Books

I am genuinely looking forward to going back to school next year, although I am a bit apprehensive about the future (in general). At HDS, I will be technically under Judaic Studies, although I hope to enrich that with a few courses on continental philosophy and literary criticism. The former I have a genuine interest for, although the latter is, well, we'll see. From the very little that I have read so far, it is not all that interesting, though perhaps the primers that I have/am reading are just no good.

I finished reading William Bartlett's "Irrational Man" two days ago, and I have to admit, it is a great compendium on existential thought, although, it is certainly a bit dated having been written nearly 50 years ago. One of the things that I found grating was his characterization of the "Oriental man", and his obvious stereotyping of the Orient as the negative reflection of the Occidental man. It's not that he does not praise "Oriental" thought - he certainly finds much to say in the idea of Nothingness and Non-being" as finding greater similarity in Buddhism and Taoism than in Western philosophical, positivist history. However, the sweeping brushes that he makes to characterize Oriental man are still a bit off-putting, because, I think, in his view the Occidental, Existentialist man arrives at the truths of the Tao and Buddha, but in a superior way. The West is still the light and the East in darkness, although the West now has tempered that darkness into its thought to cobble together a better philosophy. Still, I share in the author's repulsion of mass-homogenized culture and see through my own (and his) critical (some say cynical, I say, tomato to-mah-to) eyes at our modern society (I'm looking at you, Korean-Americans!)

Still, I find something greatly rewarding in his characterization of Heidegger. I am, by no means, well read in Heidegger. I am slowly mulching through Being and Time, but I keep finding myself distracted. But, his notion of Being as a context - as an encapsulating field that reaches beyond the subject-object divide, even reaching into time, rather than our traditional understanding of Being as a "soul" localized within time and space tethered to the body, is still very interesting and I hope to read again Levinas' Totality and Infinity with a better understanding of Heidegger. I do have a few questions, particularly on the role of agency in Being, but since I have not finished B&T I'll save it for later.

I am re-reading Jon Levenson's "Hebrew Bible, Old Testament, and Biblical Criticism" and finding his insights once more fresh and still salient in our understanding of the traditional modes of interpretation and the historical-critical. I hope to be able to work with him next year. To be honest though, I am very glad that I finished reading Kierkegaard a while back when I read this again, because it gives me a new light at understanding the role of faith and reason. (Kierkegaard might be offended though: I should call it my faith and not "faith" as a metaphyical substance). I know there are many ideas that I have still to absorb into my thought - Brevard Childs stands out as one in particular - I am growing more convinced that the traditional way of interpreting Scripture is "wrong". As much as I would want to read the book as a coherent story from a rational and coherent God, I find myself having to either mental gymnastics or heavy-handed reasoning to 'explain' the problem away. The plurality of voices in the OT all talk about God, but we must recognize them for what they are: pluralities, not univocal, of understanding God. Scripture is a choir, a symphony.

I am also blazing my way through a Giore Etzion's book on Modern Hebrew. I have finished 33 lessons in two weeks, out of 90. I have to admit, though; modern Hebrew is pretty easy if you know even the basics of biblical Hebrew. I hope to be able to finish this book by next month, start at an intermediate level at Brandeis, and hopefully enter a 3rd year level class at HDS.

Ok, it's late. Maybe I ll write more later.