The End of Certainty: A New Jewish Theology – A Conversation with Yehudah Ber Zirkind

In this episode of Truths: Jewish Wisdom for Today—part of the Seeking Ecstasy season—Rabbi Dr. Levi Brackman visits Jerusalem to sit down with Yehuda Ber Zirkind for their second full-length conversation. After their first discussion in New Haven sparked passionate debate, they explored:

What “Jewish theology” really is: A living dialogue about God, tradition, and community rather than a fixed creed.

The possibility of knowing the Divine: Wrestling with doubt, agnosticism, and the nature of spiritual “knowledge.”

Personal versus collective faith: How individual experiences and Jewish peoplehood shape one’s spiritual journey.

Cultivating holiness today: Practical guidance for infusing the mundane with sanctity and living ethically in a secular age.

About Rabbi Yehudah DovBer Zirkind
A senior research fellow at Herzog College’s Hasidic Research Institute and the David Cardozo Academy, and a graduate student in Yiddish literature at Tel Aviv University, Zirkind lectures on Hasidism, Jewish thought, Yiddish and Hebrew literature, and folklore. His forthcoming thesis examines “The Sacred, the Secular, and the Sacrilegious in the Life and Literary Works of Chaim Grade.”

Support the show

Levi Brackman is a rabbi, Ph.D. in psychology, best-selling author of Jewish Wisdom for Business Success, and founder of Invown, a platform for real estate fundraising and investing.

Episode Transcript

(00:39):
It is been about a year ago orso that I sat down the first
time with Rabbi Bear Zukin forour first full length
conversation in New Haven.
That episode stirred more than afew passionate responses and
some controversy.
On my recent trip to Israel, Itraveled to Jerusalem to sit
with him again this time in hisown home to continue our

(01:01):
exploration of faith doubt, andthe quest for meaning.
This season is titled SeekingEcstasy because I believe that
the deepest truths often emergeat the edge of our certainty.
In this conversation, you heardthe bear and I dive into what
Jewish theology really means.

(01:21):
Not as a fixed set of doctrines,but as a living, breathing
conversation about how we relateto God, to tradition and to one
another.
In the conversation we discusswhere the true knowledge of the
divine is even possible.
How our own experiences shapeour beliefs and what it looks
like to live a holy life in anage of doubt and secularism.

(01:43):
A few words about who Rabbi BearZukin is.
De Bear is a senior researchfellow at the Hasidic Research
Institute of Hertza College andthe David Cardo Academy in
Jerusalem, and a graduatestudent in Yida literature at
Tel Aviv University.
He studied at various ha Shivas.

(02:05):
And today lectures and writes oncontemporary Jewish thought,
Yiddish and Hebrew literature,Hasidism, Yiddish music and
folklore, and Judaicbibliography.
His forthcoming thesis is titledThe Sacred, the Secular, and the
Sacrilegious in the Life andLiterary Works of Hai Grada.
So pour yourself a cup of tea orcoffee or any other drink.

(02:28):
And join us as we weave togetherphilosophy.
Personal story and perhaps alittle bit of controversy.
So now let us begin ourconversation.
it's good to be here inJerusalem with you.
Yeah.
Likewise.
Last time we, no pleasure.
Last time we had the, thisrecorded conversation, it was in
Connecticut, in the UnitedStates.

(02:50):
People ask me what brings youhere?
And I feel like I don't need anexcuse to come to Israel as a
Jew.
But I'm also doing a new seasonof the podcast and it is being
titled Seeking Ecstasy.
So I'm really excited to havethis conversation with you and,
let's see how we can weave,seeking ecstasy, into this

(03:13):
conversation.
Right?
I wanna talk about Jewishtheology and narrow it down to
like a personal Jewish theology.
So tell me a little, some ofyour thoughts on Jewish
theology.
Yeah.
Okay.
So, um.
I think it was important tomention just from the very
outset, that people talk aboutJewish theology and, and the

(03:34):
truth of the matter is there aremany Jewish theologies.
Mm-hmm.
There's more than one Jewishtheology.
Should we define theology firstso we know what we're talking
about?
I think that is a very, verygood question because.
Sometimes theology,spirituality, psychology,
anthropology, and all kinds ofGs can, can get woven into the

(03:57):
mix.
Uh, so I think it is essentialto define our terms and
sometimes I would say that theendeavor of Jewish theology, the
quest for Jewish theology isengaging in that question.
In other words, it could be thatwe don't have our terms fixed

(04:17):
when entering the conversation,and part of the conversation is
trying to figure out thedifferent strands that are woven
within the enterprise calledJewish theology.
So I feel that anthropology,peoplehood, spirituality,
existentialism, all thesepsychology could all be part of
Jewish theology.

(04:38):
But what I would say for me,what Jewish theology is I.
Primarily discussion about Godor the divine and religion.
Um, how does my life relate in,in the broadest terms possible
to the notion of God, divinity,religion, um, and part of

(05:00):
today's discussion?
I mean, the, contemporarydiscussion of theology revolves
around the question of, do weknow anything about.
About God, uh, anythingmetaphysical and that, that is
an issue I grapple with a lot.
Um, and the question is, canthere be a Jewish theology when
in doubt when being agnostic,when questioning when, uh, being

(05:25):
uncertain?
Mm-hmm.
And can the discussion aboutJewish theology be richer when
we don't have all the answerswhen we're not pedaling fixed
dogmas.
That's very much my, my, um,approach to it, my entry point,
if you will.
Okay.
So when you say, you don't know,define knowledge what do you

(05:49):
mean know?
Because can anyone really knowsomething which is metaphysical?
Well, well, I think, uh, again,e every, every person is, is
situationally.
I.
Um, fixed meaning.
Mm-hmm.
Whatever, whatever we talk aboutis relative or in relation Yeah.

(06:10):
To who we are, where we'recoming from, where we're going.
So we don't live in a vacuum.
We weren't born in a vacuum.
Um, and for me personallygrowing up, uh, growing up as an
Orthodox Jew and being verymuch, uh, in the, in the fold
for many years.
Mm-hmm.
Um.
There is a certain belief andtrust in what we call the mess,

(06:34):
the tradition.
Mm-hmm.
The theological package thatwe're taught.
Yeah.
Um, and that is almost taken asa self-evident truth.
We hold these truths to beself-evident.
And so is that the knowledgethat we are talking about here,
that is the, that one isdaunting or, yes.
For me at least, for me, theknowledge is not a firsthand

(06:55):
knowledge.
Um, because I don't have thehubris to say that I know
anything firsthand about God orthe divine, uh, that I can be
sure of God's existence or not,or of anything else.
There, there I have my ownexperience that I might
interpret.
Mm-hmm.
In light of certain beliefs.
Uh, I have strong religiousimpulses, but there's a

(07:18):
difference between a religioussensibility, a religious
impulse, and saying, we know, Ithink, I think we have to be.
Um, I.
Cognizant and, um, I think theword is acknowledged that we're
living in a very, very strongage of secularization and doubt,
especially about themetaphysical.
Mm-hmm.
Um, so the question is, whatdoes it mean to be religious?

(07:40):
What does it mean to seek thedivine and an age where I can
just, um, work off, uh, dogmasthat I accept blindly blind
faith.
Right.
Or, or, or, or there are thosethat are really convinced.
That's not my experience.
So I'm not coming from a placewhere I have real concrete

(08:00):
knowledge that I can be certainof.
Definitely not mathematicalknowledge, like anything near
two plus two equals four.
Yeah.
And anything of that sort.
It is more of a, a spiritualorientation to life.
Um, and the question is, and,and I wanna broaden the
conversation both for those thatare more.
Uh, greater believers, meaningthat they're more inclined to

(08:21):
belief in God, uh, more, moreinclined towards accepting,
let's say, for Jews the 13principle of, uh, uh, principles
of faith as articulated by theRamban, by Maimonide, but also,
uh, for those that may beagnostic, for those that may
even be atheists.
For people that doubt is there.
Is there anything aboutdivinity, or call it the quest

(08:43):
for transcendence that cansomehow be.
Loosely titled Theology in thesense of what I think is really
the essence of religion.
I'm right away giving an answeron a certain level.
Yeah, and I think really theessence of religion, at least
for me, is the quest fortranscendence.
The quest for transcendence,whether or not that

(09:04):
transcendence is, uh, reaching adeity, a God, which is beyond
the world as a real, a realentity.
Ontological being outside theworld.
Mm-hmm.
Imagine as, as a being that has,as a personal God, even, uh, who
has will, who can command, whocan create, or for some people

(09:25):
may be skeptical of that aincidental element of reality, a
higher order of being, what wemight use a word, a word, hay
versus hay Shah, eternal life.
The true nature of beingultimate reality.
Mm-hmm.
As opposed to fleeting realityor, or day-to-day concerns.

