Welcome to Judaism Demystified, a podcast for the perplexed.
Join us as we explore some of the most fascinating Jewish and
Torah related topics with our esteemed guests.
By tackling some of the biggest questions you likely won't find
addressed elsewhere, we aim to shed light on important issues
and inspire a return to the fundamentals.
Enjoy the show. Thank you for joining the
Judaism Demystified podcast. It is a pleasure to welcome
Rabbi Lerner. Rabbi, if you could tell our
audience a little bit about yourself and how you found us.
Hi, good, good morning and thanks for having me.
This is a real honor and a pleasure.
So the well, I'm brought up in the Uki got into teaching a
couple of years after I got married in Israel.
I'm living with Shemesh at the moment.
I teach in Jerusalem and in Tel Aviv.
What else? We met through the Khabura, I
believe the Khabura with the with Rabbi Dwex Khabura in
London. I was part of that group and I
gave I think one of the talks on Tamia mitzvahs and the rumba in,
in, in parallel to rehearsh and for that, for that organization.
And yeah, I sort of, I, I teach the Rathersh primarily online
and in Jerusalem in different institutions as long as the
Kusari and the Rambam. Yeah, that's that that's sort of
my involvement in. Well, I suppose on a more fun
note, I'm also to besides my teaching efforts, I'm also a
licensed electrician, so. That's what.
That's what that's what I do to make money, as they say, is
that, by the way, that always lights up my students when I
like, you know, you're expecting the rabbi type of thing and
they're like, well, actually, I'm also an electrician, which
is so counter what you would expect, like the I like sort of
the intellectual abstraction and the ultimate grounding in like I
fix wires like it's a it's a jump, which is a a lot.
My wife, Rifgo, she also teaches, but she's a programmer
in the in the in the spare time. So she I always say she does the
intelligent. I smash down pause.
She continues to deal with abstractions.
But yes, that's my before wonderful children sleep up
sense and yeah, thank God, that's that's amazing.
You're a great example for people.
That's the way to do it. You know, work and learn and
everything. So we wanted to get into the
topic of of Hirsch. If you, before we get into it,
just tell us why. Because you reached out to us
and you wanted to discuss with Hirsch and we had an episode
with Rabbi Eisen and you reached out to us about it.
So I want to just let the audience know a little bit about
why we're discussing with Hirsch.
Right. So the, the, the topic emerged
or the reason why I thought it would be a good idea to discuss
this is because I believe you the, the, the, the, the stimulus
from my point of view is that often when discussions take
place specifically around the topic of Agatha and Medrish,
there's a, there's a, a modern voice that's often not spoken
about. And that modern voice is
rehearsh, but also in the broader context of a grounded,
relatable style of Judaism that rehearsh offers us that I
thought would be a great conversation to be had.
And also from the point of view of your audience and what
you're, what they call this corner of the Internet, the
people who appreciate this perspective, I think the voice
of rehearsh could be a great addition or a great tool in
their toolkit in approaching the world.
And that's why I was excited to be able to, I spent a lot of
time with rehearsh. It's it animates and pictures my
Judaism. So I thought it would be a
great, a great conversation to have.
I'm a student of Revaizen. Revaizen also is is, is a, a fan
of rehearsh, But the Revaizen really is a, is a is a, a wonder
articulating the, the world of the Rashaim.
And I thought it'd be a great opportunity for us to discuss
Rehearsh and some of his approaches, both abstractly, but
also some of the ways that his ideas are relevant and I suppose
useful in the world today. Yeah, we're, we were talking off
camera with you about the fact that he kind of flies under the
radar. Right, right.
Especially among Spartan, I think that, you know, we, we
want to know more and we want to, we want you to hopefully
make the case for why people should be focusing and paying
more attention to rehearse. So if you could tell us also
like why this is something that is resonating with you so much
and why you've dedicated so much time with refresh?
So, so that's a great question and why I so I suppose there's
two sides of it. Why do I personally get
interrupt harsh and why does he resonate?
So I'll start with why does he resonate?
Because he's a maybe I'll, I'll give a metaphor to articulate
this. When I, when I was teaching in
London, a there was AI don't mean this in a pejorative way,
but there's, there was a tendency when I would give an, I
was teaching for an organization called the Jelly in London and
one of my responsibilities was to give talks in banks and in
North Hamps. So we'd give talks and I found
it very, I suppose, a sad but a very difficult reality.
You'd have people who were very sophisticated in every area of
life. They were sophisticated
businessmen and they were able to articulate their world view
in a very sophisticated way in relationship with business and
to finance and to investments. But when they spoke about
religion and Judaism, it was quite childish.
It was quite childish, not in the sense that they didn't use a
sophisticated language, but the, the, their, their world view
from a religious standpoint was very undeveloped.
And what I've seen was that when they were talking in the level
of their business world, their, their, their world view had sort
of developed. But when they spoke in their
religious context, it was still at the level of, I'd know,
primary school. And I sort of after having a
discussion with one of them and speaking to these guys about it,
I realised that there was a always almost like a fear that
if you look at your religious worldview with this new
sophisticated worldview you have as an adult, you'll realize it
doesn't make any sense. The worldview that you have now
has grown beyond your religious perspective and it doesn't make
sense when you look at it through the lens of your most
sophisticated worldview. So you sort of have to leave
your, your, your religious worldview sort of in the realm
of that. It doesn't kind of have to make
sense. And you can kind of, you can
kind of, I always to say to people, it's like it's, it
remains in the realm of Harry Potter.
It doesn't have to make sense. The rules and the, the, the
principles in your regular life don't have to develop in your
religious worldview and through discussing it with them.
And this, this would come about through the type of questions,
the sort of questions that someone would ask that you would
never allow such a question to be asked in your business
meeting. But when it comes to religion,
you could ask such a question. And through discussing this with
them, I and then integrating rehearsh, I was, I was able to
find that through describing Judaism through the lens of
rehearsh, it allowed people and it allowed my students to ground
the world that they lived in with the world of their
religion, the world of their, the, the, the sophisticated
world view they had as an adult and the world view of their
religious perspective were able to marry rather than being 2
separate worlds. And that was my first, or I
suppose that was in my teaching life, but as an individual, when
I first approached Rathersh, it made sense.
It made sense with my understanding of the world, but
also my understanding of what I thought Judaism was, rather than
having to have this bifurcated vision where I had my, my
religious world view that didn't really have to make sense and my
sophisticated adult world view, which made sense in the, in I
suppose the, the, the world that I was living in.
Profession allows you to marry those two worlds.
You have someone who's writing post the Enlightenment.
