The Algemeiner Journal, a Chabad mouthpiece published in Brooklyn, has a piece written by a Chabad shaliach, Rabbi Levi Brackman, defending Matisyahu:
… There is a fundamental difference between the Kabbalistic and the non-Kabbalistic views of Judaism. Up until the French Revolution in 1789, society was divided into three groups: the church, the aristocracy and the peasants. In the terminology of the post-modern French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004), the landowners and the church were the centre and the peasants were the periphery. The two did not mix. Education, money and power were restricted to the elite; the peasants enjoyed no such privileges. After the French Revolution, the periphery was also given some of the privileges that were previously the exclusive right of the centre. With this came the emancipation of the Jews. Although the landowners and the educated were still regarded as the centre, the difference now was that peasants had the possibility of entering this exclusive domain.
The post-modern era, according to Derrida, was a time of “deconstruction.” All things were seen in pairs, one superior to the other: rich and poor, educated and ignorant, powerful and powerless, etc. The deconstructivist view is that rich is not necessarily superior to poor, in fact, being poor can be more advantageous. Seen from this perspective, poor is the new centre and rich is the periphery. Derrida goes one step further and says that hierarchy should not exist at all; rather, all boundaries between centre and periphery should be deconstructed .
Western society is a deconstructed civilization in many ways. Whereas in the past women were seen as inferior, today they are often regarded as superior to men. Similarly, modern human rights laws have ensured that the views of vulnerable minorities are respected and listened to.
Non-Kabbalistic Judaism, in general, does not deconstruct boundaries. According to this school of thought, the centre should be distinct from the periphery. Here we have the concept of ‘enclave Judaism,’ which clearly marks out the boundaries between the holy and the profane. The fact that this type of Judaism disagrees with Matisyahu’s style of music and choice of audience is no surprise, for it regards the mixing of the centre with the periphery as an obvious desecration of G-d’s name.
The Kabbalah as interpreted by many Chassidic schools, however, adds a deconstructive element to Judaism. To be sure, Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism) and Halacah (Jewish law) are two parts of a single Torah, mirroring each other in perfect seamlessness, like a body mirroring a soul. Halacah is the pragmatic counterpart of mystical Kabbalah. The authentic masters of Kabbalah and Chassidism were great masters of Halacah as well and saw halachic boundaries not as limitating, but as structural patterns reflecting the energy zones of life and the cosmos. Yet within the halachik system itself, the Kabbalists revealed a new light, often one that deconstructs bouandries, merging the finite and the infinite in an extraprdinary fashion.
The Kabbalah teaches, for example, that in the messianic epoch women will be perceivably greater than men, because inherently feminine energy is superior to masculine energy. The Kabbalah also deconstructs the boundaries between the physical and the spiritual. Whereas non-Kabbalistic Judaism holds spirituality superior to physicality, the Kabbalah maintains that in the final analysis the physical is more potent, the body deeper than the soul.
The principle is simple: the higher the source the lower it reaches. Esau is thus seen as having a higher spiritual antecedent than Jacob. One who meditates may reach lofty spiritual heights; however, the essence of G-d will remain elusive. Ironically, Kabbalah teaches that the only way one can connect to the Divine essence is through the physical. Spiritual levels are by definition constantly cognizant of their dependency on their sources. Conversely, physical objects project auras of egocentricity – they seem to depend on nothing other than themselves for their existence. This aura is, in a sense, parallel with the nature of the Divine essence whose existence is truly independent . According to the Kabbalists, the ex nihilo nature of the creation of the physical universe necessitates direct intervention of the Divine essence. It is this intervention that allowed the physical to assume its egocentric aura. Thus, there is a unique similarity – at least in terms of language – and connection between the physical and the Divine essence .
This sheds light on the Jewish phenomena of Mitzvoth, which are mainly physical acts rather than mystical meditations. It is precisely through the physical act of a Mitzvah that the most profound connection with the Divine is forged. In fact, according to a Midrash  – adopted by the Kabbalists – the purpose of creation was for humans to unveil the Divine essence found in those parts of the universe which are most devoid of G-dliness . This stresses the inherent value of the mundane and unrefined aspects of the universe – where the mission is most intense .
This completely deconstructs the boundaries. What was once the centre – without the Kabbalistic explanation – can now be seen as the periphery and vice versa . Thus, by bringing a G-dly message to the intensely profane one in a sense is fulfilling the purpose of creation in the most profound manner possible. Indeed it is this ideology that has caused me to choose to live in secular Evergreen, Colorado rather than in a Chasidic enclave of Brooklyn, New York.
By his own admission, Matisyahu is being guided by the Chabad School of Kabbalistic thought. Thus, as long as he adheres to Jewish law and does not get carried away with stardom and the narcissistic celebrity culture of modern-day America, his music may be considered, in my opinion, a sanctification of G-d’s name.
 See Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, John Hopkins, (1976).  See Maimonides, Hilchos Daeos, 1:3.  For a more in-depth analysis of post-modern parallels with the Chassidic School of Kabbalistic thought, see Naftali Loewenthal’s forthcoming article, “Jewish Mysticism in a World of Change: Pre-Modern, Modern and Post- Modern Perspectives,” which in part inspired this article.  Bamidbar Rabba, 13:6. This Midrash was quoted most frequently by the seventh Lubavicher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneersohn.  For a complete treatise on this subject see Faitel Levin, Heaven on Earth, Kehot Publication Society (2002).  Inherent in deconstructing boundaries is the danger of losing all sense of limits, and thus raising the possibility of further concealing the Divine essence. To forestall this possibility the Halacha (Jewish law) must be steadfastly adhered to at all times.
This is the same argument made by the followers of Shabbatai Tsvi and the Frankists to defend their heresies. While Judaism has, in more recent times, had a concept of descent for the purpose of (later) ascent, this never entailed the intentional descent into base physicality or sin – except in the theology of the Sabbatians and Frankists. As for the rest of Rabbi Brackman's hogwash about deconstuction and halakha, the theology Rabbi Brackman represents is not Jewish – at least not Jewish in a way Jewish legal scholars for millenia would recognize or endorse. And that speaks volumes about today's Chabad and its minstrel prophet, Matisyahu.