THE GOD TRILOGYThe Secret Diary of Ben ZomaThe Dreadful Symmetry of the GoodThe Seventh Chamber

Yes, that's right. The writings of Plato do NOT all fit together in harmony, irrespective of the question of chronological development. To be sure, one is just ice-skating over the surface of Platonic writings if one does not have a nuanced understanding of the various periods of Plato's intellectual development over time. The incongruity in his writings which is a function of this multi-faceted intellectual development over time can, however, be sufficiently delineated. But there is another kind of incongruity which, especially in Plato's case, could never be and in fact never was explainable through a nuanced accounting of Plato's long and ever-revising intellectual development.

The writings of Plato could never have been anything other than incongruous in this more fundamental sense, Plato being Plato. For Plato being Plato, early and or middle and or later, IS precisely this: Plato contra Plato. But more than that, "the good itself" i.e., Plato's eventual teaching on the good and also, in fact, "the good itself" obtaining in and as that wellspring of greatness characteristic of """""reality""""" itself]] is precisely the-good contra the-good. The good always and inevitably, and of its own nature, appears to be what it is not. For the good's very manner of being-at-all is, precisely this appearing-to-be-what-it-is-not.

So. Think about this. Once this foreigner is brought into the House of Israel ((albeit a foreigner who emerged from the House of Israel)) and then comes to rule it, the House of Israel itself ended up becoming, in fact, a collective apostate alienated from its burning living center. In the following I acknowledge the paradox involved in what I am saying given what is said in the Gemaric commentaries about Akher. But again, think it through. What would it mean to be an apostate from an institution which itself has apostatized? In this sense Elisha ben Abbuyah becomes the model for a grand teshuvah whose contours, as we shall see, are radically paradoxical: RETURN O BACKSLIDING CHILDREN Today -- to pick up one of those figures used in Hagigah s attempt to give cautious approval of such rehabilitation for Elisha ben Abbuyah -- Judaism is a shell whose kernel has virtually disappeared. If nothing changes nothing changes. Judaism will implode in upon itself and disappear. If you are able to see the mortal danger into which Judaism has strayed you will be able to garner the imagination to read -- as though for the very first time -- the forthcoming thrice-articulated verse-and-commentary. It was first stated by Hashem to Akher. It was then twice repeated by Akher to Meir. You need to turn the telescope around to understand its true import. Think again of the logic entailed by the apostate who apostatizes from an apostatizing Institution. Just how long will it take for you to get it? Till it s too late? RETURN O BACKSLIDING CHILDREN whispering for proper effect]: except for Akher It is not Akher who needs to return.

In the timeless time of eternity, does God have a pre-history? What was God "before" (so to speak) God became GOD? Was there some terrible mistake involving culpability? If so, how did this God of pre-history handle His mistake? Availing himself of certain currents found in Scripture and in classical Rabbinic sources, the author makes the case that God is a being with moral fault. The author argues that how God handled His mistake was the process which allowed God to become the celebrated: THE GREAT THE MIGHTY THE TERRIBLE GOD "who remains steadfast to his covenant and loving bond," [Nehemiah 9: 32] And it all started with Noah: " But Noah found grace/favor in the eyes of Hashem." [Genesis 6: 8]

Is there an idiosyncratically Jewish hermeneutic? Did such ever obtain in Jewish history? Is there an idiosyncratically Jewish theology? Did such ever obtain in Jewish history? Did the two ever obtain at once and together in Jewish history? The answer to all of these questions is: "Yes."

Come and explore -- with an idiosyncratically odd interpreter of things Jewish -- a special brief moment in the history of Jewish letters. One is speaking of roughly 75 CE to roughly 95 CE. Come and explore what was birthed in that time period. Come and explore how what was birthed in that time period came to be rejected and suppressed on the day of the coiled snake. Come and explore how, miraculously, what was rejected and suppressed ended up being re-inscribed in the final redaction of the Bavli, rendering that written production as the quintessential expression of what is idiosyncratically Jewish.

The plethora of wonderful people, services and events which I have found in Orthodox shuls in my search for a Jewish home far outweigh what I am now going to mention. But what I am now going to mention could prove fatal to Orthodoxy, and therefore, to all of Judaism. It is not that I did not find this same trait-although not quite so pronounced-in Conservative shuls. But that doesn't matter. For the future of Judaism as a whole is with Orthodoxy and if Orthodoxy is not equal to the challenge, then Judaism disappears. And what is this trait?

An undercurrent (clearly discernible and, just as clearly, not universal) of smugness and self-satisfaction. These are indeed heady times for Orthodoxy. Its ascendancy in Judaism as whole is stupendous and is still growing. Orthodoxy deserves this for its role of steady fidelity to the Covenant in the treacherous aftermath of the Haskala. Orthodoxy of all colorings is properly reaping the reward for such fidelity. But this is no time to rest on your laurels. Judaism is in mortal danger from within and the "cure" must come from the ranks Orthodoxy or it won't come at all. This smugness and self-satisfaction inhibits the ability to even see the problem at all; and thus it could be a killer.

Not unlike Rimbaud's "batteau ivre," Judaism drifts further and further away from its life-force and source without which Judaism cannot long endure. This book is a challenge to the true "talmudim" within Jewish Orthodoxy to boldly reclaim for Judaism and reinscribe into Jewish study and practice that which was suppressed at the very dawn of Rabbinic Judaism. Only by so doing can Judaism be nourished once more by its life-force and source. Further, only Jewish Orthodoxy is equipped for this life-saving task. If it doesn't get accomplished by Orthodoxy it will not get accomplished at all.

While remaining acutely aware of the shortcomings of both Heidegger and Derrida, the writer nevertheless uses insights and terminology from their discourse in the service of exposing the historical and thought trends which have alienated Judaism from what makes it tick. The writer makes the claim the a careful analysis of the final redaction of the Babylonian Talmud points the way towards a retrieval of Judaism's "burning living center" revealed through a study of the character of that final editing of the Babylonian Talmud.