What Now? Episode 11 podcast transcript
The following is a transcription of episode 5 of the podcast What Now?, “On a Scale of One to Ten” with Sarah Wolf, provided for accessibilty for all website visitors.
[Music]
Sara Beth Berman: Welcome to What Now?, a podcast from the Jewish Theological Seminary that asks how we respond when it all goes wrong. Iām Sara Beth Berman, your host, and a graduate of the Davidson School at 91¶¶Ņõ, and Iāve been searching for answers for a long time. Several years ago, my fiancĆ© Rafi, a fifth-year rabbinical student, died after a year of suffering. My desire to engage in Jewish life was shot.
Over the years, Iāve worked hard to figure out how to be myself, all the pieces, broken and repaired in equal parts. Iām still asking the questions though. Specifically, why tragedy? Why do we suffer, and what now? How does our tradition help us tackle this complicated and fundamentally human experience? Tragedy and misfortune strike all of us just about every day. On a scale of one to 10, where one is a bird pooping on your car when you just pull out of the carwash, and 10 is that time I was widowed before my wedding.
So Iām meeting with professors and teachers from my beloved alma mater, 91¶¶Ņõ. Each professor and each person has had their own struggles. My professors have applied their wisdom and scholarship to finding answers. After years of banging my head against a wall while I whine loudly about tragedy, Iām hoping they can help me out.
In this episode, I sat down with Talmud professor Dr. Sarah Wolf. We spoke about inherited familiar tragedy, and our chat took us from Babylonia to Paris and back again. Iāll let her introduce herself.
Sarah Wolf: Hi, I am Dr. Sarah Wolf. I am the newest member of the 91¶¶Ņõ faculty. I teach Talmud and rabbinics here. I did my PhD in ancient Judaism in the Religion Department at Northwestern University. And I love teaching here.
SBB: Awesome. Go Wildcats?
SW: Yes! Good job.
SBB: So proud of myself. So, everyone who comes to the podcast, I ask this foundational question, which is on a scale of one to 10, where one is you have a new kitchen but youāre not allowed to use it (that might be a five). And 10 is the Book of Job. I was wondering if you could share some of your experiences or stuff that youāve studied on the scale thatās a one or a 10.
SW: So I would say my one to two is that for about two months I didnāt have heat in my apartment. I had a space heater, which the super, whoās amazing, very graciously delivered. So thatās pretty frustrating. But the heat is back now, so thatās good.
SBB: What about a 10?
SW: So my 10 is something that I donāt really remember, because it happened when I was quite little, and also sort of before I was born. Which is that my mom suffered pretty intense pregnancy loss. So she was pregnant five times, and I am an only child. So before I was born, she suffered a miscarriage. And she then gave birth to twins who were born very prematurely, at I think 21, 22 weeks and they didnāt make it. And then they sort of figured out that my mom had this medical problem and they were able to do some interventions and so I was born pretty normally. I was two weeks early, which is not a big deal at all. And then my mom got pregnant again, and the fetus, the heart stopped in utero. And then got pregnant again and that baby was born at about 19 weeks and also did not make it.
SBB: So what do you have a memory of?
SW: So I have obviously no memory of the stuff that happened before I was born, and very, very little of what happened when I was a little kid. I mean, I vaguely remember my mom being on bed rest. I remember that I was hanging out with her when she was on bed rest and smooshed her glasses, which were in the bed. But I donāt remember the aftermath, and I know that it was terrible and I know that my mom was depressed and that it affected my parentsā marriage and ultimately they split up.
But I just donāt have clear memories of that period. But I know how much it affected my momās relationship with me. I know how much it affected me in terms of the divorce. And I definitely have a sense of, there are these sort of mythical siblings who, I mean, the babies who were born, they got names and I know what their names were and sometimes my mom talks about them. She lights a yahrzeit candle for them and says Kaddish for them, even though I think she knows that thatās not officially halakhicly the policy, itās very important to her to do that. So they feel very present in a lot of ways, even though they werenāt really part of my life.
SBB: Yeah. That stuff is hard to share, and your reflection upon it as someone who wasnāt really directly involved in the way that an adult would be directly involved and remember and have those feelings of relationship and relationship lost. Itās really interesting for you to be able to step back and say, this is something that was truly terrible and is part of my life, but in a way that the connection is sort of like a dotted line in terms of your memory.
So when you talk about all of this loss in your family, how do you relate to it as an adult now?