(09:47):
Uh, and I think right away, I,I, I think that for me, the, the
struggle of living a religiouslife broadly defined has how to
sanctify life and, we'll, we'llget to that soon.
Yeah.
But also the differentiatingbetween the, the holy and the
mundane.
We'll use the word profane, butthe mundane.
And we can talk a little bitmore about that as well.

(10:09):
in general, in terms of Jewishtheology, there has been a, um,
narrative arc, if you will, likethe literature, a trajectory, a,
a, a process of learning,understanding, changing my mind.

(10:31):
Uh, on different, differentideas.
And, um, growing up in, uh, theFroom world, the orthodox world,
the habad world has given me acertain vision of theology,
which is, uh, focus very much onwhat called religious obedience

(10:54):
conformity, piety in conformity,I.
Mm-hmm.
And, and accepting and acceptingthe package that I was taught,
that's a kind of, sorry to usethat word, gospel truth.
This is the truth.
Um, and there is a Jewishtheology and not only is there

(11:18):
our Jewish theology, but um, theJewish theology is of cosmic
significance.
Meaning, not only did I grow upwith one view or one version of
what truth about God, aboutdivinity is all about, but I

(11:39):
was, uh, taught to believe thatthere a particular doctrine
about life, which is God'sblueprint for the world.
And one could call that a veryfundamentalist view.
Um.
That we know what God wants.
We know what God's purpose andcreation is.

(12:02):
Um, we are cosmic players.
Mm-hmm.
And that is very empowering onsome level because if you are
part of the grandest game, uh,to ever take place, then of
course you feel Boyd by thatsense of mission.
And, uh, you essentially becomea missionary.
Uh, you, you try to convertother people to that truth.

(12:25):
But do, do you think that in thebeginning, let's go all the way
to the beginning of thegracious.
Yeah.
The God created man in hisimage.
Yeah.
Was that not some kind of a sim?
We are cosmic people now.
If we all created in God's imagein some way, are we not cosmic

(12:46):
people?
Is that a theology which, whichyou have brought up with?
Or is that a biblical Jewishtheology?
Um, I think it is a biblical,uh, Jewish theology.
I think that that, that theimage of we are created in God's
image is something which is avery, very profound religious
idea.
Yeah.

(13:07):
The question though is, do Itake the, that particular
picture, that particular image.
As the be all and end all of theentire purpose and plan and
master plan of creation growingup, haba with the belief of ah,

(13:28):
of that God, uh, the, theexpression of God desired that
he should have a dwelling placein the physical world comes from
a measure somehow.
Right.
It comes from a, from ameasures, right?
Correct.
Um.
I dunno if it's, or if I'mmistaken, uh, forgive me, but,
but, um, the idea of beingbecause in gives a different

(13:53):
music and that was, if you wantsome of my earliest heretical
thoughts where I read andlearned that they, on how, based
on other catalyst of sourcesgives another reason for the
creation of the world.
God's nature is to be good.
So God wants to be benevolentand beneficent and share, give

(14:18):
humans, uh, bestow upon them asbounty.
Yeah.
And that is why he set up awhole system of Toyota, Mrs.
And all that.
What I'm trying to say is that Igrew up with a very, very, um,
clear Yeah.
Uh, but also fundamentalists inthe sense that we are, this is
the fundamental truth.
Um, and we know exactly whatwe're doing, why we're doing it.

(14:41):
Yeah.
And that's why, by the way, Ibelieve that is all where I come
from.
They have why they're sosuccessful because they believe
that going out there, I don'tknow, in India or in China or in
Idaho, Montana, wherever it is,and, and spreading, again, using
that, spreading the, the, themessage.
That is, uh, relevant, that isfulfilling the cosmic purpose,

(15:07):
God's master plan.
So there's something verycomforting.
But for somebody who startsdoubting, they don't have that
certainty anymore.
Yeah.
And a theology is a small tea,not the Jewish theology, not the
master plan of creation.
And, and I guess a lot of thingswhere I differ, and this is what
I'm gonna get into where Idiffer, is that I was taught

(15:29):
that the.
The God's blueprint forcreation, God's, guidebook,
playbook for his purpose andcreation.
Mm-hmm.
And that's very much the room,worldview.
Today I look at the Toyota asmy, as a guide for life.
Mm-hmm.
Um, as a Jewish person, Ilearned from the Toyota and I

(15:52):
and I, I deemed the Toyota as asacred.
Sacred and essential to myreligion, but I'm less, um,
certain about knowing for surethis represents God's master
plan for, for.
So what does, what theology doesthe Tara suggest to you?

(16:14):
Um, so first of all, I thinkthat it would be correct to
point out that.
The way I see it now, comingfrom a more, uh, I guess,
critical academic approach, notcritical in, in criticizing, but
evaluating carefully.
Mm-hmm.
Uh, there is more than onetheology in the te and as, uh, I

(16:37):
heard from a, uh, a young Biblescholar by the name of Dr.
Ariel Saari Levy.
He says that the Torah is thefirst book of ti, right.
Torah itself is a book on Jewishthought.
In other words, in the, in themainstream orthodox conception,
if one views the Torah as revealGod revealing his definitive

(17:01):
truth.
So it is not a book about Jewishthought.
This is God revealing himself.
Mm-hmm.
God is telling him the truthabout life.
It's like, like, uh, I was like,this is the DNA, the spiritual
DNA code about life.
Yeah.
And it's not a reflection aboutlife.
This is actually telling you theDNA of life.
Yeah.
But in my conception now, I, I,to me it makes more sense that

(17:24):
the Terah may have been divinelyinspired, but that they also
reflect different humanconceptions of the divine and
the human quest for the divine.
And most importantly for me,this is the book of my people,
but there's also an inherentpluralism in that book the same
way we have be sha and beel inthe G.

(17:45):
Yeah.
We also have, I would argue, beSha and Beel in Humm.
So, for example, we're talkingabout, um, these Parra talks a
lot about the temple.
Um, so the question is, what isthe temple?
Is the temple more like God'spalace or the White House?

(18:07):
Mm-hmm.
Where the president lives?
Is that literally God's abode?
Or literally whenever we sayliterally we always say as it
were, but still Yeah.
Very much a, a anthropomorphicimage of God's dwelling place.
And therefore you have to escarboni, LaMi Hai.
God has to be given his bread.
There is a certain energy,electricity that is surging

(18:29):
through the mik dust that cannotbe defiled.
Mm-hmm.
And if you come too close andyou're not wearing protective
gear, you're gonna be zapped.
A very dynamic.
Mm-hmm.
Real electrically charged senseof holiness as if one were, be,
were in the White House and thePresident is going around and,
and you have to make sure everymove you make is not gonna

(18:50):
disturb the president or, or theking in a palace.
Or is a war like the embassy.
And I think an embassy, which isnot the literal dwelling place
of the king, but it's more of arepresentation or a physical, a
concrete.
Symbol mm-hmm.
Of the king's, uh, sovereigntyand rulership.
So I think for example, in theem, uh, uh, says, use the

(19:13):
expression, God will dwell orplace, there's another
expression to place his namethere.
So it's more like this is aplace which is, um.
God's address or a symbol of hispresence for people to interface

(19:35):
with him.
Mm-hmm.
Like an embassy, but not thatthis is literally the house of
God and, and that if you walkin, uh, you'll be zapped.
If it's a different conceptionin the, it also says at the end
of the volume that the personwho brings, the, the, and er.
And he says, Look from yourdwelling place, your holy

(20:00):
dwelling place from the heavens.
Yeah.
And he says, it's in the, in thetemple lip.
Mm-hmm.
Meaning that while, even thoughit is called the House of
Hashem, but it's like anembassy.
Hasan's real dwelling place isabove what he has below is like
a, is like an ambassador.
Like an ambassador, which is a,delegation or a representation
of the divine.

