Jewish Philosophical Politics in Germany, 1789-1848

Becoming Citizens of Hegel’s State { 79

Let us return to Moser’s famous remark that the Verein should strive to as-

sume the role of, or act in the place of, the state, and his comment that “the sense

in which I am here using the word [that is, Staat] surely requires no explana-

tion.” Although his fellow Hegelians may not have needed an explanation, the

contemporary reader likely requires some elaboration.^119 The wider context of

Moser’s lines throws light on how he envisioned Hegel’s state and the place of

Judaism in it. Moser invokes Hegel’s version of the state as one into which Jews

can integrate as Jews, without converting. In fact, he considers conversion to

Christianity incompatible with entry into Hegel’s state.^120 Rather than convert-

ing by embracing dogmas that could only be obnoxious to the state, Jews must

bring their religious culture into harmony with the state. Judaism, like nondog-

matic Christianity, could and should be a part of the national culture.

As they attempt to effect an Aufhebung of the opposition “between Jewish

culture and general European or, if you prefer, Christian culture,” Moser ad-

monishes his colleagues to comprehend the destination to which they wish to

lead Judaism within a broader vision of the ultimate goal of humanity itself.^121

Thinking of Judaism as part of this broader humanistic aim—as embodied in

Hegel’s state—precludes the option of conversion. To strive for a complete Auf-

hebung of the opposition between Jewish and Christian culture

would amount to nothing other than adopting the view of many contemporaries

who regard conversion to Christianity as our only salvation and pronounce a

condemnation on every other endeavor. This way of thinking is not ours. We do

not deny that the achievement of this aim would in many ways mean a significant

step forward for the nation (which would thereupon cease to be one), but with

that higher aim in mind a different orientation (Richtung) is enjoined upon us

(uns... vorgeschrieben), which demands greater efforts. Only to the extent

that these two paths (Richtungen) converge is the resolution (Aufhebung) of

the opposition appropriate (geboten).^122

Moser admits that conversion would “improve” the situation of Jews by open-

ing up opportunities from which they are barred, albeit at the cost of ending

the collective nature of the Jewish nation, a goal he explicitly disavows.^123 Sig-

nificantly, this “easier” way to civil improvement through conversion would be

incompatible with the “higher aim” of humanity, to which, Moser insists, any

transformation of Judaism must remain true. The Vereinler must therefore fol-

low a more demanding path toward harmony between Christian and Jewish

culture, involving a noncoercive Zusammenlaufen rather than an Übergang. For

Moser, Hegel’s state is the site where such a coexistence with shared ultimate

goals can occur.