Is Judaism A Religion Or A Culture?

Conference on Moses Mendelssohn, new book fuel debate on thorny issues of faith, identity.

Special To The Jewish Week
Photo Galleria: 

The case for a new, fuller understanding of what defines Judaism.

As any Jew knows, trying to define what it means to be Jewish is difficult, if not impossible. Yet still we try: over the past two decades, the number of American Jews who define themselves as secular has nearly doubled; in Israel, a country founded on secular and nationalistic notions of Judaism, the religious population has risen dramatically. Fifty-eight percent of Israeli Jews now consider themselves either traditional or religious, while just 42 percent say they’re secular.

But all these self-definitions fail to convey what Judaism truly is. Its religious aspects can be no more easily separated from its cultural or national dimensions than secular notions of Jewishness can be divorced from their religious origins. Still, a common assumption today is that Judaism began as a religion and only gradually grew into something more broad — and it’s flat wrong.

The idea was most recently given voice in the international bestseller “The Invention of the Jewish People,” by the Israeli historian and anti-Zionist Shlomo Sand, in which he argued that the idea of Jewish peoplehood was a modern invention in the service of the Zionist cause. Or as Tom Segev succinctly summarized Sand’s argument: “There was never a Jewish people, only a Jewish religion.”

The strange thing is that this has it exactly backwards: the very idea that Judaism is a religion is a distinctly modern invention. Prior to Jewish modernity — most clearly defined as the acquisition of citizenship rights for Jews, a long process that began in Europe in the late-18th century — Judaism was neither solely a religion, nor simply a matter of culture or nationality. Rather, Judaism and Jewishness were all of these at once: religion, culture and nationality.

The basic framework of organized Jewish life in the medieval and early modern periods was the local Jewish community. While a Jewish community’s existence depended on the whim of others (usually the nobility or royalty), pre-modern Jewish communities were unique in that they had a tremendous amount of political autonomy.

Each community had its own set of bylaws administered by laypersons who, among other things, elected a rabbi for the community. Rabbis in turn had jurisdiction over ritual law and also gave credence to the laws of the community as a whole.

Each community also had its own courts, as well as its own educational, health, economic and social services systems. Outside rulers gave the Jewish community responsibility to maintain law and order, and the right to punish its members in a variety of ways, including exacting fines, imprisonment and corporal punishment.

For all these reasons, it simply was not possible in a pre-modern context to conceive of Jewish religion, nationality, and what we now call culture as distinct from one another. A Jew’s religious life was defined by, though not limited to, Jewish law, which was simultaneously religious, political and cultural in nature.

It was only in the modern period that the corporate Jewish community dissolved, and with that, political agency shifted to the individual Jew, giving him the freedom to define his identity for himself.

So where did the idea that Judaism was only a religion come from? Moses Mendelssohn.

The German Jewish philosopher, born in 1729, essentially invented it. Known as the “German Socrates,” Mendelssohn thrived in both Jewish and German Enlightenment circles. Yet despite his fame, Mendelssohn, like all other Jews, had no civil rights.

When he was publicly challenged to explain why he Jews shouldn’t convert to Christianity, he argued that Judaism was wholly compatible with German Enlightenment values. But he stressed Judaism’s religious components over its corporate structure, thus giving birth to the idea that Judaism was a religion alone.

He vehemently opposed the idea that the Jewish community should retain its autonomy in matters of civil law, stressing that Jews should receive civil rights as individuals and not as a corporate entity. And he especially rejected the Jewish community’s claim, still maintained in his day, to the right to excommunicate.

It is not surprising that a century after Mendelssohn’s peak of fame, and after Jews had been granted some though not all civil rights, Rabbi Abraham Geiger, the Reform movement’s founding father, would affirm what he called Judaism’s “religious-universal” element. Though he reacted against Mendelssohn’s insistence that Jews maintain religious practices, Rabbi Geiger argued that Judaism consisted only of “spiritual achievements” because “it is precisely to its independence from political status that Judaism owes its survival.”

What is perhaps surprising is that what we today call “Orthodoxy” has as much, if not more, in common with Mendelssohn’s conception of Jewish religion than do pre-modern forms of Judaism. Despite the perception of it being deeply hidebound, Orthodox Judaism is, in other words, essentially modern. Orthodoxy’s founder was Samson Raphael Hirsch, a 19th-century German rabbi of what came to be called neo-Orthodoxy, and who stressed that a “unity of religious outlook,” and not political life, linked Jewish communal life throughout the ages.

Rabbi Hirsch never denied that non-Orthodox Jews were Jewish, but he parted company with his rabbinic predecessors in distinguishing between being Jewish and “the genuine Jew” who belonged to what he called “the true Jewish congregation.” For this reason, Rabbi Hirsch, despite his vehement criticism of liberal Judaism, made Judaism more like the Christianity of his times, much as Reform Judaism did.

The idea that Judaism was a secular, cultural identity was born further east, in the late-19th century. Rabbis Hirsch and Geiger’s ideas of Judaism as a religion made little sense in Eastern Europe, where Jews still, for the most part, did not possess individual rights. The cultural Zionist Ahad Ha’am, born in 1856 in Kiev, rejected the idea that Judaism was a religion, arguing that Jews had attempted to eliminate their communal identity for the false promise of full equality in a modern state.