So he's experiencing the world through the modern lens, but he
integrated religion in such a beautiful way with the use of of
language primarily to allow us to appreciate the world and
religion together. So the sort of things he speaks
about, the ideas he puts forward, the language he uses,
it allows us to talk about religion in a way that keeps our
vision of the world connected. You have the adult vision of the
world where you are seeing the world in a rationalistic way
where the world has to make sense.
But then you're also able to look at your religious worldview
with that same lens. You don't have to change your
lenses. You can keep them together.
So much so that when I was talking about a good example of
this is like reasons for the commandments.
One of the dangers I found when speaking to people about
rehearses, Tamiya mitzvahs, they sometimes the stuff made too
much sense and that made people uncomfortable.
It resonated too much. It was almost like a lack of
mystery there. That was like, so, so that's it.
I'm like, no, with Hersh isn't saying that's it, but this is a
way of walking through the world.
This is a lens you can walk through the world that actually
makes sense. So when you sing, sing as as
simple as taking colour. Well, you also why'd you take
colour? Why'd you take colour off of
bread? Why'd you separate colour and
people like people obviously sort of sort of sideline into
some sort of like. Sorry, say Gulot and stuff like
that They. They, they sort of, I, I would,
I would stop them and I would say like, do you, I don't mean
this. I'm, I'm, I'm not being
confrontational with them, but do you know what you're talking
about? Like what does?
But then like, and then they try and push it off.
But then I say that what what Raphersh says is that, well, how
does the only thing you separate twice, you separate it in the
field, but then you also separate it in your home.
You separate in the field like all the other food to recognise
and experience that God is in your life in the field.
But then you separate it again in your home as a a, a a potent
expression that God is present in your life in your home,
because the home is the focal point of the Jews mission and
the person's like that's rooted in halacha that, that that
explanation makes a lot of sense, not only in a a technical
way, but, and when I say Rathersh's makes sense, I don't
mean that he ticks a box that changes your experience.
And Rathersh has the ability to not only make sense for me, I
suppose you could say an intellectual standpoint, but an
experiential standpoint. You can sit in his reasons and
experience the world in a richer, I would say, and I use
this word in the more the technical sense, in a more
enchanted way, not with fairies and magic, but you experience
the world that you can that the Tyrians trying to draw your
experience with God in the world, not in a a a a imminent
sort of like the Khala's got magic inside it, but you as the
conscious experiencer are bringing God into your life.
And Khala is that 2 stage process unlike any other food.
And that makes Khala something very special.
And people are like, wow, that that that does make sense that,
that, that makes sense why Khal is a special and that, by the
way, that's why when people before they get married, they do
a Khala break and etcetera, etcetera.
This interpretation makes profound sense.
Well, that's a beautiful thing to do at that time.
So why I love rehearsh is that he has the ability to and I I
compare him to the Kazuri at this point.
The Kazuri was the poet and the philosopher and that unique
blend of the, the heart and the mind.
That unique blend you had with the cursory, which is why it's
such a pleasure to teach. You also have that with
rehearsh. You have the emotion, the
groundedness in the world through symbolism, but also the
the the need for it to actually make sense is that that.
It's something you articulated it beautifully and I can sense
your passion also, which is awesome.
It's like going to happen. My passion doesn't take over my
ability to explain it so. No, no, no, no, no.
You're just fine. It's almost like people go about
their religiosity in a way that sometimes it's almost like
there's a cognitive dissonance between, between their
religiosity and their general world view.
And it's kind of like they're just bouncing off of these,
these two that doesn't fit. And you just kind of bounce
between it and, you know, and, and what you're trying to say, I
believe is, is that is that you don't need to have cognitive
dissonance with, with the way you approach the Torah and the
way you approach your practical life.
They're really one in the same if you have the right
perspective. You can let one blend into the
other, meaning one can influence the other and backwards and
forth, which brings us into the whole synthesis of Rappersch's
idea of Tyre and Dere Herritz. But can I, can I maybe like if I
it's actually, by the way, the reason why personally, this is a
very much a side point. But for those of your listeners
who are listening where this will be useful or interesting.
I got into nature of Hersh because I'm dyslexic.
Oh. Really.
People like what they're really talking about.
My reading his work was because being dyslexic, I read very
slowly, which is a which is a difficult thing as a teacher.
And when I'm under pressure, it's even worse.
So you can wish I'm giving a class and I'm writing some sort
of idea on the board. If I'm under pressure, it could
be French at the at the end of it.
So I've got to always be open with my students.
But reading was very slow. And I came to this conclusion
when I was like, I, when I first got like AI was trying to come
up with a, a, a, a, a, a, a thinker that I could connect to.
And I was thinking to myself like, well, who can I connect
to? And I was like, well, I don't
want to read something that I have to read in a Hebrew
translation with speed because I'm always coming at it from a,
a, a, a second standpoint. Now, obviously I can work my way
through the Hebrew, but it's always going to be far slower.
English I had more exposure to. So it's, but also I can listen
to it, I can translate it to APDF and then from PDFI can
listen to it. So I was like, what about
rehearsh? I didn't really know much about
rehearsh except that it was written in German, which means
the best translation is English, meaning you don't want to have
the translation in Hebrew is people can read it in Hebrew if
they want to, but you're the language in English is richer.
There's more words, there's more, we have access to more
words than than from Tanakh. So that was my exit drug or the
entry drug into a Hersh. At that point I got hooked.
So I kind of make the joke from a Hashka protest standpoint,
which of Eisen would would not be proud of this idea.
But if I tongue in cheek, I say God made me dyslexic to teach
with Hersh. So that's my.
That's my my, my, my, my joke. Amazing take.
I like that a lot. So, you know, just as another
side note, we, we bring up Rabbi Sacks a lot because he's a big
inspiration to us. And I feel like, like what you
mentioned about being a poet and a philosopher is, is something
that kind of blew me away because I, it totally just
resonated me. The first time I read Rabbi
Sacks, I was just like mind blown.
So yeah, I mean in in a similar vein obviously.
Right. So you can, by the way, you'll
see a lot of parallel between both of their thinking.
A lot of parallels rehearses 90 letters.
It's quite similar in a way. Obviously it's not written in a
letter form, but the goal of Rabbi Sachs is a letter in a
scroll or radical, then radical. Now the book that is like, I
don't know if it should be an obligation for every Jew to
read, but in the modern world, every Jew should really read
that book. It seems sort of thing that was
being done. And by the way, this, I think
there's one of those things that makes Rappersh a, a, a, a, a bit
of a shining light in the modern world in my, as I say, I teach,
right. So I teach yeshivas and I teach
seminaries and I teach in Tel Aviv, which is, and they're all
generally speaking, between the ages of 20 and 30.
