April 15, 2023 • 52 mins
In this episode of ReligionWise, we talk with Michal Bar-Asher Siegal, Professor of Rabbinic Judaism in the Goldstein-Goren Department of Jewish Thought at Ben-Gurion University in Israel. Though her research considers the intersections of Rabbinic thought and the development of the Talmud with early Christianity, she is also keenly interested in thinking about the role of the humanities in the context of the modern University. Through her collaborative work in a variety of institutional and governmental contexts, she has developed a novel perspective on the value of the humanities.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Chip Gruen (00:03):
Welcome to ReligionWise the podcast where
we feature educators,researchers and other
professionals discussing topicson religion and their relevance
to the public conversation. Myname is Chip Gruen. I'm the
director of the Institute forReligious and Cultural
Understanding at MuhlenbergCollege, and I will be the host
for this podcast. In this seasontwo of ReligionWise, we will
(00:24):
continue to consider a broadvariety of religious and
cultural beliefs and practices,and try to understand their
place in the contemporaryconversation. If you like what
you hear, I encourage you toexplore the 12 episodes from
season one that are available inyour favorite podcast app. Also,
we would love to hear from youwith your questions, comments,
or suggestions for futureepisodes. To reach us, please
(00:48):
visit our website atreligionandculture.com. There
you will find our contactinformation and also have the
opportunity to support thispodcast and the work of the
Institute.
Today's guest is MichalBar-Asher Siegel, who is
professor of Rabbinic Judaism atthe Goldstein Goren Department
(01:08):
of Jewish Thought at Ben-GurionUniversity. Her book, "Early
Christian Monastic Literatureand the Babylonian Talmud" is
groundbreaking in a lot ofdifferent ways, in particular,
on intersections of earlyChristianity and the development
of Talmud. That being said, thatgroundbreaking work is not the
(01:29):
reason that we've invited her onto ReligionWise today. I wanted
to sit down and talk to hertoday because of her interest in
the broader study of humanitiesin the ancient world, in the
study of religion in highereducation today. She has been
both elected to and appointed toa number of different
(01:50):
organizations in Israel, thatlead the charge for the study of
the humanities, the study ofreligion, in the universities of
that country. So for example,she served on the National
Council for the Advancement ofWomen in Science with the Israel
Ministry of Science andTechnology. She served on the
(02:10):
Israel Academy of Sciences andHumanities and on the Committee
of the National Israeli Centerfor Libraries to name just a
few. So she is not justinterested in in her own field
or her own discipline, but isalso more broadly interested in
the project of higher education,the project of the university,
cultivating students in a broadvariety of fields, working to
(02:34):
understand the human conditionand human experience in all
number of ways. She's reallydeveloped an expertise in
considering the ways thatinterdisciplinary work happens,
the collision or cooperation ofdisciplines towards common
goals. It's really interestingto hear her talk about
strategies for how one does thatand is a roadmap, I think, for
(02:57):
future cooperation amongdisciplines, particularly in
systems where those disciplinesfeel isolated from one another
sequestered from one another.
One note of context for thisconversation, we recorded it in
early March of 2023, at whichtime the political turmoil in
Israel over the new legislationaround the judicial system in
the Supreme Court was ongoing. Ithink you'll hear a little bit
(03:20):
of the trepidation a little bitof the concern, from Dr.
Bar-Asher Siegal in theconversation. In fact, as the
time of the recording of thisintroduction, I think it's still
very unclear where all of thatgoes. Suffice it to say that
progressive individuals,particularly those embedded
within educational systems inIsrael are very concerned, as
(03:43):
we've seen with some of theclass cancellations and so forth
at some of the universities thathave resulted as a form of
protest. So by the time you hearthis, maybe there has been more
news on that, but it is sort oflurking in the background of her
context as an Israeli scholar atBen-Gurion University. In the
United States, there is areckoning that is happening
(04:05):
around interdisciplinary studyaround broad liberal education.
Because of the pandemic becauseof demographic changes, because
of the high cost of highereducation, university and
college administrators andfaculties as well as potential
students and parents of thosestudents are really thinking
about the values of highereducation. One of the expected
(04:30):
and totally understandablereactions to that conversation
is to emphasize skills necessaryfor the workplace, thinking
about ways in which we canprepare students to be the
workers that industry and theprofessions need. That being
(04:51):
said, I think it is necessaryfor us to step back and to think
about whether it is Is theskills that are necessary for
employment that people arereally after in higher
education. Or if there'ssomething else if there's
something less tangible, aboutdealing with difficult problems,
thinking about the humanexperience, thinking about the
(05:13):
past, the present and thefuture, from a number of
different disciplinaryperspectives that allows people
to succeed to be useful in thecurrent environment. And so I
think that these are the kindsof things that people like Dr.
Bar-Asher Siegal, are reallyinterested in thinking about and
thinking about ways in thecurrent institutions and
(05:35):
connecting with people in otherdisciplines, and being creative
about not only curricularstructures, but research
projects and collaborations thatcan help us sort of see how a
holistic liberal education canbe not only beneficial to
individual students, but also toour world. So it's my great
(05:56):
pleasure to welcome Dr.
Bar-Asher Seagal toReligionWise.
Thanks so much for appearingtoday on ReligionWise.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (06:10):
Oh, I'm so happy that you invited me.
Thank you.
Chip Gruen (06:13):
So I want to start, since the goal of the podcast is
to really think about thediscourse of religion within the
public square and how we thinkabout religion when we're
thinking about religion. I wantto start with your position in
the field itself. So your yourPhD is in Judaic Studies, and
(06:34):
you study Talmud, but you alsoyou hold position in religious
studies, and particularly givenyour field and your sub field
and your placement as anacademic in Israel. I wonder if
you could talk a little bitabout the way that Talmudic
studies is understood diverselyas a part of religious studies
(06:55):
as a part of the humanities, asopposed to theological study.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (07:01):
It's a good question, and I'm not sure
that I have a good answer. Thereason that there is a
theological schools versusreligious studies is a
historical reason. In fact, IvyLeagues in the United States
started as theological schools,right. So when they came in
Harvard, started as a divinityschool basically a place to
(07:23):
create and educate religiousofficials and teach them all
kinds of stuff, then anduniversity basically developed
from that. So they are the coreand this is why they're part of
the university system, eventhough they are not part of what
we call the critical study ofreligion or a text as developed
(07:44):
later on. So that's anhistorical reason for that. The
Department of Religious Studies,for example, here at Yale
developed later when that gapbetween a religious agenda that
works together with the study oftext became something that
scholars felt needed to bedistinguished. A critical study
(08:06):
of the text should bedistinguished from a religious
agenda or religious belief thatgets in the way. And sometimes
even practical training ofministers which some people
thought should not take place inan academic institution. So this
is when, in the 70s, thedepartments of religious thought
(08:27):
developed as an individualentity with a very clear
statement that this is meant tobe a critical study of the text
without the religious backgroundto it. But that's kind of a new
development in the study ofreligion. I think this is
actually a place of a little bitof a tension sometimes, because
some of our best scholars,critical scholars are actually
(08:50):
situated in Divinity schools.
And of course, we can havereligious thinkers that are
situated in religious studiesdepartment so that sometimes the
the lines are not as clear as wewant them to be. So this is a
little bit complicated. But interms of the methodology that's
being taught and the list ofcourses, a lot of the Divinity
(09:12):
schools actually cannot evenbestow or prepare people for a
PhD. They do something a littledifferent a THD or an MAR so
it's really still even in theterms of what's a curriculum or
what's the way you're supposedto get your degree that's
different between religiousstudies and divinity schools.
(09:32):
But at the end of the day, Ithink also, the statement of
religious studies being we arepart of a scientific quest to
study those texts critically,historically, without supposably
any barrier or presupposeassumption that supposed to lead
it in a certain way when we readthe text. That's the agenda of a
(09:55):
religious studies departmentversus Divinity school. It will
be a little bit different. And Iam a product of a religious
studies education rather than adivinity school, especially
coming from Israel, where wedon't have divinity school, we
have a different problem, whichis, or a different issue, which
is again, Jewish belief, whichdoesn't necessarily creates
(10:16):
divinity schools, but it doescreate ordination schools for
rabbis. My own connection tothat is the fact that I'm a
woman, in Orthodox Judaism,woman cannot be ordained or
cannot be part, it's a littlebit similar to some denomination
in Christianity as well.
Therefore, that option was neveravailable to women. So in fact,
(10:39):
academia was a gateway for womento actually approach the
knowledge to begin with. Sothat's a little bit different in
Israel.
Chip Gruen (10:46):
Yeah. So I want to think about that, that
distinction between I mean, ofcourse, you got your PhD at
Yale, right? So you're a part ofthat academic context. But yet
you went and you took thisposition at Ben-Gurion in
Israel. And the, you know, therole of Talmudic studies, even
in Israel seems a little bitdifferent than the role of
(11:08):
Talmudic studies within, youknow, an academic context in the
United States. And so as much asthis academic pathway has been a
gateway for you to have adifferent kind of authority than
a religious authority, right?
Still in Israel, it seems fromthe way that you're received
from the way that people dealwith you and your persona, that
that that line, thatdistinction, maybe in public is
(11:32):
not so clear as it is in yourhead, or as it is in, you know,
the academic understandings ofthese things.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (11:40):
Yeah, it's a good point. Because the
problem is, these are texts thatI'm studying, and other people
are studying that some peopleactually are attached to them.
They believe in many cases, thatthis is the Word of God, or this
has authoritative nature tothem. I, when I'm as a scholar,
or critical scholar, approachthese texts, I do not consider
(12:04):
them as such, I see them as aproduct of humans in history,
when different contexthistorical context and their
flaws and their humor and theirbeauty, but a very human beauty
and complexity, which doesn'talways align with a person who
looks at it in reverence, orappreciates it as a binding text
(12:27):
that sometimes leads toconflicts. And I feel that this
is, by the way, also relevant toChristian studies. And that
tension between Divinity Schooland Religious Studies appears as
well. But I'll talk about my ownfield. So religious studies
deals with the texts of therabbis but the religious world
(12:47):
or milieu, or some part of it,at least the Orthodox part of
the Jewish milieu, reallybelieve that those rabbis carry
the Word of God. And what theysay is binding. And my state
Israel state, I don't know ifyou're familiar with the crisis
we're at at the moment in Israelis very much connected to that,
because some fraction of thegovernment believes that these
texts that was composed bypeople 1500 years ago are
(13:11):
binding and the State of Israelshould abide by them. The State
of Israel does abide by them incertain areas, such as marriage
and divorce and others. This isthis is a conflict because these
texts were composed 1500 yearsago, and what do you do with a
gap and with liberalism thatappeared and feminism that
appeared on the stage. And sothis is this is a tension that
(13:32):
I'm experienced very, verysharply and sadly, in Israel as
we speak, because what do we dowhen people actually see this as
a binding text? So that'ssomething that's very apparent.