(20:21):
Uh, so I'm just pointing outthere are different theologies
and I do feel that one of thestrong, uh, aspects of Jewish
theology is the theology of ion,the idea of holiness ion to you
that one should be older.
Um, so, and, and holiness isdefined as, holiness is a vague
term, admittedly, and it canmean many different things and,

(20:44):
and, and, and different people,different commentators have
meant different things.
But I think that your questionbefore about the difference
between a scholarly approach andpersonal Yeah.
Is, is relevant and useful therebecause.
On a personal level, I think forme KAA means trying to, trying

(21:05):
to live a more noble life.
Trying to live a life which ismore in consonance with the
divine.
Mm-hmm.
Uh, which means being holy,being more moral, being more
ethical, uh, being preoccupiedwith, um.
Noble causes, which I would termmeaning there's a difference

(21:27):
between hay sha, which istemporal matters and hay eternal
matters, God implanted in us theeternal, life.
And I think what it means bythat, the way I take it is on a
personal level that whereaslet's say other creatures don't
necessarily have a concept.

(21:48):
Of eternal truth or eternalvalues that transcend their
being.
Mm-hmm.
And everything is more of, moreof a means to an end to enable
their own life.
An animal has instincts forself-preservation and self
survival.
So we can also work in that modeof shaw, the, the, the temporal
life meeting, the needs of themoment.

(22:09):
But then there's also a higherdimension, which is lum, which
is acknowledging that there's ahigher plane of existence.
Which is eternal.
There are values that areeternal.
Justice.
Kindness, truth are eternalvalues.
Yeah.
They're not, they're notcontingent upon my life.
So, so when we talk abouttheology, theology literally

(22:32):
means study of God, divinity,right?
Yeah.
So, so, so how is, is this whatyou've described to, to, to
summarize the need for holiness?
Ethical moral holiness is whatyou're describing.
And this idea of preoccupationwith which is more of a

(22:54):
transcendent, concerns ratherthan the mundane physical
concerns of she called Isha.
How does that relate to thestudy of God theology?
And the the other follow upquestion, which I have for you
is are the influences?
You spoke a lot about yourupbringing.
What used to be, and now here weare talking about what it is
now.
Correct.

(23:15):
The way you see it now.
Right?
So you've come to this, newformulation of a theology,
personal theology, which is why,very often there's any number of
people I could sit down with.
I've been asking that theology,and they would just basically
par fashion.
Something they read in, in, in abook summer, or they heard that
A sheer summit.
Right.
Which is a lot less interestingfor me sitting here, having

(23:37):
these conversations for the,seeking ecstasy season of the
podcast because, and look upthose books.
Whereas you've come to thisdifferently from a much more
thoughtful perspective.
So the follow up is like how,how did you get from what it
wasn't to what it is.
Okay.
For me, although I don't want tobe arrogant and say.

(23:57):
Know what isn't.
Uh, I, I, I feel or what, whatisn't for you today?
We, yeah, we're where I've, um,maybe grown, matured, thought
about maybe some will thinkregress, but I feel pro
progress, not regress.
Um, so first of all, the idea ofholiness as related to God, I
think is rooted in.

(24:18):
The parsha that we just readlast week says Sunday pars, but
was yesterday.
Right.
And be holy because I am holy.
And one of the interpretationsis known as the Metaio Day
imitating the Divine.

(24:38):
Mm-hmm.
And say that you go in the waysof God, just as God is holy.
So to you, beholding.
So what I, if we translate itbased on the interpretation we
gave before, what it means is,is that I move away from my
corporeality, from my body, frommy temporal human needs, and I

(25:00):
plug into a higher realm ofexistence, which is the divine
existence, true existence.
Um, and that can mean differentthings.
Uh, but for our purpose rightnow, what it means is, is God is
on a holier level, represents,uh, morality, some degree of per

(25:20):
perfection.
But I don't want to confuse thatwith the medieval concept of
perfection.
There's an atilian concept ofGod being perfect.
I don't want to get into that.
Here's more.
Perfect in, in, in, in action orrepresenting nobility.
A kind of moral perfection.
So why do you want to admit God?
Um, is that because it esnaterror, or there's a, um, so

(25:45):
first of all, I think as a, as ahuman being, we all have the
need to for self-transcendence.
Yeah.
If life is just about, if, if weare the end, yeah.
There's no higher end.
Then, then we're in a really,uh, bemoan state because if the

(26:06):
buck ends with us, then reallythe question is why go through
it?
All the reductionist,physicalist kind of perspective.
Yeah.
There's nothing more than, andnot only that, if life is only
self-serving, if what I call is,if we believe in selfism as an
ideology.
Mm, that all there is to lifehas the self aggrandizement and,

(26:30):
and, um, we live also in aconsumerist world where
everything is about consumptionand, and about, um, commodities
that satisfy our needs and ourinterests of consumption.
Um, and life is all about.
And also marketing is aboutcreating an imaginary need.
And creating that need will meanthat there, there's a consumer

(26:53):
who's gonna buy it.
So the, the company is gonnamake more money, but as a kind
of, uh, philosophy of lifewhere, what, what really we're
in we're, we are here forinstant gratification, for self
gratification.
So I just think even on a humanlevel, the quest for religion,
spirituality is understandingthat if life, if the buck stops

(27:15):
with us, if there's nothinggreater than just enjoying life.
So if we're going through a hardtime, why, why go?
Why go through life?
If it is only about ourselves,and that's very, very empty.
Whereas if we can understandthat there's a level of meaning
and purpose, or as JFK said, asknot what your country can do for
you, ask what you can do foryour country.

(27:35):
Mm-hmm.
Meaning that there are higherends, that I am in the service
of higher ends.
So then it, even, even on aselfish level, it gives my life
more meaning I upgrade my ownlife from Shaw to ca.
I upgrade my own life from justbeing we're talking about God,
so clearly God is a religiousconcept.
Right?
Right.
Some people like, William Jameswould consider any kind of

(27:57):
religious experience to be adeeply personal experience.
And, any kind of personaltheology we're talking about is
by definition religious.
Would you agree with that?
That if you have a personaltheology, which you're living
by, then that's by definition,religious.
In other words, can you have atheology for your life, which
isn't religious?
Well, I, I, I think that onecould have a, the, that's a good

(28:20):
question.
'cause Theo, I think means adeity, right?
So technically the definition oftheology might preclude.
Uh, somebody who's a non deistor doesn't have for God.
Right.
However, I, I would argue thatin a broader sense, one can be,
one can be religious withoutbelieving in God.
Because if religious means, uh,a, a propositional faith, which

(28:43):
is contingent on certain beliefsor on a certain metaphysical
facts, so then maybe an atheistor an agnostic cannot really be
religious.
Mm-hmm.
But if religion is about asensibility.
If religion is about asensitivity to the, uh,
transcendence and, and, and ifreligion is, is, is framed not

(29:07):
necessarily as the quest to, uh,be obedient to God.
Yeah.
Or it is not about belief, whatI believe or what I do in terms
of religious conformity, but itis a quest to.
Raise my life above, above themundane dimension of existence

(29:28):
to a hol a higher and holierrealm.
Like for example, I would arguethat even a a, even a, an avowed
atheist mm-hmm.
Can also an avowed atheists dohave a sense of sacred.
Same thing.
Yeah.
It's interesting'cause if youlisten to Sam Harris, and, and
his wife, who I just got herlatest series.
She's got a, very, veryinteresting series on,
consciousness which can get anaudible it's a kind of an audio,

(29:52):
documentary on her quest tounderstand consciousness better.
And, both Sam and his wife areboth, meditators.
And you can sense that they havea sense of a transcendence and
what they call consciousness orthat deepest sense of self,

(30:12):
which is not the exterioritself.
It's high, you know, not highshow.
So, but when I listen to them, Ihear them talking about God,
just not saying the name, God.
In other words, they're dancingaround it.
I think God's been given a badname from the very supplemental
views that a lot of people haveof what God is now God to most

(30:34):
more sophisticated thinkers, Godisn't, this is old man sitting
on the counter with a long whitebeard.
Right, right.
That's a span clauses version ofGod.
Right.
So, so, um, so the question is,this transcendence that you're
talking about, how is that, is,are we talking about God or are
we talking about something else?

(30:55):
Uh, the question is how do youdefine God?
Do you define God as a, uh, anoun or an adjective?
Meaning is God a being, anontological being and, and I,
I'm, I'm saying I don't, I, I, Ihave my metaphysical questions.
I have my doubts.
I don't know.
I don't know one way or theother.
Yeah, I, I don't have anyconviction because, let's be

(31:15):
quite frank, because.
My, I don't have firsthandexperience or definite
experience of God.
God did not reveal himself to mein such a way that I can be
certain that the God of theBible exists.
I didn't have that.
Rather, I had a certain trust inwhat we call the cellular, which
means the tradition.
Mm-hmm.
The tradition that I grew upwith.
Once I lost my trust in thattradition.

