Torah Im Derech Eretz - Interpretation

Interpretation

See also the discussion on this point, in the article on Rabbi Hirsch.

The philosophy of Torah im Derech Eretz has been variously interpreted within Orthodoxy. The range of interpretations arises particularly in light of the tension between Hirsch's insistence as to faithfulness to Jewish law and tradition, and the challenges posed to this by interaction with the secular world.

Under a "narrow interpretation", exposure to secular philosophy, music, art, literature, or ethics must be functional. Under a "median interpretation", this exposure is permissible, and even required, for the sake of the domination of Torah values over one's worldly matters. Under a "broad interpretation" this exposure is permissible, providing a complement to ― and even a synthesis with ― Torah.

Thus as regards involvement in the secular world, the "narrow interpretation" essentially restricts Derech Eretz to a gainful occupation; permissible knowledge would be limited to functional and occupation related knowledge, and (possibly) secular knowledge that enables one to better interpret and understand the Torah. The "median interpretation" encourages the study of secular knowledge, but only insofar as this permits application of a Torah outlook and philosophy to human knowledge and culture. The "broad interpretation" permits the general acquisition of secular culture and knowledge as valuable in its own right.

Hirsch himself appears to have embraced the "median interpretation", albeit with the qualifications above. He states that "Torah im Derech Eretz, as used by our sages, means the realization of Torah in harmonious unity with all the conditions under which its laws will have to be observed amidst the developments of changing times" (Gesammelte Schriften vii p. 294). Thus on a regular basis, he quotes secular scientists in his Torah commentary. Some scholars believe that he was influenced by Hegel and Friedrich Schiller; in fact, in a speech given in the school he founded on the centenary of the birth of the latter, he claimed that the universalistic principles of Western culture embodied in Schiller's writings are Jewish values originating in the Torah.

On the other hand, Hirsch cautioned as to the danger of scientific knowledge leading one away from God; further, his schools, unlike others in Germany at the time, taught modern (business) languages as opposed to classical languages. Famously, in his commentary to Leviticus 18:4-5 (see also Rashi ad loc.), Hirsch clearly delineates the relationship of secular knowledge and Torah, where Torah is "ikkar" (עיקר), the essential, while secular knowledge is "tefel" (טפל), secondary or supplementary to Torah. He states that "e are confident that there is only one truth, and only one body of knowledge that can serve as the standard… Compared to it, all the other sciences are valid only provisionally".

His commentary on Deuteronomy 6:7 is perhaps more explicit:

"The study of the Torah shall be our main intellectual pursuit… We are not to study Torah from the standpoint of another science or for the sake of that science. So, too, we are to be careful not to introduce into the sphere of the Torah foreign ideas… Rather, we should always be mindful of the superiority of the Torah, which differs from all other scientific knowledge through its Divine origin… do not demand of us to completely ignore all the scientific knowledge… that a person familiar with these other realms of knowledge, but … only from the Torah's perspective … and they warn us that neglecting this perspective will jeopardize our intellectual life."