And so when I teach and I my ownfield of study is the connection
between Jews and Christians andthese rabbinic texts. And
sometimes, I would reach theconclusion that the rabbis knew
(13:52):
about Christian traditions wereconversing with with it,
sometimes they agreed with someof the ideas that appear in
Christian texts and vice versa,Christian texts that talk about
Jewish context. And that cansometimes be very threatening to
people who want to think aboutthese texts as being developed
(14:13):
on their own or in some kind ofa vacuum and some kind of divine
inspiration, and how can I saythat they were influenced or in
conversation with Christiantradition. So that's something
something's very, verythreatening. I should say that
the fact that I'm a woman andthe fact that I am secular is
helpful, because sometimes theycan just disregard what I'm
(14:33):
saying. I find that the internetand the you know, the recent 10
years where making my lecturesavailable to wider audience
brings my scholarship toaudiences that never, you know,
in the past wouldn't have hadaccess to it. And among them,
Orthodox Jews or very religiousJews, and sometimes I get emails
(14:55):
from them, and sometimes theyapproached me. And it's an
interesting conversation to haveabout the medium, how I talk
about this material, what do Ilearn from that. So that's an
interesting so but the tensionbetween a religious world and a
critical appraisal of thesetexts is a real tension for some
people.
Chip Gruen (15:13):
So I want to push a little bit more on that
distinction between, on the onehand, you being the the
transmitter of authority, and inclaims and knowledge about these
texts, as a woman, and yourpresentation of self and your
identity, and all of that, asdistinct from the claims
themselves. So I want to thinklike a little thought
(15:36):
experiment, right? If we removeone or the other of those and
leave the, you know, where,where does the conflict lie? So
on the on the one hand, if youhad very kind of Orthodox
understandings of these texts,and describe them that way, with
your current identity andcurrent presentation of self,
(15:57):
versus if you have your currentclaims, and the current, you
know, your books and yourscholarship, but yet you are a,
you know, 50 year old man,right? Like, where do you see
that this is just sort of aamalgamation of everything? Or
do you think one or the other ofthose provides more tension in
your life or provides moreconflict for the reception of
(16:20):
some of your work with thosereligious communities?
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (16:24):
So first, I have a sordid past I
actually used to be I was raisedOrthodox, I come from that
milieu, I was taught that thetexts that I study today, were
not fit for women to study, so Ididn't have access to them,
until I was 19. So I know thatway of thinking, and I was
raised up this way. And I wasraised in the certain ideas and
(16:47):
agendas about the women role inthe study of those texts. And
where do they fit within thetext talk very openly about the
fact that the community needs todo something. And then the
community refers to male adult,you know, Jewish, we go to
synagogue, and there's a prayerthat talks about the the well
(17:09):
being of the community andprayers for it, and it says,
this prayer prayer that youknow, the community is going to
be well, and everything,everyone is going to be healthy
and everything they their wivesand their children's. So the
text is infused with the factthat the community, the imagined
community of the Orthodox Jew isa male, Jewish man. So an
(17:33):
Orthodox man, so this is this isthe community I came from. So I
know that way of thinking,sometimes people who know that
background, and who knows aboutthat would approach me and say,
and by the way, I speak todifferent audiences. And I do we
in Israel, we have a religiousalso religious university in
Israel called Bar-Ilan thatactually teaches that in a
(17:54):
religious milieu, and when Iteach them that question, that
kind of sort of question appearsthere more often, they will say
to me, how can you say, so forexample, if I read a text and
say, Okay, so the name of thestage, that's mentioned there,
that doesn't necessarily meanthat this is actually
historical, it could be made upit could be a literary creation.
(18:15):
So you would see people say, Butwait, the name is meant.. how
can you you know, not believewhat the text is saying, as
historical or? So I have to stopand say, you know, this, this is
the way and delineate this isthe way critical thinking goes,
you, you doubt, you you raisequestion. And, and I try to
(18:37):
explain that this is the itdoesn't always appease them and
doesn't always, you know,reaches good conclusion. I have
to say, though, that even in thefield of religious studies we
have gone through phases,because we realize, at some
point that even criticalthinkers that are supposedly
above agendas of personalagendas, have agendas,
obviously, when I'm a womanreading a text and a Jewish at
(18:59):
that I have certain biasestowards the text, and we need to
acknowledge them. I'm a straightwoman reading, you know, Jewish
texts reading a certain text andI will have biases towards it.
So no one is above, you know,biases toward the text. So we
all have our religious beliefsor religious agenda in some way
or other just based on the factthat we were raised a certain
(19:21):
way and brought to think acertain way. And in recent
years, we have gone you know,through a fate a few phases of
at least doubting ourassumption, rethinking them in
conversation with others whohave different points of view
diversity is extremely importantwhen looking at the text. I
don't think that's a coincidencethat I had to write my PhD here
at Yale and not in Israel and goout of my comfort zone. I'll
(19:44):
talk a little bit about thattoo. In Israel, we have
faculties or departments forJewish thought or Jewish you
know, a faculty for Jewishstudies that Hebrew U. This is
where I got my education. So wetake all the Jewish subjects and
put them aside and study them ontheir own. When I came to the
United States I studied first atHarvard, I took some classes in
(20:07):
Syriac, there were the JewishStudies program is part of NELC,
Near Eastern Studies. And then Iwrote my dissertation at Yale,
where Judaic Studies is part ofreligious studies. So this is a
whole different way of lookingat rabbinic texts as part of
their Near Eastern world, or aspart of other religions, I would
sit in classes with, you know,Buddhist studies and Islamic
(20:30):
Studies and Christian studies,obviously. And so this is a
whole different way of lookingat the text as opposed to the
one we get in Israel. So thatdefinitely blew my mind and
looking at the biases I had, andthe way of looking at the text.
So we have learned that wecannot, you know, say we are,
you know, above these thingsthat those religious people, no,
(20:53):
we're not. But at least I thinkthere is an attempt in the
critical study of text from the19th century, when you read
scholars such as [older photo],or you read others, and there is
an attempt to try and at leastbe aware of that and try to
correct this or talk about thatmore openly and make our
scholarship better.
Chip Gruen (21:13):
So something that you've alluded to, and I want to
sort of broaden our conversationout a little bit is the idea
that, you know, religion is apart of or religious studies, I
should say, is a part of thehumanities. And I think there
are a couple of ways to approachthat one way is to say, well,
yes, of course, what else wouldit be a part of? And the other
(21:34):
way is, actually, there's apretty bold claim there, right?
That we think about humanitiesdisciplines, study of languages
and literature's and you know,art history, and that they're
all the, you know, thinkingabout cultural production,
right? We're thinking aboutthings that humans do. And so if
(21:55):
you sort of slow down and thinka little bit about saying, yes,
religious studies is a part ofthe humanities, it is sort of
backing up and saying, sotherefore, what religion is, is
it something that humans do,right, rather than something
that is handed down somethingthat is divine, right, something
that should be accepted on onother premises, rather than as a
(22:15):
product of human culture. And soon the one hand, I want to think
about, then that broader fieldof humanities, right and the
imperiled nature of humanitiesat a lot of institutions. And I
wonder if that is similar,right, similar in Israel, as
well. But then also think about,Does the study of religion
(22:37):
undercut itself? Right, when itclaims to be yet another part of
the study of human culture?
Right, rather than as you said,traditionally, the sort of
impetus for that study issomething that is a little more,
and I nobody can see my, myscare quaotes here, but it's a
little more grand, right, thatyou one studies religion,
(22:58):
because it's the most importantthing, right? Because it is a
matter of more serious than lifeand death, right? You've said,
Well, it's a product of humanculture, you know, is there some
way in which sort of the, thestudy of religion becomes less
less immediate, less urgent,right? And how do we think about
that, in the context ofhumanities? I know, there's a
lot going on there. But if youcould just echo that, that'd be
(23:18):
great.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (23:20):
You know, it's hard to ask people
who study religion is your, youknow, is your field different
from all other fields and moreimportant than all its fields?
Because obviously, yes, becauseI chose that from all other
fields. And I love what I do.
That's my bias for todayspeaking of biases, but I do
believe that the study ofreligion is a little bit
different from the study ofother humanities, professions.
(23:41):
And I think I can make the claimfor almost every of that, but
I'll say up the I'll talk aboutreligion a little bit. There's
something about the study ofreligious thought, or that
involves a lot of otherdisciplines, right? To study
religion, you have to do firsthistory, right? The history of
(24:01):
the religion, but you also haveto do philosophy, right? Because
you have to connect the ideasthat found in the religion to
other philosophical ideas or theway these ideas influence
philosophy in general or inletter. So it's history and
philosophy. It's also archeologyobviously, because it has to do
with material objects as well.
(24:23):
It has to do with socialsciences very, very strongly,
right? It has to do with warsall of the wars almost right.
And it has to do with you know,genocide and it has to do with
the industrial revolution soreligion is everywhere. It's so
this is social science at itsbest or political science. It
(24:45):
has to do with languages ofcourse, because you have to deal
with languages and languages arethe core of religious studies
and all religious studies majorsknow that because not just
because of access to the text,but because of language playing
a very important part in thehistory and the philosophy and
the social sciences, because howdo you transmit religious ideas
in which words, words matter inthis way more than almost in any
(25:09):
other field. So words, so thelinguistic quest of what words
mean and how they mean and howthey're used and how they're
interpreted. So interpretationof the study of interpretation,
this is a huge one. So look athow many fields we covered, I
think an art obviously, becauseart is all over the place. So I
think religious studies in asense, combines almost all of
(25:32):
the fields of humanities in onefield, because religion has
always been there. As far as weknow, it's always been there as
part of humanity, always. So wetalk about technology
technology, you know, was, sothis is all part of one big
field. And I would even suggestthat even exact sciences, you
(25:55):
know, at least in the beginningin the history have had direct
influence with with religion anda direct connection to religion.
