Ep. 74 // "Thinking The Unthinkable" w/ Prof. Eliot Wolfson

00:00 Speaker 1 You know, there's no entry into Chabad if you, if you don't appropriate both that sense of emphasis on essence, because that, that is the ultimate mahut of reality. That's the ultimate substance of what is real, what they call atzmut. You're talking about something that is essentially incomprehensible, but yet we have this capacity as human beings to be, um, allured by that, to try to, to try to constantly penetrate the impenetrable. We can think the unthinkable.

00:43 Speaker 2 Welcome to Homesick for Lubavitch, a podcast where we explore Lubavitch identity in the year two thousand and twenty-five. My name is Benzi Afson, and I will be your host. Let's begin. All righty. We are here in Santa Barbara or a suburb of Santa Barbara, California, with none other than Professor Elliot Wolfson. Uh, it's an honor and a pleasure to be with you.

01:14 Speaker 1 Thank you.

01:14 Speaker 2 Thank you for making the time and, and agreeing to come on the podcast. And, uh, I'm sure we'll get back to, in due course, how, how we, how it even got to you coming to the podcast, uh, the conversation that, um, intrigued you or that, uh, came across your attention. But, um, I, I first wanna, I first wanna give you an opportunity to introduce yourself for those who aren't familiar, and I'm sure even those who have read your work, and there are many, , um, just your background and, uh, and, and where you, and where you come from. But before that, for all those who listen to this podcast and enjoy it, please like and subscribe on the various platforms. It helps the podcast. And if you really like the podcast, please help support the podcast at hflpodcast.com/donate. So...

02:00 Speaker 1 Okay. Uh, first of all, thank you, uh, very much for having me.

02:05 Speaker 2 Pleasure.

02:05 Speaker 1 Um, and I look forward to our, our dialogue. So, um, I was, um, I was born, um, into, uh, an Orthodox family. My father was actually an Orthodox rabbi. Um, and, uh, uh, though I was born in Newark, New Jersey, I, I grew up in Brooklyn and, uh, went to yeshivot. And, um, at some point, uh, actually in sixth grade, my Gemara teacher was a Lubavitcher, and on Fridays, he would actually bring in, um, some- something from the Rebbe and share with us. So that was my first kind of, uh, interaction with Chabad. Um-

02:55 Speaker 2 He would bring, like, a teaching from the Rebbe?

02:56 Speaker 1 Yeah. Yeah. He-- I mean, not, not, not... He didn't hand out any texts. He would just, you know-

03:03 Speaker 2 Like a s- like a sicha on the Parsha.

03:03 Speaker 1 A sicha for the Parsha. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Um-

03:08 Speaker 2 And this was... Which years this is?

03:10 Speaker 1 I was in sixth grade.

03:12 Speaker 2 So if-

03:13 Speaker 1 One year-

03:13 Speaker 2 I don't, I don't mean to age you.

03:14 Speaker 1 Yeah. No, that's okay. I was born in fifty-six. Um-

03:17 Speaker 2 So in the sixties.

03:19 Speaker 1 In the sixties, yeah.

03:20 Speaker 2 All right. So this is, this is in the first years of the sichas really. Close to it, at least.

03:24 Speaker 1 Yeah. Um, but then having grown up in Brooklyn, uh, I, you know, obviously eventually become, became very aware of the Rebbe's presence. And the... Before my father took on, uh, his own congregation, we went to, um, the shul, Young Israel of Ocean Parkway, it's called, and the rabbi's name was Bamzer. And he, he became a, a great follower of the Rebbe. And so because of that, typically on a Chal HaChodesh, some of the young guy Lubavitchers would walk in from Crown Heights.

04:07 Speaker 2 Right.

04:08 Speaker 1 So that was my second kind of real deepening of the awareness. And my father used to get every Friday in the mail, the sichas. So, um, I started myself to get interested, and that interest only deepened over the years. And eventually, I went to study philosophy and then, um, switched to the study of, uh, Jew- in Jewish studies at Brandeis University, where I focused both on m- medieval Jewish philosophy and on Kabbalah and Hasidut. And then, you know, uh, I haven't stopped learning Chabad thought all these years.

04:56 Speaker 2 So basically, it started with an interest in, in Hasidut or, or that Torah, and that's what, that's what brought you into the world of academia or in this field of academia. It wasn't the other way around.

05:08 Speaker 1 It wasn't the other way around. Right. Right.

05:10 Speaker 2 Was there ever a thought in your mind to pursue it in the yeshiva world, or you felt it had to be academic?

05:16 Speaker 1 Um, well, I mean, I did-- I was in yeshivas for, you know, a long time, uh, from grade school all the way through, um, high school, and then I, I spent a year in Israel. Um, and, um, then I, I even started my college career at Yeshiva University. But once I left YU, no, I thought that the path for me would be, would be the academy.

05:46 Speaker 2 Was that, like, a career choice, or was it, or was it that you felt the study's more rigorous? Like, what did you find in the world of academia? 'Cause there, there are very few... Uh, needless to say, there, there are very few people in the world of academia, I would think, that are as familiar with these texts as, as, as you were and w- were going to be.

06:04 Speaker 1 Yeah. Although it's growing because there's-

06:07 Speaker 2 Right

06:07 Speaker 1 ... there are more and more.

06:08 Speaker 2 But I'm saying back then.

06:09 Speaker 1 Back then.

06:09 Speaker 2 Like, how many, how many people could handle, uh, uh, Mayim Ru'ach D'var Ha-Shab and, and-

06:14 Speaker 1 No. Not, not, not back then. Not back then.

06:16 Speaker 2 Right. So what were you going there for in your mind?

06:20 Speaker 1 Yeah. Well, it's an interesting question, and obviously, I think it's, um, you know, it, it, it involves a much larger question of my own, my own development, both intellectual and spiritually. Yes, so I d- I think I did find in the academy a kind of discipline and rigor that was more suitable to my way of approaching things. Um, but I have to say that in my heart and in my brain, and it's sometimes reflected in my work, although I'm not sure it's always well understood by, by people who read my work, that I don't think the gap is as wide as many believe.

07:09 Speaker 2 The gap between what and what?

07:11 Speaker 1 The academy. Let's say, uh, the academic way to approach and the traditional way to approach.

07:17 Speaker 2 Mm-hmm.

07:17 Speaker 1 I think there are many shared assumptions-

07:19 Speaker 2 Mm-hmm

07:19 Speaker 1 ... and there's a place where the two actually meet in very interesting ways.

07:24 Speaker 2 Yeah. That, that's precisely why I wanted to come here. Um, you know, I, I think peop- I think even when you... when we spoke b-by email, you were, you were a bit surprised that I would have you on. Um, you know, and, you know, obv- obviously, you don't claim to be a card-carrying Lubavitcher, right?

07:45 Speaker 1 No.

07:46 Speaker 2 So, so I s- you know, I suppose like, okay, so why? And I... and maybe people listening to this will ask a similar question, but in my mind, first of all, just practically, there are a lot of people, I'm sure there are many that you know of that I don't know of, but also many that I know that you don't know of, many Lubavitchers, card-carrying Lubavitchers, some of them teaching in, in prestigious yeshivas who have read your work and, and maybe they don't agree with everything that you say and all your conclusions, which is, uh, inevitable-

08:21 Speaker 1 Right

08:21 Speaker 2 ... and understandable. But you know, somebody that I know, who I respect very much and is very well-respected by many people, told me that back when he was a bachur in yeshiva, his reading of your book, Open Secret, which we have on the table here, is what gave him like a framework with which to approach this, this, the famous sichas of Nun Alef and Nun Beis.

08:44 Speaker 1 Uh-huh.

08:44 Speaker 2 Right? So even though I'm sure he would disagree on many of your conclusions, the way that you approach it with what you discuss, the rigor and the analysis, and I wanna get to the, the language, which I think is the most striking Wilsonian kind of, uh, thing that people know about you, I think that just opened up a, a way of seeing things that he had... that hadn't been available to him earlier. So like you're saying, there is an overlap that, to me, is fascinating. And you know, I don't really care about membership clubs and, you know, like the famous quip, like, "If it's a, if it's a club that will have me, I don't wanna be part of it anyway."

09:20 Speaker 1 Okay. That's Groucho Marx.

09:21 Speaker 2 Yes, correct. So, you know, like, like, um, you know, w- in a way, and maybe we will get there in the conversation, I feel in many ways, especially in Dorot Shvi, Lubavitch became a, um, became... The center of gravity almost shifted, paradoxically, to use one of your favorite, uh, f- uh, w-words, it shifted to the margins. Like the center, this, uh, you know, the Rebbe was an outsider, historically speaking. He, he was not He married into the family. He had radical ideas that sh- that, that took many years for the Hasidim to accept, right? And the, so many people that came into Lubavitch, so that's all the way at the top.

10:06 Speaker 1 Right.

10:06 Speaker 2 I mean, that's a more controversial, provocative statement. But even if you leave the Rebbe aside, downstream, so many of the figures that came into Lubavitch and became a mainstays in how Lubavitch was shaped were outsiders. They came from the outside. And so a club... You know, the whole idea of there being a club where you-

10:25 Speaker 1 Mm-hmm

10:25 Speaker 2 ... you're inside or outside, the whole thing doesn't make sense to me.