That's my, and just in terms of without getting into refresh the
sort of more his, his deeper philosophy on a very basic
level, you can ask someone, why are you doing what you're doing?
Like, why, like, why are you, why are you doing this?
And so Hersh gives language to that sort of question and that
sort of approach the world the way I frame it.
I actually got this framing of rehearsh from Rabbi Doctor Sam
Liebenz, which was a bit bizarre.
But so, and he has some, he has some works, some essays and some
works of rehearsh and the in the rehearsals, 19 letters.
He he originally wrote it, which is actually his first book he
published. He actually wrote horror first,
which is the insanity of that. He wrote that at the age in his
20s. And the publisher was like, I
publish this because no one will read it because we don't know
who you are. So write something else.
So he systemized his philosophical worldview into the
19 letters published in that. First it blew up to the point
where Reform, we're using it as well.
And then he wrote, then they produced Kharev.
But in the 19 letters, he asks 3 basic questions.
He says, what is Judaism's goal? Like what's he trying to
achieve? Is that noble?
Now people don't think that's a question, but it absolutely is a
question to quote Rabbi Sachs, where he quotes, I think it's
from Yitzhaka Rama. He he's quoting the question
about why be Jewish is a new question.
It's like there's Charles Taylor, a sociologist wrote a
book called The Secular World where people talk about the idea
of like religion and secular. He's like 300 years ago there
was no interesting secular. Like you didn't have a setup 500
years ago. If you would have asked someone,
are you religious? They would have been like, like
my part of the clergy, like being Jewish at a certain point,
like being secular became an option.
When Judaism became an option. You then had to ask why, and
Rafesh says why. What is the goal of Judaism?
Is that a goal, a noble goal? Does it cool the better part of
you? And then your last question is,
how do the particulars of Judaism in mitzvot fulfill those
goals? How does it now you'll, you'll
see this idea brought up by anybody who gets Tami and
mitzvahs, but with rehearsals who explicit.
And then when he lays out his categories of commandments, they
seamlessly work towards his goal.
So you live in a, you live in a world where the world of your
experience and the world of your action are In Sync.
There's a, there's a philosopher called Jonathan Nuvecchi,
profound thinker. I think he's in Toronto.
He has this phrase that he calls worldview attunement, where your
worldview and what you're doing in your world are attuned
together. So a basketball player playing
with with a basketball player on a tennis court, that doesn't
make sense. The worldview is not attuned
with what he's there to do. A basketball player on a
basketball court. He, he, he's fitted to his
world. Rathersh in the modern world
allows us to be fitted to the world, but we are attuned to the
world in a way that the actions that we're performing fit into
the higher goal of what Judaism is trying to achieve.
And that language of mission of of of of a calling of a that the
in the in the in the in the Christian context, they, they I,
I tell my students that when you're when you when you when
you read works with Christians, a lot of the work can be
beautiful and profound. It's a it it.
But the language that a Christian would use is carry
your cross. You've heard that phrase as a
metaphor Commissioner might refresh very specific at the
beginning of Kharev because the metaphor we use in I always
perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself.
What's the parallel in Judaism? What's the parallel bear your
cross. You can make that sound
beautiful and profound. What is Judaism's?
Version. Of us, sorry.
What's Judaism's version of that?
Yeah. What's a yoke?
A yoke and and and and and. Think of the difference. 1 is
about death, 1 is about death, and one has purpose.
A yoke provides. It provides food.
It plows a field. There is a reason.
I know it's a agricultural metaphor, but it's such a
beautiful metaphor because it's mission based.
There is a reason for being it produces food, it produces a
livelihood. That is what a yoke does.
So when we are adopting the yoke of heaven, that sounds very like
a disconnected and and and grandiose.
And 1st, it's like that you're you're adopting a perspective.
You are on a mission. There is a reason for you to be
here and that that language of mission and of of is is It
resonates I find not only with me but also with my students,
which is another right reason why refresh is that quite.
Yeah. Absolutely beautiful.
We wanted to ask you also regarding rehearses thinking and
how it helps modern Jews navigate their place in the
world today. So I'd, I'd, I'd, I'd slip into
the point I mentioned before about this worldview attunement,
but also perhaps we can use it as an opportunity to sort of
segue into his, his classical slogan, which was Tyra and Derek
Erritz. Now the beauty of Barbara Hersh.
And like any great thinker, you'll have his interpreters and
his interpreters disagree. And that's a lot of fun.
I mean, you'll love this because when it comes to a Hersh, people
are so passionate about him. They they, they have to, he also
has to, he also has to makes how best to say this without being
once again, pejorative. And I don't mean it in a
everybody's trying to do their best.
But when you're interpreting rehearsed, there's a tendency to
make rehearsed you. That's a that's a danger.
The same way when it comes to the rumbam people who interpret
the rumbam, they often make the rumbam do what they want the
rumbam to do. And obviously I can't escape my
own biases, but a way that this emerges is in this slogan of
term. What did he mean by that?
But also it's actually emerges fascinating enough in Kabala
because you have these two schools of thought, like did
rehearsh do Kabala or didn't he, which is like people, why do you
care? Why is that interesting?
Well, because if you're in the modern yeshivish world and you
love rehearsh, rehearsh has got to be a lookable Ah, but he
never mentions it and any and when he does, he like says like
it's like a spiritual resource, but it's like an taken over by
magical thinking and goblins like it has been usurped.
But then people say, well, maybe he's only saying that because of
his audience. And you get this weird sort of
para discussion that takes place of like a person's original
thinking. Why do I bring that up in
reference to term Derek Hartz? Because Tyra, you know what?
Tyra's Derek Hartz. Well, what is Derek Hartz?
And that's not a new phrase. And that wasn't a new phrase in
his time either. So what did he mean by that?
As a philosophy of life and as a principle of education?
And I think the the reason why rehearsh is a we to draw these
ideas together. Have you heard of Morichai
Broya? Yeah.
Ah, excellent. So he writes a fascinating
essay, which I would encourage every.
It's free online on distilling Rehearsh's philosophy.
And I always found it great as a, as a, as a gateway drug to
rehearsh is because he often, if he's a good a, he's a good
spokesman for Rehearsh. But also people know of Ramon
Chai Breyer. So the way he refers to it, and,
and This is why, once again, I think it really connects to the
modern world. He says Rehearsh's approach in a
philosophical sense as per the the his educational principle.
To one side, what is Tyrant Darhartz?
