Before Madonna, Ashton Kutchner, and The Kabbalah Center turned Jewish mysticism into the new Scientology, most of us had probably never heard of kabbalah (ed.’s note: I first read about it in Umberto Eco’s Foucault’s Pendulum). But as with most things that are filtered through the prism of Hollywood, pop-kabbalah has little in common with the more traditional religious belief. According to Aaron from Aaron's Rantblog:
Now according to Jewish tradition, one shouldn’t learn kabbalah until one is 40, has already mastered scripture and Jewish law in the original Hebrew, and learns directly from a rabbi who is already a master of kabbalah in a class with no more than two pupils at a time. Typical kabbalistic masters are hardly well-off since directing its power selfishly is incongruous. Now you know why The Kabbalah Center is hardly kosher. Pop Kabbalah is like celebate orgy. It just ain’t what it’s named.
I don't know much about kabbalah. In fact, even though my favorite text is a collection of books, stories, histories, and wisdom written by or about Jews, I know far too little about Judaism in general. Fortunately, though, I know someone who does. When I need help discerning the "kosher" from the, er, non-kosher(?) I always turn to Leah Guildenstern. Leah is not only a solid, conservative blogger, she's also my primary resource in the blogosphere for rabbinic knowledge.
Unlike some of us, Leah isn't an obssesive blogger who feels the need to produce a daily stream of posts. Instead, she waits until she has something interesting to say. She rarely disappoints. Take, for example, her recent post in honor of Sephirat ha Omer, in which she developed a chart to classify different blogs according to the spheres on the Kabbalistic Tree of Life. She graciously grouped me with Roger Simon and Little Green Footballs under the category of Yesod blogs:
With Chochma the idea was contracted and Bina expanded ideas, now that the ideas have been processed they must once again be summarized into a graspable concept that can be communicated to others. Yesod is this taking of the broad idea and encapsulating it into the seed of an idea to be passed on (and expanded once again.)
Interesting. Summarizing ideas that can be passed on into a graspable concept that can be communicated others. I like that. It sounds much better than saying that I take other people’s original ideas, put my insipid spin on them, and pass them on to the public.
Update: Aaron has taken Leah’s tree and put it into a graphical format:


She graciously grouped me with Roger Simon and Little Green Footballs under the category of Yesod blogs
Egad! Anyone who grouped me with Little Green Footballs for any reason would promptly get a cease-and-desist letter, and cause me to re-examine my posts for signs of outright bigotry. Ouch!
One hopes that she was comparing you to LGF for other reasons. For all of our differences, I haven't found you to be either a bigot or a jerk -- I cannot say the same for Charles F. Johnson, and I've known of him for more than a decade.
Thanks for the shout-out.
And Charles Johnson is an incredible mensch.
Any chance that tgirsch is either romantically involved with a liberal or is rebelling against Republican parents? I've never met anyone who had rational reasons for switching from the GOP to the Democrats. Membership in the GOP was likely an accident of birth. Recall Churchill and Shaw on young liberals and old conservatives.
I loved Foucault's Pendulum. Reading Eco is an education in esoterica.
By the way, I don't know if you ever learned that you got a Blogopoly piece back in February.
Joe,
Thanks for the compliments! Glad you like your placement on the tree and the description of Yesod. You did a nice write up on the whole concept.
Tgirsch, the grouping is more a style thing than necessarily a content thing. (And I actually hadn't started reading your blog until today, so any categorization is yet to come. :-) )
Aaron:
Any chance that tgirsch is either romantically involved with a liberal or is rebelling against Republican parents? I've never met anyone who had rational reasons for switching from the GOP to the Democrats.
Huh? If you must know, yes, I'm romantically involved with a liberal, am myself a liberal, and I have no idea what my parents' politics are because they have always made it a point never to discuss them with us, something for which I give them a tremendous amount of credit.
And for the record, how did you know I switched from GOP to Democrat (circa 1998, by the way)?
As for rational reasons, I have plenty:
There are others, of course, but those are the primary reasons. There are still certain areas where I find myself more closely aligned with the GOP than with the Democratic party. Gun control springs to mind. But on most issues, the Democrats are the least of evils as compared to my personal politics.