse and the research literature, the signifier “religious-Zionism” is usually viewed as denoting a specific group located midway between secular and ultra-Orthodox Jews. This location does not turn religious-Zionism into a residual category including whoever is not part of the two others. Quite the contrary. Religious-Zionism used to be a group with unique characteristics, including values and a normative fullness of its own. I argue in this article that, at present, the category “religious-Zionism” no longer signifies a specific group due to a series of centrifugal processes affecting it. Its ethos, myth, textual web, and authority principle have collapsed and the signifier reflects no more than a political and rabbinic discourse attempting to control the breakdown.
Contrary to the impression of many, religious strife in Israel is not a new phenonmenon. The early history of the World Zionist Organization (WZO) is one consisting of a highly precarious relationship between the secular and religious Zionist organizations and movements, and the religious, non Zionist Agudat Israel movement, as well. Outright fights in the WZO were very bitter. Ehud Luz's work,1 despite a few errors in the translation from the original Hebrew, provides the most complete analysis of the ideological and pragmatic issues involved. One factor which has exacerbated the religious-secular conflict since the Six-Day War is the interrelationship between religion and nationalism. Specifically, most of the religious parties are viewed as "hawkish" in general, and especially visa -vis Israel's retention of virtually all of the Administered Territories, Judea and Samaria/the West Bank. Among secularists, in par ticular, there is a prevalent image of religious Zionists as political messianists. This image stems, in large measure, from the strong religious Zionist influence in the settlement movement, Gush Emunim, as analyzed by Stewart Reiser in his essay, "The Religious Parties as a Support System for the Settler Movement,"2 The first comprehensive in-depth analysis of the interrela tionship between the more extreme elements of the religious and political right appears in a recent book by Ehud Sprinzak.3 The literature on Gush Emunim is vast, compared to its size and, as with any controversial subject, the quality varies. Significantly, virtually all social scientific analyses implicitly and in some case, explicity view Gush Emunim as an unnatural and undesireable feature of Israeli society. Gideon Aran's doctoral dissertation on the subject, written for the Hebrew University's Department of Sociology, is unpublished. However, he has written several articles based on that work, including, "From Religious Zionism to Zionist Religion: The Roots of Gush Emunim,"4 and "Jewish Zionist Fundamentalism: The Bloc of the Faithful in Israel (Gush Emunim)."5 Three books on the subject, from three somewhat different perspectives, are by an Israeli parliamentarian, Amnon Rubinstein6; an American political scientist, Ian S. Lustick7; an a collection edited by David Newman, an Israeli social geographer.8 Among the notable briefer analyses are those by Ehud Sprinzak,9 and Janet Aviad.10 Of the Israeli books in Hebrew, Danny
Fighting for Legitimacy: New Religious Movements and Militarism in Israel (with Guy Ben-Porat)
Nova Religio 26 (3): 80–100., 2023
This article examines the links between alternative spirituality and Israeli militarism in the context of the confrontations between new religious and spiritual movements and Israeli society and state, and the efforts of such movements to gain legitimation through participation in republican citizenship practices and adaptations of Israeli cultural values. The article discusses the representation of alternative religious and spiritual movements as a danger to the Israeli Army by anticult movements, and the response of new religious movements to such accusations. Through the study of two case studies, Emin and Anthroposophy, the article examines the adjustments of religious and spiritual doctrines and practices of new religious movements to Israeli military ethos, the role of militarism in the endeavors of such movements to legitimize themselves through participation in Israeli republican citizenship practices, and the appropriations and interpretations of the Israeli military ethos by Israeli alternative spiritual movements.