As he put it in a well-known and aptly titled essay, “Slavery in Freedom”: “Do I envy these fellow Jews of mine their emancipation? I answer in all truth and sincerity: No! A thousand times No. ... I have at least not sold my soul for emancipation...” Instead, he believed Jews should revive their own homeland in Palestine, and one founded on a rich Hebrew culture.

Yet while Ahad Ha’am is today often treated as a “secularist,” there can be no denying that, somewhat paradoxically, he understood religion and theology as the vital element of what he regarded as the future of Hebrew culture. Put another way, the notion of Jewish culture, or Jewish secularism, relied on religious sources. Particularly telling is how Ha’am drew inspiration from the Hebrew prophets, contending that the ethical imperative was the true meaning of prophecy and the unique contribution of Judaism to all of humanity.

But his younger contemporary Michah Josef Berdichevsky took things further, posing a critical challenge to Jewish secularism. Without God, he wondered, from where does this ethical imperative arise? And if not from God, then who has the authority to define the parameters of a culture when the sole source of the traditions on which it is built has been undermined? Thus, we see that the category of Jewish culture, like the categories of Jewish nationality and Jewish religion, is not without its own tensions and internal contradictions.

So what is the answer to that very modern question: Is Judaism a religion, a secular culture or a national identity? The answer, I think, is none and all of the above. This may not be entirely satisfying, but complex questions rarely allow for simple answers. The truth, as they say, is often inconvenient.

Leora Batnitzky is a professor and chair of the department of religion at Princeton University. She is author of the forthcoming book “How Judaism Became a Religion: An Introduction to Modern Jewish Thought,” to be published by Princeton University Press later this month. This essay is adapted from the book.

Last Update:

09/01/2012 - 15:25

Get The Jewish Week Newsletter

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.

Shlomo Sand's book has nothing to do with us as Jews. It's is to help the/our objectives for which is Israel's public relations department. We are fighting against the accusation that Judaism is a race and that Israel is Apartheid. His work is to open the eyes of gentiles to this aspect of us Jews of the Israeli.

Again, we are not his audience: since the Siddur has the word "Thy people", addressing G-d, appears on every single page of our prayerbook three times, on average. So, for this audience, he is not to be taken at face value. It's nothing to argue about because it's moot. Like someone writing a book that tries to explain why oranges are really purple. It is silly of any of us to even debate him for this very same reason. It's not debatable. It's just plain silly.

I HAVE A QUESTION???? SOMEONE PLEASE ANSWER!! I have always wondered why Jewish people were called Jewish? I was rasied Catholic but I am not catholic, I am Irish! I read this article and understand that culture and tradition may Identify Jewish people but if they are from Russia wouldnt that Identify them more????? There are Catholic Irish and Protestant Irish they classify them selves as Irish. So I wonder why the Jewish people call them selves Jewish????

You can read a view of Batnitzky's book at Lawrence Grossman enjoyed the book and only wishes it could cover more information.

Equally important in the formation of the modern Jewish identity were the deliberations of the French Assembly during the time of the Revolution and of Napoleon's Sanhedrin. Together they typified of the European experiment in integration: the promise of equal civil rights for Jews in the emerging modern nation states in exchange for the abandonment of Jewish nationality and its transformation into a religion pure and simple--or so it seemed until European racists rejected this quid pro quo.

Judiasm can be all that YOU want it to be... nothing more, nothing less for you.


oh please give me a break. Why does the author not even mention "Judaism as a Civilization," by Dr. Mordecai M. Kaplan -- written in about 1934 -- which addressed -- and answered the question of what Judaism is, in hundreds of deeply thought out pages -- not one little article. try reading the book -- or just look up the topic on Wikopedia -- before wasting time on this "pre-school level" article.

Being Jewish is a nationality/culture because if you are Jewish, even if you are not religious, and you are born anywhere in the world, you will have an instant family-like connection to any other Jewish person. Within our Jewish world community, we are free to be as religious or as secular as we want. We might have slightly different traditions based on the countries we come from, but we can always put our differences aside because we are all related.

Really? Almost eighty years after Mordecai Kaplan described Judaism as the evolving religious civilization fo the Jewish people, we still have this question?

According to Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch Judaism is not a religion.

In fact, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch emphasized a number of times in his writings that Judaism is not a religion.

In his commentary on Shemos 6:7 - "I will take you to Myself as a people and I will be a God to you; you will come to know that I am Hashem, your God, Who brings you out from under the burdens of Egypt" - Rav Hirsch wrote:

Li l'am. These two short words are the first statement of Israel's destiny. They express the quality that makes Judaism so unique. It is entirely inappropriate to refer to Judaism as "the Jewish religion"; it is thoughtless to define Judaism as a religion, to classify it with the other religions, and then to be amazed that this "religion" includes so many elements that transcend the conventional bounds of "religion." Li l'am: Israel is to be a people unto God.
This statement alone already makes it clear that Judaism, as established by God, is not a religion at all. True, Judaism also embraces elements generally characterized as "religion," but the term "Judaism" is completely different and infinitely broader. In "religion," God has only temples, churches, priestly orders, congregations, etc. Nations, peoples, are subject only to kings and governments; they are founded on the concept of statehood, not on religion and God. In Judaism, however, God founded not a church, but a nation; a whole national life is to be fashioned by Him. Israel will be His people, not just a congregation of believers.

Dr.Yitzchok Levine
Brooklyn, NY

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.