This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Zunz was influential on reform and the creation of the science of Judaism 1819 -1845 but after the reform conferences 1844-1846 he wrote anti-reform articles and defenses of rituals to contradict Reform. He is claimed more by positive Historical Judaism. His biography of Rashi, defense of tefillin, and his studies on Kinot became part of Orthodoxy. He rejected Holdheim, post 1846 Geiger after the conferences and the Hegelian progressive approach of the Berlin Hochshule. His later writings would be positive historical and as the JE article ends - all movements claimed him. If the JE authors have a POV we should cite it as their opinion--Jayrav15:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
I don't really get this line (even though I was the one who added it from JE).
"Although Zunz kept to the Jewish ritual practises, he understood them as symbols. This contrasts with the traditional view of the validity of divine ordinances accordinng to which the faithful are bound to observe without inquiry into their meaning."
Considering that Samson Raphael Hirsch also developed his philosophy (in Nineteen Letters and Horeb around the idea of certain ritual practices were of a symbolic nature. Surely no-one would insist that Hirsch was not "traditional"?