A Response to Shmuel Lesher's “Tikkun Olam Revisited”
Shmuel Lesher, “Tikkun Olam Revisited”, The Seforim Blog (January 10, 2024)
Overall this is a good piece, well-written and backed up, on an important topic. It’s a good contribution to the discussion. I'd like to push back on a few things. I have four comments, numbered in sections below.
1
The first major thesis is overstated (near footnote 9):
>>“When one takes a look at the sources, from the Talmud until the contemporary halakhic literature, it is clear that the recognition that the Jewish people is charged with the improvement of mankind as a whole has widely been accepted among rabbinic scholars.”
Almost all the sources subsequently adduced and cited are from the late modern period and on (meaning, circa mid-19th century and on): R' Hirsch, R' Yaakov Ettlinger (=Aruch LaNer), R' Soloveitchik, R' Sacks. All could (except for maybe R' Ettlinger) arguably properly be called 'Modern Orthodox'.
The only two earlier authorities cited are Maimonides (a known universalist, see Kellner, “Maimonides the Universalist” [2020]). The only one somewhat surprising is the Maharsha. The thesis would be more convincing, if a greater number and variety of early authorities were cited.
2
The other major thesis is overstated as well:
>>”One contemporary Jewish thinker who took an active role in general society stands in a league of his own — the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson. One would be hard-pressed to find a better example in the 20th century of someone who was both staunchly committed to authentic Torah values and at the same time dedicated to the betterment of general society than the Lubavitcher Rebbe. The Rebbe developed a comprehensive, holistic, and deeply spiritual mandate for what sociologist Philip Wexler refers to as the “resacralization” of society. “
The only real examples given are a) public menorah lighting around Chanukah time; b) pushing for prayer in public schools. Both were standard Christian culture battles with secularists, and can’t be properly understood without the greater historical context.
Public menorah lighting of course exactly parallels the battles around public Christmas tree lighting, happening at essentially the same time of year.
“education in schools” is clearly a euphemism, based on the continuation, it seems to essentially be about prayer in schools. Again, the battle about prayer in schools was primarily between religious Christians and secular people. I'd assume that R’ Schneerson’s impact was marginal.
For historical context, see this 2017 article in Snopes (“A History of the 'War on Christmas' | Snopes.com”):
“Christmas again became a battleground in the struggle over America's identity in the 1950s, when a rise in religiosity after World War II reached its peak [...]
The post-World War II religious revival also had an impact on public school curricula. A 1955 resolution adopted by the National Council of the Churches [...] explicitly called for the inclusion of religious teachings in classrooms [...]
The civil rights and anti-war movements of the 1960s presented a head-on challenge to the conservatism of the '50s, setting the stage for broader social changes (and reactions to those changes) over the next few decades. The '70s and '80s saw a shift toward greater recognition of and sensitivity toward Americans' growing ethnic and religious diversity. Secularism was on the rise, too [...]
The cultural change also reached in public schools, which saw increasingly diverse student populations at the same time that court rulings reaffirming the separation of church and state mandated the non-preferential treatment of religion in the classroom [...]
3
>>” In a 1983 talk the Rebbe delivered, he voiced his support for a moment of silence and also stressed the need for parents to contribute to their children’s education: “The actual situation in this country is that parents have no time — and even those who do have the time do not have the patience — to invest themselves in the education of their children.” “
This is a popular idea in some circles, but the indications mostly go against this.
4
>> “Over twenty years ago, Rabbi Berel Wein told interviewer and author Faranak Margolese of the book Off the Derech, that he sees a lack of interest in general society and its issues as a contributing factor for today’s youth leaving a life of Torah and mitzvot. In his words: “To a great extent, I think one of the greatest problems that Orthodoxy faces is that it doesn’t promise anything. It should. On an individual basis perhaps it does; but [not] on a national basis. I mean let’s say everybody would vote for the Orthodox parties tomorrow. What would be its platform? What are we going to do? We have no idea [...]”
Indeed, traditional Jewish Orthodoxy has no interest in broader questions relating to society. R’ Natan Slifkin has made this point extensively in his writing. The reason for this lack of interest is due to the fact that traditional Jewish Orthodox have been a minority population for 2000 years, so broader societal questions haven’t been especially relevant. In contrast, many Religious Zionist thinkers have articulated visions regarding broad questions relating to modern secular society. Already Rav Kook discusses these questions.. These thinkers are not mentioned at all in this piece.