So how did that we all knowobviously about, you know, the
medieval controversy with achurch or a science, but that
that was a big deal of a verybig deal. And so, all of that to
say that there's something aboutreligious studies, in order to
(26:17):
study it, you have to befamiliar with many fields of
study, that's one, you know,trying to be interested in it,
you need to be interested inmany fields of study. Third, its
relevance is to many fields ofstudy. So when others do
something that touches uponreligion, they are in need of
(26:39):
religious studies, insight orinput or or, you know,
scholarship. So this is why Ithink this is what makes
religious studies a little bitdifferent, I think from the
other fields. I don't think itundercuts it's importance . I
think it's the other way around,I think it really puts religious
studies in a very importantrole. However, when you say
(27:02):
religious studies, what do youmean? So and this is this is a
little bit tricky. And that kindof has to do with a conversation
you and I had before about whichreligious studies. So when I
talked about history, and Italked about languages, and I
talked about material evidence,a lot of it has to do with the
past. And where we're talking alot about scholarship today with
(27:24):
modern time, the question is,how is that relevant? Or why is
it important? Or why should westudy it? Fine. Okay, so there
is a history there, Why does itmatter? What, why should we
study it? And sometimes the caseis made for religious studies
that we need to know our past inorder to understand our future
better, which is a good claim.
And I can stand by it andexplain why it's true. But the
(27:44):
question is, is that the realreason or that's the real way to
present why religious studies isimportant as a field to all
other fields? And that's aquestion to ask in itself. So
what do you mean, when you sayreligious studies, you only
mean, its development? You onlymean its interaction with other
fields in the past? Or do youmean, its relevance for today?
Or what do we do with it asideas and thought that integrate
(28:07):
or come in contact with otherfields now?
Chip Gruen (28:12):
Yeah, so and I think the conversation you're alluding
to is is, you know, more, again,more generally, right? Whichever
one of those tracks we take, isabout the relevance not only of
religious studies, but therelevance of the study of
humanities. And you you sort ofallude to something that is a
concern to me. I mean, it's aconcern to both of us, I think,
(28:34):
I mean, if you study a world of1500 years ago, and I study a
world, you know, primarily ofmaybe 17 or 1800 years ago, that
there's a push towardspresentism. Right, that if the
study of religion is useful atall, it might be useful in
explaining or thinking about thecontemporary world, right? We
see that argument. You know, Ithink that you see that
argument, sort of moregenerally, right? In the
(28:56):
humanities, where, where youhave a, a denigration of, of
things from the past. I mean, Ithink about what I do for a
living and I think aboutcolloquialisms in our language.
You know, if you want to saysomething is irrelevant, you can
say, well, it's just academic.
Or you can say it's ancienthistory, right, both of which
mean, you know, in one shape orform irrelevant. So, I mean,
(29:16):
how, how much do you think thatthat presentism is a part of the
issue with humanities? And maybeI'm making assumptions? I mean,
do you feel that pressure for aneed to legitimize the study of
humanities in Israel the waythat I think a lot of us feel it
here on this side of the ocean?
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (29:39):
I think Israel is safer than what I see
here in the United States. Sothis sabbatical year has been
like a moment of awakening whenI realized that a lot of
department are cutting verystrongly back on fields of study
of the past and focus much moreon the 19th and 20th century and
that was new to me, and a littlebit sad, I think In Israel, we
(30:00):
are very strong still in thestudy of the past. But I have to
say the study of the Jewishpast, less so about other
religion, and I think it has todo with nationalism and has to
do with cultural studies. Sothat's a little bit different.
But still, there is somereverence to that the study of
the past. Now, I think that'ssomething that I find extremely
(30:25):
hard to understand first,because it's fun. And this is
what I alluded to, it's truethat you should study the past,
because it's useful because it'shelpful because you can't
understand the future withoutunderstanding the past. Because
people are people, and they tendto repeat patterns. And you can
detect, I don't know, traces offascism, and how they start and
(30:50):
be prepared, if you are familiarwith past examples. And you can
learn from other people'smistakes. And you can also
understand what's happening andgive it greater context, once
you have that, the all that istrue. But that's not why I study
the past, I study the pastbecause it's fun and
interesting. And it's, it's aportal into us as human beings.
(31:12):
It's kind of like looking atchimpanzees or bonobo monkeys to
see how we evolved as humanbeings. It's interesting to see
what we used to be in howwe...And we have text that
actually describe to us what ourforefathers thought, and how
they looked at things. And it'sfunny, because it's, it's
familiar, but it's not. And it'sconnected to our world. And it's
(31:36):
different. And, and it's notdifferent at all, and it's
complex. And so, and I think wekeep saying that the humanities
are in trouble and theuniversity are trying to deal
with that. But the truth ispodcasts that talk about
religion and talk about history,I just saw, like a statistics in
Israel, that out of the, youknow, the top 20 podcasts, I
(31:59):
think, I think something likeseventeen are about history. So
there's something people want tohear that but because it's fun,
and it's interesting, and it'sabout the past, not just about
the future. So I don'tunderstand that tendency to say
that it's not, let's start withthat. And second, I think also,
(32:20):
there's something and it's notnot related to Israel, and the
study of the past in Israel,people feel emotionally
connected to certain issues.
It's like people doing their,you know, family tree, or you
want to learn about your pastand your history that has a lot
of emotional reasons, and a lotof historical reasons. And this
is where we as academia comeinto place. And we can tell
(32:43):
people about the past orcountries or minorities that
look for their, you know, paths.
This is also part of our role inhistory to to supply people with
that knowledge. And I don'tunderstand why would anyone
reach the conclusion that it'snot needed? Everything that I
see with my students, and peoplefrom outside of academia tell me
(33:05):
the opposite. I think whatuniversity confused is the
ability to make money and toearn a living by studying this
as a profession. That's adifferent question. Do you need
to study this in order to be agood lawyer? I think you do. But
obviously, you can be evenwithout that, or, you know, when
(33:25):
you have a degree in history,what can you make with that?
Especially in in university,when it's not a liberal arts?
When you have to choose aprofession? Why would you choose
humanities when it's very, veryhard then to make a living?
That's a different separateissue, but it shouldn't be
connected to the question,should we study history? Should
we study religion? Should westudy religious studies or the
(33:48):
history of, of religion? Theseare two different things. And I
think we kind of got mixed up atsome point, and lost track of
that. So yes, we should dealwith the fact that humanity is
no longer a valid, you know,substantial way to educate and
give degrees that will allowpeople to make a living long
(34:11):
term for a lot of people. That'strue. That's something that has
changed when we became a certainsociety that makes money or
produces products in a certainway. That's okay. But it's not
it's not the same as saying noone cares about history, decline
in the interest of religion No,not at all. Everything we see
(34:33):
that people, you know, projectto us in their free time,
suggest look at just Netflix andhow many series are about you
know, historical drama or, orpeople being dressed in, you
know, high hats and people wantto learn about the past. It's
part of who we are as a society.
And I think universities youknow, misunderstood that.
Chip Gruen (34:58):
Yeah. And you say part of who we are as a society.
I totally agree. I wouldn't Iguess also, argue you part of
who we are as humans, right,that there's something about,
you know, about being human thatasks a lot of those questions as
well. So I, you know, you find adozen humanities professors, and
(35:19):
you'll find two dozen argumentson why the humanities are
important, right, that we allhave our our take on this. But
you have kind of a special rolehere that I want to talk about
as well, within the State ofIsrael, that you have some
official placement in, inconsulting with, giving advice
(35:42):
to, helping the State understandthe importance of these issues.
Can you talk a little bit aboutthat, and then I want to follow
up by thinking about thestrategies that you might employ
in such a situation.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (35:57):
So first of all, we have to talk
about Israel, Israel is a verysmall country where we have 9, 9
million people it's a smallcountry, which makes it easier
to get to policymakers. In twophone calls, you can get to
whoever makes the decision andwhoever gives them money. And
from my experience, if you'rewell placed, you can talk to
whoever needs to be talked, andthat's an advantage. The
(36:19):
hierarchy is is much lessstructured in Israel also. So
that makes it easier to changethings. For better or for worse,
as we see, sometimes we justchange things all of a sudden in
Israel. So this is this is forbetter or worse. But there's
there's something good and alsoin academia. So I'm actually
part I was part and I'll tellyou a little bit about my
(36:40):
activities in Israel, I am firstin my own university, but also
on a national level, I'm part ofa few committees that discuss
those bigger issues and try toinfluence policymakers on a few
topics. So first I was anelected member of the Young
Academy of Sciences, which is onan under the Academy of Sciences
(37:01):
in Israel, which is where theall the fancy professors are
elected, the prize winners andthe very established scholars,
and they created a YoungAcademy, where every so every
year, there's 30, of what wecall the the brightest minds in
Israel, that are from alluniversities in Israel, and from
(37:23):
all fields of diverse selection,and you're elected for four
years. And the idea is basicallyto use your prominence and
scholarship to do good in Israelto use to do this. So I was part
of that I was elected as that asthe representative again of, of
my field. And in my university,that also served as the as part
(37:44):
of the governing board of thatthing for two years. And
basically, we worked on manyfields, among them, you know,
making a knowledge accessible,especially when COVID hit in the
middle. And we had to, we hadthis series, for example of
talks about COVID, making thisinformation accessible in the
beginning, when people didn'tknow, we helped young, you know,
(38:07):
scholars who had extremedifficulties during COVID. But
we also talk about firstgeneration of education in
Israel and Arabs andultra-Orthodox people, we talk
about the promotion of women insciences, we talk about
humanities, and how to promotethis in Israel. So we had a few
those things. What's importantabout the Young Academy more
(38:27):
than what it does, I think, isthat it's create a network of
scholars, from otheruniversities from other fields,
I have best friends now from thephysics departments, and from
computer sciences and fromchemistry, from the arts with
and from other university, whichotherwise I wouldn't have a
chance to meet. We're verysegregated in our own, you know,
departments. And sometimes youdon't know the people from the
(38:50):
other side of your campus. Sothere's something about that
collecting, you know, goodpeople who want to do good in
Israel from differentuniversities in different
fields. And that's, well afterthat I'm done with my four
years, I'm no longer consideredYoung Academy, I call myself an
"old academy" now. So now we'renow we're continuing this
collaboration and doing otherthings as well. That's number
(39:11):
one. And they feel that'sextremely important, the
technique and the strategy to dothat you have to have good
partners from other fields. AndI think humanities have to join
forces. And I've seen this manytimes. If I want to talk about
the promotion of humanities,it's always better to do that
when on my side as a physicistand a biologist who say the same
(39:31):
thing as me, it's not just ustalking about our own field, but
others who support us as well.