(31:37):
Yeah.
Because there were all kinds ofquestions that made me question
this.
All of a sudden, how do I know?
What the tradition tells meabout God is true.
Nevertheless, I I am not readilygonna dismiss.
I'm not a reductionist who'sgonna readily dismiss all claims
of God.
Like, oh, do you believe in afairy or the tooth fairy or
bigfoot?
There, there are a lot ofatheists who use that example.

(31:59):
Well, do you believe in aunicorn?
Do you believe in UFOs?
So why should I believe in God?
Uh, okay, I I hear them.
I understand.
I, I can be skeptical as well.
I, I do question.
But first of all, it doesn't, isa different, not only is a
different magnitude of, of, ofit has more relevance, the
question of God, whether or nota unicorn exists or not, or

(32:20):
whether demons exist.
But, but also I think thatthere's a bigger question
because the question of Godreally touches on ultimate
reality.
Yeah.
Whereas a question of Bigfootdoes not touch on, on, on
ultimate reality.
And I think whatever, that's amore important question.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And, and therefore, um.
I am open.
What I'm trying to say is Ithink there is a notion of, of,

(32:41):
of theology or religiosity thatone could, in the, in the most
conspicuous or the most obvioussense, would be related to God
as a deity.
But also if one looks like God,views God as an adjective, uh,
as a definition of reality of ascriber reality.
Um, divine goodness to be goodis to be divine.

(33:02):
The divinity in the, in theuniverse.
Um, the dimension of theuniverse, which, which, which,
um, inculcates meaning alwaystranscends the physical, which
transcends the physical, right?
The things that we deem eternal.
So then, yes, that there can bethe divinity as an adjective.

(33:23):
And I think there are manypeople that even if they did not
believe in the supernaturaldeity and ontological deity,
they definitely had a sense ofgodly myth.
Mm-hmm.
As, as, as a, as an adjective,as a, as the godly dimension of
reality.
And therefore, what I'm tryingto argue is, is that while I a

(33:44):
hundred percent traditionalJudaism or, or any traditional
theistic religion for thatmatter, is rooted in the belief
and a deity, I think the conceptof holiness of transcendence is
not dependent solely on, on thatconception of God.
Yes.
We can, we can gloss overwhether God came down on Mount
Sinai.
No, let's not gloss over thatbecause that's, that's a really

(34:06):
for, for Jewish religion, that'sa really important, uh, part of
the theology is that Goddescended upon Mount Sinai and
spoke to man and gave them the10 Commandments.
Uh, and then, you know, in asense, betrothed the Jewish
people.
When you think about that andyou think about all the people
we, uh, you know, receivedrevelation from God in the, in,

(34:28):
in the terror, right?
Abraham, I, Jacob, they all hadthese revelations.
What was going on there?
Uh, what did they tell you?
What does it, what does it, uh,what does it tell you to you in
your life?
I mean, what, what's, how, howdo you view that?
Um.
So first of all, I wasn't there.
I'm, I'm not privy to such anexperience to be, to be quite

(34:51):
honest.
I'm not, I'm not trying to becynical and brush it.
I'm, I'm just trying to behonest, meaning, yeah.
Um, I believe and I do, I trulybelieve that those descriptions
in the Toyota are not fiction.
They describe something.
Yeah.
What it is.
I don't know what exactly it isbecause, because I wasn't there.

(35:11):
It takes one to know one, I'mnot one.
Yeah.
So therefore, I don't know,meaning I don't, I don't know
exactly what it's referring to.
James Kugel in his book, theGreat Shift Deals a little bit
with it.
Uh, but I don't, I don't havethat.
I'm not, I wasn't privy to thatkind of revelation, so I don't
know what that means.
Uh, there can be moments ofinsight, there can be moments,
there have been moments in mylife where I felt that whatever

(35:36):
is happening is being divinelyorchestrated.
Mm-hmm.
In other words, there's a powerbeyond me.
That is taking hold of me.
Not in a vision or, in a,possessing me in, in a spiritual
way, but that there were timesin my life that I felt that
whatever was happening, althoughI thought I was making the, the
plans, I was pulling thestrings.

(35:58):
Really?
There was something else pullingthe strings.
One can call it god, one cancall it fake, one can call it
destiny.
Yeah.
But that there was somethinghigher, greater than me or
beyond me.
That was that I was fitting intoa larger script and I wasn't the
one who was writing that script.
Yeah.
I was a pawn maybe, or a puppetand somebody else's.

(36:18):
Okay.
So take going back to Yes, tothe theology and, and, and what
one takes them from.
So they weren't fiction, right.
They represent something real.
You just don't know what itactually represents.
And I do feel, I definitely dofeel that part of it, like you
take the SCO.
Uh, Ito's vision of the Mervaand, and, and, and, and, and

(36:41):
other that they are ascribing aWhat may be the, uh, the
theologian, Rudolph Otto wouldcall the numinous?
The great power, the great powerthat is both ing and
terrorizing.
And, and in the rah there's thisword used a lot, phrase em and

(37:03):
it describes that the em, theglory of Hashem, the ma of
Hashem, the vision of Hashem islike, like a burning fire.
So there was an understandingthat the, the divine glory is
manifest as a real power, like,like the sun, for example.
Mm-hmm.
That the divine dimension is, isof enormous power.

(37:26):
And that, that that power doesreveal is both impersonal and
personal.
Yeah.
It's, it's transfers greaterthan personal, but it's not less
than personal.
Um, and for somebody whoquestions, so the question is do
I take this literally or can Itake it in a direction of.

(37:49):
There is a greater force.
There is a, there is atranscendence.
There is the greater whole.
Yeah.
Which is pulling me to move awayfrom my own ego.
Yeah.
Or like this work that I heardfrom Professor Michael Fiba of I
Shane of a called Lady demeaning the way, literally it
means I am asleep, my heart isawake, the voice of my beloved

(38:13):
is knocking on the door and hesays, open up the the door for
me.
He, uh, from the Song of Songs,from the song, from the song of
Songs, he interprets it in hisbook on Shira, Shira, the JPS
commentary, and also in hisbook, uh, fragile Finitude.
That what a, when the eye, whenthe ego is asleep, then the lead

(38:33):
be the heart could be aired, canbe alert, can be awake to call
Duty Day fake.
So is it possible that Cold DutyDay fake is happening the whole
time?
Absolutely.
And yeah.
Right.
There's a revelations which aregoing on the whole time and if

(38:54):
that is shame enough how you'regoing to experience that
revelation.
That revelation being attuned tothe new music of the cosmos.
Yeah, and you know what it'slike, it's like here that you
have a park right near nearby.
If I'm busy thinking or I'mlistening to my music, I can't
hear the chirping of the bird.
Right.
But if during the nighttime whenthe buses are not humming and
buzzing, then I can hear thechirping of the birds.

(39:15):
Or in the morning, earlymorning, I'm usually there.
So then you do know what's,what, what happened there?
Perhaps.
I don't know exactly whathappened there, but I, they were
inviting people who were in tunewith the customer.
They, I think that is part ofit.
I don't know.
I don't Is that higher item toyou or, um, I, I think.
Part of the great, and this ispart of Jewish mysticism, it's

(39:37):
not necessarily biblicaltheology, but I definitely feel
as a part of the cabalistictheology is self annihilation.
Beto Hayes, where the, the Animorphs into the ion, the I turns
into the greater nothingness.
And that nothingness is, is, islike the, the drop of the ocean

(39:59):
that loses his individuality,but becomes part of the whole
ocean.
So there is a sense where, towhat extent am I focusing an I
as a separate entity, and towhat extent am I part of the
great cosmic flow of life?
I am part of, to what extent amI a a particle that is separated

(40:20):
from the light?
Mm-hmm.
And to what extent am I particleor a wave, whatever you want to
call it, uh, a a, a sliver oflight myself.
And I think part of it is.
Tuning down the ego and, um,dialing up the God the higher
energy.
But particularly with theToyota, the language is still be

(40:42):
holy.
Be a holy people imitate God.
Mm-hmm.
Be moral.
Don't, don't hate your fellow.
Love your fellow as yourself.
Uh, don't lie, don't cheat,don't do humas, don't do
violence.
Don't do evil.
Um.
Because all that is seen asanti-God.