10:27 Speaker 1 Right.

10:28 Speaker 2 But the overlap is profound.

10:29 Speaker 1 Yeah. A-and actually, I mean, one, one of the, uh, profound teachings of the Rebbe is to start to break down that inside/outside dichotomy.

10:38 Speaker 2 Right. What do you mean by that?

10:40 Speaker 1 Well, I mean, um, he says, I mean, with, uh, So he will, um, sometimes when quoting that, he will make the point that really for one who truly understands what that means, that the, the

11:03 Speaker 2 Right

11:05 Speaker 1 ... are actually

11:08 Speaker 2 Right

11:08 Speaker 1 Right? They actually become indistinct or, or they're in- they're indifferent in their sameness.

11:17 Speaker 2 Right. The mayan, the, the wellspring, which Hasidus always explains is by definition supposed to be, uh, secluded, and, and the kind of hidden source is in a, is in the hutzah-

11:29 Speaker 1 Right

11:29 Speaker 2 ... which is not, which is not supposed to work.

11:31 Speaker 1 Right. Right.

11:32 Speaker 2 And yet that's the whole point.

11:33 Speaker 1 Right. And he also says that with respect to nigla and nistar.

11:36 Speaker 2 Right.

11:36 Speaker 1 Right?

11:36 Speaker 2 Right.

11:37 Speaker 1 That the, there, there isn't a dichotomy here, actually. If one who really knows the pshat, the nigla will come to the nistar.

11:45 Speaker 2 Homesick for Lubavitch is brought to you by Yuvala Media, a boutique video production company servicing the Chabad and Jewish community. Since opening 10 years ago, Yuvala Media has pushed the boundaries of artistic and thoughtful storytelling in the community, with an insistence on there always being a memorable story as well as a beautiful and striking visual image that we believe is second to none. Over the years, we have worked with Chabad organizations around the country, as well as large organizations like Bonialo, Torah Umesora, and Athalathon, guided by the belief that your story is absolutely worth telling with depth and creativity. If you are looking to tell your story with a video, please reach out to us at hello@yuvalmedia.com. Again, that is hello@yuvalmedia.com. A link can be found in the show notes. And now, back to the podcast. I do wanna, you know, talk a little bit about your, your, your use of language, um, and the way you use your langu- uh, the way, the way you, you use, uh, or, or in a way almost explode English to try to convey ideas the way you understand it. Um, you know, the, the constant use of, uh, n-negatives and, and, uh, you know, uh, the concealment of the, of the openness and the openness of the concealment and, you know, the, the title of your book, Open Secret. To me, one of the profound challenges of Chabad in America is the challenge or the problem of translation, right? You have this corpus of work that's extensive

13:23 Speaker 2 and almost inexhaustible of, of Maamar and Mesikutas, but it all, l-linguistically at least, but also culturally, 'cause language and culture are, are, are com- are inter-i-intertwined.

13:35 Speaker 1 Yeah.

13:36 Speaker 2 It, it all has a point of reference that's outside of, of mo- of modern America or English-speaking America, right? America... It's, it's, it's all from the Old World.

13:47 Speaker 1 Yeah.

13:47 Speaker 2 And so to, to give a simple example, ask the regular Lubavitcher what bitul means.

13:53 Speaker 1 Yeah.

13:53 Speaker 2 Translate bitul for me.

13:54 Speaker 1 Yeah. Can I say something about it?

13:57 Speaker 2 Of course. Of course.

13:57 Speaker 1 So when I was working on this, uh, I had s-spending some time in, in, in Jerusalem, and, um, Philip Wexler, um, um, introduced me to a Lubavitcher that he was studying with. And we started to talk about bitul, and he didn't like the w- the fact that I was using terms like nullification, uh, or obliteration to translate it. And he said, "No, it just means perfection." And that was very telling because it opened up for me a, a much bigger issue, that this dimension of Chabad is difficult in the current moment, 'cause the bitul is not just perfection. Yes, of course, it isn't-- it does ultimately lead to the, to the, uh, perfection, the utmost perfection, but there, there's, there's a mamashut there. There's a reality to the bitul. Bitul hayesh, bitul bemitzvot is even a more profound bitul.

14:57 Speaker 2 Right. Right. Yes. So i-is it, is it, is it, it's a profound problem that, that, that I feel in many ways is at the root of... A-and of course, this, this goes all the way, uh, up th- you know, theologically or how you understand so this, but also has downstream effects culturally of how we, of how we experience it. If, if our point of reference and our ideas is always to a different world and a different fra-- uh, a different, d- a different way of life back in the day, and we're spea- we're thinking in Hebrew-

15:30 Speaker 1 Mm-hmm

15:30 Speaker 2 ... right? And then we come to real life, and we, we don't have a language nearly as rich in our, in our, in our, in our com, uh, our lingua franca. We don't have... We're not, not even lingua franca, our mamlashin, like they say, in our, in our English, the, the language with which we perceive the world and experience the world. It, it, our, our English Hasidic language is very, very impoverished compared to the... And I feel like that's what you're grappling with in your work.

15:57 Speaker 1 Yeah. Yeah. And of course, the Yiddish layer as well, the Hebrew and the Yiddish.

16:02 Speaker 2 Right.

16:03 Speaker 1 Both, both are, uh, are kind of lost to many.

16:07 Speaker 2 Right.

16:07 Speaker 1 Yeah. Yeah, so I, I, I know some people, some people kind of, uh, make fun of me for my language, but, um, I... Language is a kli, is a vessel to carry thoughts forward, and, and the, the kli, the vessel, has to be commensurate or proportionate to the thought that is being expressed in the kli. Now, the thought is, is greater than the language. The language is limiting, and especially if, especially if much of the thinking is about Ein Sof or Ohr Ein Sof or even higher, the Atzmus, right? So there clearly language will, will not be able to completely, uh, account for the thinking. But nevertheless, we have to express it in language.

17:10 Speaker 2 Right.

17:11 Speaker 1 And so I try to translate this, these ideas into a language, an academic language, uh, heavily influenced by my study of philosophy and mysticism of other traditions, incidentally, and, um, try to craft a language that, as I said before, is kind of proportionate or commensurate t-to the thoughts.

17:41 Speaker 2 Yeah. Uh, de-it definitely feels that way in your writing, and, you know, people, people may not, they may not adopt it completely, but at least attempt is being made, right? And, and that's the way you're attempting at it. And, uh, and I think-

17:54 Speaker 1 Yeah

17:54 Speaker 2 ... I think it's at least important for people to s- to, to, to, to grapple with this. We cannot shove ideas of Hasidism into a, an impoverished English language. E-English is not in itself an impoverished language.

18:06 Speaker 1 No, it's a very rich language actually.

18:07 Speaker 2 It's, it's extremely-- it's one of the richest languages, right?

18:09 Speaker 1 Yeah.

18:09 Speaker 2 I'm not a linguist, but, but-

18:10 Speaker 1 Yeah

18:11 Speaker 2 ... English supposedly is able to adopt all kinds of ideas. It's very flexible and very accepting, but we just don't have the history of English as a Hasidic language.

18:21 Speaker 1 Right.

18:21 Speaker 2 So we, we, we... Bitul's nullification. Okay, but what's nullifica... We never use the word nullification. We don't have... What does that word even mean, right? And so it's-

18:28 Speaker 1 Mm-hmm

18:28 Speaker 2 ... it's like a dead end.

18:29 Speaker 1 Right.

18:29 Speaker 2 And that's, I think, what we need to grapple with. Uh, and so, but, you know, you, you talk about bringing in languish, in English or, or other, other, you know, other, other philosophies have also been translated from other languages. It's c- it's a constant attempt of modernizing or adopting and bringing into our world, right? A lot of these philosophies were written in God knows which languages originally, but someone made that attempt and brought it in.

18:55 Speaker 1 Right.

18:55 Speaker 2 How... In your mind, is there... When, when you start mixing these different disciplines and these different traditions that have roots in very distinct cultures and times of history and religions and beliefs, all kinds, it depends how deep you wanna go.

19:12 Speaker 1 Right.

19:13 Speaker 2 How do you, how do-- do you make sure, do... Is it important for you to retain the identity or even sanctity of, of the Hasidic tradition? Or, or, or, you know, is, is that, is that important? And if it is important, how do you do it?

19:33 Speaker 1 Yeah. That's an excellent question, and, and absolutely is, is critical. Uh, so the, the specificity or the particularity of, let's say now, the Jewish tradition, or let's even be more specific, the Jewish mystical tradition, its integrity as something distinct has to be preserved, and that's of course, the case with Chabad. O-on the other hand, on the other hand, uh, I have alw- been committed to the idea that the deeper one goes into any tradition, one can find pathways to other traditions.

20:18 Speaker 2 Mm.

20:19 Speaker 1 So I reject... There used to be a kinda model of comparative study where, you know, you kind of were flying high above and looking down, and then imposing structures on these different traditions. I don't agree with that. I think you can only get to the similarities by really delving deep into the soil or the ground of any particular, particular tradition, and that-that's certainly the case with Chabad.

20:51 Speaker 2 If you, if you dig deep enough anywhere in the earth, hypothetically, eventually you'll hit the core.

