From Lubavitch to Lakewood: The Chabadization of American Orthodoxy

The year 1941 witnessed the arrival in America of two Eastern European refugee rabbinical figures destined to reshape the landscape of American Judaism, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson¹ and Rabbi Aharon Kotler.² Within a decade both stood at the helms of their respective constituencies. Schneerson was formally chosen as the Rebbe (central spiritual figure and political leader) of the Brooklyn based Lubavitcher hasidic sect, while Kotler led the Beth Medrash Govoha yeshiva in Lakewood, New Jersey and was head of the Council of Torah Sages (Moetzes Gedolei ha-Torah) of Agudath Israel of America. In these capacities, he was widely acknowledged as the driving force in the renaissance of Lithuanian yeshiva world Orthodoxy (also referred to as yeshivish, Right Wing, and Haredi Orthodoxy or the Torah world) on American soil. Despite their common commitments to Orthodox interpretation of Jewish law, as outstanding representatives of hasidic and mitnagedic (non or anti-hasidic) traditions, there were certainly significant differences in their personal religious orientations. Indeed, one of the sharpest divides was expressed in their polar visions of how to mould the future of American Judaism.³

Kotler positioned himself in direct opposition to all American Jewish religious movements—including Modern Orthodoxy—that had emerged in the early twentieth century.⁴ In his estimation, they all accommodated to local cultural and intellectual norms as a price for social acceptance. Authentic Judaism would develop in America, he argued, only if a core population separated itself physically from society and its members concentrated on enriching their own Jewish knowledge and commitment.⁵ The key to achieving this goal was to establish yeshivas and, even more so, kollels—institutions where married men receive a regular stipend in return for dedicating themselves exclusively to Talmud study.⁶ He claimed that the young scholar who secluded himself in the pursuit of Torah knowledge was not only growing intellectually and spiritually, this very feat was making a critical contribution to the welfare of the Jewish people. As such any activities that distracted him from this pursuit were to be discouraged.⁷

Schneerson was no less disturbed than Kotler by the integration of Jews into American society and their widespread abandonment of traditional Jewish practice. His solution, however, was expressive of a completely different educational and ideational orientation. He proclaimed the main goal of his generation to be the spread (“u-faratzta“) of the wellsprings (“ma’ayanot“) of the Torah to every Jew regardless of his or her personal level of observance.⁸ Paradoxically, he considered materialistic America to be the ideal framework for fulfilling this challenge. Starting in 1951, he systematically transformed Lubavitch Hasidism from an insular sect to the multifaceted Chabad⁹ religious movement.¹⁰ The vanguard were his shluchim (personal emissaries) who were commanded to leave the warm confines of the Rebbe’s Crown Heights neighborhood and settle in areas that were often devoid of any Orthodox infrastructure.¹¹ There they were to dedicate themselves to touching the souls of the local Jews, while remaining absolutely committed to the strict religious regimens of their hasidic order. Needless to say, Kotler was reported to be highly critical of Lubavitch activism.¹²

In his groundbreaking 1965 survey of American Orthodoxy, Charles Liebman highlighted Chabad’s focus on addressing the “potentially devout” as a unique phenomenon within the Right-Wing world. In contrast, Kotler’s isolationism was the accepted view. Moreover, Liebman predicted that along with the accelerated growth of the Torah world, the enclavist outlook would continue to dominate the future.¹³

Indeed, the last five decades have witnessed significant growth and expansion of the American Right-Wing Orthodoxy.¹⁴ In the course of this development, however, many of the heirs to Kotler’s legacy have veered away from insularity and have adopted significant aspects of the outreach ideal first championed on American soil by Schneerson. This transformation, which is not without its critics within the yeshiva world, has entailed the assimilation and adaptation by America’s mitnagedic elite of institutions and methodologies that parallel those conceived within the Lubavitch hasidic milieu. It is particular noteworthy since it has taken place simultaneously...