My post below got cut off; let me complete it here: --- A racist and/or xenophobic view of gentiles as being ontologically less valuable than Jews, and non-Jewish learning as being irrelevant to the Jew. This is based on the fact that according to Haredim, the mitzvah of peru u'revu (in the sense of settling the world and developing civilization and science) applies only to gentiles (Rabbi Shimon Schwab, "Elu v'Elu"), whereas other Orthodox Jews believe that peru u'revu applies to all humans, Jewish and gentile alike (Rabbi Schwab, ibid.). According to Rabbis S. R. Hirsch and Benzion Uziel (a scion of the Judeo-Spanish school of Orthodox Judaism), "For he [the Jew] knows that the upright and pure in all societies of men are working with him for the kingdom of G-d on earth", and "therefore [he] find[s] in every new truth which is propounded [by even non-Jews] a welcome contribution to the clearer revelation of G-d in nature and in history, and [...] see[s] in every new art and in every new science a welcome addition to the means for rendering perfect service to G-d." (To quote Rabbi Hirsch; Rabbi Uziel says very similar words.) In other words, since Jews and gentiles have the same goal and purpose on earth, therefore Jews value non-Jewish people and their learning and creations. By contrast, Haredim would disagree with the above, and hold that Jew is to abstain from peru u'revu and any knowledge not found explicitly in the Torah, and that therefore, gentiles and their learning have little value for the Jew.

I'd define an Orthodox Jew roughly as follows: -- Jewish (matrilineal descent, etc.) -- Seriously committed to the Torah (both Written and Oral) as the word and/or command and/or will of G-d; punctiliously observes the mitzvot of the Written Torah and the halakhot of the Oral Torah (Talmud, Shulhan Arukh, etc.), considering the mitzvot of the Written Torah to be the direct and explicit revelation of G-d, and the halakhot to be either His direct revelation at Sinai or hiddushim derived later by Hazal and whose observance is commanded in "And you shall go to the judge who will be in those days". Haredism I would define as being what Orthodox Jews are, plus also the following in addition: --- Adherence to a fundamentalist interpretation of the Talmud that refuses to entertain the notion of anything in the Talmud is time-bound, i.e. dependent on sociological or material conditions, and therefore subject to reevaluation when those conditions change. --- Belief that everything in the Talmud is equally Sinaitic, disregarding the Gaonim, Rambam, Ramban, Ran, Sefer ha-Hinukh, etc., who indicate that there is such a thing as post-Sinaitic hiddush that was not revealed at Sinai. (The Yerushalmi asks rhetorically, "Could it be that the whole Oral Torah was revealed to Moshe?", and it answers that no, Moshe was taught only the general principles, and it was left to later Sages to elucidate the rest of the Oral Torah, as per tanur akhnai, lo ba-shamayim hi, Moshe not understanding Rabbi Akiva's lecture, etc. Some do hold that Moshe was taught the ENTIRE Oral Law, but even these authorities hold that Moshe did not relate everything to Yehoshua. If so, then Yehoshua and the entire chain in Avot 1:1 was ignorant of much of the material taught to Moshe, and so there is no nafka mina; in the end, post-Moshe authorities had to use their human wisdom to elucidate the Written Torah according to the 13 Principles. But Haredim disregard all the of previous; they hold that the entire Oral Law was given at Sinai and transmitted as per Avot 1:1, until it was written in the Talmud and Midrash.) --- A racist and/or xenophobic view of gentiles as being ontologically less valuable than Jews, and non-Jewish learning as being irrelevant to the Jew. This is based on the fact that according to Haredim, the mitzvah of peru u'revu (in the sense of settling the world and developing civilization and science) applies only to gentiles (Rabbi Shimon Schwab, "Elu v'Elu"), whereas other Orthodox Jews believe that peru u'revu applies to all humans, Jewish and gentile alike (Rabbi Schwab, ibid.). According to Rabbis S. R. Hirsch and Benzion Uziel (a scion of the Judeo-Spanish school of Orthodox Judaism), "For he [the Jew] knows that the upright and pure in all societies of men are working with him for the kingdom of G-d on earth", and "therefore [he] find[s] in every new truth which is propounded [by even non-Jews] a welcome contribution to the clearer revelation of G-d in nature and in history, and [...] see[s] in every new art and in every new science a welcome addition to the means for rendering perfect service to G-d." (To quote Rabbi Hirsch; Rabbi Uziel says very similar words.) In other words, since Jews and gentiles have the same goal and purpose on earth, therefore Jews value non-Jewish people and their learning and creations. By contrast, Haredim would disagree with the above, and hold that Jew is to abstain from peru u'revu and any knowledge not found explicitly in the Torah, and that therefore, gentiles and their learning have little value for the Jew.

If I understand you correctly, then, with all due respect, I believe your definition is false. I think most would agree that YCT/Edah types are not Haredi. And yet, according to the "toils in Torah" definition, they are certainly Haredi! A certain scholar once said: "The more, indeed, Judaism comprises the whole of man and extends its declared mission to the salvation of the whole of mankind, the less it is possible to confine its outlook to the four cubits of a synagogue and the four walls of a study. The more the Jew is a Jew, the more universalist will his views and aspirations be, the less aloof will he be from anything that is noble and good, true and upright, in art or science, in culture or education; the more joyfully will he applaud whenever he sees truth and justice and peace and the ennoblement of man prevail and become dominant in human society: the more joyfully will he seize every opportunity to give proof of his mission as a Jew, the task of his Judaism, on new and untrodden ground; the more joyfully will he devote himself to all true progress in civilisation and culture." I think we both agree that the author of the previous lines was not Haredi. And yet that author certainly toiled day and night in Torah! So according to your definition, he IS Haredi, and yet his hashkafah is clearly not Haredi! Who is this author? Rabbi S. R. Hirsch, in his essay, "Religion Allied to Progress".