(41:03):
That is the realm, maybe of thedemonic, the realm of, of tma,
the realm of sha oil, uh, ofthe, of the underworld, the
netherworld.
Um, there is, even in biblicaltheology, one can argue a
separation between, I wouldn'tsay that they're two different
beings, like in Zora, uh,Zoroastrianism, a dualism

(41:24):
between the good, bad and Godand the bad God.
But there are intimations,enough intimations, even within
ana of a conception of thekingdom, the realm of of, of the
other world, whether it'spersonified or not.
But there is a realm ofdesolation, um, that you have,

(41:46):
you should not serve to the, tothe, uh, to the goats, to the
demons.
They served to demon.
There was an understanding thatthere was some kind of people
worship to powers of, ofdestruction, the gods of
destruction and that thebiblical God is the God of life,

(42:06):
not the God of destruction.
So part of Kaa very much waspart of Kha is about life, but
not only in the Hasid, in In hasstories.
There's a famous story of.
Who came to the AL and he askedhim for ab, not the life of a

(42:27):
peasant.
Yeah, and and I think that isreally what Kadu is, the life
that we should live.
One can live for a very longtime and every moment of it is
only haw.
And then one can be, in otherwords, one could be high.
By doing one deed in which theperson transcends their

(42:50):
mortality or their verycontingent reality.
Their limited reality.
Yeah.
And they do something forhumanity, for kindness, for
justice, for goodness, forholiness, and which is a
redemptive act.
They do something heroic inwhich they're able to transcend
who they and, and sometimes thatone moment.
Yeah.
Which makes the differencewhether or not a person will be

(43:12):
remembered for eternity or not.
That's that transformationalmoment that transforms their
life.
I, I mean, because I mean,there's a lot of, uh,
conversation around that.
Uh, I know, um, uh, WilliamJames talks about a lot that you
have this, you have, you have,you can have this one religious
conversion moment.
Yeah, exactly.

(43:34):
Where, where, where all of asudden you have this unit
experience where everything getsclear.
People have this epiphany andthen something then changes,
that people who describe, orthat people who are addicts and
other kinds of things, beforeall of a sudden they don't have
desire to drink anymore.
And they've become justdifferent people see the light
in the moment.
Yeah.
They saw the light and they,they convert.

(43:54):
So it's living more of aspiritual life.
I mean, this is a verytraditional kind of viewpoint.
It sounds to me, first of all,it, it is traditional in many
ways.
I'm not gonna deny it.
Uh, we'll, we'll talk about themore untraditional stuff in a
moment.
But there are different levelsof, of, you're taking it to
seeking ecstasy, looking forsome kind of supernatural or, or

(44:15):
mystical experience.
I think the holiness of theToyota is a very part of the
expression, prosaic holiness, atleast on a basic level.
Sanctify yourself in the mundanereality.
Yeah.
Don't cheat, don't steal.
It's not about meditating on amountain and getting any deep
insights into reality.
It is taking part of Kaha.

(44:38):
Uh, and I think this is verymuch the biblical concept is
infusing IL with Kish.
And now I'm gonna get into themore critical on the one end
though.
Yeah.
First of all, the revelationcyanide itself was not sure the
mystical experience but then youdo have later where the ian on
the ian went up.

(44:58):
Right.
And they saw these visions,right.
Soccer get so much.
Right.
So, you know, these were verymystical experiences that were
happening.
It certainly was some kind ofmystical experience.
So with the, Terry it's not justdo's and don'ts, it's also No, a

(45:19):
hundred percent.
And, and I would add, I mean,something that I can relate to
in a very different, in adifferent, very different way,
but perhaps related is the, Iremember when I was 12 years
old, I went to Vienna andthere's a place called SCH the
Palace is where?
France, Joseph's Palace.
Mm-hmm.
I remember, uh, when I first sawit, there was actually a

(45:43):
observation point or a, like ontop of the hill when you can
look down and see the entireestate.
That, and I was just like, mymind wide open.
I never saw splendor in my life.
It was an incredible moment.
Like mm-hmm.
It was like the little child whodiscovers thing for the first
time, like I was.

(46:05):
Wide open, gaping wide, open mymouth.
Like, and, and, and I wouldthink that nu seeing that, let
me see this great site.
Yeah.
Or you, ka ka ka.

(46:27):
Um, yes, that it was a visualexperience of something very,
very profound.
Something that Hessel would callan something tremendous and
seeing that vision of la howeverwe understand it, is what may be
ADO would call the luminus.
You saw like somebody who neversaw the sun and all of a sudden

(46:49):
they see the sun.
Wow.
H how did, how did I, how did Iknow, or, or in today's day and
age, when you first discover ai,what AI can do it, it is a
discovery, it is an epiphany ofsorts.
Like it changes your view.
Some people call looking atplanet earth from, from, from
outer space.
They never did it.
Obviously the overview effectstill happen.

(47:11):
Yeah.
They're still overview effect.
Yeah.
All of a sudden there's amystical experience of seeing a,
a certain grandeur.
That, that there was a certaingrandeur, and Heschel talks a
lot about that.
Uh, his way of religiosity iscultivating a sense for the
ineffable, radical amazement.
All wonder, the grandeur ofbeing, uh, it could be on a

(47:34):
certain level, one can interpretvisions and AK in a similar way.
I think the effect was similar.
Right.
Meaning they saw the word is moI'm going, all of a sudden I am
shifting gears.
I'm, I'm shifting consciousness.
You have people that say theirfirst psychedelic trips.
I had never had one.
I never took any of them, butthat that was mind altering for

(47:57):
them.
They saw vision, whichcompletely changed the way they
look at things.
So yes, there is an element ofecstasy there, but I think for
the Jewish tradition.
There Ma, Mahar Sinai, it wasagain, sanctification because of
the great power, God's presencebeing revealed at Mount Sinai.
But when vo after therevelation, see, hey Bahar, you

(48:22):
can go.
You come back up.
What is the continuation ofEdina is a mish.
Yeah.
And the mish gun is very muchabout.
The, the Holiness in the camp.
So I think a good way todescribe it, the, the biblical
theology of holiness as afollowing way.

(48:42):
Imagine, I think even imagineour bodies, we have a heart, and
the heart has to pump blood toall different veins.
What happens if we start eatingstuff or doing things, not
keeping our, our, our, ourwatching our health, we end up
the, the arties start beingclogged.
Mm-hmm.
And essentially what I see thetheology of holiness of the

(49:07):
Toyota is that the desire isthat that blood flow or that
electrical current shouldsuffuse all of reality.
The means that God's presence,holiness, should be manifest
throughout all of Israel.
Now, in the biblical conception,God's domain is not only the

(49:29):
temple, but also the land ofIsrael.
That's why if somebody does, ifsomebody clogs the arteries,
yeah.
If somebody does an ave,somebody defiles the temple and
the sacred grounds, the, a spateof the king, the land is gonna
chase them out, is gonna, isgonna literally vomit them.
Why?
The same way if a virus startscoming, a healthy body is going

(49:53):
to fight against it.
Yeah.
So essentially the way I see theToyota, the.
There is a fight or a fight, astruggle, a a, a process between
the forces of God, the forces ofduche, which is, is God gonna be
present?
Life holiness, beauty meaningin, in a, in a broader sense.

(50:15):
But is the duche, the holinessof God, gonna be manifest?
Is the king to use an example ofthe palace, is the king gonna
feel comfortable in his entirepalace?
Yeah.
Or are we gonna chase them away?
So this is biblical theology.
Based on the scholarship inother Right.
This isn't just, uh, kaza, thisis not just Za, it's not just

(50:35):
before.
Right.
This seems to be what Te Kain issaying.
Right.
And, and I, I'll for example,illustrate the difference
because one of the great.
Uh, Bible scholars on Vara.
Uh, the book of Leviticus wassomebody by the name of Jacob
Milgrom.
Mm-hmm.
Uh, Jacob Milgrom wrote, uh,three, uh, volume massive

(50:56):
commentary.
Yeah.
On Leviticus containing like 20,2700 pages.
Uh, now Jacob Milgrom, heactually views the, a little bit
differently than Al.
He argues, for example, thatwhen it says in certain times.
Time places in the Toyota thatby you doing the sins, you are

(51:17):
gonna be contaminating thetemple.
It doesn't mean only as Kazawould have it, only by entering
the, the, the, the, mm-hmm.
The temple.
He, he, he, he refers to it asthe priestly portrait, uh, of
Dorian Gray.
Dorian Gray, as a character froman Oscar of Wild novel or play,

(51:38):
again, I'm not familiar with theliterature part of it so much.
Where he argues where the, the,the, the, the, the, um, the
image is that if, uh, that ifDorian Gray does something
wrong, it won't be noticeable onhim, but there's a portrait of
him hidden somewhere else, andthe more he does something

(51:58):
wrong, the more it will affecthis portrait.
So Groms argument is that thetemple, the, the mish gun is the
epicenter right of God'svitality and energy.
When somebody does an Avera inthe, for example, interfere with
it, it it, it, for example, it,it, it, it casts pollution or

(52:22):
radiation is airborne and itreaches the temple and therefore
the carbona that are brought.
For example, the carbon, whichwe usually, uh, translate as a
sin offering or an offering ofatonement or yaki, put in the,
the day of atonement, uh, whichis seen as forgiving of sins.