SW: It definitely makes me think differently about if I were to be pregnant, how I would experience that and how I would feel about it and how, first of all, I donāt take for granted the ability to do that and bring a fetus to term. And Iām a little worried that Iāll be a really neurotic pregnant person. And I also think about just what it would have been like for me to grow up with siblings. Itās not something that I thought about a lot as a kid. I was an only child and that was just my life and it was fine. But as an only child of divorced parents, I had a super-intense relationship with each of my parents because we were the only two people in the house at a time.
And I actually remember, as part of my being a literature major in college, I got to go to Paris and actually learn French in college and I was in the introductory French class. And they were introducing us to the different characters who were going to be in our little Intro French video. And they were telling us about one characterāthere were two characters, a French character and an American character.
And the American characterās name was Robert and he was a fils unique, heās an only child and āses parents sont divorcĆ©s,ā his parents are divorced. Iām like, wow, this is so exciting, just like me! And then it says, āAnd therefore, il a des complexes,ā thatās why he has so many complexes. And it was weirdly gratifying, you know! If the Intro French video thinks that thatās going to screw you up, I have carte blanche, you know? Any way in which Iām crazy is totally justified.
SBB: Thatās amazing.
SW: Yeah. So I think about that sometimes. It was also amazing that āHe has complexesā was one of the first sentences that I learned how to say in French. Very telling. [laughter]
SBB: That is an incredible story. Okay, can we talk a little bit about your very personal story, your familyās personal story about pregnancy loss and connect it to some of the work that you do with the Talmud?
SW: Yeah. So one thing that I think is interesting to think about is this idea of loss that you have maybe a vague memory of, maybe that you have no memory of at all, but that is sort of part of how you know you developed. And that you know that you would be in a really different place right now if that loss that you know happened, maybe to your ancestors, hadnāt occurred.
And I think the big one for the rabbinic period, which is the time period that I study, is the destruction of the Temple. Which for most of the Rabbis who appear and are quoted in the Mishnah and the Talmud, thatās not something that they themselves personally experienced, but itās sort of there at the heart of what theyāre thinking about.
And itās interesting actually, in the same way that I feel like my siblings sort of remained presences in my life, even though I never knew them and have no memory of them, the idea of sacrifice really stays very present for the Rabbis. Itās not like theyāre no longer thinking about it or theyāre just totally thinking about it as something that happened in the past and theyāve completely moved beyond. I mean, thereās lots of legal material that theyāre still producing about sacrifices and how theyāre supposed to happen and how theyāre supposed to work. Theyāre really thinking about it. Itās very there and present and real for them.
And at the same time, theyāre also trying to figure out what their ritual lives are going to look like in a Temple-less world. So theyāre producing lots of theoretical legal material about sacrifices because thatās what they do now is produce lots of theoretical legal material, not actually go give sacrifices, right? So theyāre still hanging out with those concepts, but they have to really shift to relating with them in a new way.
SBB: So all of this theoretical work in the Talmud, what are the Rabbis doing with it? Like what happens?
SW: What happens. So there are all sorts of practices that the Rabbis start to conceptualize in this sacrificial paradigm, including prayer, including giving charity, giving tzedakah, fasting. And one of these practices or experiences, I guess, that the rabbis start to see in this paradigm is suffering, which they call yisurin. The root of yisurin appears in biblical literature and it has a range of meanings, including something like āteach,ā something like āchastise,ā and maybe something like āpunish.ā But starting in tannaitic literature, the earliest stratum of rabbinic literature, it shifts to actually meaning something more like suffering. It starts appearing in the form yisurin.
And it means suffering, but it still holds on to that meaning of chastising / punishment because itās suffering that is conceived of as coming from God. So there are these early rabbinic texts that talk about yisurin as expiating, as achieving atonement, in the same wayāsame effect that sacrifices are supposed to have. Theyāre supposed to, you sinned and what the sacrifice does is it cleanses you. So yisurin, this experience of suffering, is supposed to do that too.
SBB: Okay, so this is like if I did something bad, then I would take a goat to the Temple and they would sacrifice it, and then I would be good. But instead of that, thereās yisurin that happens.
SW: Yes, exactly.
SBB: I donāt have a goat, so go on.
SW: Yeah, so you might not have a goat, but fortunately, there are other things you can do. You donāt have a goat, so thereās also Yom Kippur. Fortunately, weāve all got that. And the Rabbis set up this whole framework. And I can even tell you a little short piece of tannaitic midrash that lays this out very clearly, that yisurin and sacrifices are doing the same thing.
SBB: So I havenāt had any tannaitic midrash yet today, so that would be great.
SW: Great. Okay, so this is from the Mekhilta deāRabbi Yishmael. It says,
āRabbi Nehemia says: precious are yisurin, for just as sacrifices appease, so too do yisurin appease. What does it say about sacrifices? āAnd it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.ā What does it say about yisurin? āAnd they shall atone for their iniquity.ā And not only that, but yisurin actually appease more than sacrifices do. Because sacrifices are only with money (or goats!). But yisurin are with the body.ā
So very clearly laying out, there are these two biblical verses that they are putting in conversation with each other, using this word ratzah, to please or to appease, and saying that both yisurin and sacrifices achieve this, that theyāre doing this work of reconciling between you and God, making sure that everything is okay. But actually, theyāre going a step further and theyāre saying, you know what, itās really fine that you donāt have a goat because itās actually better for you to suffer. A goat is just a material object, right? Your money, whatever. But your bodyāand it seems like theyāre conceiving of yisurin as something maybe like sickness, something that youāre experiencing physically, thatās you. Thatās your personhood. And so actually, in some way, yisurin do this even better.
SBB: With apologies to any beloved goats out there. I mean, itās pretty amazing that these yisurin fill that void, the sacrificial void, as it were. So what are these annoyances and sufferings and trials that my body is going through in place of the sacrifice of a goat?
SW: Good question. So what I just quoted from was tannaitic literature. And you know, it doesnāt say for sure what they are, but it does seem like it is some kind of bad physical experience. In the Babylonian Talmud, yisurin are portrayed in a few different ways. So there are passages in the Babylonian Talmud that also portray yisurin as some kind of really bad physical affliction. But one thing that the Babylonian Talmud starts to pick up on is the role of the person who is experiencing yisurin as accepting them or not accepting them.
SBB: Accepting the yisurin upon themselves?
SW: Yeah. So there is a passage that says that everyone that God loves, God afflicts with yisurin. And then the passage says, well wait a second. Is that true even if the person doesnāt accept them out of love? And then it says, no, actually. Itās really different. If you donāt accept them, it actually doesnāt work. And if he accepts them, or she, or they, get the reward of these yisurin. But if they donāt accept them, then they donāt get the reward.
SBB: I hear that, and I also think of the many platitudes that people told me when my fiancĆ© died. Like it was his time, and God wanted himāwhich, like, I canāt. And he was in a better place, and Iām so strong, and Iām getting through it, and Iām so amazing. Like I donāt care, all of those things, right? Because I enjoyed him, thatās why we kept him around. And I didnāt want to sacrifice him. And Iām sure people really love their pet goats, but itās hard for people that have suffered these sorts of things in their adult consciousness and child consciousness as well, to be like, all right, cool, I suffered, all I had to do was give you one fiancĆ©, and now Iām good in terms of repentance.
So Iām hearing what youāre saying and itās fascinating, and itās also frustrating as someone who has experienced traumatic loss to be like, well, all right, some people sacrifice a goat. And I sacrificed a human.
SW: Yeah, well, there are two issues with this idea of everyone that God favors, He afflicts with yisurin. One is what youāre saying. Itās a horrible concept to think that what God does to the people that God loves is make them suffer, and that if youāre suffering all you have to do is remember that God loves you and then everything will be fine and youāll be rewarded. Youāre not the first person to find that totally repellent and deeply troubling.
But thereās actually another issues which I think maybe is even more present for the rabbis, oddly. Which is what if youāre not suffering? What if youāre not experiencing horrible loss? Does that mean God doesnāt love you? Does that mean that your sins, which youāre still doing, are not being atoned for when suddenly you are not having terrible skin disease or losing your loved ones or having foreign armies come and attack your towns? What happens then? So, yeah. Thereās problems from both directions.
SBB: Right. Thereās a lot of things that you just said. So the first is, remembering, like Iām suffering and God loves me, that was the opposite interpretation that I had. Right? I was like, God obviously hates me, and I donāt really know what I did to deserve it. Because Iām a little saucy, but Iām fairly well-behaved. So itās just hard. Itās hard to hear that. I donāt like it. I mean, youāre great. But Iām not enjoying this particular line of conversation. Bring me back.
SW: So Iām going to bring you back. But Iām going to do it through the other direction in which the Rabbis have a problem with this model. Itās not clear if theyāre really troubled by this idea of a God who punishes the people that God loves. There are scholarsāDavid Kraemer and Yaakov Elman have written about this idea that actually later voices in the Talmud do this anti-theodicy thing, where theyāre really tired of this idea that thereās a solution to the problem of evil in the world, and we can come up with a theologically coherent explanation.
And that the Talmud is like, no, forget it, bad things just happen and itās horrible and we canāt explain it. So that may be, but I think also the Rabbis are at least if not more troubled by the fact that what about people who arenāt suffering so much? If yisurin are this really powerful way to know that everything is cool between you and God, which ultimately both you in your worry that God hates you, and the Rabbis in their interpretation of, maybe God really loves me! Itās the same concern. People are worried. They want to know. They want to know that God doesnāt hate them, because that would be sad.
Thereās this really amazing passage from the Talmud in which they respond to this concern by basically redefining what yisurin are.
SBB: Iām listening.
SW: So using your scale from one to 10, they say, you know what? Yisurin donāt have to be a nine or a 10. Yisurin can be a one or a two. So they give a few examples of what that might look like. So for example, they say anyone who had a piece of clothing woven for them to wear and it doesnāt fit. And then they say, no, actually, even more than that. If you intended to mix your wine with hot water and it got mixed with cold water. Right, the Rabbis had this whole weird thing where they drink wine concentrate and then they had to dilute it. Anyway, you wanted hot wine, or letās say, you wanted hot cider and someone gave you a cold can of Coke, or the other way around. Itās a hot day and you really wanted an iced latte, and someone gave you just a nice hot tea.
SBB: Thatās rough.
SW: You know, itās rough! Itās rough. Itās upsetting. You wanted a sensory experience and you got a different sensory experience. Not fun. They say, you know what, even if your shirt is backwards, maybe inside out.
SBB: God loves me because I canāt dress myself?
SW: God loves you because in the middle of the day, youāre at a meeting and youāre like, oh, my seams are showing. Thatās not the way this shirt was meant to be worn. Yeah. And then they say, you know what? Even if you reach into your purse to take out three coins, and you only take out two coins, then you have to go back into your purse to take out that third coin that you didnāt get to the first time, that counts as yisurin.
SBB: What if I needed like 10 cents, and I pulled out two dimes.
SW: So they do talk about that, and they actually say thatās not yisurin. If you meant to take out two coins, but you took out three coins, and then you have to put one back, thatās not yisurin. I think probably because the feeling of being like, ooh, I donāt need to spend that extra coin, Iām going to put it back in my pocket, shifts the experience a little bit.
So theyāre not just talking about anything that is a different experience from what you expect, but something that is not what you wanted. Something that is in some way disappointing to you or frustrating to you. That counts as yisurin. And then at the end of this passage, they say, well okay, but why all this? Kol kakh lamah? And they say, well, you know, there is this teaching from the school of Rabbi Yishmael, Kol sheāavru alav arbaāim yom belo yisurin kibbel olamo. āAnyone who has gone 40 days in their life without experiencing yisurin has received their share in the World to Come [preemptively].ā
Youāve had it too good for those 40 days, and thatās it. You have used up your heavenly reward here on earth by having 40 days with no suffering, and thatās it for you. So if you can say, aha, but donāt worry! I actually have checked the yisurin box once in this 40-day period, then you can feel secure that your heavenly reward is still waiting for you down the line.
SBB: Iām trying to imagine a situation where I wouldnāt be annoyed by something on a daily basis.
SW: Right! Exactly.
SBB: Cool! World to Come, here we go! I hadnāt heard about this before now. In my experience, no one really needs to be on high alert to be annoyed by something. Do people know about this 40-day thing? Are they concerned? Is this widely taught?
SW: It is not the most well-known Talmudic passage. When I was first working on this in grad school, there was someone who was I think a post-doc in my department who had learned a lot said, oh yeah, I know that passage. Every time I go and take out the wrong key to try to open my office I think about it, and I think oh yes, thatās my yisurin and I feel good about this now.
And I really want to make it a thing, because as troubling as we find the idea that really, really horrible thing that happen to us are some way of being in communication with God because thatās sort of horrifying, there is something I think thatās kind of nice about seeing these small, annoying moments that happen to us all the time as actually some way of God showing that God is still looking out for us. Or some way of feeling secure that things are going to ultimately be okay.
SBB: So trauma, yisurin made me cranky. And then now weāre like in the middle, where thereās the annoying yisurin to remind you that God still loves you. So is there another end of the spectrum, where like God pays my rent for the next several years and I donāt have to think about that again? Or does it have to be like, I canāt find my retainers.
SW: Well, look. In late antiquity in general, people are really into suffering as a marker of religious or spiritual greatness. And thatās kind of how everybodyās thinking about it at the time. Thereās lots of Christian martyrs or ascetics going around being like, look, the reason that you can tell that I am a super-holy person is that I havenāt eaten in weeks and my flesh is rotting. So I donāt think that that means that thatās the only way to think about Godās presence in our lives.
And I think it also highlights the fact that even though suffering in late antiquity is sort of a big thing generally, what the Rabbis do with it is really unique and different. The Rabbis are not saying you too should go live in the desert and make yourself horribly physically uncomfortable all the time. Like yeah, thereās fasts here and there, but by and large, theyāre not really advocating for that. And instead, theyāre saying no, no, no, what you have to doāand this is, I think, super rabbinicāis you just have to have a different frame for how you think about your own life. Right? You just have to take the things that happen to you every day, and once you choose to accept them, meaning once you choose to frame them as suffering and not just, I don’t know, random thing that happened to me that happens to me constantly when I forget where I put my phone for the hundredth time, once you reframe it, then you get to participate in that discourse of āsuffering means that I am spiritually awesome.ā
SBB: So itās clear that Iām cranky about this stuff. This is interesting. Iām wondering, for someone whoās less cranky, what can they learn from this teaching?
SW: To step back, one of the things thatās going on in this very rabbinic reframing of the whole category of suffering to say, look, actually we conclude all these other things in this category, is an idea that is powerful for me and that I think about a lot, that the narratives that we tell about our own lives are really important. And that we actually have control over how we frame our own experiences and what they mean to us. And I think itās incredibly difficult to step out of the mode of saying, objectively this is just whatās happening to me and I can only react to it in this very particular way. To, well, I can tell myself story number one about whatās happening to me. And I can get really mad. Or I can realize that Iām telling myself story number one, and decide to actually tell myself story number 1.2 or story two.
This happens to me all the time. One of my complexes, so to speak, is that I am always convinced that people are mad at me. Iām sure other people who are listening can relate to this, but itāll be like, okay, someone didnāt respond to my email, and itās because theyāre mad at me. And thatās how Iām now going to think about that relationship, is they didnāt respond to me because theyāre mad at me, and what did I do wrong?
And one thing that I have tried to learn how to do is notice when Iām telling myself that story. Realize that it is a story that Iām telling that might or might not be true, and decide oh, I can tell myself a different story. Like, I bet that personās really busy. And itās not that they hate me, or the email I sent them, or the paper that I asked them to read a couple of months ago that they just never responded toānot that something like that has happened to me lately.
And that itās a choice. And I think that in some ways, thatās what the Rabbis are doing here too.
SBB: People are generally very busy, if that helps you in your quest to remember that itās not that much about hatred for you. At least usually. I actually donāt know that much. This is our first lengthy conversation. But you seem pretty pleasant. And you put up with me being cranky very nicely. So thereās that.
SW: Thanks.
SBB: Youāre welcome. Well itās interesting about writing our own narratives, because I spend a fair amount of time writing, and expressing myself. And I think I express myself in a way that many people do, and also many people do not. Iām in the constant process of editing the book that I wrote about my suffering and also my entire life experience around that. Itās a memoir of traumatic loss and general hilarity, is the working subtitle.
SW: I love it.
SBB: Thank you. So thatās definitely one way to create our own narrative. I canāt tell you that Iām going to go home and find my retainers. Maybe I will. But if I do or if I donāt, I donāt know that Iām going to be able to be like, well thatās because God loves me! And so do the orthodontists. I don’t know that I can get to that place. But itās aspirational for me to think that the little annoyances are evidence of Godās love, and maybe the large traumas, I donāt necessarily need to think of them as evidence of God having any feelings about me, which is sort of the place that I got to after I used to say all the time that God hates me and wants me to be unhappy. I donāt say that as much anymore, for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that Iām a tefillah educator, so itās not a good thing to say all the time.
SW: Thatās a great point. I mean, I didnāt think about that, but once you reframe things so that little things are signs of God still cares, then the big things donāt have to mean that. Because what youāre looking for is God showing care to me in some way. And if itās the little annoying things that are doing that, then it kind of frees up room for the big things not to mean that anymore.
And actually Iām thinking about this meaning of yisurin, the root of yisurin from the Bible as this sort of teaching, chastising thing, kind of almost being in a parent or a teacher role. And you can think about, well, okay, if a parent scolds a child about a little thing, says, hey, you really need to be in bed by this time and if you donāt there are going to be consequences. Thatās small, and thatās an act of love. Thatās a parent setting boundaries and itās a way of showing care.
If the parent has something really go wrong and like, behaves in some horrible way to the child, you wouldnāt say thatās a sign of love anymore. You would say, that is now something else. That is now, something has gone deeply awry and love is not in the picture. And the punishment is just outsized at this point, and you kind of just have to feel bad for everybody involved. And I think maybe thatās a helpful way of thinking about this yisurin discourse, too.
SBB: Look at me, teaching my professors. Professor Wolf, it was lovely speaking with you today.
SW: Likewise.
SBB: I learned a lot, and I hope people come out of listening to this thinking about maybe a different way to interpret it when they lose their keys.
SW: Thank you. Thanks so much for having me on the podcast.
[Music]
SBB: And what now, everybody? So this podcast series may have gone quickly for you, especially if you listen at my preferred chipmunk speed of 2.5 times faster than normal, destroying the beautiful production values. Itās only 11 episodes. This podcast goes to 11. But for me, it was so much more. On a scale of one to 10, where one is the little yisurin, the little indignities of our lives, like when I swipe my subway card and it doesnāt work and I crash into the turnstile and bruise my hip bones, and a four is when I thought I was getting a splinter from a popsicle when it turned out a bee had flown into my mouth and was stinging my tongue. And then thereās 10. Ten is that time when I was widowed before my wedding. And sometimes, that tragedy can feel like a freaking 11 on a scale of one to 10.
If youāve listened to the whole series, youāve heard a fair amount of my whining about being widowed before my wedding, now nearly 10 years ago. It will never make sense. It will never be fair. It will never feel like Godās way of being like, hey Sara Beth, I love you and I knew you could handle it. It was a year before I finally answered my friendsā texts and joined a support group of young widows who knew the kind of 10 I was living through. It was five years before I was able to be truly supportive of other widows in a real way. It was a good five years before I got serious about writing my experiences into a book. Eight before I got it all out and onto the page, and nearly 10 before I sent it to my agent. And it was nearly nine years before we started planning, pitching, and recording this podcast.
So hereās what I learned. We suffer because we care. Tiny indignities can give us a chuckle as we think about God being present. And there are counselors who are trained, and other people who are not trained, who will be there for you when the time is right. You may need to write, or rant, or get a nose ring. You may find that railing against God as the Psalmists and the Rabbis of the Talmud once did is the rebellion that makes you feel the most whole. And the next year, you may turn back and start apologizing for the cracks youāve made in other peopleās surfaces. You may find that saving a piece of literature from destruction and elevating it and sharing it with others will restore the holes left in your sense of self by the 10s and the 11s that youāve witnessed. You may find that sometimes you just want to bang your head against the wall.
Am I better? No. But also yes, in that I move forward holding the weight of memories. Iām more palatable for public consumption than I used to be. I love my future husband Jeffrey who will be my actual husband, God willing and yisurin-stay-away, by the time you listen to this. I have found the one in whom my soul delights, my broken, cracked, beleaguered soul.
I know Iāll still bang my head against the wall every time something reminds me of my suffering. Thatās normal. It doesnāt go away. But neither do I. And now, now? Iām more determined than ever to keep going. Iām ready to march, to teach, and call out, in a way I couldnāt before. I hope you are, too.
What Now? was produced by Michal Richardson. Editorial oversight was by Rabbi Tim Bernard. Funding for this series was provided by 91¶¶Ņõās Louis Finkelstein Institute for Religious and Social Studies, and suffering is and was provided constantly by the human condition. What Now? was recorded by 91¶¶Ņõās irreplaceable and inquisitive new media staff, Larry Cameola and Brian Hart.
Hit subscribe, give us a review, and help more people find answers to the big questions. Email onlinelearning@jtsa.edu or tweet @91¶¶Ņõvoice if you want to advocate for a second podcast season. This has been your host, Sara Beth Berman, 91¶¶Ņõ Davidson School class of 2009. It has been real banging my head against the wall with you.