20:56 Speaker 1 Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, even... I mean, if we wanna get technical at, I, I find in ch- in... Th-this is really coming down very strong in the Mitteler Rebbe, and I feel the Rashab, the Rebbe Rashab goes even further, that the, uh, the hitachtut of the, of the atzmut. Right? Sometimes they'll use the expression of the Rambam, that it's an incomposite one. But they, they deviate from the Rambam insofar as th-that unit-unity is manifest through what they call hitkalkut.

21:40 Speaker 2 Right.

21:40 Speaker 1 So it's almost kind of the endless divisibility of that oneness that really constitutes its unification, its oneness. And that's a, that's a really good model for what we were just discussing. Right? 'Cause the oneness of a traditi- of the ch-- of these different-- the truths of these different traditions, right, will be manifest in all of the in-infinite variety and specificities, and you have to be faithful to each of those in its particularity. So you have to know the languages.

22:15 Speaker 2 So what is the particularity in your mind of Chabad Hasidus? Why do you keep on... Y-you're, you're, you're, you're exploring all these other disciplines.

22:24 Speaker 1 Yeah.

22:24 Speaker 2 Why do you keep on coming back to this?

22:27 Speaker 1 Um, it just really... I, I find it to be, uh, kind-- uh, really one of the most profound, um, paths, uh, of religious thinking. Although I know here, I also wanna emphasize here, I understand that, uh, this isn't only a, a kinda academic philosophy. Like the Rebbe would always say that the maes- the maase is the ikar, right? Right? Th-this is a, this is about a, a way of living, a path of living. So I'm, I'm familiar that that's an integral part of, of the Hashkafa here.

23:06 Speaker 2 Right.

23:07 Speaker 1 But nevertheless, Machshavat Chabad is really something that I find endlessly fascinating, and, uh, I think, you know, it's a, it's a tran- it's a translation of not just, not just the teachings of the Baal Shem Tov, but Kabbalah more generally. I mean, like, because, because already the Alter Rebbe, you know, was, was, was citing from Kitvei HaAri, and, uh, some people criticized him for that even. But, y-you know, th... So he, he unleashed an incredibly interesting, um, lineage of interpreting Kabbalah. And I, I... For me, uh, for me, there is just an accuracy there in understanding the, the Kabbalistic tradition.

23:59 Speaker 2 What do you mean by that?

24:00 Speaker 1 There's a kind of clarity. Well, um, um, it, I mean, it, it relates to so many different things. L-let's, let's, let's take the... E-even the distinctionfrom being absent in the world. Mm-hmm. Right? And ultimately, ultimately this relates to what I think is their messianic consciousness, right? When we get to a point where we can see, we can see that the Heh Lamed is itself a gilui. Right. Right. I think you, I think you write in the book that the, the point is not to, not to... What, how do you phrase it? That it's not to, not to equate the visible with the invisible, but to realize that the invisible is, is, is the most kind of visible thing, right? Right. You have to ex- you have to break, which of course is your language in general. It's, it's, it's not extending-- It's not so much extending ideas as much as breaking the, the, the, the binaries in the first place. Right. Right? Not just-- It's not, it's not so much about inclusion as it is breaking the assumption that there was a separation in the first place. Right. Right. Right. So you, so you feel, at least in your, in your travels, that Chabad Hasidus has a, an accuracy. I wanna drill down on the word accuracy. Uh, what, what, what, what does-- What's it... Y-you, you, you're describing ""By accuracy, you mean like a, like a sharp kind of focus, like this is what it means, or that it's more correct in other

26:46 Speaker 1 ways? What do you mean by accuracy? Yeah. The, by accuracy I, uh, yes, I mean that, that it's-- there's a, um... I'm tr- I'm trying to find the right words here. Um, not that there aren't other possible readings, but there's a kind of lucidity or clarity of thinking that comes through from the Alter Rebbe all the way to the Rebbe, um, which to me presents the, the most precise reading of the tradition. Mm. You know? Um, and I gave, you know, I gave the one example of "" but I, you know, I, we could, we could speak about other things as well. But, um, yeah. So, um... If, i-it-- You'll tell me if I'm, if I'm understanding. The Chabad Hasidus seems to be, I think I've spoken about it with other guests as well, it's almost, almost as a totalizing kind of, uh... There's a, there's something to, I don't know, maybe it's a negative word, but the, you know, totalitarian, but I don't, I don't, I don't... It's what? I think the word's more to-to-totalizing. Total. Where totalizing where it doesn't, it doesn't like go, it never goes halfway, right? It never go-- It never inches up to the edge and then backs off. It goes right, right to the edge and through the edge. Yeah. Right? And that, is that what you mean by, by ac- by accuracy that that doesn't leave you guessing at the end? Like, like this is what it is. Right. It, it, um... Yeah, exactly. That it draws

28:34 Speaker 1 out implicit assumptions that weren't re- even expressed by, by the immediate disciples of the Ari, like Chaim Vital or Yisrael Sarug, who is, by the way, a very important influence on Chabad through, through Na-Naftali Bachrach's Emek HaMelech. So, you know, there were, there were, you know, several major disciples of the Ari, Chaim Vital, of course, you know. And then there was Yisrael Sarug, and his, his ideas became much more disseminated through Emek, the Emek HaMelech, and that's a very important source for Chabad. So what I'm saying is that there, there was a certain m-mode of thinking, and it's uncanny that y-you have in Chabad Lubavitch, uh, lineage, you know, you have s-seven, seven different figures, each of whom has their own distinct style, but nevertheless all share, all share something. Um, and, um, I think that's what keeps, keeps my interest. How, how would you say, how would you say, um, in your, in, in your, in your estimation, what makes the Rebbe's Torah, um, different from, from the, from what came before? Yeah. Well, um, yeah, uh, that's also, uh, uh, another very important question. Something really I've been thinking about for, for many, many years now. Um, obviously, there's fr- just the Koch HaDibbur of the Rebbe, right? Which, um, is probably unparalleled, and he was much more, more than what he wrote is, you know, what, what he taught orally, and it was endless, it seems. And there's a kind of comprehensiveness there, um, where all f- all aspects of Jewish learning

30:43 Speaker 1 are brought together, and it creates this very interesting kind of, um, uh... There, there's a musical world word that really fits, I think, for the style of his putting together, certainly a, a, a "" but also s- in the Sichas, a fugue. You know? Um, that would be the, that would be the musical term. Uh, where, where these different components reverberate one with another. Mm. Right? And he'll go off on seeming on tangents, and then he'll bring you back to the main point. So there-- rhetorically, there's something different, I believe, in the way he, he presented th-the teachings of his predecessors. Um, um, and then there's the issue of the historical moment and, and the geography. He ends up in America, you know, and, uh, it's after the Shoah, and that has a tremendous, obviously, impact, though he resisted a theodicy, what's called technically a theodicy, which, you know, attempt to explain the Shoah. But, in my opinion, there's no question that it shadowed his whole approach. In what way? To respond to what happened by instilling pride in the Jewish tradition, right? And, and as difficult as it may have been to emphasize the uniqueness of the Jewish soul, he, he never relinquished that. And even when he tried to be more embracive, let's say the Sheva Mitzvot B'nei Noach that everybody mentions, it's, it still didn't erase the sense in which he had of the very dis-the distinctiveness of the Jewish soul in this world and its mission. And I think that is

32:54 Speaker 1 his-- that's his response, you know, to, to, to the attempt to eradicate the Jewish people. As we approach the two-year mark of this podcast, Homesick for Lubavitch has become a household name in the Lubavitch community, with thousands of views each week on YouTube alone, as well as thousands more on the various podcast platforms. We have a devoted audience that listens regularly to the conversations and shares their thoughts with their families and communities. If you would like to sponsor an episode or advertise on one of our episodes, please reach out to bentzi@yuvlamedia.com. That's bentzi@yuvlamedia, Y-U-V-L-A media.com. Yes, it's ha- there's a fascinating entry in the Rebbe's diary, the Der Shimus. Um, it's notes-- It's interesting how in those years the Rebbe would write notes for his speeches, and there are also notes from speeches he would give in Vichy France when he was escaping the Nazis. But this was for a dinner in the Beis Rivkah schools in nineteen forty-seven, I think. Uh-huh. Um, and he writes about how, uh, I guess the dinner was Parshas Bemidbar time, so right before Shavuos. And he writes, uh, the speech was, "Why does Bemidbar come after Acharei Mot?" And he says, the, the... This is the, the, the point that I remember is that after the Tayfachah, which he says referring to the, the rebuke or the catastrophe that was just-- that had just ended in Europe, the only response is Bemidbar, which is to count every Jew individually, right? And to-- And that was, to him, the