And I think that's extremelyimportant to show that this is
across the board and not just ustalking about ourselves. So the
strategy in that is extremelyimportant. And again, using our
excellence in science to promoteideas outside of our field as
well. That's I think isextremely important with
(39:53):
policymakers. When you have ayou know, very important prize
winner in chemistry coming andsaying, we need this. It's heard
differently. So I think thatstrategy is extremely important.
Second, I'm also part of theMOLMOP, which is a committee
that advises the government onfunding. I am in a committee as
part of that I'm in a committeefor examining the Excellence in
(40:16):
Israel and the academicexcellence, which has been
deteriorating in recent years.
And we're trying to figure outwhy, and how to deal with that.
So I am the representative ofhumanities in Israel, and the
other members are from differentfields. And I represent
humanities in that committee.
And it's extremely important andinteresting, we learn about
what's the state of academia inIsrael in different fields,
(40:40):
what's been happening, how do wecompare to other countries. So
that's really interesting. Andwe're supposed to be a body
that, you know, advises thegovernment on how to fund and
how to change funding. So Ithink that's extremely important
as well. Also, I am part of acommittee that this is not
specifically about thehumanities, but Vatat is the
(41:01):
body that actually funds notjust advises, but actually funds
University in Israel. It'scalled the Budgeting Committee
of Israel. And they have asubcommittee that deals with
women's issues, and theyallocate money for that. And I'm
part of that, which I thinkwasn't I'm very proud of that
experience, it took two years todo, do we study from other
countries in the world, aboutthe way to encourage University
(41:24):
to promote women. And what wedid is we came up with a system
of basically, gradinguniversities, according to their
efforts in that field ofpromoting women in science and
humanities, and in Israel, or inacademia in general. So,a
university can apply to thatprogram, they set goals. So for
example, they have certainhiring or certain program for
(41:47):
women for supporting youngwomen, or how many women sit in
each committee. So there's like,a list of many, many, many
parameters. And they can choosewhich one they want to, they
say, set goals, and I want toset goal in that field. And over
the course of five years, wegrade the university
accordingly, and they getfunding. So we actually give
(42:08):
percentage, so the policymakersdecided to dedicate money for
that they turn to us and wecreated that committee to judge
and evaluate how to do that. Andthen lastly, the university
collaborate with us by applyinginto that program, and then
working towards an a five yearprogram to promote women in
academia, and I have to say,kind of, it's kind of moving, it
(42:30):
takes a lot of my time, I spenta lot of time writing the
program, and then judging theuniversity takes hours and hours
or hours of that. But it's kindof moving, because even when the
university decides to set agoal, a target, it's already
changes. You know, it looksaround to oh, we only have very
few women. And that also, wemaybe it just checking of it was
important. And I am therepresentative of humanities and
(42:52):
the promotion of women inhumanities in that, and that
actually is different from thepromotion of women in exact
sciences. So that was an extrainteresting thing to see why the
difference in the promotion ofwomen in academia in humanities
versus sciences, so that anotherelement. And lastly, and this is
what this is something I want totalk about is the promotion of
interdisciplinary study. So I ama strong believer in the need
(43:15):
for humanities to collaboratewith other fields to advance our
toolbox of methodological waysto study humanities, huge
supporter of that. I myself havea few projects that I
collaborate with scholars fromexact sciences, from biology,
from psychology from computersciences, and I'm a huge
(43:37):
believer in what it can do toour field. It really can broaden
our horizon give allow us to asknew questions and answer them in
new ways and be very, veryexciting. The problem with that
is there's very little if at allfunding for interdisciplinary
study in Israel, it just doesn'texist, you have to apply to your
(43:58):
discipline. And in yourdiscipline, it's very hard to
convince someone that mycollaboration with a bat
scholars is helped for forTalmud studies. So now try to
convince that my rabbinicscholar or the bat scholar that
the Talmud is important forthem. So how does one go about
this? So what we did is weactually, I'll tell you about
this because in a week, I'mgoing to Israel to do this. We
(44:19):
applied for a fund. So we wentto policymakers, we reached the
highest of them, the head of theAcademy of Sciences, and the
head of the Budgeting Committeeand the Ministry of Science and
the head of the Israel ScienceFoundation that gives money to
all the scientists, we talked toeveryone. Everyone agreed that
this is something that needs tobe done. For my data from the
(44:40):
committee that I told you aboutabout excellence. We saw that
Israel is very low oninter...interdisciplinary
collaboration, we need to dothis. There's just no money and
there's no way to fund itbecause the system doesn't know
how to deal with complex youknow, interdisciplinary study.
And then with that in mind, wewent and got a grant from the
Rothschild Foundation for 2.2million shekels for a three year
(45:03):
experiment called the Forum forthe Promotion of
Interdisciplinary Study inIsrael. And the idea is this, we
do two runs of this, and I'mgoing in Israel in a week to do
the second round, we invite 36scholars, the best scholars in
Israel are from differentfields, for three days, in the
Negev, in the and get the, andin the desert, we have a lot of
(45:25):
fun, there's carbs involved, andbird, seeing and touring and,
and there's a lot of themarshmallows and a fun stuff,
but also speed datingacademically between scholars.
And the idea is basically at theend of the three days, is to try
to create combination betweenscholars wouldn't otherwise have
thought to work together. And atthe end of that, three days,
(45:49):
they can apply for a grant of400,000 shekels, and my judges
are heads of university, NobelPrize winners, and the head of
the Israeili BudgetingCommittee. And so I have very
high profile scholars who judgethe different project and then
decide who to allocate the moneyto. So not only we promote
(46:10):
studies that are ofinterdisciplinary nature, we
also try to say the mere meetingof minds of different scholars
from different will lead in thefuture for the creation of
scholarship, it's, that'sinterdisciplinary. And by the
end of the three years, that isbasically to go to people who
policymakers in Israel and say,Okay, now let's change the
(46:34):
system, see, this works. Andit's easily done, give money to
this. So just to conclude, Ithink that will be extremely
helpful for humanities to try tobroaden that I think there's
ways to advance humanities alsoby doing
interdis...interdisciplinarywork. But in order to do that, I
need to change how the system isbeing funded. So we need to work
(46:56):
with policymakers, and we needto work from with outside
budgeting grants. And we need tostart thinking strategy and how
to do that in order to help savethe field and basically promote
it much better than we've beendoing so far.
Chip Gruen (47:12):
So if I am seeing no a through line, in a lot of the
things you're talking about,it's it's good partnerships,
right, good partnerships acrossdisciplines, good partnerships,
you know, in, in government, orin the academies as you've been
talking about good partners atother universities, right, good
partners, you know, eveninternationally and it, and I
(47:36):
can't help but think about theway I mean, sort of the the
stereotypical scholar in thehumanities operates, right,
which is alone, you know, thatthis is really, to some extent,
swimming against the grain of alot of habits that are hundreds,
if not thousands of years old. Imean, do you run into when you
(47:58):
talk to people and you say,Okay, what we need to do is we
need to develop all thesepartnerships. And look, I spent
all this time doing this, butthere's great rewards. I mean,
do you run into resistancearound this message of
developing partnership?
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (48:09):
I'm happy you stopped at alone and
you didn't mention the smokefilled room with, with the smell
of old books and very darkcorners? Yes, definitely. First
of all, I love working on myown, and I love the quiet of my
room. And I don't think it hasto be one or the other, that's
(48:29):
for sure. I think there'ssomething a little bit lonely in
that but there's good in thisloneliness, you know, the
sticking in the stacks in thelibrary. And, and there's
something you know, magicalabout this, I find you alone
with the text. And so I don'tthink that you know, kind of has
to be either that or the other.
But I am a huge, huge supporterof collaboration and meeting
(48:53):
with the minds and I have to saythat my own from my own
experience, I would not havebeen the scholar that I am today
without meeting scholars fromdifferent disciplines from my
discipline, talking about myresearch, exchanging idea. This
is what we do in conferences,right. This is what we do in
workshops, we have to step outof our comfort zone and it's
hard for some people who areshy, but this is if you're an
(49:14):
academic, you have to otherwiseyou can't be a good scholar and
I'm definitely I just think weshould raise it to the next
level. And the next level is twothings. First of all, it's
friendship. My own life haschanged dramatically from the
fan friends they made on thequest when you have you know,
some agenda that you want topromote together you become good
(49:36):
friends, sometimes. It's funny,and it's, you know, my WhatsApp
group with, you know, somephysicists and, and biologists I
have a group with the physicist,biologist, a computer science
and a psychologist and we thisis a group that sustained me in
the hardest time of my life withthe jokes and humor and sadness
and so friendship is animportant cause of that. So we
(50:01):
should do that just for thefriends you make on the way.
That's number one. But also, Ireally, really think that my
scholarship has become so muchbetter just by talking about
academic issues and academictopic and academic agendas and
promoting them and thinkingtogether how to do that my
scholarship becomes better justperiod. And I do think we have
(50:21):
to do that much more often indifferent ways. I do think we
have to be creative in the waywe do it. Right? Not just you
know, go to conferences, 20minutes, talk, 10 minutes
question and answers. And thenagain, we can do other things.
And I wasn't joking, I was alittle bit joking talking about
marshmallows and a bonfire andeven singing together. But I do
(50:44):
think that stepping out of ourcomfort zone and doing things a
little bit differently, talkingand all kinds of different ways.
And I think that's been doingI've been starting to be more
prevalent in our circles, tryingto create connection in
different ways than just regularconferences. And I think that's
important. And carbs areimportant in that. When you're
(51:06):
happy and well fed, you are morelikely to be nice to each other
and think of ideas together. SoI am a great great believer in
carbs, friendship, and promotingand collaborating with others.
Chip Gruen (51:21):
Michal Bar-Asher Siegel I'm sorry that I had no
marshmallows or carbs to sharewith you.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (51:26):
You should be sorry!
Chip Gruen (51:28):
Right on this remote session, if we can figure out if
anybody knows a way that I cantransport sweets across online,
let me know. But nevertheless,thank you very much for
appearing today on ReligionWise.
It's been great and I am goingto go out and work to make
friends and find good partners.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (51:47):
There we go. Thank you so much for
having me.
Chip Gruen (51:53):
This has been ReligionWise a podcast produced
by the Institute for Religiousand Cultural Understanding of
Muhlenberg College. ReligionWiseis produced and directed by
Christine Flicker. For moreinformation about additional
programming, or to make aninquiry about a speaking
engagement. Please visit ourwebsite at
religionandculture.com. Thereyou'll find our contact
(52:14):
information, links to otherprogramming and have the
opportunity to support the workof the Institute. Please
subscribe to ReligionWisewherever you get your podcasts.