Tyrant Darhartz is you as an individual approaching the world
through Raphael's understanding the lens of Tyra, which means
you approach the world as the raw material that the Tyra will
give form to in. In a sense, the world around you
is part of your avoider session. The world around you is the raw
material in which you are supposed to live out your
religious mission on. Which means there's not really a
secular religious split. He's explicit about this.
There's no philosophy as secular, but religion is Tyra is
Tyra. It's like, no, in an ideal
world, your philosophy should be an integrated whole in your
relationship to Tyra. Your science, your sociology,
your psychology, you should be able to merge it all together
with your Tyra to create. And this is the language of of
Rothbroyer in a, in a Hegelian synthesis.
When people say that something is a synthesis in the Hegelian
sense of the word, you get to, you get your thesis and you get
your antithesis and you create the synthesis.
But the synthesis is an expression of the two on a
higher level. So the Tyra, the Tyra, the
Derkharts, and that includes culture, that includes good
manners, that includes your job, that includes what is involved
in being a good citizen in the world.
And those two merged together to create a Jew, a Jew in the
world. Which means if this is a
principle that you're coming at the world through and you see,
and people are saying whatever I compose this forward, people
like, well, they, they, they, they, they say, well, either
they say, well, no, doesn't apply today.
It only applies in 19th century Germany for some reason.
Why? Because people look at the
culture today and like the culture is so terrible.
It's, it's, he couldn't have meant it today.
No, he also had difficult culture in his time.
It's like a difficult culture emerged in the 21st century.
So, so the reason why I think of Hersh is so powerful as a
thinker today is any sophisticated, a nuanced way he
gives an approach of how we look at the world and integrate it
into our lives with time. Which means you have the, the,
the, the, the, your mission as a Jew, the world you're
experiencing, and you draw them both together to create a higher
reality, which we would call being a Jew in the world.
It's not that you have your religious worldview and then you
have your secular worldview. They should be integrated into
one. To give a practical example of
this, Scheller, which was a a famous German poet Rehearsh was
enamoured with. He wrote a beautiful hespert to
his philosophy when he in his in his high school.
But there was also thinkers that Rehearsh didn't agree with,
philosophers he didn't agree with, and he didn't integrate
their worldview. I always give the parallel today
that you could think of thinkers in today's world that their
worldview is kind of not is Tyra that's the wrong way to put it,
but is the raw material Tyra should be making use of trying
to think of a a modern philosopher, a modern thinker
that would be Jonathan Height have.
You heard of Jonathan Height? Yes, of course.
We can envision that you will be a better Jew in the world with
that philosophy, that of, of moral foundationalism as part of
your tool kit. You can envision that you would
be a better Jew in the world through looking at the world
with that as part of your tool kit.
And for refresh, then it would be and not just you should you
could it is an obligation. Then you can't got the ability
to be the ideal Jew without using the best errors of your
time with your approach to Tyra, which means you look through the
world almost like a an investigative thing.
What good ideas are there are there for me to integrate into
my worldview? Now, obviously, if they counter
a Tyra perspective, they're not supposed to be integrated that
that that's obviously that's clear.
If you have A, and let's think of a good, a good example that
you wouldn't want to integrate Michel Foucault in his, he's a,
he's a postmodern philosopher. I think he was Jewish, but I'm
not sure actually. But anyway, he had this idea
that power dynamics were at the core of everything.
Everything was power dynamics. You can envision that is not
something that would would that would synthesize into a Tyra
perspective because the Tyra would revolt at such a
worldview. If you were trying to come up
names of the trying to give another another.
They're very famous. Once again, a Canadian thinker,
Jordan Peterson. You can vision, there are
perspectives in his world that would be like, wow, I am the
better Jew in this language. And then you synthesize it into
what it means to be a Jew. Now, obviously you've got to be
careful. You've got to take advice,
you've got to be try and be humble.
But you look at the world not as this external dead landscape
where you as a Tyra person are kind of walking you through.
It's like, no, the world is an integrated, a integrated
potential for you to use through your lens of Tyra.
And as you grow in your Tyra, you grow in your approach to the
world, you'll become a better person.
And that makes you as like not an alien on the world.
It makes the world a part of the story.
It makes it makes history part of the story.
When you learn history, do you see that the progression of
history tending into a certain way?
When things happen in history, you can look at them as a
religiously significant, not that you start interpreting
history, but when you when you when you when you see things in
the world and you learn about ideas and you synthesize them
into your Tyra perspective, you become a greater Jew through the
process. And I think that approach of
Tyrion Derek Harris articulated like that I think could be
powerful once again, a powerful perspective that people can
integrate. And Rafesh gives a beautiful
language rooted in the sources, rooted in the sources.
And he is passionate about giving this over that.
I think especially people in our corner of the Internet would
find a would find, if if nothing else, just such great language
to express ideas perhaps they already held before.
You know, it actually gives a lot of new perspective to a
phrase that people just, I think you're very familiar with it,
which is Derek Heritz, Karma la Torra, which is an idea that
people usually associate with like, OK, what well mannered,
you know, behavior and so on and so forth.
They don't really see it as like as what you explained it.
It's every aspect of the world, which is, you know, the, you
need the raw materials. So in order to have the Torah,
you know the tour, the tour has to infuse into those raw
materials first. So if.
Not. You have nothing to use.
Exactly. It has, it has to come with
that. So I think that, you know that
that's just a very unique and I think powerful way of looking at
it. By the way, so it's just, it's
just his side in a bizarre direction with Salia gone and
his I've been teaching of Salia gone recently.
And once again, it's one of those one of those farm that
like he's so modern. I mean, obviously he's not he's
1000 years old, but his language, he opens with an
epistemology with his way of approaching the world and the
the the way we gain information from the world.
And he has four. And the last one is the
tradition. I mean sense perception, obvious
ideas, reason. And like students are saying to
me like, like, like, why is tradition the last one?
I'm like, well, how did you come to the tradition?
What lit you there? What with the building box that
got you? You didn't wake up.
And like Judaism like the same way when it comes to, as you
said, with rehearsh, I think it's Yukio Yakov Weinberg from
Montre. I think it's three DH who, who,
who in one of his essays about rehearsh, he says uses the edit
in the Aristotelian sense. You, you, you have matter and
you have form. You, the matter is the world you
can't have. I mean, it's, it's one of those
things that when people, people who deny they have a philosophy
are just not aware of that philosophy.
In a similar way that when you have the raw material, you can
deny that you're using the raw material, but that's just
another way of using the raw material of the world.
You cannot escape it. And being conscious about that,
it's like a person does. I don't take anything in from
the external world. Then you're just expressing your
blindness, my friend. Look at it in a positive way.