(52:45):
He actually says he put incomes, which also means to
sanitize, to clean.
Mm-hmm.
And katas, if, how do you say,a, a disinfected in, in, in, in,
in, in Hebrew modern Hebrew.
There's right sso.
You find that also in the Toyotasso, not you'll sin, but you

(53:06):
will purify and he has thefollowing theory and with a very
interesting theory, whichillustrates his point.
There are three different typesof sacrifices to purify the
temple.
One Haas, one purificationoffering the blood of it is
doubted on the corners of thealtar.
In the aro or the animalsacrifice alter, which is in the

(53:29):
courtyard, which is not in theholy, which is the lowest level
that is for sins that areperpetrated by individual
Israelites unwitting sins bge.
A unwitting sin that was done bythe, this is from, by the, or

(53:50):
the entire congregation thatwarrants an offering.
That is actually the blood is,doubted on the inner altar, the
one which was already in theish.
And finally, once a year thereis a carbon that the carbon that
Thedo brings into the actual rethe Holy of Holies to, purify,

(54:16):
the inner sanctum, the re.
From the wantons, the brazensins Yeah.
Of, of the Israelites throughoutthe year.
So the theory is that, thatthere is a, if you will, a a, I
won't use the word tug of war,but there are two opposing
forces that are, that are wor,that are at play here.

(54:37):
On the one hand, there is theforce of holiness, and the more,
the more calm, the closer to thesun you are.
Yeah.
The, the more likely you are toget burnt and therefore.
Um, a cado is a concept ofgreater ho graded holiness.
Yeah.
Somebody, in order to enter theIan one has to be really holy

(54:57):
and that makes them, thatprotects them against the, the
dangerous, the high voltage andtherefore only the cado can go
in.
Somebody else, A stranger will,will die.
Somebody who's not the ca or azothat goes into the ish.
Then there's a lesser level of,the.
And the, the notion being thatat the one hand, the more

(55:18):
intense the, the holiness, likeI'll say, did not do his ki
properly.
They would die.
Yeah.
Um, but then there's a counteridea, which is that the forces
of impurity of TMA can actuallydefile the temple.
And there's this whole vision ofthe abominations of the

(55:41):
Israelites actually cha chasingGod away from the temple, like
flogging the arteries.
That, that diagram of thepriestly picture of portrait of
Dorian Gray.
Illustrates the concept of the,the greater sin as like a, a
stronger bullet that canpenetrate further right.
That a a wanton sin has to be,can penetrate into the rad.

(56:05):
And, and then, and, and so intoday's where we don't have the
tabernacle right, and we're notbringing any sacrifices, this
might be seen from a moralperspective, you're saying.
And also, somehow, God restinghis glory.
The covered, which is rests onthe mishka.

(56:25):
And that, by sinning, thatpushes it away.
So in today's day and age, Imean the similar kind of thing.
If you want to have the glory,if you want have connectivity,
communion with the divine, thenyou have to make sure that you
are pure, you are holy, you areacting in an ethical, moral way,
but you are also not, you'renot, not showing that away.
You're not.

(56:46):
You're not called blocking thearteries, so to speak.
Right.
Okay.
Who's gonna send a mountain ofGod, the, of our label?
Somebody who's, uh, yeah.
Queen of, interactions.
Yeah.
So this would be, I think wehear clearly the differences,
slight differences from thescholarly perspective, versus

(57:06):
the, the far, but how, how doyou personally take this you
know, in, in my personal life.
Because your biblical scholar.
Uh, well, that's my hobby today.
Well, more than I, we haven'tdiscussed in this, session
conversation.
Yeah.
But we have discussed howbiblical scholarship with the
documentary hypothesis issomething which you've been

(57:29):
convinced about.
A version of the compositeauthorship of the te as opposed
to the strict model known as adocumentary hypothesis, but Okay
and, and I, I also want to takeit on a personal level.
Go ahead.
Yeah, yeah.
So, even someone who studiesthat can still look at the, take
this and say, okay, I can takethis to my life and, live it.

(57:51):
In other words.
Having the documentary onprothesis in your life doesn't
preclude taking these teachings,these truths to one's lives as
a, uh, as a, as a guide for lifein many ways.
Yeah.
Even if one doesn't believe themas being necessarily, uh, they,
they have to be an infallibletruth that can never be, um,
reinterpreted, if you will.

(58:12):
Yeah.
Um, so on a personal level, Ithink an example that more
people can relate to today.
Um, and this is apropos ourcurrent par of, of Emir, uh,
where there are cleardistinctions between a regular
cayan and a and a and a CayanGado.
For example, a regular cayan isnot allowed to defile himself,

(58:34):
render himself in pure to a aquato a dead body.
But with the exception of sixrelatives and a claim, God is
not even allowed to do that.
Caen has allowed to marry a,widow, but he is not allowed to
marry a, a divorce sea.
The cado has to marry a virginaccording to the, this week's
par.
The idea again, is great atholiness.

(58:54):
Yeah.
But the way I would take it intoday's day, for example, a
question that people can relateto us, let's say about
vegetarianism.
Mm-hmm.
Vegetarianism is a, a certainethical ideal.
And, they're of cook.
Wrote a whole monograph calledThe Vision of Vegetarianism, and
he actually argues, and that'sright.
That before, no, before theblood, the the, we were, yeah,

(59:19):
we weren't allowed to eat animalmeat.
So it was really a concession tohuman frailty to human blood
loss.
That, that we eat meat.
So he believes that when theshiia will come in the future,
it will be a return to thisvegetarian ideal.
Even claims that the Caras willalso be vegetarian, but min is
made of flowers.

(59:39):
Is, vegan.
It's not it not animal.
What I'm trying to say is, isthat I think on the one hand
there is a a question.
There's always that aspirationof increasing holiness.
And that can also be on a morallevel.
Like maybe at one stage I'llreach the point I'm not vegan or
vegetarian, but maybe at onepoint I will be meaning and also

(01:00:01):
questioning am I really on thatlevel?
Am I on that?
Am I a ca gale?
Am I a ca now or not?
Am I on that level?
'cause sometimes if we're not onthat level and we, and we take
on.
Uh, holiness, then we can be ahostage, then it can be
misplaced, and it can even bedestructive.

(01:00:21):
Like Ralph Cook says, ifsomebody's into animal rights
and they don't care about humanrights, it can be, it can be a
travesty.
Uh, so in that regard now more,more importantly, and also
talking a little bit morebroadly about my own journey, I
think where, where, where Idiffered a lot from my previous
upbringing is.

(01:00:43):
Um, Judaism can be defined intwo ways.
Judaism can be defined as areligion, Judaism, like Islam or
Christianity as a religion.
And then there is Jewishnessbeing ethnicity and nationality
nationalism.
Mm-hmm.
Uh, in the world and the throneworld, Habad world where I grew

(01:01:04):
up, it was very clear thatJudaism is defined by the
religious definition of Judaism.
Mm-hmm.
In other words, if my Jewishethnicity doesn't really matter
in, in the greater scheme ofthings, uh, what really matters
is being a religious Jew, beingGod's chosen people, which is a
religious concept and followingand following the, the laws with

(01:01:29):
the conception.
That this is a book that wasgiven to us by God and
represents the truth, the wholetruth, and nothing but the truth
very much that a Christian.
You see there's an interestingparallel to Christianity.
'cause Christianity is areligion of faith and belief in
God.
If somebody doesn't believe inJesus or they can't call
themselves a Christian, butsomebody could be Jewish even if

(01:01:50):
they're an atheist.
So, but as far as one wouldargue as far as because Huh?
How is that, why is that?
Because we are a people.
We are a ethnicity.
We are, we are a people.
Mm-hmm.
And it's not just we'regenetically Jewish.
Huh?
Genetically Jewish.
We're, we're, we're part of apeople, we're part of an Yes.
Genetically Jewish by lot,whatever it is.

(01:02:11):
I don't want to get into allkinds of theories or whatever,
but we are a people, we're notjust a religion.
Christianity may feel a sense ofsolidarity with other
Christians, but, but in, inIslam, you also have the
difference between being Araband being Muslim.
Right.
But they do have also thisconcept of the umma.
The Uma.
Right.