We look forward to seeing younext time.
Welcome to ReligionWise the podcast where
we feature educators,researchers and other
professionals discussing topicson religion and their relevance
to the public conversation. Myname is Chip Gruen. I'm the
director of the Institute forReligious and Cultural
Understanding at MuhlenbergCollege, and I will be the host
for this podcast. In this seasontwo of ReligionWise, we will
(00:24):
continue to consider a broadvariety of religious and
cultural beliefs and practices,and try to understand their
place in the contemporaryconversation. If you like what
you hear, I encourage you toexplore the 12 episodes from
season one that are available inyour favorite podcast app. Also,
we would love to hear from youwith your questions, comments,
or suggestions for futureepisodes. To reach us, please
(00:48):
visit our website atreligionandculture.com. There
you will find our contactinformation and also have the
opportunity to support thispodcast and the work of the
Institute.
Today's guest is MichalBar-Asher Siegel, who is
professor of Rabbinic Judaism atthe Goldstein Goren Department
(01:08):
of Jewish Thought at Ben-GurionUniversity. Her book, "Early
Christian Monastic Literatureand the Babylonian Talmud" is
groundbreaking in a lot ofdifferent ways, in particular,
on intersections of earlyChristianity and the development
of Talmud. That being said, thatgroundbreaking work is not the
(01:29):
reason that we've invited her onto ReligionWise today. I wanted
to sit down and talk to hertoday because of her interest in
the broader study of humanitiesin the ancient world, in the
study of religion in highereducation today. She has been
both elected to and appointed toa number of different
(01:50):
organizations in Israel, thatlead the charge for the study of
the humanities, the study ofreligion, in the universities of
that country. So for example,she served on the National
Council for the Advancement ofWomen in Science with the Israel
Ministry of Science andTechnology. She served on the
(02:10):
Israel Academy of Sciences andHumanities and on the Committee
of the National Israeli Centerfor Libraries to name just a
few. So she is not justinterested in in her own field
or her own discipline, but isalso more broadly interested in
the project of higher education,the project of the university,
cultivating students in a broadvariety of fields, working to
(02:34):
understand the human conditionand human experience in all
number of ways. She's reallydeveloped an expertise in
considering the ways thatinterdisciplinary work happens,
the collision or cooperation ofdisciplines towards common
goals. It's really interestingto hear her talk about
strategies for how one does thatand is a roadmap, I think, for
(02:57):
future cooperation amongdisciplines, particularly in
systems where those disciplinesfeel isolated from one another
sequestered from one another.
One note of context for thisconversation, we recorded it in
early March of 2023, at whichtime the political turmoil in
Israel over the new legislationaround the judicial system in
the Supreme Court was ongoing. Ithink you'll hear a little bit
(03:20):
of the trepidation a little bitof the concern, from Dr.
Bar-Asher Siegal in theconversation. In fact, as the
time of the recording of thisintroduction, I think it's still
very unclear where all of thatgoes. Suffice it to say that
progressive individuals,particularly those embedded
within educational systems inIsrael are very concerned, as
(03:43):
we've seen with some of theclass cancellations and so forth
at some of the universities thathave resulted as a form of
protest. So by the time you hearthis, maybe there has been more
news on that, but it is sort oflurking in the background of her
context as an Israeli scholar atBen-Gurion University. In the
United States, there is areckoning that is happening
(04:05):
around interdisciplinary studyaround broad liberal education.
Because of the pandemic becauseof demographic changes, because
of the high cost of highereducation, university and
college administrators andfaculties as well as potential
students and parents of thosestudents are really thinking
about the values of highereducation. One of the expected
(04:30):
and totally understandablereactions to that conversation
is to emphasize skills necessaryfor the workplace, thinking
about ways in which we canprepare students to be the
workers that industry and theprofessions need. That being
(04:51):
said, I think it is necessaryfor us to step back and to think
about whether it is Is theskills that are necessary for
employment that people arereally after in higher
education. Or if there'ssomething else if there's
something less tangible, aboutdealing with difficult problems,
thinking about the humanexperience, thinking about the
(05:13):
past, the present and thefuture, from a number of
different disciplinaryperspectives that allows people
to succeed to be useful in thecurrent environment. And so I
think that these are the kindsof things that people like Dr.
Bar-Asher Siegal, are reallyinterested in thinking about and
thinking about ways in thecurrent institutions and
(05:35):
connecting with people in otherdisciplines, and being creative
about not only curricularstructures, but research
projects and collaborations thatcan help us sort of see how a
holistic liberal education canbe not only beneficial to
individual students, but also toour world. So it's my great
(05:56):
pleasure to welcome Dr.
Bar-Asher Seagal toReligionWise.
Thanks so much for appearingtoday on ReligionWise.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (06:10):
Oh, I'm so happy that you invited me.
Thank you.
Chip Gruen (06:13):
So I want to start, since the goal of the podcast is
to really think about thediscourse of religion within the
public square and how we thinkabout religion when we're
thinking about religion. I wantto start with your position in
the field itself. So your yourPhD is in Judaic Studies, and
(06:34):
you study Talmud, but you alsoyou hold position in religious
studies, and particularly givenyour field and your sub field
and your placement as anacademic in Israel. I wonder if
you could talk a little bitabout the way that Talmudic
studies is understood diverselyas a part of religious studies
(06:55):
as a part of the humanities, asopposed to theological study.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (07:01):
It's a good question, and I'm not sure
that I have a good answer. Thereason that there is a
theological schools versusreligious studies is a
historical reason. In fact, IvyLeagues in the United States
started as theological schools,right. So when they came in
Harvard, started as a divinityschool basically a place to
(07:23):
create and educate religiousofficials and teach them all
kinds of stuff, then anduniversity basically developed
from that. So they are the coreand this is why they're part of
the university system, eventhough they are not part of what
we call the critical study ofreligion or a text as developed
(07:44):
later on. So that's anhistorical reason for that. The
Department of Religious Studies,for example, here at Yale
developed later when that gapbetween a religious agenda that
works together with the study oftext became something that
scholars felt needed to bedistinguished. A critical study
(08:06):
of the text should bedistinguished from a religious
agenda or religious belief thatgets in the way. And sometimes
even practical training ofministers which some people
thought should not take place inan academic institution. So this
is when, in the 70s, thedepartments of religious thought
(08:27):
developed as an individualentity with a very clear
statement that this is meant tobe a critical study of the text
without the religious backgroundto it. But that's kind of a new
development in the study ofreligion. I think this is
actually a place of a little bitof a tension sometimes, because
some of our best scholars,critical scholars are actually
(08:50):
situated in Divinity schools.
And of course, we can havereligious thinkers that are
situated in religious studiesdepartment so that sometimes the
the lines are not as clear as wewant them to be. So this is a
little bit complicated. But interms of the methodology that's
being taught and the list ofcourses, a lot of the Divinity
(09:12):
schools actually cannot evenbestow or prepare people for a
PhD. They do something a littledifferent a THD or an MAR so
it's really still even in theterms of what's a curriculum or
what's the way you're supposedto get your degree that's
different between religiousstudies and divinity schools.
(09:32):
But at the end of the day, Ithink also, the statement of
religious studies being we arepart of a scientific quest to
study those texts critically,historically, without supposably
any barrier or presupposeassumption that supposed to lead
it in a certain way when we readthe text. That's the agenda of a
(09:55):
religious studies departmentversus Divinity school. It will
be a little bit different. And Iam a product of a religious
studies education rather than adivinity school, especially
coming from Israel, where wedon't have divinity school, we
have a different problem, whichis, or a different issue, which
is again, Jewish belief, whichdoesn't necessarily creates
(10:16):
divinity schools, but it doescreate ordination schools for
rabbis. My own connection tothat is the fact that I'm a
woman, in Orthodox Judaism,woman cannot be ordained or
cannot be part, it's a littlebit similar to some denomination
in Christianity as well.
Therefore, that option was neveravailable to women. So in fact,
(10:39):
academia was a gateway for womento actually approach the
knowledge to begin with. Sothat's a little bit different in
Israel.
Chip Gruen (10:46):
Yeah. So I want to think about that, that
distinction between I mean, ofcourse, you got your PhD at
Yale, right? So you're a part ofthat academic context. But yet
you went and you took thisposition at Ben-Gurion in
Israel. And the, you know, therole of Talmudic studies, even
in Israel seems a little bitdifferent than the role of
(11:08):
Talmudic studies within, youknow, an academic context in the
United States. And so as much asthis academic pathway has been a
gateway for you to have adifferent kind of authority than
a religious authority, right?
Still in Israel, it seems fromthe way that you're received
from the way that people dealwith you and your persona, that
that that line, thatdistinction, maybe in public is
(11:32):
not so clear as it is in yourhead, or as it is in, you know,
the academic understandings ofthese things.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (11:40):
Yeah, it's a good point. Because the
problem is, these are texts thatI'm studying, and other people
are studying that some peopleactually are attached to them.
They believe in many cases, thatthis is the Word of God, or this
has authoritative nature tothem. I, when I'm as a scholar,
or critical scholar, approachthese texts, I do not consider
(12:04):
them as such, I see them as aproduct of humans in history,
when different contexthistorical context and their
flaws and their humor and theirbeauty, but a very human beauty
and complexity, which doesn'talways align with a person who
looks at it in reverence, orappreciates it as a binding text
(12:27):
that sometimes leads toconflicts. And I feel that this
is, by the way, also relevant toChristian studies. And that
tension between Divinity Schooland Religious Studies appears as
well. But I'll talk about my ownfield. So religious studies
deals with the texts of therabbis but the religious world
(12:47):
or milieu, or some part of it,at least the Orthodox part of
the Jewish milieu, reallybelieve that those rabbis carry
the Word of God. And what theysay is binding. And my state
Israel state, I don't know ifyou're familiar with the crisis
we're at at the moment in Israelis very much connected to that,
because some fraction of thegovernment believes that these
texts that was composed bypeople 1500 years ago are
(13:11):
binding and the State of Israelshould abide by them. The State
of Israel does abide by them incertain areas, such as marriage
and divorce and others. This isthis is a conflict because these
texts were composed 1500 yearsago, and what do you do with a
gap and with liberalism thatappeared and feminism that
appeared on the stage. And sothis is this is a tension that
(13:32):
I'm experienced very, verysharply and sadly, in Israel as
we speak, because what do we dowhen people actually see this as
a binding text? So that'ssomething that's very apparent.