And one of one of my, one of my teachers said that like, what is
more dangerous reading a, a philosophical work?
Let's say you're reading thus so thus Spoke Zarathustra from
Friedrich Nietzsche, or you're reading something from one of
the more existential philosophers like Jean Paul
Sartre, where he would write in a, in the language of the like a
story, which is more dangerous. And people say, well, maybe
Nietzsche because it's like really dangerous.
It's like his ideas could integrate into your world.
He's like, he's like, no, the dangerous 1 is when you don't
realize you're reading a philosophical work.
That's more dangerous in terms of but changing your perspective
and you're not aware that your world view is changing.
If you're reading a philosophical text, you have the
correct guards up. Some ideas I will integrate.
Some ideas I won't integrate because you'll be conscious
about it. You're living a conscious life.
If you read a philosophical story, the danger there is that
you will adopt ideas that you never would have adopted if they
were written in treatise form. So it's it's idea that you are
integrating whether you like it or not.
The question is, can we do it consciously with the lenses that
we think are the highest set of values that we want to use to
decide what comes in and what doesn't come in.
And that's, as you said, White. Derek Eretz will have to come
first. You know, there's something
unique. We, we, we just discussed this
with Steve Goldstein there, this idea that a lot of people don't
pay attention to, but like, you know, the Rishonim, the
Sephardic Rishonim specifically, they, they, they often times
wrote about hash kafa and we don't see it so much of the
Ashkenazi Rishonim and, and, and, and the like.
But what's interesting is of Hirsch and, and Rabbi Sachs and,
and everyone who you mentioned before, they're very much,
they're very much attuned to that and making us aware of
these things. And I think that actually, you
know, I think that's, that's why Sephardic people, like many of
our listeners would probably resonate a lot with ref sack
with ref Hirsch. So I just wanted to point that
out. I think that it's, it's an
interesting thing that we, we noticed in our previous
discussion. But the next thing I wanted to
ask you was Robbie Hirsch's approach to of Gothic literature
and Midrash and the Talmud. I think that that that's a topic
that obviously that got us together because we were having
a discussion with Rabbi Eisen and you wanted to speak about
this. So we'd like to know more about
that. So what?
The ideas of reversion are not new.
And by the way, it's interesting whatever big thing when big
thing to say like I'm not telling you anything new.
I'm, I'm telling you, I'm using different language to express
similar ideas and the same when it comes to Gazza magic,
miracles in the Talmud, science. He's not saying anything new.
He's just perhaps using different language.
And I would say the most important aspect of rehearsh is
a he looked at himself primarily as an educator.
Like for example, side point on this, on this topic, when I,
you've heard the term Kirov, right, people do Kirov.
So I'm involved in new students coming to do interest in Judaism
and people say to me, am I into do I do cure of?
I say, well, I could answer in the same way, like in a very
superficial way, but I say, no, I'm not.
I'm, I'm a teacher. I show people my lens and if
they find it interesting, well, it's part of their tradition.
They're more than welcome to it. And I feel a responsibility to
display this lens. That's what Hersh does, meaning
Hersh uses language to be an educator.
And that's the goal. We're there to be to demonstrate
Judaism. Your responsibility in any
educational context is to do your best to give the best
lenses possible to Judaism. That's all you can do.
You can't convince people to do anything, and God forbid you'd
never want to. And that's true in Kirov in
general, but also not to say that everybody approaches like
that, but I do realize that I'm saying my language is not used
to this. But the same with rehearsh.
He he, his language is so special.
And just to give an opening into the area of the first point that
you realize when you read his essays on this topic is his,
his, his, his humility, his, his recognition that we're dealing
with the Hakalim, we're dealing with the sages of the Jewish
tradition. And he before he begins,
especially considering he's going to be taking an approach
that his interlocutor will not be taking and he has to
sometimes be very falsehood about it.
But he opens up with the importance of humility of who am
I in reference to the the sages. And I find that such an
important way of opening this conversation because it almost
like he waxes poetically about it that we only are grasshoppers
in their shadows. Why is that so important?
Because not only if you're going to be saying something that
might by some people sound negative towards the hakamai,
you've got to make sure that you phrase what you're phrasing in
the correct framework. You're framing matters.
Because if I tell you the Rafesha's ex about Agatha and we
have listeners, well, probably not on this particle, but in
general, if someone hears that, like what?
Like you can say that about the, the the sages.
Well, no, the first thing is the humility on the point of rehash,
but also the greatness and the, the renown that he holds the
sages in. And simply when it comes to
Agatha, I think the most important way of a gatha
specifically is Agatha is not synatic.
That's the first point. It's not from Sinai.
And that's, that's, that cannot be overemphasized from a Hersh's
table. And he speaks about when we see
Agathator interplay with the halacha and he deals with them.
And he is, he's the person who wrote in the letter, wrote 32
examples to try and show that no halacha and Agathator Rehersh's
like the 1st and most important principle we need to articulate
to our students. It's not synatic, it's not from
Sinai, it's not a tradition from Sinai.
Which means the minute you blur the lines between a core
principle of Judaism and a gazeta, you do the worst
disservice spiritually and educationally to our students.
Second of all, they're parables. But definitionally a parable has
multiple interpretations. And that's OK because that was
the genius of wise men. They would write in parables.
But then to say that I found the interpretation and I got the
answer of this parable or this metaphor or this allegory that
you, that doesn't make sense because the, the, the, the
category of ideal you're dealing with lends itself to multiple
interpretations. So when it comes to a gazetor
and understanding of gazetor in general, he's saying what the
what the from high gone or Sharia gone with Nissan Rabeno
Khanana. He's he's talking the Rambam.
He's, he's, he's giving over these well trodden ideas, but
he's using language of, well, first of all, modern language,
but also the language of humidity and education, humidity
in reference to who we are dealing with.
And second of all, education. Why are we speaking about this?
We're speaking about this because education to ourselves,
but also education towards our students, recognizing that when
they come across ideas from Khazar that seem outlandish or
difficult, you walk away with either them denigrating Khazar
or them having a warped sense of Judaism.
And I think the unique part he has to play is the modern
language he uses. Obviously it was in Germany.
It's translated into English. But also he frames it in a way
that you're not saying, well, Khazar aren't literal.
Now, obviously that comes out from it, but not we're not
taking Khazan in a literal way. And I understand there are
different interpretations. There are some people that say
no Midrashian and Afghanistan. And I know there's a distinction
between the two of them, but they are synaptic.
They are traditions from Sinai. And I'm sure you can find
sources for that. Bharath Harsh felt comfortable
in saying yes, Well, first of all, that's a that that that's
not the that's not how things began.
