INTRODUCTION

ERNST TROELTSCH's church-sect typology, a well-known attempt to characterize distinct types of religious organization, uses as its point of departure the extent to which Christianity is able to compromise with the material world. Michael Hill has shown that this depends on whether the emphasis is being placed on a radical or a conservative element of Christianity: the church-type organization represents the conservative element, the sect the radical. However, the entire question applies specifically to Christianity and cannot be seen independently of Christian theological values, ideals, and concepts. For this reason, Troeltsch's typology cannot be used directly in the analysis of other religious traditions. This does not mean that the dilemma of conservatism versus radicalism never plays a role in other religions, but it is not necessarily as basic to the understanding of the emergence and development of many non-Christian religious collectivities as it probably is to the understanding of Christianity. In itself, however, the idea that doctrinal systems are marked by inherent contradictions and present their adherents with dilemmas which force them to make choices depending on time and circumstances is one which can undoubtedly provide some insight into non Christian religions as well, including Judaism. An example of this kind of contradiction in Judaism is, in my opinion, the clash between the values of study and work, a clash which has its roots in the more fundamental distinction between the realms of the spiritual and the physical, the sacred and the profane.