The Problem with the Term “Orthodox” in Judaism

by Ram ben Ze'ev

The Problem with the Term “Orthodox” in Judaism

The term “Orthodox,” so commonly used today to describe traditional Jews, is not a Hebrew word and does not originate from Jewish sources. Rather, it comes from the Ancient Greek word orthodoxos, meaning “correct belief” or “right opinion.” The word itself is formed from two Greek roots: orthos, meaning “straight,” “right,” or “true,” and doxa, meaning “opinion,” “belief,” or “praise.”

From a Jewish standpoint, this already presents a problem. When a Jew describes himself as “Orthodox,” he is relying upon a foreign language and conceptual framework that comes not from the Torah or the sages of Israel, but from Greek culture. In effect, the very label used to identify fidelity to the Torah is itself borrowed from outside the Jewish tradition, from a culture based upon an idolatry that is antithetical to the Torah.

Historically, Jews did not describe themselves in this way. A Jew was simply a Jew who lived according to the Torah and the commandments. One might speak of someone who is שומר תורה ומצוות (shomer Torah umitzvot, one who guards the Torah and the commandments), but there was no need to create ideological labels to distinguish between types of Jews. The assumption was simple: the Torah given at הר סיני (Har Sinai) was binding upon the Jewish people. All Jewish people.

The term “Orthodox” only emerged in the modern era, particularly in Europe during the nineteenth century, as a reaction to the rise of movements that attempted to redefine Judaism. As various groups began to alter, reinterpret, or discard aspects of Torah observance, those who remained faithful to the traditional practice of Judaism were labelled “Orthodox.” In other words, the term was not originally a self-definition but a classification imposed within a broader social debate.

The difficulty does not end with the word “Orthodox.” The same problem extends to the entire vocabulary that has grown around modern Jewish classification. Terms such as “Modern,” “Conservative,” and “Reform” are likewise not drawn from the language of the Torah or from the traditional vocabulary of the sages of Israel. They arise from modern social and political categories that were later applied to Jewish life. Each of these labels frames Judaism as though it were a collection of competing ideological movements, similar to political parties or philosophical schools. Yet Judaism was never historically structured in this way and it remains that way today. The Torah speaks to a people bound by a covenant, not to factions distinguished by ideological titles.

When Jews adopt these labels to describe themselves, they unintentionally accept the assumptions that accompany them. The conversation shifts from whether one is living according to תורה (Torah) and keeping the מצוות (mitzvot, commandments), to which “branch” or “denomination” one belongs to. In this framework, Judaism becomes a matter of preference or alignment with a movement rather than fidelity to the covenant given at הר סיני (Har Sinai). The result is a subtle but significant transformation: instead of the Torah defining Jewish identity, modern terminology begins to define it.

It also creates a system in which Jews begin to select which of G-D’s commandments they will accept and which they will set aside. Once Judaism is framed through ideological labels and denominational identities, the discussion shifts away from the covenant itself and toward personal or communal preference. For this reason, the problem is not merely the word “Orthodox,” but the entire system of labels that has grown around it and which has gradually reshaped how Jews speak about themselves. What was once a unified obligation rooted in תורה (Torah) and מצוות (mitzvot, commandments) becomes recast as a series of options, as though the commandments of G-D were subject to selection rather than obedience.

This explains why the term can feel somewhat artificial from a Jewish perspective. Judaism is not a matter of holding the “correct opinion” in the Greek philosophical sense. It is a covenantal way of life rooted in תורה (Torah), מצוות (mitzvot, commandments), and the eternal relationship between עם ישראל (Am Yisrael, the people of Israel) and the Holy One, blessed be He.

Even the term “Ultra-Orthodox,” often used by the media, carries the same difficulty. It doubles down on a foreign classification that never existed within the internal language of the Jewish people. Traditional Jews did not historically think of themselves as occupying a point on a spectrum of “Orthodoxy.” They simply lived according to the Torah as it had been received and transmitted from generation to generation.

Yet perhaps the most unfortunate development is that many Jews themselves have come to adopt these labels and repeat them as if they were authentic Jewish definitions. Terms created by outsiders have been internalised and normalised within Jewish discourse. Instead of simply describing themselves as Jews who live according to the Torah, many have accepted the vocabulary of the surrounding culture and begun to define themselves within categories that were never part of the Torah’s language.

This habit is not merely linguistic; it subtly reshapes the way Jews think about their own identity. Once the terminology of external cultures is accepted, the framework that accompanies it often follows. Judaism then begins to be described in ideological or denominational terms, rather than as the covenantal life of a people bound to the Torah and to G-D.

For this reason, the casual use of such labels should be approached with caution. While the word “Orthodox” may be convenient in modern conversation, its widespread adoption reflects a deeper problem: the willingness of Jews to accept definitions of themselves that originate outside the Torah and outside the language of Israel.

A healthier approach is to return to the vocabulary of our own tradition. Expressions such as שומר מצוות (shomer mitzvot, one who keeps the commandments) or יהודי ירא שמים (yehudi yire shamayim, a Jew who fears Heaven) describe a person not by ideological category but by his relationship to Torah and to G-D.

In the end, Judaism does not require imported labels to define itself. The Torah already provides the language we need. The challenge is simply to remember it—and to have the confidence to use it.

###

Bill White (Ram ben Ze'ev) is CEO of WireNews Limited, Mayside Partners Limited, MEADHANAN Agency, Kestrel Assets Limited, SpudsToGo Limited and Executive Director of Hebrew Synagogue