And so when I teach and I my ownfield of study is the connection
between Jews and Christians andthese rabbinic texts. And
sometimes, I would reach theconclusion that the rabbis knew
(13:52):
about Christian traditions wereconversing with with it,
sometimes they agreed with someof the ideas that appear in
Christian texts and vice versa,Christian texts that talk about
Jewish context. And that cansometimes be very threatening to
people who want to think aboutthese texts as being developed
(14:13):
on their own or in some kind ofa vacuum and some kind of divine
inspiration, and how can I saythat they were influenced or in
conversation with Christiantradition. So that's something
something's very, verythreatening. I should say that
the fact that I'm a woman andthe fact that I am secular is
helpful, because sometimes theycan just disregard what I'm
(14:33):
saying. I find that the internetand the you know, the recent 10
years where making my lecturesavailable to wider audience
brings my scholarship toaudiences that never, you know,
in the past wouldn't have hadaccess to it. And among them,
Orthodox Jews or very religiousJews, and sometimes I get emails
(14:55):
from them, and sometimes theyapproached me. And it's an
interesting conversation to haveabout the medium, how I talk
about this material, what do Ilearn from that. So that's an
interesting so but the tensionbetween a religious world and a
critical appraisal of thesetexts is a real tension for some
people.
Chip Gruen (15:13):
So I want to push a little bit more on that
distinction between, on the onehand, you being the the
transmitter of authority, and inclaims and knowledge about these
texts, as a woman, and yourpresentation of self and your
identity, and all of that, asdistinct from the claims
themselves. So I want to thinklike a little thought
(15:36):
experiment, right? If we removeone or the other of those and
leave the, you know, where,where does the conflict lie? So
on the on the one hand, if youhad very kind of Orthodox
understandings of these texts,and describe them that way, with
your current identity andcurrent presentation of self,
(15:57):
versus if you have your currentclaims, and the current, you
know, your books and yourscholarship, but yet you are a,
you know, 50 year old man,right? Like, where do you see
that this is just sort of aamalgamation of everything? Or
do you think one or the other ofthose provides more tension in
your life or provides moreconflict for the reception of
(16:20):
some of your work with thosereligious communities?
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (16:24):
So first, I have a sordid past I
actually used to be I was raisedOrthodox, I come from that
milieu, I was taught that thetexts that I study today, were
not fit for women to study, so Ididn't have access to them,
until I was 19. So I know thatway of thinking, and I was
raised up this way. And I wasraised in the certain ideas and
(16:47):
agendas about the women role inthe study of those texts. And
where do they fit within thetext talk very openly about the
fact that the community needs todo something. And then the
community refers to male adult,you know, Jewish, we go to
synagogue, and there's a prayerthat talks about the the well
(17:09):
being of the community andprayers for it, and it says,
this prayer prayer that youknow, the community is going to
be well, and everything,everyone is going to be healthy
and everything they their wivesand their children's. So the
text is infused with the factthat the community, the imagined
community of the Orthodox Jew isa male, Jewish man. So an
(17:33):
Orthodox man, so this is this isthe community I came from. So I
know that way of thinking,sometimes people who know that
background, and who knows aboutthat would approach me and say,
and by the way, I speak todifferent audiences. And I do we
in Israel, we have a religiousalso religious university in
Israel called Bar-Ilan thatactually teaches that in a
(17:54):
religious milieu, and when Iteach them that question, that
kind of sort of question appearsthere more often, they will say
to me, how can you say, so forexample, if I read a text and
say, Okay, so the name of thestage, that's mentioned there,
that doesn't necessarily meanthat this is actually
historical, it could be made upit could be a literary creation.
(18:15):
So you would see people say, Butwait, the name is meant.. how
can you you know, not believewhat the text is saying, as
historical or? So I have to stopand say, you know, this, this is
the way and delineate this isthe way critical thinking goes,
you, you doubt, you you raisequestion. And, and I try to
(18:37):
explain that this is the itdoesn't always appease them and
doesn't always, you know,reaches good conclusion. I have
to say, though, that even in thefield of religious studies we
have gone through phases,because we realize, at some
point that even criticalthinkers that are supposedly
above agendas of personalagendas, have agendas,
obviously, when I'm a womanreading a text and a Jewish at
(18:59):
that I have certain biasestowards the text, and we need to
acknowledge them. I'm a straightwoman reading, you know, Jewish
texts reading a certain text andI will have biases towards it.
So no one is above, you know,biases toward the text. So we
all have our religious beliefsor religious agenda in some way
or other just based on the factthat we were raised a certain
(19:21):
way and brought to think acertain way. And in recent
years, we have gone you know,through a fate a few phases of
at least doubting ourassumption, rethinking them in
conversation with others whohave different points of view
diversity is extremely importantwhen looking at the text. I
don't think that's a coincidencethat I had to write my PhD here
at Yale and not in Israel and goout of my comfort zone. I'll
(19:44):
talk a little bit about thattoo. In Israel, we have
faculties or departments forJewish thought or Jewish you
know, a faculty for Jewishstudies that Hebrew U. This is
where I got my education. So wetake all the Jewish subjects and
put them aside and study them ontheir own. When I came to the
United States I studied first atHarvard, I took some classes in
(20:07):
Syriac, there were the JewishStudies program is part of NELC,
Near Eastern Studies. And then Iwrote my dissertation at Yale,
where Judaic Studies is part ofreligious studies. So this is a
whole different way of lookingat rabbinic texts as part of
their Near Eastern world, or aspart of other religions, I would
sit in classes with, you know,Buddhist studies and Islamic
(20:30):
Studies and Christian studies,obviously. And so this is a
whole different way of lookingat the text as opposed to the
one we get in Israel. So thatdefinitely blew my mind and
looking at the biases I had, andthe way of looking at the text.
So we have learned that wecannot, you know, say we are,
you know, above these thingsthat those religious people, no,
(20:53):
we're not. But at least I thinkthere is an attempt in the
critical study of text from the19th century, when you read
scholars such as [older photo],or you read others, and there is
an attempt to try and at leastbe aware of that and try to
correct this or talk about thatmore openly and make our
scholarship better.
Chip Gruen (21:13):
So something that you've alluded to, and I want to
sort of broaden our conversationout a little bit is the idea
that, you know, religion is apart of or religious studies, I
should say, is a part of thehumanities. And I think there
are a couple of ways to approachthat one way is to say, well,
yes, of course, what else wouldit be a part of? And the other
(21:34):
way is, actually, there's apretty bold claim there, right?
That we think about humanitiesdisciplines, study of languages
and literature's and you know,art history, and that they're
all the, you know, thinkingabout cultural production,
right? We're thinking aboutthings that humans do. And so if
(21:55):
you sort of slow down and thinka little bit about saying, yes,
religious studies is a part ofthe humanities, it is sort of
backing up and saying, sotherefore, what religion is, is
it something that humans do,right, rather than something
that is handed down somethingthat is divine, right, something
that should be accepted on onother premises, rather than as a
(22:15):
product of human culture. And soon the one hand, I want to think
about, then that broader fieldof humanities, right and the
imperiled nature of humanitiesat a lot of institutions. And I
wonder if that is similar,right, similar in Israel, as
well. But then also think about,Does the study of religion
(22:37):
undercut itself? Right, when itclaims to be yet another part of
the study of human culture?
Right, rather than as you said,traditionally, the sort of
impetus for that study issomething that is a little more,
and I nobody can see my, myscare quaotes here, but it's a
little more grand, right, thatyou one studies religion,
(22:58):
because it's the most importantthing, right? Because it is a
matter of more serious than lifeand death, right? You've said,
Well, it's a product of humanculture, you know, is there some
way in which sort of the, thestudy of religion becomes less
less immediate, less urgent,right? And how do we think about
that, in the context ofhumanities? I know, there's a
lot going on there. But if youcould just echo that, that'd be
(23:18):
great.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (23:20):
You know, it's hard to ask people
who study religion is your, youknow, is your field different
from all other fields and moreimportant than all its fields?
Because obviously, yes, becauseI chose that from all other
fields. And I love what I do.
That's my bias for todayspeaking of biases, but I do
believe that the study ofreligion is a little bit
different from the study ofother humanities, professions.
(23:41):
And I think I can make the claimfor almost every of that, but
I'll say up the I'll talk aboutreligion a little bit. There's
something about the study ofreligious thought, or that
involves a lot of otherdisciplines, right? To study
religion, you have to do firsthistory, right? The history of
(24:01):
the religion, but you also haveto do philosophy, right? Because
you have to connect the ideasthat found in the religion to
other philosophical ideas or theway these ideas influence
philosophy in general or inletter. So it's history and
philosophy. It's also archeologyobviously, because it has to do
with material objects as well.
(24:23):
It has to do with socialsciences very, very strongly,
right? It has to do with warsall of the wars almost right.
And it has to do with you know,genocide and it has to do with
the industrial revolution soreligion is everywhere. It's so
this is social science at itsbest or political science. It
(24:45):
has to do with languages ofcourse, because you have to deal
with languages and languages arethe core of religious studies
and all religious studies majorsknow that because not just
because of access to the text,but because of language playing
a very important part in thehistory and the philosophy and
the social sciences, because howdo you transmit religious ideas
in which words, words matter inthis way more than almost in any
(25:09):
other field. So words, so thelinguistic quest of what words
mean and how they mean and howthey're used and how they're
interpreted. So interpretationof the study of interpretation,
this is a huge one. So look athow many fields we covered, I
think an art obviously, becauseart is all over the place. So I
think religious studies in asense, combines almost all of
(25:32):
the fields of humanities in onefield, because religion has
always been there. As far as weknow, it's always been there as
part of humanity, always. So wetalk about technology
technology, you know, was, sothis is all part of one big
field. And I would even suggestthat even exact sciences, you
(25:55):
know, at least in the beginningin the history have had direct
influence with with religion anda direct connection to religion.
