[2] Jews should engage constructively with the world that they are in to foster goodness and justice within both themselves and the larger community, such as by avoiding sin in their personal lives while also caring for the unfortunate.

At the same time, in order to preserve the integrity of halakha, any area of "powerful inconsistency and conflict" between Torah and modern culture must be filtered out.

[5] Here two characteristics are manifest: in general, Modern Orthodoxy places a high national, as well as religious, significance on the State of Israel, and institutions and individuals are, typically, Zionist in orientation; relatedly, involvement with non-orthodox Jews will extend beyond "outreach" to include institutional relations and cooperation; see further under Torah Umadda.

[2] Among the issues have been the extent to which Modern Orthodoxy should cooperate with the more liberal denominations, support secular academic pursuits combined with religious learning, and embrace efforts to give women a larger role in Jewish learning and worship;[6] the acceptability of modern textual criticism as a tool for Torah study is also debated.

[8] In addition to increasing stringency in adherence to Halakha, many Modern Orthodox Jews express a growing sense of distance from the larger, secular culture.

Adherents on the ideological left have begun to develop new institutions that aim to be outward looking while maintaining a discourse between modernity and halakhah.

Tikun Olam ("repairing the world") is re-mapped onto the values of social justice and basic Judaism is increasingly abandoned.

This "Orthodoxy of convenience" has maintained a certain stability over time: as long as these don't seek to legitimize their behaviour in halakhic terms, the leadership of the (Modern) Orthodox world have no particular difficulty with them.

Here, the "individual has absorbed the attitudes characteristic of science, democracy, and Jewish life, and responds appropriately in diverse relations and contexts".

In Rav Soloveitchik's thought, Judaism, which believes that the world is "very good",[18] enjoins man to engage in tikkun olam.

Here too, the ideological basis is largely drawn from the teachings of Rav Kook,[9] and there is therefore much overlap; philosophical differences, as well as other "non-modern" forms of Religious Zionism, are discussed below.

See also Mizrachi; Bnei Akiva; National Religious Party; Hesder; Mechina; Gush Emunim; Torat Eretz Yisrael.

Although there is some question as how precisely to define the distinction between Modern Orthodoxy and Haredi Judaism, there is basic agreement that they may be distinguished on the basis of three major characteristics:[12] A fourth difference suggested, relates to the acceptability of moderation within Jewish law.

Modern Orthodoxy holds that strictures are not normative, rather, these are a matter of personal choice;[21] "severity and leniency are relevant only in circumstances of factual doubt, not in situations of debate or varied practice.

Note though, that in recent years, many Modern Orthodox Jews are described as "increasingly stringent in their adherence to Jewish law".

In the Haredi view, on the other hand, "the most severe position ... is the most likely basis for unity and commonality of practice within Orthodox community, and is therefore to be preferred".

According to Modern Orthodox scholars, although the term "da'as Torah" has been used in the past, the connotations of absolute rabbinic authority under this banner occurs only in the decades that follow the establishment of the Agudas Yisrael party in Eastern Europe.

The movements are nevertheless distinct, and in general, Neo-Orthodoxy has taken a more qualified approach than Modern orthodoxy, emphasizing that followers must exercise caution in engagements with the secular world.

For example, Shimon Schwab, second rabbi of the Torah Im Derech Eretz community in the United States, has been described as being "spiritually very distant" from Yeshiva University and Modern Orthodoxy.

Further, in practice, except at their extremes, the differences between Religious Zionism and Modern Orthodoxy in Israel are not pronounced, and they are often identical, especially in recent years and for the younger generation.

There is an often repeated contention that Modern Orthodoxy—beyond its approach to chumrahs ("strictures") described above—has lower standards of observance of traditional Jewish laws and customs than other branches of Orthodox Judaism.

[1][This] group is appropriately described as "modern" in the sense that those who see themselves as part of it are committed to the tradition, in general, but feel free to pick and choose in their observance of rituals.

Their sense of "freedom of choice", although never articulated theoretically, is as evident as it is among many other contemporary Americans who view themselves as religiously traditional, but, nevertheless, are selective in their religiosity.

[citation needed] Note that claims of this nature have been commonplace within Orthodox Judaism since the first "reforms" of Samson Raphael Hirsch and Azriel Hildesheimer.

[citation needed] It is foolish to believe that it is the wording of a prayer, the notes of a synagogue tune, or the order of a special service, which form the abyss between [Reform and Orthodoxy]....

(Religion Allied to Progress, Samson Raphael Hirsch)Some observe[12] that the ability of Modern Orthodoxy to attract a large following and maintain its strength as a movement is inhibited by the fact that it embraces modernity—its raison d'être—and that it is highly rational and intellectual.