(01:02:31):
Which is the, um, true, right,but what, what I want, what I
wanna get at, what I wanna getat, at least as far as Judaism
is concerned,'cause this is ourtopic that I, I grew up very
much with the mindset that whatreally matters is the religious
principles of Judaism.
If I don't believe the religioustruths of truth claims of ju of
Judaism, so then I'm just asecular person.

(01:02:54):
Yeah.
And I, I wanna share an insightwhere I, where I really had like
180 degree turn on this, uh,shift.
And I, I wanna preface it with astatement that has really been,
or of work that has beenpercolating in me, especially
since October 7th es that Iheard in Yiddish.

(01:03:15):
Um, right.
And Jews do not make kd.
The non-Jews will make dulan,and the way I interpret it in a
modern day idiom is thefollowing.
If Jews don't have a positivereason to be Jewish mm-hmm.
Based on a sense of sacredness,of sacred duty, of sanctifying,

(01:03:39):
their nationhood and theirpeoplehood.
If we don't make kiddish, if wedon't, if we're not ish
ourselves, we don't sanctifyourselves if we don't live up to
the mission of being.
So then we will be forced to beJewish for a negative reason
because of antisemitism, becausethe non-Jews will discriminate
against us.
So the question is, take yourpick.

(01:04:00):
Do I wanna be Jewish today in apost-OC October uh, seventh
World?
Uh, because, uh, the non-Jewshate me or some non-Jews hate
me?
Not saying all of them do.
Um, because I am aware of thehaah.
In, in a negative sense, or do Iwanna be Jewish?
Because in, in the positivesense, I have a sense of being

(01:04:24):
part of a holy nation.
So going back to the shift thatI had, this is the vt, the VT of
living, the, the nature ofJewish identity, not just based
on the Holocaust as what causesJewish identity and
self-consciousness, but based onSinai.
Yeah.
Knowing that we, however, weview Sinai as a literal event,

(01:04:46):
as, as, as, as a narrative in at as a concept.
But that notion, the notion ofSinai, the tradition says that
we become a nation of, of, ofpriests and explains the idea.
Ma kish means that the same waywe're supposed to be like
priests and other nations Yeah.
Who are devoted to God and, andand the temple or to God and not

(01:05:08):
necessarily monastic lifestyle,though.
Not necessarily a monasticlifestyle.
And that is why I feel that, uh,living here in Israel especially
makes me, uh, feel much morepart of the, the, the
peoplehood.
Yeah.
But, but I wanna first, so theshift, the shift when I wanna
get to the shift is one of thethings that I've, uh, blurred

(01:05:30):
from border high capital, eventhough there are a lot of things
I disagree with them about.
But that notion of thecentrality of Jewish peoplehood.
Mm-hmm.
In other words that the reason,if I were to go with the old
paradigm of, I believe I amJewish because I believe in the
13 in the the, the Maimon is 13principles of faith.
I believe Judaism is the truth,the whole truth, and nothing but

(01:05:53):
the truth and all the otherreligions are false.
So then if I questioned that, myrelationship to Judaism would be
very tenuous.
Because it's based on ametaphysical belief system,
based on, the veracity ofcertain religious truth claims.
If, however, my religiosity isbased on the understanding that

(01:06:14):
we, the people like the preambleof the constitution.
Yeah.
Meaning that we are the Jewishreligion is the religion of the
Jewish people.
Yes.
Yeah, Jews proceed ontologicallythe Toyota.
The Toyota is there for theJewish people now, yes, the

(01:06:34):
mission of the Jewish people is,is to bring God into the world.
To bring holiness into theworld.
But if I understand, it's not aquestion of I, I no longer
adhere to the fundamentalistview that I know exactly why God
created the, the entireuniverse.
I know God's, blueprint for, Idon't know.
I, I remain agnostic about that.
What I do know is that I'm abiological Jew.
Mm-hmm.

(01:06:54):
And I do know that part of theJewish tradition, part of our
self-concept, whether it wasrevealed by God on, on, on Mount
Sinai, or whether this was adivinely revealed insight by,
uh, a prophets who had an innerrevelation of God, or even if it
was made up, quote unquote, byJews, my ancestors.

(01:07:15):
Who were seeking the divine, whowere seeking that transcendent
connection.
Yeah.
And they viewed themselves.
They came to believe themselvesas, as children to God and as I
think that remains thecornerstone.
Yeah.
That should remain thecornerstone of Jewish identity,
even as somebody who's totallysecular.

(01:07:36):
And I think that even today,even really secular Jews.
Which leads to like a very, veryinteresting paradox, if I may.
Because what you're saying isright, that, yeah, that, yes,
she grab a finger.
Yeah.
What you're saying.
One second.
Yeah.
What you're saying is on the onehand, right, I don't need to

(01:07:58):
believe that the TER isnecessarily the truth.
Capital, capital T, right?
Didn't come from God necessarily100% dictated by God to Moses,
et cetera.
Yeah.
However, in this book.
Which came about somehow orother from our ancestors.
It says that God came and hetold us that we should be.

(01:08:21):
Therefore we should bededicating ourself to God as
ish.
So in other words, start offwith agnosticism about the
veracity of the book or aboutthe origins of the book.
Correct.
Right.
But because this is our book,therefore now we're gonna become
religious people because thebook tells us to become

(01:08:43):
religious people.
Do you see the some?
Absolutely.
It's not somewhat.
It is a great paradox, but Iwould, I would, I would say that
even if you take, uh, let's saya liberal Jewish notion of tku
lam.
Yeah.
Even if there's some aspects of,of, of it that I think are, are,
are downright dangerous and,and, and extreme, and especially
in today's climate, I don't wantto get into that.

(01:09:04):
Yeah.
But, but at the heart of it, atthe core, I'm not talking about
the cellulous.
Yeah.
Uh, about the waste byproduct ofit.
But at the core is a sense thatwe are supposed to be a light
onto the nations.
Right.
And I think even the mostsecular Jew understands that
what justifies their existence.

(01:09:26):
Is t la that we need to make theworld better.
We need to bring God into theworld.
However they understanddivinity, make the world a
better place.
Yeah.
And I, I, I, and again, soeveryone gets to the same place
in the end, but let me, let me,let me broad, yes or no, uh,
because I think a religiousperson will focus more on the

(01:09:46):
ritualistic myths.
For example, Eros, let's say,will be more important, let's
say, than vegetarianism.
Who sheta it is will be a moreof a burning issue than whether
or not we should be vegetarian.
Yeah.
The question of shana's and abag egg will be more important,
let's say than, being honest inbusiness and stuff like that.

(01:10:06):
'cause that's more of an ethicalmisa for the liberal person and
including myself, who relatesmore to Ben.
That takes center stage.
Not that I don't, not that Idon't observe ritually, but it's
a matter of emphasis.
It's a matter of emphasis sothat, that's why I do feel there
isn't, there is an element ofyes and no, and I would also add

(01:10:27):
to what I said before.
Mm-hmm.
Is that to me, the idea of canbe understood, prescriptively
and descriptive.
A real, a religious person isgonna believe this a hundred
percent and gonna believe thatthis is God's blueprint for the
world, and therefore there's themandate, Ian.
This is an absolute word of God,but there's also a descriptive

(01:10:47):
approach, which is to understandthat throughout the generations,
because my ancestors believedthis to be true, this was their
mission.
Mm-hmm.
And, and they sanctifiedthemselves based on that belief.
So here is not the question oforigin, but the question of
result.
What is the result as a Jewishperson?

(01:11:09):
Yeah.
What is, how do I view myself?
How do I, how do I make the mostof my Judaism?
That becomes like, tradition isalso traditional, but if it's
not just traditional, thatbecomes how we as Jews do it.
Right?
And, and therefore, it's notjust like Morde Kaplan says
Jewish folk ways like dancing,the horror, singing hava.
Drinking barsch, eating bagelsand locks.

(01:11:31):
It's not just the custom eatingCanadian LA and Lakas, it is
really a higher divine mission,which does is religiously based.
In other words, I believe verymuch that even a secular version
of Ju Judaism or even a lessorthodox, of Judaism is whether
you like it or not.
Uh, based on the religiousconception of Judaism, of being

(01:11:54):
a, a nation of priests, uh, uh,a kingdom of priests in a holy
nation, even reformed Jews oreven completely secular Jews who
are the warriors of socialjustice and tikun ola, there may
be secularizing, a religiousconcept, but it begins from
ation to it begins for, for ish.
Yeah.
And I, and therefore, again, bewhat, what I'm trying to say is,

(01:12:17):
unlike my.
Previous paradigm where this isthe truth and there's a binary
between truth, hood andfalsehood.
This is the truth, the wholetruth, and nothing but the truth
and other religions aren't todayI can believe and I do believe
that there are holy people ofother faiths and they also are
able to approach God in theirown way, and I believe there's a
lot of value and perhaps truthsand other religions as well.

(01:12:40):
But the reason why I'm practicedJewishly and I'm not interested
in another form of practice isbecause this is my language.
Yeah.
And if someone's gonna say thatEnglish is true and French is
false, for example, or Hebrew istrue, and Yiddish is false, then
you miss the book.
Yeah.
The point is, this is yourlanguage.
Uh, now I know this soundstheoretical to a typical from

(01:13:00):
point of view, but that's notmy, this is where I am today.
Yeah.
This is what I've come tounderstand.
I could be proven wrong, I couldbe mistaken.
But based on my criticalapproach to scholarship, the
idea of Jewishness as a form ofnational identity is a starting
point.
I infuse that with a religiousconsciousness.

(01:13:20):
I would argue further that evensecular Jews have essentially
secularized a religious concept,a religious definition of Jewish
nationalism.
Yeah.
Which is to be moral, to beholy.
And they understand that to betheir mandate.
Because I'm also a religiousperson.
I see value in reli and ritualobservance, either as promoting

(01:13:41):
holiness, like shabbas, I thinkis a great example of a day that
is meant to focus on, not on, onwhat is transcendent, what is
eternal, not on what istemporal.
Mm-hmm.
Um, but, but overall, and, andI, I, I also do many, many
ritual mis'cause I think, andalso part of the nationalism,
let's say kosher.

(01:14:02):
Uh, rabbi Louis Jacobs spokeabout the genetic fallacy.
Genetic fallacy is people say,well, it could be that kosher or
laws of, of purity, laws ofneedle, let's say, emerged from
primitive taboos.
It says, yes, maybe as acritical scholar, we think about
it, but on the other hand,because as a nation, this is how
we sanctify ourselves, so it canalso be symbolic.

(01:14:26):
In a certain sense, the hookinand the M button can come become
ada.
What I mean by that is there's aclassic medieval, classification
of ada, which are testimony likemissiles that we do.
We do tro because God put us,set us up in dwelling booths.
Uh, and then there's m say,don't kill, which is natural

(01:14:47):
morality.
Uh, and then there is a, that wedon't understand, like things
that we don't understand.
What I'm arguing is, is thatthose, even those missiles that
are, which are either superrational or maybe they do
originate from, from primitivetaboos as a, as a Bible scholar,
they put up as they end up asada.

(01:15:09):
I'm doing it as bearing witnessto traditions, to my people, to
their idea of sanctification.
I don't have to believe that Godliterally command.
To be part of the ak.
I'm not saying that I don'tbelieve it, but even if I'm not
sure about it, how does that getyou to any kind of a spiral sort

(01:15:30):
or, or any kind of, uh, VA or,because it seems like or does it
not?
In other words, does this getyou to a kind of fractious
religious spiritual sense?
Or is this just, uh, this is howmy nation does it.
They're probably going to do it.
So, first of all, there is, orwe all know too well, the

(01:15:52):
problems of this kind ofnationalistic euphoria or, or
collective effervescence thatEmil Durkheim talks about, a
sense of national, uh, identity.
I don't wanna turn nationalisminto a.
Because I feel that thenational, it could bring its own
fervor is what you're saying.
It could bring its own fervor.

(01:16:13):
Okay.
And also, well, what I'm tryingto say is perhaps unlike maybe
what you were intimating before,yes, I do get ecstatic.
I can listen to music and getinvolved in what may be turned a
mystical experience on somelevel.
But I think as a Jewish person,or as I told you, I told you
many times, for me, I feel a, agreater.

(01:16:35):
Need that impulse to Davin topray when I'm among my people
than when I'm, when I'm on myown.
When I'm my own, I'm anindividual.
I'm either bird, zirkin.
Yeah.
But it's when I'm with the, uh,the seaboard so convey to show
you when I feel the pulse of mypeople, that is where I feel I
have an urge to pray.
And even if I'm not gonna divein every day, every filler, but

(01:16:57):
when I'm walking into a shul andsomebody's diving in, I, I'm,
I'm gonna join them usually.
If I didn't da, I'm going, I'mgonna, I'm gonna join their,
their les.
Why?
Because, not it, it is about me.
Yeah.
It's about Makayla Makayla jointhe Marys of Jews.
Hey Ra, you know, be together.

(01:17:19):
I feel that I am that, and, and,and that also brings a certain
degree of ecstasy.
Yeah.
And I also believe that.
Um, I'm not against individualecstasy during prayer or
meditation.
There's room for that as anindividual.
And I also believe in genericreligion, which is unrelated to
any specific religion.
It could be meditation.

(01:17:40):
And I think as somebody who is apost fundamentalist, I, I'm, I'm
a little bit of a perenniallist, meaning I believe there
are truths in every religion andwe're all trying to reach a
divine.
So I could appreciate a, a kindof nons institutionalized or
even non-Jewish,non-specifically Jewish form of
religious slash spiritualexpression and meditation, or

(01:18:00):
even in being kind to otherpeople in immoral way, even
though that's not the ecstasy.
But I think the r also has tocome with a sh The accent also
has to be grounded.
The spiritual, the greatspiritual soring also has to,
land I can't just live in thecave, like trash me.
Yeah.
Like we were approaching likewe, we, we also have to live in

(01:18:24):
this world.
And Ash b, when he, he was sointense, when he looked
according to the, when helooked, he burnt everything,
that he burnt everything in hiswake.
So this is where I feel that forme.
For me, there is a mission ofbelonging to the Jewish people,
belonging to a collective formof religion and spirituality.
Mm-hmm.
And it's not just aboutnationalism, it's also that we

(01:18:46):
have a mission, we have a roleto play in the world.
Yeah.
Whether it means that we're it,I'm not going there.
And there is some ability tolose one's own identity or one's
own self image, or to besubsumed.
Once it was consumed in thatgreater whole, which can lead to
a unitive experience or a senseof ecstasy yes, a hundred
percent.

(01:19:06):
I mean, you're not givingyourself up to God necessarily
in some way, be giving up to thepeoplehood and to the Jewish
people.
And by doing that, you end upgiving yourself up to God'cause
conditioned to you.
Very useful.
Right?
Like for example, like if, let'ssay sometimes at the, at the, at
the, at the, at the Kotel.
Yeah.
And I'm among hundreds orthousands of Jews praying.

(01:19:30):
Let's say there's a moment ofYeah.
You know, that is a moment.
It, for me, that's a very strongdivine moment.
Yeah.
Like encounter with the divine.
As a very moment of deepbiblical import that turns of
the, because of priestlyblessings is, is written in the
Toyota.
And it is a, is a biblicalblessing, but also because I

(01:19:51):
connect to my people, I connectto tradition.
And when I go to the, I alsofeel that vertical, vertical and
horizontal connection, I thinkthat's key because just
Peoplehood is only a horizontalconnection.
I'm connecting with my people,right?
And that, that is more secular,but through, because it's the
Jewish people, which has in itthe terror, right?

(01:20:13):
Which is connectivity with God.
You end up.
With the birth.
I, I, I, I believe that in orderfor us to sustain ourselves, in
order for us to be a people thatcan justify, that can justify
our own existence ourselves, letalone to the world, yeah.
We need to live up to a highermoral mandate.
And I think whether we like itor not, the world doesn't expect
of us to be que whether we likeit or not.

(01:20:35):
But we do need to live up tothat.
And I think, again, that Ibelieve in nationalism, but not
in the idol.
In other words, the flag.
Just waving the flag Yeah.
Is not what it's all about.
Yeah.
It, it represents a moral duty.
Yeah.
And again, what I'm saying isvery typical, even in a, in a
broader Jewish sense, thisdoesn't necessarily have to be,

(01:20:56):
uh, uh, uh, untraditional, evenin therum sense of being, or
which is the particularmanifestation or the emphasis
that I place on nationalism asthe comedian point for that.
And I view religion as anextension of peoplehood rather
than religion, as this truththat I know that Judaism is true

(01:21:18):
and all the other religions are,are, let's say false from a
fundamentalist point of view.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So that, that's the base.
Eddie, very clear.
Yeah.
Thank you very much.
You're very welcome.
My pleasure down again foranother, recorded conversation
and a pleasure as always.
Thank you.
Thank you for your hospitalityin your home.
Pleasure