" In those years—between 1915 and at least 1927—the religious sphere assumed a central importance for Benjamin that was utterly removed from fundamental doubt. At its center was the concept of Lehre [teaching], which for him included the philosophical realm but definitely transcended it. In his early writings he reverted repeatedly to this concept, which he interpreted in the sense of the original meaning of the Hebrew torah as “instruction,” instruction not only about the true condition and way of man in the world but also about the transcausal connection of things and their rootedness in God. This had a great deal to do with his conception of tradition, which increasingly assumed a mystic note. Many of our conversations—more than may be perceived from his written notes—revolved about the connections between these two concepts. Religion, which is by no means limited to theology (as, for example, Hannah Arendt believed in writing about his later years), constituted a supreme order for him. (The terms Ordnung [order] or geistige Ordnung [intellectual order] were among his most frequently used in those years. In the presentation of his own thought it usually took the place of “category.”) In his conversations of the time he had no compunctions about speaking undisguisedly of God. Since we both believed in God, we never discussed His “existence.” God was real for Benjamin—from his earliest notes on philosophy to letters written in the heyday of the Youth Movement to his notes for his first projected Habilitation thesis on the philosophy of language. I am acquainted with an unpublished letter on this subject to Carla Seligson, dated June 1914. But in these notes, too, God is the unattainable center of a system of symbols intended to remove Him from everything concrete and everything symbolic as well. Although in his Swiss period Benjamin spoke of philosophy mostly as the doctrine of intellectual orders, his definition, which I took down at the time, extends into the religious sphere: “Philosophy is absolute experience, deduced in the systematic-symbolic context as language.” Thus it is a part of the “teaching.” The fact that he later abandoned this specifically religious terminology, although the theological sphere remained very close and alive to him, is not in contradiction to this. "
― Gershom Scholem , Walter Benjamin: The Story of a Friendship
![Gershom Scholem quote : In those years—between 1915 and at least 1927—the religious sphere assumed a central importance for Benjamin that was utterly removed from fundamental doubt. At its center was the concept of Lehre [teaching], which for him included the philosophical realm but definitely transcended it. In his early writings he reverted repeatedly to this concept, which he interpreted in the sense of the original meaning of the Hebrew torah as “instruction,” instruction not only about the true condition and way of man in the world but also about the transcausal connection of things and their rootedness in God. This had a great deal to do with his conception of tradition, which increasingly assumed a mystic note. Many of our conversations—more than may be perceived from his written notes—revolved about the connections between these two concepts. Religion, which is by no means limited to theology (as, for example, Hannah Arendt believed in writing about his later years), constituted a supreme order for him. (The terms Ordnung [order] or geistige Ordnung [intellectual order] were among his most frequently used in those years. In the presentation of his own thought it usually took the place of “category.”) In his conversations of the time he had no compunctions about speaking undisguisedly of God. Since we both believed in God, we never discussed His “existence.” God was real for Benjamin—from his earliest notes on philosophy to letters written in the heyday of the Youth Movement to his notes for his first projected Habilitation thesis on the philosophy of language. I am acquainted with an unpublished letter on this subject to Carla Seligson, dated June 1914. But in these notes, too, God is the unattainable center of a system of symbols intended to remove Him from everything concrete and everything symbolic as well. Although in his Swiss period Benjamin spoke of philosophy mostly as the doctrine of intellectual orders, his definition, which I took down at the time, extends into the religious sphere: “Philosophy is absolute experience, deduced in the systematic-symbolic context as language.” Thus it is a part of the “teaching.” The fact that he later abandoned this specifically religious terminology, although the theological sphere remained very close and alive to him, is not in contradiction to this.](/image/1225252.jpg)