So how did that we all knowobviously about, you know, the
medieval controversy with achurch or a science, but that
that was a big deal of a verybig deal. And so, all of that to
say that there's something aboutreligious studies, in order to
(26:17):
study it, you have to befamiliar with many fields of
study, that's one, you know,trying to be interested in it,
you need to be interested inmany fields of study. Third, its
relevance is to many fields ofstudy. So when others do
something that touches uponreligion, they are in need of
(26:39):
religious studies, insight orinput or or, you know,
scholarship. So this is why Ithink this is what makes
religious studies a little bitdifferent, I think from the
other fields. I don't think itundercuts it's importance . I
think it's the other way around,I think it really puts religious
studies in a very importantrole. However, when you say
(27:02):
religious studies, what do youmean? So and this is this is a
little bit tricky. And that kindof has to do with a conversation
you and I had before about whichreligious studies. So when I
talked about history, and Italked about languages, and I
talked about material evidence,a lot of it has to do with the
past. And where we're talking alot about scholarship today with
(27:24):
modern time, the question is,how is that relevant? Or why is
it important? Or why should westudy it? Fine. Okay, so there
is a history there, Why does itmatter? What, why should we
study it? And sometimes the caseis made for religious studies
that we need to know our past inorder to understand our future
better, which is a good claim.
And I can stand by it andexplain why it's true. But the
(27:44):
question is, is that the realreason or that's the real way to
present why religious studies isimportant as a field to all
other fields? And that's aquestion to ask in itself. So
what do you mean, when you sayreligious studies, you only
mean, its development? You onlymean its interaction with other
fields in the past? Or do youmean, its relevance for today?
Or what do we do with it asideas and thought that integrate
(28:07):
or come in contact with otherfields now?
Chip Gruen (28:12):
Yeah, so and I think the conversation you're alluding
to is is, you know, more, again,more generally, right? Whichever
one of those tracks we take, isabout the relevance not only of
religious studies, but therelevance of the study of
humanities. And you you sort ofallude to something that is a
concern to me. I mean, it's aconcern to both of us, I think,
(28:34):
I mean, if you study a world of1500 years ago, and I study a
world, you know, primarily ofmaybe 17 or 1800 years ago, that
there's a push towardspresentism. Right, that if the
study of religion is useful atall, it might be useful in
explaining or thinking about thecontemporary world, right? We
see that argument. You know, Ithink that you see that
argument, sort of moregenerally, right? In the
(28:56):
humanities, where, where youhave a, a denigration of, of
things from the past. I mean, Ithink about what I do for a
living and I think aboutcolloquialisms in our language.
You know, if you want to saysomething is irrelevant, you can
say, well, it's just academic.
Or you can say it's ancienthistory, right, both of which
mean, you know, in one shape orform irrelevant. So, I mean,
(29:16):
how, how much do you think thatthat presentism is a part of the
issue with humanities? And maybeI'm making assumptions? I mean,
do you feel that pressure for aneed to legitimize the study of
humanities in Israel the waythat I think a lot of us feel it
here on this side of the ocean?
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (29:39):
I think Israel is safer than what I see
here in the United States. Sothis sabbatical year has been
like a moment of awakening whenI realized that a lot of
department are cutting verystrongly back on fields of study
of the past and focus much moreon the 19th and 20th century and
that was new to me, and a littlebit sad, I think In Israel, we
(30:00):
are very strong still in thestudy of the past. But I have to
say the study of the Jewishpast, less so about other
religion, and I think it has todo with nationalism and has to
do with cultural studies. Sothat's a little bit different.
But still, there is somereverence to that the study of
the past. Now, I think that'ssomething that I find extremely
(30:25):
hard to understand first,because it's fun. And this is
what I alluded to, it's truethat you should study the past,
because it's useful because it'shelpful because you can't
understand the future withoutunderstanding the past. Because
people are people, and they tendto repeat patterns. And you can
detect, I don't know, traces offascism, and how they start and
(30:50):
be prepared, if you are familiarwith past examples. And you can
learn from other people'smistakes. And you can also
understand what's happening andgive it greater context, once
you have that, the all that istrue. But that's not why I study
the past, I study the pastbecause it's fun and
interesting. And it's, it's aportal into us as human beings.
(31:12):
It's kind of like looking atchimpanzees or bonobo monkeys to
see how we evolved as humanbeings. It's interesting to see
what we used to be in howwe...And we have text that
actually describe to us what ourforefathers thought, and how
they looked at things. And it'sfunny, because it's, it's
familiar, but it's not. And it'sconnected to our world. And it's
(31:36):
different. And, and it's notdifferent at all, and it's
complex. And so, and I think wekeep saying that the humanities
are in trouble and theuniversity are trying to deal
with that. But the truth ispodcasts that talk about
religion and talk about history,I just saw, like a statistics in
Israel, that out of the, youknow, the top 20 podcasts, I
(31:59):
think, I think something likeseventeen are about history. So
there's something people want tohear that but because it's fun,
and it's interesting, and it'sabout the past, not just about
the future. So I don'tunderstand that tendency to say
that it's not, let's start withthat. And second, I think also,
(32:20):
there's something and it's notnot related to Israel, and the
study of the past in Israel,people feel emotionally
connected to certain issues.
It's like people doing their,you know, family tree, or you
want to learn about your pastand your history that has a lot
of emotional reasons, and a lotof historical reasons. And this
is where we as academia comeinto place. And we can tell
(32:43):
people about the past orcountries or minorities that
look for their, you know, paths.
This is also part of our role inhistory to to supply people with
that knowledge. And I don'tunderstand why would anyone
reach the conclusion that it'snot needed? Everything that I
see with my students, and peoplefrom outside of academia tell me
(33:05):
the opposite. I think whatuniversity confused is the
ability to make money and toearn a living by studying this
as a profession. That's adifferent question. Do you need
to study this in order to be agood lawyer? I think you do. But
obviously, you can be evenwithout that, or, you know, when
(33:25):
you have a degree in history,what can you make with that?
Especially in in university,when it's not a liberal arts?
When you have to choose aprofession? Why would you choose
humanities when it's very, veryhard then to make a living?
That's a different separateissue, but it shouldn't be
connected to the question,should we study history? Should
we study religion? Should westudy religious studies or the
(33:48):
history of, of religion? Theseare two different things. And I
think we kind of got mixed up atsome point, and lost track of
that. So yes, we should dealwith the fact that humanity is
no longer a valid, you know,substantial way to educate and
give degrees that will allowpeople to make a living long
(34:11):
term for a lot of people. That'strue. That's something that has
changed when we became a certainsociety that makes money or
produces products in a certainway. That's okay. But it's not
it's not the same as saying noone cares about history, decline
in the interest of religion No,not at all. Everything we see
(34:33):
that people, you know, projectto us in their free time,
suggest look at just Netflix andhow many series are about you
know, historical drama or, orpeople being dressed in, you
know, high hats and people wantto learn about the past. It's
part of who we are as a society.
And I think universities youknow, misunderstood that.
Chip Gruen (34:58):
Yeah. And you say part of who we are as a society.
I totally agree. I wouldn't Iguess also, argue you part of
who we are as humans, right,that there's something about,
you know, about being human thatasks a lot of those questions as
well. So I, you know, you find adozen humanities professors, and
(35:19):
you'll find two dozen argumentson why the humanities are
important, right, that we allhave our our take on this. But
you have kind of a special rolehere that I want to talk about
as well, within the State ofIsrael, that you have some
official placement in, inconsulting with, giving advice
(35:42):
to, helping the State understandthe importance of these issues.
Can you talk a little bit aboutthat, and then I want to follow
up by thinking about thestrategies that you might employ
in such a situation.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (35:57):
So first of all, we have to talk
about Israel, Israel is a verysmall country where we have 9, 9
million people it's a smallcountry, which makes it easier
to get to policymakers. In twophone calls, you can get to
whoever makes the decision andwhoever gives them money. And
from my experience, if you'rewell placed, you can talk to
whoever needs to be talked, andthat's an advantage. The
(36:19):
hierarchy is is much lessstructured in Israel also. So
that makes it easier to changethings. For better or for worse,
as we see, sometimes we justchange things all of a sudden in
Israel. So this is this is forbetter or worse. But there's
there's something good and alsoin academia. So I'm actually
part I was part and I'll tellyou a little bit about my
(36:40):
activities in Israel, I am firstin my own university, but also
on a national level, I'm part ofa few committees that discuss
those bigger issues and try toinfluence policymakers on a few
topics. So first I was anelected member of the Young
Academy of Sciences, which is onan under the Academy of Sciences
(37:01):
in Israel, which is where theall the fancy professors are
elected, the prize winners andthe very established scholars,
and they created a YoungAcademy, where every so every
year, there's 30, of what wecall the the brightest minds in
Israel, that are from alluniversities in Israel, and from
(37:23):
all fields of diverse selection,and you're elected for four
years. And the idea is basicallyto use your prominence and
scholarship to do good in Israelto use to do this. So I was part
of that I was elected as that asthe representative again of, of
my field. And in my university,that also served as the as part
(37:44):
of the governing board of thatthing for two years. And
basically, we worked on manyfields, among them, you know,
making a knowledge accessible,especially when COVID hit in the
middle. And we had to, we hadthis series, for example of
talks about COVID, making thisinformation accessible in the
beginning, when people didn'tknow, we helped young, you know,
(38:07):
scholars who had extremedifficulties during COVID. But
we also talk about firstgeneration of education in
Israel and Arabs andultra-Orthodox people, we talk
about the promotion of women insciences, we talk about
humanities, and how to promotethis in Israel. So we had a few
those things. What's importantabout the Young Academy more
(38:27):
than what it does, I think, isthat it's create a network of
scholars, from otheruniversities from other fields,
I have best friends now from thephysics departments, and from
computer sciences and fromchemistry, from the arts with
and from other university, whichotherwise I wouldn't have a
chance to meet. We're verysegregated in our own, you know,
departments. And sometimes youdon't know the people from the
(38:50):
other side of your campus. Sothere's something about that
collecting, you know, goodpeople who want to do good in
Israel from differentuniversities in different
fields. And that's, well afterthat I'm done with my four
years, I'm no longer consideredYoung Academy, I call myself an
"old academy" now. So now we'renow we're continuing this
collaboration and doing otherthings as well. That's number
(39:11):
one. And they feel that'sextremely important, the
technique and the strategy to dothat you have to have good
partners from other fields. AndI think humanities have to join
forces. And I've seen this manytimes. If I want to talk about
the promotion of humanities,it's always better to do that
when on my side as a physicistand a biologist who say the same
(39:31):
thing as me, it's not just ustalking about our own field, but
others who support us as well.
And I think that's extremelyimportant to show that this is
across the board and not just ustalking about ourselves. So the
strategy in that is extremelyimportant. And again, using our
excellence in science to promoteideas outside of our field as
well. That's I think isextremely important with
(39:53):
policymakers. When you have ayou know, very important prize
winner in chemistry coming andsaying, we need this. It's heard
differently. So I think thatstrategy is extremely important.
