One factor that distinguishes the different religious movements within Judaism is the absolute or relative character each gives to the commandments of the Torah. There are those, on the one hand, who completely resist making any changes, in contrast to those who have modified everything.

Shai Landesman tells us that when the walls of the ghetto began to crumble in the 18th century, ultra-Orthodox Judaism saw it as a threat to its existence. The aspect of modernity that most frightened the rabbis of that time was the modernist position that everything was relative. They saw the world moving toward a society where anything goes, where there is no absolute measure to define what is good, where there is no ulterior meaning or purpose to life. Shai explains that, to this end, they designed a structure where all aspects of life, from the most important religious obligations to the most mundane trivialities, have only one correct way to be done. Their opposition to change is total.

Modern Orthodoxy takes a different stance. Rabbi Norman Lamm says: “The Torah, faith, and religious study, on the one hand, and Madda, science and knowledge of the world, on the other, together offer us a more comprehensive and truthful vision than either alone.” Modern Orthodoxy, while remaining absolutely faithful to halacha, accepts that some principles found in the Torah cannot be taken literally. Persistently believing that the world was created in six 24-hour days is completely unsustainable. Seeking congruence between religious principles and those of science is the path of the Modern Orthodox.

Conservative or Masorti Judaism also bases the practice of Judaism on the commandments of the Torah, but accepts that their validity is not entirely absolute, as the history of the Jewish people teaches us how our sages adapted them to the needs of the moment. They maintain that some precepts can be modified to function in new circumstances, but this can only be done by a collegial group of specially chosen rabbis.

The Reconstructionist movement goes a little further. It rejects the divine origin of the halachic commandments, but recognizes that these, being a product of the evolution of Judaism as a civilization, have a certain absolute character, which encourages compliance.

For their part, Reformists go a step further by completely eliminating the obligation to observe halakha, and it is the rabbi who decides in each community how to practice their Judaism. And Humanist Judaism, by eliminating God from its vision of Judaism, leaves open the possibility of total change.

On what does each movement base its position on change? The key lies in how much one believes the mitzvoth have a divine origin or were created in part or entirely by man. To paraphrase Hamlet: “To change, or not to change, that is the question.”

By: Marcos Gojman.

Bibliography: Shai Landesman “On the alleged collapse of Haredism” and other sources.