34:34 Speaker 1 justification of pushing for education of Jewish girls, which was still controversial. Mm-hmm. Um, you know, and had been a lot more controversial before the war. Um, but he said a Jewish girl needs to be-- has to have a sense of v'nifneyno. Yeah. A sense of pride, a sense of they're special, and it's individual by individual. Right. Like, the only response to this catastrophe is the individual's pride. Right. There is no other... Th-th-that's the only bedrock. When you, when you're like, when you're, when there's, when, when you're destroyed to almost zero, the only bedrock you can find is the individual pride of the Jew. Right. Yeah. And I th- I think you s- you see, um, that completely shaped his approach. But what do you make of-- 'cause this is in a way how we first, uh, communicated. What do you make of... And this is something that I think most honest people, uh, acknowledge, that the Rebbe's language of Chassidus certainly seemed, uh, I mean, there are many ways to frame it, but that the fact is that the-- it seems more atzmus heavy or like, like, you know, it, it, it, it, it goes all the way, and it gets to the, it gets to those kind of massive conclusions. You open up a maamar in the Melo- you know, the edited maamarim, and very often they're talking about different levels of atzmus, and you thought this was atzmus, well, really there's a higher level, and, and the, you know, everything's a limitation, so

36:01 Speaker 1 we're constantly breaking even those things that we thought were the ultimate infinity, even that's a limitation, and further, and further, and further. And, you know, there is a, there is, at least in my experience growing up in yeshiva, there was very often this kind of sense that bochurim that were learning the Rebbe's maamarim were more comfortable talking about the highest levels of godliness as opposed to the more kind of prosaic, uh, you know, um, levels of say, the Rshash's. Um, you know, and, and that was, that was one of the things that, uh, Joey and I discussed on the podcast- Right ... which is what got your attention about, you know, can a Jew talk about atzmus? Can a Jew-- Does a Jew have a sense of atzmus? Well, he's r- according to the, the soul of the Jew is rooted in atzmus. But that was your, that was, that was your- Yeah ... rebuttal- Yeah ... or correction. Yeah, but that's, that, that's all over the teaching. I'm not making that up. No, I know. I agree with you. Yeah. I know. And so what do you make of, what do you make... And you said, of course, also that comes from the Alter Rebbe. That's not a, that's not a innovation of Darash V'... It's not an innovation of the Rebbe. No. But, but what do you make of that- Is there, is there in your mind a shift in language, uh, where, where, you know, especially as you're approaching it from such

37:17 Speaker 1 an analytical place, do you sense that the Rebbe basically, you know, to use the modern kind of, uh, talking, he takes it up to 10? Like he-- or takes up to 11, like he, like he, he constantly, constantly at the edge of, of, of, of, of- Well, y- I, I won't disagree with that, but I, I mean, I see that already in the Mitteler Rebbe and then in the, in the, in the Rashab and then in the Frierdiker Rebbe. I mean, I think, I think there is, you know, he's not, he's not the first- Mm-hmm ...to walk to the edge and then beyond the edge. Right. Yeah. No, but is there an emphasis? Is there, is there a- I-- There's an emphasis and there's al- also what I think the Rebbe really brings it down. I mean, this is the interesting thing about him. W-what is most abstract is most concrete. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. He has that ability to constantly bring, bring it back down into the world. And I think, again, the, the, his historical and geographical setting is not insignificant. You know? He's very attuned to the moment. Right. And he has to tr... You said before about translation, and that's r- I totally agree with that because thinking, thinking is, um, active interpretation, and every interpretation is a mode of translation. Right. You know? Whether we're talking about, as we were before, from one language to another language, or even within the same language, right? To tr- So for him, he's kind of

38:55 Speaker 1 translating for Darashvi all of this rich, rich legacy of the Chabad Lubavitch tradition. So what do you mean by Darashvi? Darashvi, Darashvi. No, but you, but you, do you, is it- That, that he- You, y- you, he's translating it as a final statement? What- Well- What do you mean by... Well, how do you understand Darashvi? That he-- Well, he underst- well, uh, the way he understood it. Right. Right? That, uh, you know, he, um... And he, you, you of course you know, um, that he never really referred to himself as N-Nasiador. Right. That was always his predecessor. So he was just the "Mamaleh Makom." Yeah. Um, so by Darashvi, I understand what he understood, namely that, you know, this was, uh, the task of this generation was very heavily tied with, with the Mashiach. Um, but the question I ask in Open Secret is, how are we to understand- Right ...what he, what he actually means by the Mashiach? Um, so that, that's what I meant, uh, that the center of gravity for the Darash- Darashvi is in Brooklyn, New York, is in the United States of America, right? And this is the post-Holocaust moment, and things have to be translated into a, an idiom or a rhetoric that makes sense for that moment. Yes. Yes. That, that is in many ways the, the, the, the fundamental problem in my mind, um, culturally, but it goes much deeper than culturally, where are we living in the right time? Like, is this the right time to

41:01 Speaker 1 be alive? Is this the time to be alive? And on one hand, I think even the most traditional people will, will accept that the Rebbe would have said that absolutely, emphatically, yes, right? Right. Right? Right. Right? It, it, um, you know, it, it, it is about this moment. And like the Alter Rebbe explains in the "Kuzara" that, that it, it, Hayom La'asok is not just about the past, it's also about, it's also vis-a-vis the future. Right. 'Cause in Olam Haba, you don't have that ability, you don't have that capacity for action. You don't have the ca-- Right? There's something about this moment that transcends- Right ...history. Right. So there's no question that that's, that that's what he would say. And yet, there's also a sense of, we missed the boat. It would be much better to live in the nineties before the Rebbe passed away. Uh-huh. Or even in- Uh-huh ...the nineties, by the way, the nineties were, were not like the fifties or the sixties when the Rebbe was still more available. There's a sense of the past being better than the present. Yeah. Um, and so in many ways, that is ultimately the problem, which is: How do you find a language that allows you to talk about the present in its full- Yeah ...glory? Yeah, I hear you. Uh, that's, that's an interesting dilemma. Um, of course, uh, we have, we have, uh, so mu- so much available that k- sort of keeps, keeps it alive. Yeah. The videos and whatnot, but,

42:35 Speaker 1 um, of course, the, the, the, the record of all of, all of his teachings. But yeah, he's, he has a, has a physical presence, um, it, it can't be the same. However, Vachiyot Umazman, the famous teaching - Right ...of the Alter Rebbe, that's always the mandate. We have to, we have to figure out how to be in, in, in the, in the present moment. But that, that, that moment- Is, can't be dissociated from either the past or the future. Of course, the model for, the model for them is the way the tradition understood the Shem Havayah as Hayah ovah v'yehiye. Right. So that's kind-- Th-that's the nitzchuyot, the eternality of the divine. But that eternality of the divine isn't the negation of time, but its fullest manifestation, and its fullest man-manifestation is w-what I would call the, the compressance, uh, or the simulta-simultaneity of past, present, and future. So to really be in the present, one has to be able to retrieve the past and anticipate the future. It converges altogether. Mm. That's what it is to be in that, in that moment. So to return, return to the... Returning to this, to what we discussed about the Rebbe bringing the abstract into, into, into reality, into concrete. Yeah. W-- And, and again, this is, this is where we had a brief conversation via email about this, that I suppose... I, I don't know the words critique, but, but the, the challenge with that is that one could say you, you lose, you lose the

44:39 Speaker 1 sense of awe and wonder, and this is, I think, what Joey was talking on the podcast as well. Right? Like, there has to be a part of God that's completely off-limits. There has to be, there has to be a part of divinity that is, that reminds you that you, you don't have a handle on anything. Yeah. Yeah. I like to quote, uh, tachlit hayedaya. Right. Uh, hi shelo neda. Right. Right. And, and so there is... And, and even i-i... Th-that's obviously in a more, like a theoretical framework, but even culturally, you know, especially when you scale, when, when, when you start talking about a community that's, that's being, uh, informed by these ideas, you know, at what point do, do... Does, does bringing the abstract and the concrete, at what point making that kind of, uh, um, false, a total-totalizing system where everything fits and everything is explained, at what point does that kind of lose the elasticity and the energy of, of, of paradox, right? At what, at what point do you say it's become, it's become almost... You've, you've lost the mystery almost, right? I think there I would not agree. Um, I, I mean, I don't disagree with, um, what you're saying in terms of a kinda totalizing approach. And that may strike the contemporary ear as problematic, actually, 'cause, you know, where, where philosophy has gone, you know, um, is to kinda av-avoid that totalizing or essentializing. Even the fact that they keep talking about essence, right, is from, from, from

46:22 Speaker 1 a contemporary philosophy problematic. But that's, you know, there's no entry into Chabad if you, if you don't appropriate both that sense of emphasis on essence, because that, that is the ultimate mahut of reality. That's the ultimate substance of what is real, what they call atzmut. And there is a totalizing, as you say, but I don't think it ever leads to an abandonment of the mystery. Mm. On the contrary, it actually keeps amplifying the mystery, and the paradox, the paradox is never r-resolved. You don't get to a point where... Let's say, let's take one example. Um, in the Atzmut, I just came across this passage, uh, before you came. Um, it w- it was in the, uh, Sharei Yichud V'Emunah, uh, where in the Atzmut, right, there's no more distinction between ayin and yesh. Also, so you could walk away and say, "Ah, he solved the problem." Right? There's no more distinction between ayin and yesh. But that's a, that's a superficial way of receiving that tradition because really what he's saying, you have to constantly try to negotiate that paradox. How can the ayin be not different from the yesh? Right. He doesn't answer the question. It's almost like God is able to hold the question. Yeah. There's no answer. There's no an- there's no resolution. Yeah, the... And the mystery, the mystery keeps giving itself. I mean, this, this is, this is a larger point I made in terms of my studies of Kabbalah and not just Chabad, that... So let's say the Rambam,

48:19 Speaker 1 m- the Rambam has a great emphasis in, especially in Moreh Nevuchim, on secrets. But for the Rambam it seems, what the secret is, is something that has to be hidden from the masses because the, the masses couldn't accept the truth. So secrecy is intimately connected with hiding something from those who are unworthy. Elitism. Yeah. Yeah. Now you sometimes have that in the Kabbalah as well. However, there's u- I think, a deeper and alternative understanding that the secret always remains a secret, even to the one who knows the secret. That's the whole point about the secret. Right. Because you're talking about God. Yeah. You're talking about something that is essentially incomprehensible, but yet we have this capacity as human beings to be, uh, allured by that, to try to, to try to constantly penetrate the impenetrable. So where, where does that leave someone? Where... Uh, some- somebody said to me afterwards, um, or, or somebody sent me recently, um, and I'm, I'm forgetting the details, but there was a, there was a Hasid that said at a farbrengen with the Rebbe Rashab that the, the Hakira says that, um, ilev data v'yisiv as a way of saying that you can't know God, right? Because then you would be God. If you knew, if you understood God, you would be Him. You would be. And yet, this person said that actually by, by avoida and, and, and, and, and by avodas Hashem, proper avodas Hashem, you actually can come to... You can, you can come to that,

50:04 Speaker 1 that sense. But what, what does that mean? If we're gonna go back to English, what does that mean to, to, to be... To, to, to have... To know a secret that is a secret? What, what-- How does... How, how do we, how do we end... How do we, how do we get to... How, how do we get there in a way that doesn't either make a joke of language- Mm-hmm ...or, or make a joke of the, the, the subject that we're talking about? I- does language ever allow us to get there? Well, before I answer that, I wanna say, there's a ki chelek Elohim mima omenem, right? Right. From the Alter Rebbe forward. So yes, there is this utter distinction between our finite mortal beings and, and, and the infinity of, of the divine. On the other hand, crucial to Chabad thinking is this idea that, right, we are a chelek Elohim mima omenem, right? There is a constem- con-substantiality, right? We are of the same substance as the essence. And this is distinctly Chabad in your reading? Well, it's emphasis in Chabad. It's not-- You can find it elsewhere, but there's a, uh, ac-accentuation, there's an accenting and an emphasis in Chabad. Yeah. Which is, I think, is crucial to understand, I mean, everything about Chabad. Right. Its commitment to the mitzvah, everything. It all stems from that. Right. And that relates to the, to the Avodah part that you just mentioned. Right. Now, to answer your question more directly about language, um, I

51:51 Speaker 1 think language, our language, and to the best of my knowledge, as a s- as a species, this, the ability to venture beyond our limits does seem to be something distinctive to our species, you know? Um, and I think, again, it always has to be culturally mediated, right? Because it'll be different from culture to culture. But I do see a shared possibility here, that language is a vehicle that carries us beyond language, but it's alway-always mediated through language. Mm. And the same thing with thinking, that we can think the unthinkable, right? As pa- as paradoxical as that sounds. But we have, we seemingly have the capacity to think the unthinkable, and this is, this is actually very important to science itself. Science moves forward by scientists at any point in time being able to imagine something beyond where they're at. Right. Yeah. I'm, I'm no scientist, but I do remember reading that, that many people feel that Einstein's ability to come up with his theories was his imagination. Yeah. That's what... That's, that was his genius. Right. His genius was, was, was being able to think, to think past- Right ...the, the conventions. Or, or as we say, out of the box. Yeah. Right. So, uh, just to drill down a little bit on that point, I suppose what you're saying is that there is a limit, there is a ver-- We, we-- Sometimes we get trapped in our words. We want our words to do the lifting for us. Like, like tell me what you

53:42 Speaker 1 really, what you really feel. Yeah. Yeah. And you can't. Yeah. You can't. Yeah. So, so, so there is a space, after all the words have been said, and all the mamar have been written, and, and, and, and everybody has written their interpretation, there is a space beyond that that's just completely... So what, what, what-- And it's just a sense that can't be explained. It's just something innate to the human being or the soul. It, it can't be explained, but we have no choice but to try. Right. I mean, we have-- Because we're, we're, we're wired somehow in that regard. I mean, um, and I can't explain why that is. Right. That's the whole point. Yeah. Right. That's the whole point. So, so ultimately, ultimately, uh, when you think of it, when you s- when you take a step back, and, you know, Chassidut talks about this a lot as a mashal, which is always to me in a way ironic that the Rebbeim speak of the mashal of the Rav and Talmud, which to me is very self-referential, even though it's very often being used as a mashal. Right. In a way, it's describing what's going on in general, right? In terms of tzimtzum or- Tzimtzum and just the... And like the famous, um, in Layam Yom about the, the, the accomplishment, the godly accomplishment of Chassidut was that it used to be that a Rav was alone, like the teacher was lonely, and the-- elend, and the s- and students were lonely. And, and

55:08 Speaker 1 the divine in accomplishment or maybe intervention, you could say, of Chassidut was that the, the Rav wouldn't be lonely, and Chassidut wouldn't be lonely. Yeah. Like, ultimately, when you're in the space that's beyond words, that's a terribly lonely place to be. Exactly. Yeah. Right? It's like the person who cannot speak. Uh, we, we all see people who are, who, who lose their ability to speak after a stroke or whatever it is. Uh, you know, in Lubavitch, we saw that distinctly the last couple years of the Rebbe's life as well. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Right? Uh, the 5th Yechiel also had a challenge speaking, which I spoke about. There, there's a terrible loneliness of this person is here, and yet it's become so clear that there's not even an illusion of communication. There's not even a sense of communication, right? But ultimately, that's always going on, is according to what you're saying. There's always an inability to fully express yourself. To fully express it. But, but there's still the difference between You know, the inability to say anything, I think the technical term is aphasia, when you really can't speak anymore. Uh, and what I'm talking about... 'Cause what I'm talking about is still a language. Right. Right? But isn't, isn't there, isn't there ultimately, at some level, an inability to communicate with any words? Yeah. There, there is, there is a space where you're terribly alone. Yeah. There is... I agree. There is a, there, there can be a deep sense of loneliness here. But it's something

56:37 Speaker 1 that is common. It's not a, it's not an idiosyncratic experience, so others can relate to it, can understand. And- So that's the ultimate paradox. How so? That I think you, the way you would phrase it is that you are together in your loneliness. Together apart. Right, something li- That's something that you would write, I think. Yeah. So w- you know, the- there's... To me, that's just a, a, a, a... That to me is what, in a way, is what Lubavitch is about, is that we're talking about massive ideas, but ultimately it's a brotherhood. Mm-hmm. Ultimately it's a brotherhood. It's a shared experience. As, as astonishing and as impossible as it would seem that you are sharing an experience with the Alter Rebbe- Yeah ... when it started, or with any of the Rebbeim- Yeah ... because they are inf- they are, in Chabad tradition- Yeah ... infinitely removed from you- Yeah ... yet you are, you are in this together. You're in... Right. So, uh, I once heard, uh, R- uh, Rav Soloveitchik say, you know... And he, he wrote his famous essay, "Lonely Man of Faith," so he well knew, understood this sense of loneliness. But nevertheless, I heard him once say, um, "I'm really never lonely because I always have Rabbi Akiva, the Rambam, Rabbi Akiva Eger," uh, he mentioned some other people, that he's always i- in their presence. They're always in dialogue and conversation with him. So that's exactly the point, yeah. And that, that goes back to what we were

58:17 Speaker 1 talking about before about time, right? To be in the present means that somehow you have to be able to retrieve the past because it's hayom, right? It's... You live it again. It's as if, you know, the fam- you know, the, the, the, uh, Rabbinic tradition about, uh, Matan Torah is relived every time you study Torah. That's as if the Torah was given again. Chadash emet. Yeah. And that's the whole thing of Hitkhadshut, right? What is the Hitkhadshut? And, uh, I know here is a little bit of a d- disagreement with Eli Rubin and myself. Is there? Yeah. Let's hear about it. Well, because- Eli, Eli won't mind. No, Eli won't mind. Uh, we've discussed it. Um, he thinks that the r- the Rebbe Rashab puts m- uh, his idea of Hitkhadshut is really creating mashhu chadash, something really new that was unprecedented. And I don't think that, uh, I don't think Chabad can sustain that sense of novelty because the, the, the, the chadash, the mashhu yashan. You're talk... Well, so let's, let's back up. You're talking about, he's f- he's talking about Samech Vav, I think, right? The Rebbe Samech Vav, and, and, and the, the Rebbe Rashab basically saying that dir betachtonim is not just to restore in this world the primo... for lack of better words, primordial light of lifnei atzim tum, but to- Yeah ... create something entirely new. Entirely new. An entirely new revelation of godliness that, that never- Right ... really existed before. Right. Right. Which is fair, I'm

59:55 Speaker 1 not denying that he does say that. But again, I think one, one has to think through to the depths of that. And would he not, the Rebbe Rashab himself, be committed to the paradox that I just said? Namely, that which is chadash is yashan. Right. 'Cause it was al... Actually, its roots were always there, lifnei atzim tum. Right. Right. Huh. Yeah. But anyway, to get back to the point you were making, yes, that, that, that's a critical part of understanding living in this sense of you call brotherhood or community. There's a good word, uh, in German, Gemeinschaft. I mean, I think it g- I think there's a Yiddish cognate to it. Sense of a, a community of, a community of, uh, like-minded thinkers. If you're looking for an event that is memorable, meaningful, and affordable, let me recommend This World Is a Garden, a film and live concert production created by us here at Uvlah Media, inspired by Basse leGani, the first mimer, the Rebbe said. If you're a regular here at HFL, you know that Basse leGani is something that we think about and talk about a lot. And in this production, we use the power of cinematic filmmaking and a live concert by String Quartet to bring the beauty of Basse leGani to your community and your audience in a way that they've never seen, heard, or experienced it before. The production has already been hosted by Chabad Houses around the country and has drawn wonderful reviews. Our package comes with everything that

1:01:30 Speaker 1 you need to put on the production, the films, original arrangements for String Quartet, publicity materials, everything besides the String Quartet, which we recommend that you hire locally to save on travel costs. To find out more about this production, please visit thisworldisagarden.com. Again, thisworldisagarden.com. And now, back to the show. Uh, it's, it's very interesting, the... I was reading my grandfather's memoirs. I may have mentioned this on a different episode, you forgive me, those listening. Um, my grandfather, my grandfather, Avtzin, uh, was a bachur in Russia, in Tekhatonim, and he was there at the last Tishrei, uh, or part, the last of Chassid with the Friediker Rebbe after he had been expelled, but, you know, he, he was on his way out of Russia, and the Chassidim weren't coming with him. So for many of them at that time, they assumed they would never see him again, and, and most of them... Many of them didn't. Most of them didn't, I don't think. By the time they made it to America, he had passed for a lot of them. Um, and, and the Friediker Rebbe write, uh, said my, my grandfather writes that he remembers the Friediker Rebbe saying that, "I would like... I, I, I'm parting, um, I would, I would like to refer to you as brothers, but I'm an only son. I never had a brother." Hmm. "So I don't really know what it means to have a brother, so I'll refer to you as friends." Huh. And to me, that was just a

1:02:51 Speaker 1 very moving, a moving, uh, a moving statement. First of all, just the, the te- the, there's a, there's like a humanity to it. Like, the only, the only son who never had- Right ... who never had a brother. You know, the Rebbe Rashab was very close with his brothers, the Razah and... You know, there were, there were, there were different stories of the brothers and different dynamics and different generations. Um, one of, uh, uh, uh, one of the most beautiful anecdotes that I picked up along this podcast journey was someone told me that his grandfather, I think, remembered from Russia how the Rebbe had come to be with his brother, not the, not the mathematician, uh, not Labor, Barrow. Barrow. Another brother who was eventually killed by the Nazis. Yeah. Um, he had come to, I think it was Kharkov, one of the cities. His brother had, had to go to a sanatorium for treatment, and the Rebbe came to be with him and, and originally it was supposed to be for a few weeks and ended up being with him for a full year. Hmm. Which, you know, everybody knows how in those days, the Rebbe spent his whole day learning. For him to be dislocated that way- Yeah ... it, it wasn't the kind of thing that, that, that he... But he was a brother, right? Right. There's a, there's a brotherhood to this that, you know, and the Friediker I was talking about with, with the, with, with Chassidim, you know, I,

1:04:15 Speaker 1 I, I can't tell you the... I, you know, maybe we're not... Maybe I can't use the word brothers 'cause I don't even know what that means. But, but closeness, the cl- the closest that I can, that I can imagine, which is a friend, a, a, a reim, reim, colleagues. Mm-hmm. Co-companions. Yeah. It's a companionship. Companionship, right. A brotherhood, a companionship. And, you know, of course, in many ways, on some level, for the Lubavitch mind, so to speak, the typical Lubavitch mind, that, that feels completely foreign because the Rebbe rightfully is up here, right? It's not, it's not, it's not, not b-by your side, right? Right. You, you come to Yechidus, you, you're on the opposite side of the table- Right ... and the Rebbe tells you to sit. Right. And you say, "I'm not gonna sit. I'm gonna stand." Right? Right. There, there's a distance that you, that, that you insist on- Right ... out of respect and protocol and, and, and respect primarily. Right. Right. Right. On the other hand, he, he seems to have had the u-uncanny ability to zero in and focus on the individuality of the person with whom he was speaking. Mm-hmm. Right? Even in the do- to the dollars, right? Right. He was able to do that, right? So, um, uh, I mean, look, the Rebbe knew his place for sure. Mm-hmm. I mean, you could see it even how, how he walked in the world. Right. Literally, his gait, the way he walked, you could see there was

1:05:42 Speaker 1 a kind of dignity, right? But he also, he also, instrumental to his leadership is to spread, that the whole shlichus is all about that, right? Is to, to kind of spread the, the authority or the power. Delegate. To delegate, right. So this is also part of, I think, his leadership genius, right? He understood something about the moment. Did you ever meet the Rebbe later on? Did you- I never had Yechidus. I was there at 770, but I, I never had, uh- Dollars? You came back for dollars? I think, I never came for dollars. Um, no, I didn't do that. So, so what changed for you? Did anything change for you, um, like, in the way that you... 'Cause you, from what you're describing, you, you've been dis- you've been studying Chabad-Chassidis from well before the Rebbe passed away. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Right. For at least a few decades before. Yeah. A couple decades before at least, and then many decades since. Yeah. Was there a difference in the way you, uh, you approached Chassidis when there was a, uh, a physical Rebbe talking and, and, and, and after? Yeah. Well, I mean, I was-- Since I was never, um, to, to invoke your language, a card-carrying Lubavitcher, um, so it was always different for me. But of course, I, I felt his presence in the world and there was, there was a, you know, a, a, an incredible sense of sadness in Gimmel Tammuz. Um, what was it? '92? Ninety... Well, the stroke was '92,

1:07:24 Speaker 1 '94. Ninety-four. '94, sorry. '94. So it is, yes, it does become different. W- Um, although as, you know, as we said before, there, it was already a number of years before he was already not communicating. But, um, still, he was in the world. And was there a difference-- 'Cause you're approaching from an academic place, was there a difference at a time when there's, there's a, it's not academic in the sense that the Rebbe delivers a maamer and in a way- Yeah ... or in every way, this is now the new statement of, of Chassidis, right? Yeah. Chassidis has now changed. Yeah. Right? It's like it- it's history is being made every moment. It's not... A-and so how did- That's true ... was there a difference in how you approached it as an academic back then where like- Are there- Yeah ... there something alive here? A, a more like a journalist as opposed to a removed academic or? Well, I didn't, I didn't actually w- write about, about the Rebbe's teaching academically until much later. So I think, uh, to answer your question most precisely, um, I was interested in it, in his teaching in... I would, you know... Yes, I, I would... My methodology was academic, but I w- I really... It, it wasn't a, it wasn't a critical part of my academical project. Mm-hmm. You know? So it's something I only attended to after his passing. Is there a reason for that? Um, I actually didn't think I was gonna write Open Secret.

1:09:01 Speaker 1 I mean, uh, I was, I was working on other things, you know? I was focusing on, uh... I started in, in, uh, with the, the, the Zohar and, uh, then related kabbalistic literature, um, and then Kabbalah Taari, and then, uh, I did work on some things in Hasidut, but not, not s- so much specifically in Chabad. I don't know. And, and at a certain point, um, I felt it was time to, um, to try to ch- to, uh, address the Rebbe's teachings and with the f-focus in trying to understand really what his, what his Messianic teaching was all about. Do you think the, the passing and the distance of, the distance- Yeah ... of time allowed you to- I think so ... think of it as- Yeah ... you're, you're not, you're not drinking from the fire hose anymore. Right. I think so. I think, yes. I think, uh... I mean, I, I didn't articulate this consciously, but when I, when I think about it by y-your questions, that does make sense to me. I needed a little bit of the, the distance. Hmm. Hmm. So I, I do wanna get to something that you're, you're, you're known for, those who re-re-uh, read your work, and, uh, I'm sure, I'm sure there's, um, the... I'm sure there's an element w- that you would want to explain about it, or maybe I'm not sure. I'll give you a, I'll give you an opportunity to explain it. Um, and that is your thesis about, uh, Mashiach having

1:10:32 Speaker 1 come already. Mm. Right? That, that when the Rebbe said Mashiach was here, he meant that this is Mashiach, which the, the, the, the... In many ways for many Lubavitch, uh, Lubavitch readers that I know, this is the first thing that they, you know... And I, and I told them I was coming to interview you. They're like, "Yeah, but what about this thing that he said?" And it's all the way at the end of the book, right? It's at the end. It's in the post, where essentially, you, you, you, you, you bring the Rebbe into this Ro-Rosenzweig kind of, uh, framework where, where Mashiach is... Or, or maybe it was really Kafka, where Mashiach comes af- the, the day after, right? The very last day. Um, and, and, you know... Yeah, so, so the, the, but, but, but, but the Lu- the Lubavitcher who appreciates your work will ask is, "Yes, but ultimately-" Yeah. Don't disagree ... "It's, it's ultimately, everything the Rebbe said was within a container of Halakha and..." Right? And, and, and the, and the Rebbe said that. It wasn't just a nec- how we as... Understand the Rebbe was very, a very Halakhic Jew. Oh, yeah. Right? And you said that earlier in this conversation as well. Yeah. You're not trying to sh- to, to override that, and Halakhically, Mashiach has not come. Right. So, uh, first of all, maybe explain your position, and we can open it up a little bit. Okay. Now, I'm, I'm aware that... I'm aware, of course,

1:11:50 Speaker 1 that there w- uh, of the pushback, and even when I was writing this, I was aware that that would be the case. Um, um, because on the face of it, it might be absurd what I'm claiming. Right. But, um, it's also, um, what I think of as every, every thinker who's worth our attention, there's an element of what we can call the unthought in that thinker's thinking, which even the thinker himself doesn't necessarily articulate clearly. But it, it's up to us to try to plumb the depths of his thought and give expression to the unthought. Now, um, as far as, uh... Look, there's no question of, uh, of the Rebbe's commitment to Halakha, obviously. I mean, it go- goes without saying. But we also can't deny that he, he embraces the, the, this Kabbalistic idea that Torat HaMashiach is gonna be beyond the polarities of Isur Veheter. Right. Now, he never works this out, in my opinion, and I understand why he didn't work it out, because it's hard to work it out, right? But it's there. You're saying the post-Halakha Halakha. Yeah. It's in his teaching. It's the Torah. It, it goes back to, uh, Tikkunei Zohar. We have the Torah of the Etz Chayim versus the Torah of Etz HaDa'at, Tovara. So we're, we transition from the Torah of the Etz HaDa'at Tovara to the Torah of the Etz Chayim, where it embraces again that paradox, where the Isur and Heter are shavim. Mm. The... But how does that manifest itself in the

1:13:58 Speaker 1 world? I can't answer that, and nor do I think he answered that. Can't... Why can't you give a simple answer that Halakha tells us when we get to that place? Like when Halakha says Mashiach comes- Well- ... then something will change. But what... How would, how would it look? How would the embodied communities of Jewish people who are Shomrei Mitzvot, how would they live? Uh, very different, very differently, obviously. But, but we haven't even reached the Halakhic terminus of, of, of Mashiach in the first place. Well, that's the question. Ha- You sure? I mean- I mean, the, the Rambam's definition of Mashiach, right? Right. Have we reached it? I don't think anybody argues that we have. No, but the question here is what, what do you think the Rebbe thought? Right. Well, so that's what I'm saying. So, so, so, so, so, so, I mean, the way I always understood it is that the Rebbe, for all the, all the, all the expansive... You, you mentioned this earlier also about the, the universalism or the embrace, trying to, uh, open up to the world or bring in the world, but then the hard line of, well, a Jew is a Jew. Yeah. Which in a way seems almost like a stubborn holding on to a, a, vestigial tradition, but there is ultimately the container of Halakha, which the Rebbe was adamant about. Absolutely. Right? So as much as I want to talk about every-- all the whole world finding its purpose and being included in

1:15:29 Speaker 1 this exalted- Yeah ... state of consciousness, if you want to talk in more mystical terms, ultimately, the Halakhic difference or the traditional difference between a Jew and a not, really the le-- the Halakhic difference, the Rebbe was as, as, as, as big as he spoke mystically, one of the things that the Rebbe took a stand on that cost him on many levels was the Mi Yodeya controversy in Israel. Right. Which is a Halakhic question. Right. Like Halakhically conversion or not, right? Yeah. There's no, there's no space for it's black and white in the Rebbe's mind. Right. Right? And so I would say the same thing about Mashiach. That's how I would understand it, that, that, you know, although I would concede that, that the Halakhic definitions about Mashiach are perhaps not as black and white as other... They're not as worked out like, like a conversion, let's say, which has a much more specific protocol, whereas, you know, what is the Halakhic moment of Mashiach's arrival? Is it the sound of a shofar? I don't think that's what it is, right? It, it's, it's harder to, to nail down, and, and maybe the Rambam speaks about it, but it's not some extensive- Right. But maybe that's where I understand there's an opening. But I think, I think the Rebbe was pretty adamant that Mashiach is... I mean, he, he, the Rebbe was one-- Another thing the Rebbe took a stand on was the whole idea of Azchalt HaDegula, right? He, he did not accept the

1:16:48 Speaker 1 idea that Zionism or the state of Israel was a beginning of, of redemption. No, no. Okay, that's a whole... Right. That's a whole other issue, and I, I agree with you on that also. Um, but, but it's not clear to me that he didn't think of... If we under-- if we, if we shift the focus to a kind of Messianic consciousness, Herchavat HaDaat, right? That, that the, that the Mashiach, um, im-imposes upon us to get to that point of what I, again, what I would call inculcating a Messianic consciousness. It's not clear to me that the Rebbe didn't think that we were already there. And then he was kind of, you know, um, I mean, somewhat disappointed even. Yeah. Frustrated. Frustrated. Yes. But that seems to me, you know, ir-irrespective of the journalistic question, if he thought of himself as the Mashiach or not, I, I think to me that's, that's not really the ikar here. I see. I see. You're, you're, you're saying you're not trying to negate the Halakhic question. No. It's more you, you- No. But, but, but what you can't deny is he-- I, I use the term hyponomean as opposed to antinomean, 'cause I don't think he thought of the, the Torah from Et Chaim to being against the Halakha, which would be conveyed by the term antinomean. Right. But he did think of it as a hyponomean in the sense of something which extends beyond the boundaries. Expansion. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, like Purim. Purim is an even higher

1:18:26 Speaker 1 giluy and a higher Matan Torah than Sinai. Right. And this is something which is said by pr-by, by previous Admorim, but the Rebbe picks up on it, and if you look at it, especially early, early on, his, you know, the Ma'amarim in Purim are unbelievable, but the whole, the whole, the whole secret of Purim. Right. Right? Higher than Yom Kippur. Higher. Higher than everything. Right. And we can't... You know, there's, there's no difference between Arur Haman and Baruch Mordechai. We ca- we get to a point where the opposites here are no longer distinguishable. So is it almost, is it almost that the inevitable, the inevitable state of being of the Hasidic mind as embodied even by the most exalted of it, which is the Rebbe, right? Is it almost inevitable that un-until Mashiach comes, it leads to frustration? The ideas, the... I mean, we spoke about earlier the, the fact that it touches on a loneliness that cannot be articulated, so the words are frustrated. As, as far as you can push the words, they will always be frustrated by their, by their incapacity for, for what they're trying to convey. And then on a lar- on a, on a, on a more macro level, the ideas that Hasidus is trying to articulate and is articulating and, and is, and is experiencing in the world, is held back by the almost legalese or bureaucracy or realities of Halakha, right? And it's almost like until Mashiach comes, which is the resolution, if there is such a

1:20:09 Speaker 1 resolution, um, it's just like it, frustration is to be expected. To be expected. Yeah. I guess so. Yeah. Um, yeah. What is the appeal then? What is the appeal of, of, of a frustrated- Um, finished thought. The fr- Uh, it, it- Who wants to be frustrated? I, what, what, what, what value do you see in being frustrated? Well, maybe that's the only place to have hope. Explain. That from our, from our present standpoint, it might seem frustrating, but it still does instill in us some sense of Tikva Le'Acharit HaYamim. There's some sense of hopefulness that we're moving Towards something more perfect, to some come tikkun. But the Rebbe also said all the be-rum are finished. Right. He says that, too. Yes. So I, I understand the resistance to, to my way of thinking. Right. And it's-- I would be the first to say it's kind of absurd what I'm arguing, but I'm, I'm not coming to it, you know, through a dream. It's through a deep engagement of, of his, of, of what's been preserved of his teaching, if all the be-rum are already completed. Right. No? I, well, I, I think you're also clarifying something here. I think, I think at least s-- or, or maybe you'll tell me if I'm getting it right. I think a lot of people understand that you are trying to conflate the, the mystical understanding or the Hasidic understanding of Moshiach with a Halakhic un- Yeah ... like force the issue Halakhically. Doesn't sound like that's what you're

1:21:55 Speaker 1 saying. No. It doesn't sound like you're saying... Well, it sound, it, it sounds more, and I don't mean to sugarcoat what you're saying, it sounds more like you're saying that, number one, on a Hasidic mystical level, Rebbe emphatically spoke about Moshiach already being here, and you could see it in both his language and things that he said, as well as the frustration that he expressed of- Mm-hmm ... what else is there to do, right? So it's, that's on one hand. And on top of that, I think maybe this is where the, where, where there is more c- meat for con-controversy, is that our sense, you know, our comfortable sense that we know exactly where the lines are in the first place might not be as comfort... a-as, as secure as we, as we'd like to think. Yeah. And, and that is a very unsettling thought. I mean, of course, the easy, the cheap kind of response is, "Okay, Shabtai Tzvi" you know, like, but I don't think that's to me the real issue here, 'cause I, 'cause I, I really don't-- Nobody that I know thinks of that, thinks in that way on any serious level. What, what makes me more comfort-comfortable is not, like, how, how do I defend the position? What makes, what makes me uncomfortable when I hear that is that our, our binary of galut geulah, our, our binary of, you know, until Moshiach comes, he's not here, right? And that, that, that is a, in many ways it's a humbling

1:23:25 Speaker 1 thought, but it's also a very comforting thought. "Oh, Moshiach didn't come yet, so-" Yeah. "... you know, he's not here." A-and so whatever, when we, when, when God brings him, he brings him. But what the Rebbe was unsettling that, that binary. Yes. Yes. And that's very unsettling. It's very unsettling to be in a s- in, in a space where you can no longer, you can no longer say for certain which side of it you're on. Right. Right? Where it's, it's... I don't know if the word's in between, but maybe to use your kind of language, you're in a space that shows that there was no opposites in the first place. Right. And that, you know, and that, that is a very unsettling place to be. It's unsettling. It's disorienting. Extremely disorienting. Do you ever feel a danger of, of getting carried away with these ideas where, you know, the, the flight of language and the flight of ideas takes you to a place, and then you look around the world around you, and it's just, uh, it's like the, the world doesn't feel this way at all? Does it, does it ev-- Do you ever, do you ever worry about that? Well, I don't worry about it, but I've, I definitely have had that experience. And incidentally, n- uh, even in the academic community, I feel that way. So I, I do- What do, what do you mean, academic community? I, I feel that sense of loneliness that we were talking about before in terms

1:24:52 Speaker 1 of, uh, in terms of the reception of, of, of my work. I see. But do you feel sometimes that, that, that, that, that, like how do you check these ideas? How do you, how do you, how do you make sure that you're not get-getting carried away with, with, with like, with like terms of phrase and, and- Well, be-- I try to be exacting philologically and textually, right? Mm-hmm. So I try to ground my ideas in the sources that I'm studying. But obviously, there is, there are flights of fancy or imagination that color my interpretation. I, I recognize that, and that's what, that's what makes it a l- a living tradition for me. And that this, this goes back to what I, what I said, uh, early on. I don't think the gap between the scholar and the, the believer is so profound. Because if you're a believer and you're in the, if you're in, if you're in the parsha, as they say, so it's up to you to continue con-- not just repeat, but to creatively translate and reinterpret what you're s- what you're studying to keep it alive. Right. And that I see as a, as a task of the scholar as well. But the check of which you're asking about, that check to me has to be, you know, kind of, uh, being rooted in the sources. Mm-hmm. And not just talking somewhere high above them and s- making specula-speculative leaps. So, so I wanted to, I wanna, I wanna talk about the,

1:26:41 Speaker 1 the difference between the scholar and the believer, 'cause in many ways, this is the obvious meta-paradox about your work and the, the, the proverbial elephant in the room. How do you negotiate, um, the, the, the f-- how do you negotiate the fact that on one hand, you are probably from, from the most immersed people in the teachings of Hasidism, Rebbe's teachings, and, and may... possibly from the most well-versed Right? Uh, it's hard to... It, it, you know, it, it's hard to know, but, but, but very few have ever, very few have ever said, have ever doubted your, your, your, your, your immersion and your knowledge and your, and your command of th- of these subjects, right? Uh, you're not one of the academics who learned Chassidus via other academic books, right? And we're sitting in your library here, and it's, it looks like a typical Lubavitch home in many ways, and maybe a little bit more Kabbalistic than s- than most, but, you know, it's full of sefarim here. How do you negotiate that, the, what you call the, what, what, what in many ways is the, the immersion of it as a scholar with the fact that you have chosen not to live your life as a Chassid? Yeah. Um- I'm sure you think about it. Yeah, sure. I th- I think about it. Um, um, sometimes my father would say to me, "You're, you're like Elisha, "Na'eh daresh ve'aino na'eh makayem." El- El- Elisha ben Abuyah. Yeah, Elisha ben Abuyah. Because, you know,

1:28:15 Speaker 1 it says of Elisha that he was Na'eh daresh ve'aino na'eh makayem, so- He would give drashes and he wouldn't, he wouldn't act upon his drashes. Yeah. Your father was upset at you? Yeah. Yeah, sure. I mean, uh, he would have... Yes, because, you know, I was raised in a certain way living, uh, you know, in the dah l'ramot halakha, and that's what he would have w-want... What he would have wanted. Though, I mean, he was, in his own way, proud that I gave my life to the study of these sources, but... So I have thought about the question a lot, um, and I, I don't have an easy answer for that other than to say it, you know, just is how things evolved for me. But I do believe that the... In this, in my scholarship, uh, there, there is another way in which, uh, I'm fulfilling the practical part of things. It's not, it's not, it- it's not just simply, uh, a theoretical interest. It's a more for-fully embodied sense of how it, how it guides me in the way I live my life in this world. So the teachings are not dissociated from that, even though they may not look on the surface that way to someone who's, who's within the tradition. So s- the, the, the fact that what you said earlier about the scholar and the believer not being as far apart as one might think is, is, is, is your, is your story. Yeah. Yes, both in terms of needing

1:30:06 Speaker 1 to constantly, uh, engage these texts and, and interpret them for the moment, right? And also in terms of, um, kind of narrowing the gap between, you know, is... You know, what's the ikar, ma'aseh or Talmud? Well, I think you can't really, you know... Like the famous debate in the Gemara about this, uh, gadol talmud shemevila dema'aseh. Right. So, so learning is important because it somehow affects your way of behaving. So you feel, you feel that you have the ma'aseh on your level as well? I think so, but yeah. No, I... Look, I, I, I, I was hesitant to bring up the question because I am not, I, I am not the, the, the gatekeeper, and I don't wanna come across as a gatekeeper questioning, uh, your credentials, your religious credentials. I, you know, I just think it's, I think it's, uh, it's, it's, it's... It was important to understand as part of- Yeah ... understanding where you're coming from and how you think about it. Yeah. Not that you have to, not that you have to def- not that you have to defend yourself. I, I, I don't, I don't feel like you were making me defensive, and I, I understand, I understand that people would, would wonder about this. I get it. Would you be comfortable... If, if, if, i-if you had, if you were able to today, going to the Rebbe and, and, and speaking to him, would, would you go? And what would you say? Yeah. Uh- Maybe that's private, but would

1:31:37 Speaker 1 you go? Oh, yeah, I f- sure. Uh, I would welcome such an opportunity, but what I exactly would I say? I don't know. I mean, uh, I can't, I can't even begin to imagine what that would, uh- So you, you would be comfortable, you would be comfortable to go to the Rebbe as, as you are. You, there's a, there's a, there's a- I think so. Yeah. Yeah. I think so. Um, I would be in awe and intimidated about such a meeting. Right. Is, is there something, is there something... You know, the podcast is called Homesick for Lubavitch. Um, and, and, you know, there's a, there's a sense of, uh, you know, in many ways it all comes back, like the rivers come back to the sea. Mm-hmm. You know, the, the, the search for, for an anchor, the place where you feel at home and, and, or the sense of dislocation until you find that. Is there, is there at all... I, I understand and I respect what you're talking about, um, finding your own way of practice. Not, if I understood you correctly, and I think it's important to emphasize, not saying that that's the same as Halakhic practice or traditional practice. Right. You're not trying, this is not the... You're not trying to substitute one for the other. Right. But that's just, that's just how it is for you. Do you feel at all, um, a homesickness, like a, a dislocation from... You know, there is, there is that, I think, I, I

1:33:07 Speaker 1 actually for myself, there's that proverbial kind of- Yeah ... Hasidic life where everything seems to be in sync. You know, you have, you, you have the ideas that you learn, that you contemplate. You refine them through, through prayer, through meditation, that is in itself filtered through practice, through community, through culture, and so on. There is this beautiful harmony that is There, at least in concept, and, and I've had the privilege of meeting people who, to one level or another, seem to exemplify that. Have, have you ever felt dislocated or homesick by the cho- by, by the way that you've chosen to approach it? Oh, yeah. Um, yeah. I mean, I think there... Another paradox which I think really, um, uh, shapes who I am, uh, I belong by not belonging. And, um, y- you mentioned before Kafka, so there's a famous parable of Kafka's Before the Law, which he wrote independently but then placed in his book, The Trial, and, uh, almost everybody thinks he's talking about the Torah there. So he's really... It's a parable about his own Yiddishkeit, his own Jewish identity. And so it's a man who comes to this door, and he's told that behind the door is the law, and he's negotiating back and forth with the guard at the door to get through the door, and then he, he has no entry into the door. But just before he dies, he's told that the law behind the door was for him. So the way I interpret it is Kafka

1:34:57 Speaker 1 is telling us his way of being inside was by being outside, right? And I... That leads to a tremendous sense of dislocation a- and nostalgia for something for sure. So, uh, yeah, I, uh, I have to be honest and say to you, yes, what you're describing is appropriate for, for me. So to those who asked me before I came here, yes, Professor Elliot Wilson is, is in fact homesick for Lubavitch. Yeah. Yeah. Um... But we're sitting here together, and it's been a wonderful conversation. Well, thank you for having me. Thank you very much, and, uh, like every one of these conversations, they... And to use a Wilsonian turn of phrase, it makes me more homesick by being less homesick. Oh. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. The music for this podcast comes from the album Repentance Doors by Oren Sor and Nadav Bahar, and is used with their permission.