Second, I'm also part of theMOLMOP, which is a committee
that advises the government onfunding. I am in a committee as
part of that I'm in a committeefor examining the Excellence in
(40:16):
Israel and the academicexcellence, which has been
deteriorating in recent years.
And we're trying to figure outwhy, and how to deal with that.
So I am the representative ofhumanities in Israel, and the
other members are from differentfields. And I represent
humanities in that committee.
And it's extremely important andinteresting, we learn about
what's the state of academia inIsrael in different fields,
(40:40):
what's been happening, how do wecompare to other countries. So
that's really interesting. Andwe're supposed to be a body
that, you know, advises thegovernment on how to fund and
how to change funding. So Ithink that's extremely important
as well. Also, I am part of acommittee that this is not
specifically about thehumanities, but Vatat is the
(41:01):
body that actually funds notjust advises, but actually funds
University in Israel. It'scalled the Budgeting Committee
of Israel. And they have asubcommittee that deals with
women's issues, and theyallocate money for that. And I'm
part of that, which I thinkwasn't I'm very proud of that
experience, it took two years todo, do we study from other
countries in the world, aboutthe way to encourage University
(41:24):
to promote women. And what wedid is we came up with a system
of basically, gradinguniversities, according to their
efforts in that field ofpromoting women in science and
humanities, and in Israel, or inacademia in general. So,a
university can apply to thatprogram, they set goals. So for
example, they have certainhiring or certain program for
(41:47):
women for supporting youngwomen, or how many women sit in
each committee. So there's like,a list of many, many, many
parameters. And they can choosewhich one they want to, they
say, set goals, and I want toset goal in that field. And over
the course of five years, wegrade the university
accordingly, and they getfunding. So we actually give
(42:08):
percentage, so the policymakersdecided to dedicate money for
that they turn to us and wecreated that committee to judge
and evaluate how to do that. Andthen lastly, the university
collaborate with us by applyinginto that program, and then
working towards an a five yearprogram to promote women in
academia, and I have to say,kind of, it's kind of moving, it
(42:30):
takes a lot of my time, I spenta lot of time writing the
program, and then judging theuniversity takes hours and hours
or hours of that. But it's kindof moving, because even when the
university decides to set agoal, a target, it's already
changes. You know, it looksaround to oh, we only have very
few women. And that also, wemaybe it just checking of it was
important. And I am therepresentative of humanities and
(42:52):
the promotion of women inhumanities in that, and that
actually is different from thepromotion of women in exact
sciences. So that was an extrainteresting thing to see why the
difference in the promotion ofwomen in academia in humanities
versus sciences, so that anotherelement. And lastly, and this is
what this is something I want totalk about is the promotion of
interdisciplinary study. So I ama strong believer in the need
(43:15):
for humanities to collaboratewith other fields to advance our
toolbox of methodological waysto study humanities, huge
supporter of that. I myself havea few projects that I
collaborate with scholars fromexact sciences, from biology,
from psychology from computersciences, and I'm a huge
(43:37):
believer in what it can do toour field. It really can broaden
our horizon give allow us to asknew questions and answer them in
new ways and be very, veryexciting. The problem with that
is there's very little if at allfunding for interdisciplinary
study in Israel, it just doesn'texist, you have to apply to your
(43:58):
discipline. And in yourdiscipline, it's very hard to
convince someone that mycollaboration with a bat
scholars is helped for forTalmud studies. So now try to
convince that my rabbinicscholar or the bat scholar that
the Talmud is important forthem. So how does one go about
this? So what we did is weactually, I'll tell you about
this because in a week, I'mgoing to Israel to do this. We
(44:19):
applied for a fund. So we wentto policymakers, we reached the
highest of them, the head of theAcademy of Sciences, and the
head of the Budgeting Committeeand the Ministry of Science and
the head of the Israel ScienceFoundation that gives money to
all the scientists, we talked toeveryone. Everyone agreed that
this is something that needs tobe done. For my data from the
(44:40):
committee that I told you aboutabout excellence. We saw that
Israel is very low oninter...interdisciplinary
collaboration, we need to dothis. There's just no money and
there's no way to fund itbecause the system doesn't know
how to deal with complex youknow, interdisciplinary study.
And then with that in mind, wewent and got a grant from the
Rothschild Foundation for 2.2million shekels for a three year
(45:03):
experiment called the Forum forthe Promotion of
Interdisciplinary Study inIsrael. And the idea is this, we
do two runs of this, and I'mgoing in Israel in a week to do
the second round, we invite 36scholars, the best scholars in
Israel are from differentfields, for three days, in the
Negev, in the and get the, andin the desert, we have a lot of
(45:25):
fun, there's carbs involved, andbird, seeing and touring and,
and there's a lot of themarshmallows and a fun stuff,
but also speed datingacademically between scholars.
And the idea is basically at theend of the three days, is to try
to create combination betweenscholars wouldn't otherwise have
thought to work together. And atthe end of that, three days,
(45:49):
they can apply for a grant of400,000 shekels, and my judges
are heads of university, NobelPrize winners, and the head of
the Israeili BudgetingCommittee. And so I have very
high profile scholars who judgethe different project and then
decide who to allocate the moneyto. So not only we promote
(46:10):
studies that are ofinterdisciplinary nature, we
also try to say the mere meetingof minds of different scholars
from different will lead in thefuture for the creation of
scholarship, it's, that'sinterdisciplinary. And by the
end of the three years, that isbasically to go to people who
policymakers in Israel and say,Okay, now let's change the
(46:34):
system, see, this works. Andit's easily done, give money to
this. So just to conclude, Ithink that will be extremely
helpful for humanities to try tobroaden that I think there's
ways to advance humanities alsoby doing
interdis...interdisciplinarywork. But in order to do that, I
need to change how the system isbeing funded. So we need to work
(46:56):
with policymakers, and we needto work from with outside
budgeting grants. And we need tostart thinking strategy and how
to do that in order to help savethe field and basically promote
it much better than we've beendoing so far.
Chip Gruen (47:12):
So if I am seeing no a through line, in a lot of the
things you're talking about,it's it's good partnerships,
right, good partnerships acrossdisciplines, good partnerships,
you know, in, in government, orin the academies as you've been
talking about good partners atother universities, right, good
partners, you know, eveninternationally and it, and I
(47:36):
can't help but think about theway I mean, sort of the the
stereotypical scholar in thehumanities operates, right,
which is alone, you know, thatthis is really, to some extent,
swimming against the grain of alot of habits that are hundreds,
if not thousands of years old. Imean, do you run into when you
(47:58):
talk to people and you say,Okay, what we need to do is we
need to develop all thesepartnerships. And look, I spent
all this time doing this, butthere's great rewards. I mean,
do you run into resistancearound this message of
developing partnership?
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (48:09):
I'm happy you stopped at alone and
you didn't mention the smokefilled room with, with the smell
of old books and very darkcorners? Yes, definitely. First
of all, I love working on myown, and I love the quiet of my
room. And I don't think it hasto be one or the other, that's
(48:29):
for sure. I think there'ssomething a little bit lonely in
that but there's good in thisloneliness, you know, the
sticking in the stacks in thelibrary. And, and there's
something you know, magicalabout this, I find you alone
with the text. And so I don'tthink that you know, kind of has
to be either that or the other.
But I am a huge, huge supporterof collaboration and meeting
(48:53):
with the minds and I have to saythat my own from my own
experience, I would not havebeen the scholar that I am today
without meeting scholars fromdifferent disciplines from my
discipline, talking about myresearch, exchanging idea. This
is what we do in conferences,right. This is what we do in
workshops, we have to step outof our comfort zone and it's
hard for some people who areshy, but this is if you're an
(49:14):
academic, you have to otherwiseyou can't be a good scholar and
I'm definitely I just think weshould raise it to the next
level. And the next level is twothings. First of all, it's
friendship. My own life haschanged dramatically from the
fan friends they made on thequest when you have you know,
some agenda that you want topromote together you become good
(49:36):
friends, sometimes. It's funny,and it's, you know, my WhatsApp
group with, you know, somephysicists and, and biologists I
have a group with the physicist,biologist, a computer science
and a psychologist and we thisis a group that sustained me in
the hardest time of my life withthe jokes and humor and sadness
and so friendship is animportant cause of that. So we
(50:01):
should do that just for thefriends you make on the way.
That's number one. But also, Ireally, really think that my
scholarship has become so muchbetter just by talking about
academic issues and academictopic and academic agendas and
promoting them and thinkingtogether how to do that my
scholarship becomes better justperiod. And I do think we have
(50:21):
to do that much more often indifferent ways. I do think we
have to be creative in the waywe do it. Right? Not just you
know, go to conferences, 20minutes, talk, 10 minutes
question and answers. And thenagain, we can do other things.
And I wasn't joking, I was alittle bit joking talking about
marshmallows and a bonfire andeven singing together. But I do
(50:44):
think that stepping out of ourcomfort zone and doing things a
little bit differently, talkingand all kinds of different ways.
And I think that's been doingI've been starting to be more
prevalent in our circles, tryingto create connection in
different ways than just regularconferences. And I think that's
important. And carbs areimportant in that. When you're
(51:06):
happy and well fed, you are morelikely to be nice to each other
and think of ideas together. SoI am a great great believer in
carbs, friendship, and promotingand collaborating with others.
Chip Gruen (51:21):
Michal Bar-Asher Siegel I'm sorry that I had no
marshmallows or carbs to sharewith you.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (51:26):
You should be sorry!
Chip Gruen (51:28):
Right on this remote session, if we can figure out if
anybody knows a way that I cantransport sweets across online,
let me know. But nevertheless,thank you very much for
appearing today on ReligionWise.
It's been great and I am goingto go out and work to make
friends and find good partners.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal (51:47):
There we go. Thank you so much for
having me.
Chip Gruen (51:53):
This has been ReligionWise a podcast produced
by the Institute for Religiousand Cultural Understanding of
Muhlenberg College. ReligionWiseis produced and directed by
Christine Flicker. For moreinformation about additional
programming, or to make aninquiry about a speaking
engagement. Please visit ourwebsite at
religionandculture.com. Thereyou'll find our contact
(52:14):
information, links to otherprogramming and have the
opportunity to support the workof the Institute. Please
subscribe to ReligionWisewherever you get your podcasts.
We look forward to seeing younext time.
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.