I mean, he wasn't actually talking to someone necessarily
who was quoting people who would disagree with him.
But his point is humility and the importance of education in
talking about these ideas. But that in a more not radical
way, in a more like extreme way, parallel some to questions and
miracles that happen in the tumbled a person.
Let's say you've got a student who, OK, I get you, I've got
that. But what about the tunnel
Shanakanai, the oven where the, the Kumar that discusses the
water's going up, water's going down, caves going in and the
other, what do you do with that? And this once again, this, this,
this idea. So the way he had tick sacks
this, this. So he's like, I'm OK with that
being a miracle. I am, I'm OK with that.
I'm OK with that. I'm OK with and he gives an
interpretation like why I haven't got a problem of
understanding the, the stories in the Gemara as being miracles.
I, I'm, I'm OK with that. But am I going to push aside
someone who isn't OK with that? This is where he brings, he
brings Ribeno Khanala as an example.
Am I going to say I'm greater than Ribeno Khanala that I'm
going to be able to? And Ribeno Khanala gives an
interpretation that was a dream about without going to the
details. But the miracle didn't actually
happen. Let's say someone's like, you
know, I'm struggling with that actually happening.
If you're telling me it's a principle of faith, I'll cross
that bridge. But really like I get I get
Sinai. I get the splitting of the sea.
OK, I'm with you on that. I can I by the way, the whole
topic about what what do we actually mean when we say we
believe these ideas? I think that's a a whole topic
in of itself. But let's see, I say on whatever
level it means that I can integrate them into my
worldview. But this really like like, I
don't know, post the destruction of the temple, like really
miracles like that was actually happening and refreshes like I'm
going to push him away. I'm going to say that he's,
he's, he's not part of the circle.
And once again, the, the framing, the humility, and I
can't stress that humility enough because if you, even if a
person comes at this with a no, everything's literal, you cannot
walk away thinking the rehearsh is being negative towards,
towards Hazar. And I always, I often find when
these conversations are happening, not enough emphasis
is put on who we are dealing with, Not in a way that we're
making them into gods, but like, these are the Jewish people.
And I think Robbie Dweck said so beautifully, you have to be a
Hakan to understand. We have to we can't just assume.
And then when what do they mean by that?
No be and then look at the the sages and then decide whether
you can what they're talking about.
But that point that he opens up with humility.
The reason we're doing we're having this conversation is
because of education. And then lastly, the canopy.
Do I want to make everything a principle of faith?
Like do really do I want to do that?
Is that a healthy thing to do? If something is, then let's
cross that bridge. But if it's not, and I can show
the basis for other thinkers taking these sorts of
approaches, I might not agree with them, but that's definitely
a path that people can tread. Very well said and.
Very well said and very important, very fundamental.
Oh, by the way, and it's just a side point that in terms of
magic, once again, his approach to magic.
Now this is perhaps harder for some people, but he says, what
about magic? Magic exists.
I, I, I taught a class on magic the other day and people love
magic. By the way, an interesting
sociological point. People who claim that they're
not religious on on reports like the the nuns, I think they call
them the people who say nun to no to they, they don't have any
religion. They they 80% of them believe in
ghosts, which is which is because because in my sense, if
I'm going to say, listen, I don't hold a religious one of
you, the motivation for doing that would be my my reason, my
difficulty with integrating spiritualistic concepts.
I would say, OK, no, funny. Interesting enough, that's not
the case. They're good with ghosts.
I don't believe in ghosts, but I I struggle with a religious
perspective of integrating things I can't see and ideas.
But people who say none to religion, 80% of them believe in
ghosts. So I think it's hysterical, but
but magic. What about magic?
So Rathers says the to cut a Long story short, am I going to
put my head between two mountains?
The Rambam in the Ramban, does it make first of all, does it
make any difference to me in the Today, in the here and now?
But also we have two legitimate perspectives in the Jewish
tradition. Am I going to shove my head
between these two mountains and say which one was true?
And once again, that's that's once again widening the canopy.
A person reads that and like, like my, I love magic.
I'm Harry Potter all the way. I love it.
And that's by the way, that's great.
And there is a, a, there's a space with the tradition for you
to be able to sit. And especially because even
people who take that approach all often would say it doesn't
exist today. But the point by making is that
a person who says that, listen, I can't integrate magic into my
world. That doesn't, that doesn't make
sense. There is a space for you as
well. And the importance of having
that canopy, being able to shade as many people as possible.
I think it's also an important principle that we that that in a
modern sense, especially when it comes to our avatar, magic,
astrology, whatever it may be, is an an important valuable idea
that Refersh gives us. Yeah.
I mean, as far as him, again, I'm going to say again that it
really resonates because we come from community that is, you
know, welcoming of different ideas.
That's the way it's supposed to be.
And I think, I think Rev Hirsch, obviously he he represents that
because he's constantly as, as you mentioned, he's constantly
trying to make space for these different viewpoints.
And I think that it's extremely refreshing.
So to, to, to, to, to damage my presentation just for a second.
He was also a, a, a major canoe. When he thought something was
bad, he would, he, he had this idea of, of cessation.
He would, he cut himself off for the rest of the orthodox
community because he felt they were compromising to reform too
much. And people criticized him
heavily for that, this idea of that.
I'll give you a fun anecdote. You've heard of Abraham Geiger.
Sure. Right, so he was a bend bias in
Refresh's house. Next thing once again, it's an
interesting historical point, but Geiger would give a Abraham
Geiger would write a wrote a an experience of him learning with
him. Every morning they would have a
Haversa shaft where they would learn toastmas to hit them
together and then cat they would have a they would have a Carusa
in obviously all these important key topics like, but there was
some time where they were learning Hegel and apparently
first got very upset about an idea and wanted to burn the
book. And guy was like, it's a library
book and he was labeled meaning he had that that that like if
something was bad, he had a passion for the bad as well as
the good. So it's something was like the
the antithesis of what Judaism was holding.
He would be clear about it as well and say, OK, beyond the
pale. And I I'm not integrating this.
So I'm saying he had he had the he had both sides as well.
Meaning. Yeah, I thought it was a bit a
fun, a fun, fun point. By the way, just another fun
point. You've that one of Hersh's
grandsons, another fascinating thinker called Isaac Breyer of
Isaac Breyer. Now he has a he's he's the one
who was around during the beginning, the start in the
state. He knew Ruth Cook in his living
room. He had two portraits, one of her
Pash and one of Emmanuel Kat. OK, I say like, and, and the,
the, the, the, the people today would be like, well, that's
insane. Why you've got Kant on your
wall. They'd be like, because because
Kant gave me tools that that allowed me to understand Judaism
in a way that like that, that, that, that animated every aspect
of his life. And it was like, it wasn't a bad
thing that he happened not to be Jewish.
