Orthodoxy as a "modern" movement is misleading and ignores Sefardic Jews[edit]

I tried editing an unsourced and un-nuanced sentence in the beginning of the article that refers to Orthodoxy as a "modern movement" that originated with breakdown of the Jewish community in Europe to the following: The label arose in the Ashkenazi world during the breakdown of the autonomous Jewish community since the 18th century to describe those who maintained traditional beliefs and customs, and in more recent times has also been applied to traditional Sephardic Jews. (And I sourced it with an article by Professor Zion Zohar in the Worldmark Encyclopedia of Religious Practices)

Additionally I removed an unsourced sentence that refers to Rabbi Moses Sofer as the "father of Orthodoxy" which represents a blatant Ashkenazi bias.

My edits were reverted by user AddMore-III claiming that my edits were "making claims contrary to what you'll find in any academic source" (even though I quoted an academic source). Obviously not interested in edit warring which is why I'm being this here but I'm not sure what about my edits AddMore-III thinks contradicted academic sources. Is Orthodoxy not a label that arose in the 18th century to describe those who maintained traditional beliefs and customs? Are observant Sephardic Jews members of a modern movement that began during the breakdown of the European Jewish community which they never experienced? Is Rabbi Moses Sofer the father of the observant Sefardic community (even indirectly)?

In general it is worth noting that this article leaves Sefardic (and Yemenite for that matter) Jews out of the narrative almost entirely; it seems as though Sefardic and Yemenite Jews first began to exist when the State of Israel was founded and that the traditions and beliefs which they maintained for thousands of years are just the outgrowth of some 18th century Ashkenazi "movement." Shaked13 (talk) 06:53, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is not for me to find your arguments sound or not, all I can do is cite academic sources. One both available and succinct, by Dr. Michael Silver of the Hebrew University HERE, restates the common theme one will find in papers and in the article: Orthodoxy in all its variety is characterized by a firm ideological stance, defining itself in relation to rival trends within Judaism... It is this conservative posture that lies at the very core of the self-definition of the modern-day Orthodox. As such, it is a relatively new phenomenon, a consequence of the challenges posed to tradition by modern ideologies. More so, it states: This has been the received wisdom concerning Sephardic and Oriental Jewries. Brown's article which Shaked contests is in Hebrew, as are most sources concering oriental Jews, but I could get Prof. Nissim Leon's work about the crisis of young oriental in the 1970's/1980's Israel: The crisis arose from the Israeli education system’s impact on the children of immigrants from Islamic countries. On the one hand, the non-religious state education system encouraged secularization. On the other hand, the religious education system promoted Orthodoxy. Ergo, they could not have been Orthodox to begin with. AddMore-III (talk) 11:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do not see how the beginning of what you quote contradicts what I wrote.
As far the the Sefardic Jews, it is unclear why you think "the religious education system promoted Orthodoxy" means Sefardic Jews could not have been Orthodox to begin with. It is also an incorrect assessment as there are Sefardic and Mizrahi Jews all over the world that are Orthodox, not just those who were educated in Israel. Shaked13 (talk) 13:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Again, I'm not here to debate anyone. That's not what Wikipedia is for. Benjamin Brown, a leading scholar, writes that Orthodoxy appeared among the orientals in Israel, in the latter half of the 20th century. Few conservative, anti-modern rabbis were active in Muslim lands, but nowhere did their reaction consolidate into full-fledged Orthodoxy. If you want to change the article, you need to provide a good (i.e. academic) source backing your claims (and trust me, there aren't any). AddMore-III (talk) 14:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
so perhaps I'm not being clear and it seems like this spiraled into a larger discussion than I intended. The sentence "though their beliefs are traditional, the movement is a modern phenomenon" makes it sound like it is only in the modern day that a new movement of Jews began to have traditional beliefs (like some sort of neo-pagen phenomenon) which obviously isn't true. That is why I felt it would be better to change the sentence and I cited Professor Zohar's article which states "In 1795 the term "orthodoxy" (borrowed from Christianity) first appeared in a Jewish context—in an article published by reformers intent on disparaging those who refused to modify Jewish practice or belief. Jewish traditionalism had previously required no specific designation." (And I don't think any academic source disagrees with that). When academics write that Orthodoxy began in the 18th century they just mean the community's opposition to secularization (which they could not oppose earlier because it didn't exist), but the fact that they follow traditional beliefs and practices is not a modern phenomenon. This article defines Orthodoxy not just as Jews opposed to secularization but also as Jews who adhere to traditional beliefs and practices and that is not something new. The introduction should reflect that nuance. What I did write in my edited version of the sentence did not contradict any of the academic sources that you quoted but if you do feel that there was something misleading about it perhaps we can come up with some other way of saying this which still removes the misleading connotation.
That there is an obvious Ashkenazi bias in this article is self-evident, many Sefardic and Mizrahi Jews would take offense to your implication that they practice a form of Judaism that was invented by Jews in Europe (obviously false). (And you can tell me if I'm misunderstanding you but that seems to be what you think "academia" is saying and I find that difficult to believe.) But I'll hold off on this point for now because I believe my previous point is one where we can actually come to some productive conclusion. Shaked13 (talk) 15:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories