"Rethinking Jewish Mysticism" - Rachel Elior

Rachel Elior, a Professor of Jewish Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, explores what "spirituality" has meant in Jewish mystical thought. For more information on this Colloquium, visit iishj.org/colloquium-01.html.

[@cassandraconroy563]

Thank you for sharing this. All of the knowledge that Professor Rachel Elior brings forth is very valuable. She explains things in such a succinct & logical way and deserves much credit for the beautiful treasures she shares. I appreciate you posting these.

[@geoffreynhill2833]

"Religion is about society and law; mysticism is individual and poetical." Very helpful.

[@alexstrasheim5451]

Thank you. It's wonderful that people take the trouble to post videos like this on youtube.

[@melindaendoramoga5532]

Wow! Enlightening! What a great woman!

[@cindygray2994]

I would give my eye teeth to study with this woman.

[@nir766]

she is the best isnt she ...?

[@lynnfarley7859]

No need to give eye teeth. Read her books.

[@cindygray2994]

Dr. Elior, your book "The Paradoxical Ascent To The G-dhead: Kabbalistic Theosophy In Chabad Chasidism," is MASTERFUL.

[@dimakauffman]

I like this woman

[@robelicit]

We must be thankful--after thousands of yrs we still have Jewish teachers like Eliior 🍷📖

[@SibleySteve]

As a Gentile I say thank you to this scholarship and blessings to all who read and learn, for the sake of peace and understanding. I was blessed as a youth to be allowed to attend a synagogue prayer service near Detroit, and I have been respecting Temple Bethel since then.

[@s.deoliveira4109]

This Professor is fabuleuse!

[@ThunderBroomPilot]

Glad to hear insightful ideas. Appreciate real speech, not extreme introverts just reading their papers.

[@geoffreynhill2833]

Hear! Hear!

[@yotama8]

הגדולה העיקרית של המרצה הנפלאה הזאת היא לנסח בצורה פשוטה דברים מסובכים ומורכבים .. דבר שדורש כשרון מובנה בסיסי. ויכולת הבנה מאד בריאה של החומר. !!! this great women can explain sophisticate things in a simple way ....amazing

[@barrywicksman6337]

Excellent . Wish she had a website and online courses.

[@Historian212]

She has books.

[@cindygray2994]

i am a big, big fan.

[@aquillafleetwood8180]

Me too...

[@dennisokola5332]

THank you so much...I am found...

[@MLODIST]

Secular Jewish Spirituality = Day Dreaming

[@JAHsh077]

although I don't partake in the spiritual games of kabbalah, hearing her explain context , is helpful in study of the "jewish" mind . I appreciate that

[@Historian212]

There’s not just one “Jewish mind.” As she pointed out. And I think she oversimplified it quite a bit.

[@clairebennett7831]

"Unhypenated Jew." I like that. Now there are terms like post-denominational. Comparing Jewish mysticism to Islamic fundamentalism is about as fair as comparing Sufi mysticism to the strictest of Hasidic fundamentalists.

[@TheRawrevelations]

The Bible in essence is a divine blend of literal, abstract, factual, and respectively mystical content. If we believe in it, our journeys in our interpretive work of it will absolutely bring you to that conclusion with and through the aide of external, truthful, knowledge and spiritual enlightenment (or wisdom and experiences).

[@TheRawrevelations]

...My name's Rachel too :)

[@margovasquez8333]

Traduzcan en español por favor

[@JacobGuidi]

This is the best video in KZbin

[@galbright0990]

Dat is in Megilat Esther 20 times, which would incline to the definition of “Biblical.” However, I would agree that it is not necessarily referring to “religion,” in regards to tradition of mankind. Instead, a way of life to seal mankind with what is holy.

[@adamchapman6530]

Dat means a law and not religion in biblical Hebrew. She meant to say that there's no biblical word for religion, and when she referred to dat it was in the modern sense.

[@Historian212]

Prof. Elior, whom I greatly respect, ignores the fact that the existence of law means that individuals have rights under those laws. In the Torah, there are prescribed ways to compensate people from whom something is stolen, or against whom other offenses are committed. The victims of crimes must go to the local community leaders, and then prescribed actions are taken; IOW, they assert their rights under the law. Just as people do today. The Torah may not say so outright, as in the US Bill of Rights; but there are any number of examples about penalties and compensation for wrongdoing to a person. There’s even a famous example of a man who died without a son. His daughters go to Moses and demand to inherit their father’s property, even though they are women. And Moses agrees to it. They argued that they had a right to inherit. So I don’t understand her assertion there.

[@davidsears6678]

Much perspicacity here -- but in defining Jewish mysticism as originating with the destruction of the Holy Temple, Prof. Elior ignores the role of prophecy that even precedes the building of the Temple (as mentioned in TaNaKH). The prophetic mysteries may be a different category of mysticism than post-Churban mysticism, which came to be called "Kabbalah." But it is mysticism nevertheless, and of a most potent sort.

[@Historian212]

The problem is the timeline. I suspect that Prof. Elior would suggest either that the Tanakh was backwritten, as per the documentary hypothesis, or that pre-Temple prophecy also emerged during times of stress. But I’m also not sold on her perspective. Because ancient peoples have been having visions and prophesying since prehistoric times, and not always during times of great stress. Although it must be admitted that people don’t generally consult oracles if they don’t have a question or concern to be addressed.

[@radiohill]

Is she actually saying that the shephirot and the Merkaba are a made up notions?! This is so sad. I'm someone who turned to Jewish mysticism due to actual physical occurances in sensitivity to the sephirot and to the Merkaba, and Judaism is the only body of information that offered the explanations and educational direction I was seeking. Angels are real beings, there IS a holy platform of G_D, the tree and the sephirot are real. And if my eyes and ears aren't deceiving me this woman is saying that they don't exist. Wow. She has no experience with mysticism at all if that's her take.

[@carolparker7782]

Adam Kadmon the Macrocosm.

[@aligzanduh]

Is Rachel a mystic ? Or is she an intellectual describing what mystics are ? I never much liked gershom scholem - because he himself was an intellectual not a mystical practicioner. But I read him as a youth.

[@Historian212]

Clearly she’s not a mystic. Neither is Moshe Idel, whom most people agree is the greatest living scholar of Jewish mysticism. Idel also has issues with Scholem, whom he knew, IIRC. Idel gets calls from haredi rabbis to answer questions, sometimes, even though he’s not religious.

[@Historian212]

I rather object to Prof. Elior’s rebuking of people’s pronunciation of “kabbalah.” The pronunciation she objects to is the way it’s pronounced by Yiddish speakers- a common enough difference between Yiddish-inflected pronunciation and modern Hebrew pronunciation. The word originated in Hebrew but doesn’t belong to it exclusively. A simple, “In Hebrew, it’s pronounced ….” would have sufficed. She came off as arrogant, which I’m sorry to see. (Yiddish is Judeo-German, but it retains many words from Hebrew, and incorporates Russian, French, and other words, too. It emerged around 1000 CE, and is a legitimate language on its own. This is not just a random way to pronounce “kabbalah.” It has a tradition of its own.) Personally, I can pronounce it either way. But her attitude was uncalled for.

[@williamturner6192]

Relativism again?

[@Historian212]

Lol, we’re free to choose? Tell that to Spinoza, who was famously excommunicated and banished as an apikoros.

[@carolparker7782]

Threskeia in the NT Greek = "religion", and invariably shows up in a bad sense.

[@Historian212]

That ancient term doesn’t mean what “religion” means today. Translation involves more than literal word-for-word interpretation; it requires understanding the contexts in which words were/are used. “Religion” changed in meaning over time, and originally referred to a high level of devotion to a deity, to piety, etc. There were few if no people who conceived of an existence devoid of unseen entities and forces. Even during the 1600s, such notions were virtually unthinkable (even Spinoza held out for a naturalistic, pantheistic sort of deity, and he was almost universally shunned). Later, “religion” came to be used as a category, in order to differentiate one type of experience and behavior from another: like sacred vs secular, for example. But ancient people made no such differentiation. Their whole lives involved “interactions” with unseen beings. “Threskeia” refers to ceremonial behavior/ritual, what social scientists call “cult” (not in the contemporary sense), which involved prescribed songs, gestures, offerings, etc., at certain times and places. This is not the same as “religion” as a category or realm of thinking/belief separate from the rest of life.

[@sghoorichile]

ודתיהם שונות -מגילת אסתר…………