It was, it was OK. That was just where the where
that that that that where the sage happened to be.
I feel like this also really helps if the whole idea with
Harambeam and Aristotle. Yeah, just thinking.
About you were thinking that too, like, you know, that it's
always all this like controversy and hoopla like Aristotle and
Aristotle, that Aristotle was a tool that was used for that, for
Harambeam to, to, to articulate Judaism in in a way which
previously was not able to, to be articulated literally what
you're saying. Yeah.
Yeah, and and and it's a it, it, it, it sidelines to the whole
Hazel and science as well. It's and I understand there are
different perspectives, but Rupesh was was was put the Hazel
besides that being masters in Tyra, they were masters in or
masters or they mastered, excuse me, the tools that they had in
front of them. Now, when it comes to science,
those tools change and that's what that's not being
denigrated. That's the reality they were
living with. So there are certain
specifically when it comes to science, the idea of the
longevity of tools obviously has an issue because our
understanding of the natural world changes.
But yeah, the, the conceptual tools we get from people and the
way of approaching the world is a is is is a is is.
As I said, I, I, you could envision the Rumbam having a
portrait of Aristotle. I mean, I don't know if you
would do portraits, but you can envision the way he speaks of
Aristotle. It's like this person knew the
world in a way that like, like when I, when I try and get
people to appreciate the genius of Aristotle and people find
that difficult to really, we speak of the Rumbam and we
people don't sit down and go through the Nike media, Netflix.
I haven't either. But my point is we we don't, we
don't really sit with the appreciate the genius of these
people. There's this idea called the
square of opposition, which is a logical construct that Aristotle
made. It's a way of illustrating
logical relationships that Aristotle basically condensed
all of logic into a box. And when you see that and you're
like that, that there is such genius to come up with this
without going into why it's because it's called, but it's a,
it's a, it's once again, as you say, it's the key tools that we
use that without them we are more impoverished Jews and our
ability to serve Hashem is impoverished.
Our teacher Robert Maroof gave us a class on Mourne Wukima.
In the first class he gave to us first.
First class I remember clearly he he was praising Aristotle and
he said he's like people don't realize, but every single the
way we go about everything, it's due to Aristotle, logic,
mathematics, science or every single subject that is taught
and used in every field of life was really because of Aristotle.
Like, like we don't even know it, but like, like we're
indebted without everything that that's like the whole modern
world is built off of Aristotle's logic and, and his,
his development of all these different subjects.
Like you, you, you can't move without him.
And you just don't know that. So you have to, you have to
appreciate that. You can't just look at it and
say, oh boy, it doesn't work like that.
You know what I mean? Like.
Now that you you brought up the, you know, his, his scientific
worldview, how does that relate to his understanding of Jewish
texts? So it's actually interesting,
interesting when it comes to a person science, it's a he was
clearly enamored with it, but it doesn't actually it obviously
his works. He speaks about it, but in a way
what makes his work so timeless is that he actually doesn't
integrate science explicitly into his, for example, his
interpretations of of not of the tyrant.
Explain what I mean by that. If we take something like it,
it, I mean, it doesn't, it doesn't.
Perhaps it's a good way of explaining it.
The danger of, of when you write you, you, let's say, describe
ideas from the tyrant through a scientific lens.
The danger is that the science will develop and thereby your
interpretation will become, you know, just not interesting
anymore. It's just not valuable because
we don't look at the world through those lenses anymore.
Unless you're like, as I said, unless you're as great as the
rumbam where your ideas are, are, are are so valuable and
universal. Even though the scientific
framework may have disappeared his value, his ideas still have
their staying power. That's a rare thing.
That is a rare thing. Rupesh didn't integrate science
into his understanding, except I think there's one time when he
talks about Saras where he talks about in his, when he talks
about leprosy specifically and he tries to show whenever
Raphersh gives a reason for the commandment, he, he doesn't just
he approaches it in a, in a, in a scientific way.
He has a hypothesis. He then investigates the
hypothesis through the written and oral law, which means he
needs his idea to thread its way out not only in terms of its
understanding from a symbolic standpoint of the Tyra as it as
it's expressed in the tire, but also the Gomorras and halacha.
The more he can, the more particulars he can bring
together to make sense of his reason, the richer he finds his
reason. And there's one time during
Sarras where he tries to show that it's not a natural element,
tries to show and he tries to show that people call it
leprosy. He says our understanding of
leprosy clearly isn't this. That is I think the only time he
brings modern science into his interpretation in his hommish.
But that doesn't mean it doesn't have a place.
And I explain what I mean by that.
Take evolution as an example. Evolution a contentious issue.
And the same way when I say about Hazan science and I have
teachers that I respect who take different views in this area,
which is fair. So when it comes to evolution,
how do you approach evolution? Because it was it was A to say
it was a, a hypothesis and in his time it actually was.
Does that make sense? Like nowadays, it's not really
like that anymore. It's that people use like, oh,
it's only a theory. No, no, it's not theory.
Like like that people think theory.
But in his day, when it was first emerging, it was a new
idea. And from a scientific
standpoint, he says quite simply, well, if this grain
gains traction and the and becomes accepted by the majority
of the scientists, rather we'll show how this will be
incorporated into our understanding of the tiger.
Excellent. So like, not, not a big deal.
Just like, yeah, we'll just see how this idea integrates.
But then how does that emerge in his actual parish of the Comish?
It it emerges as a, a, a philosophical morning.
What I mean by that is he will warn of the dangers of allowing
evolution to become a philosophy of life.
For example, the philosophy evolution as a a, as a way of
describing the natural world, natural selection, working off a
genetic mutation, that's a way of describing the natural world.
That's great. And that there can be a beauty
and A and A and a drawing towards God that can emerge
through that. But if you then make it into a
philosophy, you then come up with Herbert Spencer and
eugenics. If you then use it as a way of
viewing the world, you come up with Karl Marx and the the lower
form of life, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat and the
dialectic of history, and everything becomes natural that
he would work against. And social Darwinism.
Exactly, exactly, and by the way, the the language he uses,
he he then latches it on to You'll love this on Baal Paar.
What's Baal Paar in the story of Bilam and Balak, you have this
him taking them to different mounting tops Baal and then you
have the Sedai, I think serum and then you have baal par.
And he shows that each one of them illustrates a different way
of trying to find an opening in the Jewish people's worldview
that you can draw God's eye at them.
He says, what's baal par Now as kids, we will learn in religious
schools like what's baal par to obviously not be explicit.
You basically go to the bathroom in front of it and people are
like, that's weird. Why would you do that?
And Raphael says it's called the God of shamelessness.
And Raphael says the, the, the, the, the factor that holds us to
the moral law, to God's will is to an extent our conscious, our
conscience shame. But if I could erode that, if I
can show I am just an animal and express that symbolic with a
symbolic ritual drama through acting in a way that the entire
natural world shares from animal to plant to human.
If we all pass our waste. And he looked at that as a way
of demonstrating you are just almost like a, a, a, a, a, a, a
philosophical materialism that you are just matter.
You can express that through this idol and erode and practice
eroding your shame to the point where you have none.
And so you see a philosophical principle emerging from a, from
his point of view, you could look at it emerging from a
scientific idea where we are just I know, I know on the, the
in the, in the language of Darwin, after he wrote the
Origin of Species, he wrote the Descent of man.
That rehearsal would have felt very dangerous where you have
the idea emerge as a philosophy and thereby it's also opens up
to a whole conversation about why what was so dangerous about
like why was idolatry dangerous? Why was it a bad thing?
This is an example of where rehearsal sees one idol
illustrating something that is so morally corrupt, but not just
morally corrupt. You train yourself in moral
corruption as trying to level the playing field between you
and every other part of the natural world.
So that, that that would be a way.
And he, he, I'm pretty sure he uses the word social Darwinism.
He uses the idea of Darwinism having a, a, a, a philosophical
effect where it really is a way of describing the natural world.
So that's I think is a good perhaps a way of showing that.
You sold me on that. That bapa or explanation was
phenomenal. Yeah, by the way, really
interesting. Really interesting.
The quote, the beauty about rehearsh is his ideas are so
good. I was saying to Rifka, whenever
I'm not learning rehearsh, like I obviously learn other other
things as well. But when I, when I, when I
always go back to him, some of his interpretations, they just
oh, can I, can I give you, can I give you just another exact?
We, we spoke about Madrid. We spoke about Madrid.
Like how does rehearsh interpret Madrid?
Good question. It's a good question.
Now he doesn't have a book on interpreting Madrid, but when he
quotes a Madrid, it's a way of like integrating into a symbolic
idea. We just had, we just had the
latter, Jacob's Ladder, we had the story of the latter.
So he said the latter interstates 3 truths.
The first truth is that the goal transcends the natural world
meaning the I, the any, any, any meaning, any meaning.
To give meaning to a system, the meaning has to come from outside
the system. So that against the heavens,
that's the, the distinction between the terrestrial world
and the, and the, and the world beyond.
That's the first truth. The symbol is giving over.
So the second truth, this is where the Medridge comes into
play, Says the angels are going up and going down.
What were they doing? The angels were going up and
they were looking on the throne of glory and they saw Jacob's
face engraved on the throne of glory.
Be beautiful. And they were coming and looking
at Yaakov below and Rappersh sees that as the illustration of
the world, that the ideal and how things actually are and they
are comparing the two. Thereby you get that oughtness,
the world as it ideally should be and how we are living out the
world today. And and and and then then, yeah,
so that's a good example. And in this week's partial you
have the the the the wrestling match and the and the Hazel talk
about the dust that's kicked up that reached the heavens and
reached God's stroke. It's like what's that trying to
that's trying to say that what's happening here has historical
and cosmic significance. You have the, the, the drama of
Jacob wrestling, the the story of the Jewish people throughout
history that we are damaged. We are, we have no foundation,
the foundation of power that every other nation has that
keeps their survival. We don't have that because we
are damaged our leg, we have no foundation and that principle
that the the Jewish people will still hold on.
We will still hold on Is is is has has has cosmic significance
because that is the story of the Jewish people.
And that's consult using that language of reaching the throne
of glory to illustrate the cosmic nature of it and the way
he ends it. He says, what point do we hold
on to? Why are we holding on until they
bless us, until the world this is so beautiful recognizes that
what we've been doing this whole time has not been only for us,
it's been for you as well. We're part of the same story
until you bless us and recognize that we've been doing this for
you. We've been doing this for all of
us together as children of God. So yeah.
Absolutely stunning. Stunning.
I love that. Wow.
Amazing that is. He's he's awesome.
He's awesome. He's.
Awesome, you're great at expressing it too.
So yeah, excellent articulation, articulation of fantastic.
We, we want to thank you for coming on the podcast.
It's been a pleasure. We learned a lot from you and I
think you've inspired a lot of people to listen to study Rob
Hirsch. And that's that's our hope from
all this. And we want to also ask you
where everyone could find you. So I have a podcast on Spotify
called Judaism From Within, which was Repairsh's slogan,
which a whole topic. Why that's his slogan.
It's on the OU as well where I teach Kharad specifically, but
this one also integrate PowerShot ideas as well.
You had also run Adlestein on your podcast as well.
Together with Rabbi Eisen, Yes, right.
So I do a podcast with Eisenstein on.
It's called 22 Rabbi's Three Opinions.
It's more of a schmooze on interesting ideas.
He's the man. He's the I love Rabbi.
It's yeah, he's like the, the yeah, no, he's a yeah.
So that's another podcast I do with him and yeah, that's my I
teach. I should mention I teach in
Chappelle's and in Madrasahal and Madrasah Tina.
Those are the places that I I teach the people might have
heard of in case they want to check out on their websites.
Guys, thank you so much. It was an absolute pleasure.
I really but proper honor. Thank you and that I didn't know
about this podcast you had with. Let's check it out.
We're going to check it out, but that might be a great crossover
podcast if you want to have them together and maybe we can make
it expand the schmooze. For sure, because especially he
has a different, he's a very different.
There's a very different audience that comes.
He's got the whole other side of his life there.
So it's a very yeah, that'd be cool.
Love to mention that to him. Yeah, very cool.
Excellent. That's fantastic, Shavuto.
I just want to say one thing. One thing I noticed about you
that jumps out at me. You are you when you talk about
Robert Hirsch and when you talk about Judaism in general, I see
like a joy comes out of you like you, you, you have a joy when
you talk about Judaism. And if Rabbi Hirsch has has
enabled that in you, then that that in itself to me shows like
you know, that that's it's, it's worth looking into and it's
worth learning of repurchase tour because I see the joy that
you talk about Judaism when you're talking about it through
his lens. And it's powerful.
It's powerful. That's that's humbling.
Thank you. That's that's cool.
That's cool. I appreciate.
That you're very welcome. We hope to do it again.
Very cool guys. Hope that everyone will.
Thank you. This was.
Fantastic. Thank you.
Thank you very much.