Preservative leadership versus innovative leadership in a religious society undergoing transformation: the case of the modern Haredi community Israel (Hebrew)

• In Event: New Directions in Studies of Orthodoxy

Abstract

The paper was co-authored by Tehila Gado

Societies undergoing change and modernization processes are characterized usually by transformative leadership that succeeds in developing a vision and creating feelings of responsibility and meaning among the group, while motivating them to change and grow. The transformative leader creates among his group members motivation for constructive change and is an inspiration for advancement and innovation.
In this presentation, we will deal with religious leadership in a period of change. Our case study will be the rabbinic leadership of modern Haredim in Israel. We will discuss two types of religious-rabbinic leadership in a period of change: preservative (conservative) leadership versus innovative (adaptive) leadership.
The Haredi community in Israel is a minority, conservative ultra-orthodox society, numbering approximately 1.3 million people. Due to its high birth rate (over 4% per year), and due to the increasingly large number of people joining, its margins are widening. Thus, while the Haredi mainstream remains conservative and even fundamentalist, in the last two decades, modern elements have emerged in the community. According to estimates, the modern or semi-modern sub communities reach up to 40% of the Haredi community.
As modern Haredism has developed, a rabbinical leadership has emerged, who takes part in bringing about change in the community. Preservative and innovative leadership styles are both evident. We will discuss these two types while pointing out a typical character of each type.
Rabbi Baruch Greenboim will serve as a model of preservative rabbinical leadership. Analysis of his writings and communal involvement shows that contrary to what is customary in the classical Haredi community, he encourages his disciples to enter the job market when necessary, he allows for a middle class lifestyle and even borrowing from other Orthodox Jewish groups. At the same time, he makes a great effort to preserve the classical Haredi ideology with the authority and hierarchy that is part of it, to preserve its social structures, and thus basically to subordinate the modern current to the Haredi hegemony. In doing so, he aims for only practical changes, and avoids significant ideological changes that might set modern Haredism apart from classical Haredism.
On the other hand, Rabbi David Leibel will serve as a model of innovative rabbinical leadership. We reviewed and analyzed his social involvement, speaking, and religious writings, and have concluded that he is not afraid of innovation. He aims to create an ideal independent from classical Haredism, and advocates for independence in thought and action. Rabbi Leibel does not shrink from supporting new social structures where they are needed, and does not subordinate the modern current to the classical Haredi leadership. In doing so, he aims to bring about fundamental and ideological change. At the end of the presentation, we will discuss implications the two models of rabbinic leadership have for the future.

Author

• Itschak Trachtengot, Hebrew University of Jerusalem