This book re-thinks the relationship between the world of the traditional Jewish study hall (the beit midrash) and the academy: Can these two institutions overcome their vast differences? Should they attempt to do so? If not, what could two methods of study seen as diametrically opposed possibly learn from one another? How might they help each other reconceive of their interrelationship, themselves, and the broader study of Jews and Judaism? This book begins with three distinct approaches to these challenges. The chapters then follow the approaches through an interdisciplinary series of pioneering case studies that reassess a range of topics including: religion and pluralism in Jewish education; pain, sexual consent, and ethics in the Talmud; the place of reason and devotion among Jewish thinkers as diverse as Moses Mendelssohn, Jacob Taubes, Sarah Schenirer, Ibn Chiquitilla, Yair Ḥayim Bacharach, and the Rav Shagar; and Jewish law as a response to the post-Holocaust landscape. The authors are scholars of rabbinics, history, linguistics, philosophy, law, and education, many of whom also have traditional religious training or ordination. The result is a book designed for learned scholars, non-specialists, and students of varying backgrounds, and one that is sure to spark debate in the university, the beit midrash, and far beyond.

Breaking with strictly historical or textual perspectives, this book explores Jewish philosophy as philosophy. Often regarded as too technical for Judaic studies and too religious for philosophy departments, Jewish philosophy has had an ambiguous position in the academy. These provocative essays propose new models for the study of Jewish philosophy that embrace wider intellectual arenas including linguistics, poetics, aesthetics, and visual culture as a path toward understanding the particular philosophic concerns of Judaism. As they reread classic Jewish texts, the essays articulate a new set of questions and demonstrate the vitality and originality of Jewish philosophy."

Theory, as it’s happened across the humanities, has often been coded as “Jewish.” This collection of essays seeks to move past explanations for this understanding that rely on the self-evident (the historical centrality of Jews to the rise of Critical Theory with the Frankfurt School) or stereotypical (psychoanalysis as the “Jewish Science”) in order to show how certain problematics of modern Jewishness enrich theory. In the range of violence and agency that attend the appellation “Jew,” depending on how, where, and by whom it’s uttered, we can see that Jewishness is a rhetorical as much as a sociological fact, and that its rhetorical and sociological aspects, while linked, are not identical. Attention to this disjuncture helps to elucidate the questions of power, subjectivity, identity, figuration, language, and relation that modern theory has grappled with. These questions in turn implicate geopolitical issues such as the relation of a people to a state and the violence done in the name of simplistic identitarian ideologies. Clarifying a situation where “the Jew” is not readily or unproblematically legible, the editors propose what they call “spectral reading,” a way to understand Jewishness as a fluid and rhetorical presence. While not divorced from sociological facts, this spectral reading works in concert with contemporary theory to mediate pessimistic and utopian impulses, experiences, and realities. Contributors: Svetlana Boym, Andrew Bush, Sergey Dolgopolski, Jay Geller, Sarah Hammerschlag, Hannan Hever, Martin Land, Martin Jay, James I. Porter, Yehouda Shenhav, Elliot R. Wolfson

Denying recognition or even existence to certain others, while still tolerating diversity, stabilizes a political order; or does it? Revisiting this classical question of political theory, the book turns to the Talmud. That late ancient body of text and thought displays a new concept of the political, and thus a new take on the question of excluded others. Philosophy- and theology-driven approaches to the concept of the political have tacitly elided a concept of the political which the Talmud displays; yet, that elision becomes noticeable only by a methodical rereading of the pages of the Talmud through and despite the lens of contemporary competing theological and philosophical theories of the political. The book commits such rereading of the Talmud, which at the same time is a reconsideration of contemporary political theory. In that way, The Political intervenes both to the study of the Talmud and Jewish Thought in its aftermath, and to political theory in general. The question of the political for the excluded others, or for those who programmatically do not claim any "original" belonging to a particular territory comes at the forefront of analysis in the book. Other Others approaches this question by moving from a modern political figure of "Jew" as such an "other other" to the late ancient texts of the Talmud. The pages of the Talmud emerge in the book as a (dis)appearing display of the interpersonal rather than intersubjective political. The argument in the book arrives, at the end, to a demand to think earth anew, now beyond the notions of territory, land, nationalism or internationalism, or even beyond the notion of universe, that have defined the thinking of earth so far.

Theory, as it's happened across the humanities, has often been coded as "Jewish." This collection of essays seeks to move past explanations for this understanding that rely on the self-evident (the historical centrality of Jews to the rise of Critical Theory with the Frankfurt School) or stereotypical (psychoanalysis as the "Jewish Science") in order to show how certain problematics of modern Jewishness enrich theory. In the range of violence and agency that attend the appellation "Jew," depending on how, where, and by whom it's uttered, we can see that Jewishness is a rhetorical as much as a sociological fact, and that its rhetorical and sociological aspects, while linked, are not identical. Attention to this disjuncture helps to elucidate the questions of power, subjectivity, identity, figuration, language, and relation that modern theory has grappled with. These questions in turn implicate geopolitical issues such as the relation of a people to a state and the violence done in the name of simplistic identitarian ideologies. Clarifying a situation where "the Jew" is not readily or unproblematically legible, the editors propose what they call "spectral reading," a way to understand Jewishness as a fluid and rhetorical presence. While not divorced from sociological facts, this spectral reading works in concert with contemporary theory to mediate pessimistic and utopian impulses, experiences, and realities. Contributors: Svetlana Boym, Andrew Bush, Sergey Dolgopolski, Jay Geller, Sarah Hammerschlag, Hannan Hever, Martin Land, Martin Jay, James I. Porter, Yehouda Shenhav, Elliot R. Wolfson

True disagreements are very hard to achieve. Yet, they are even harder to maintain, for the ghost of final agreement constantly hunts and dissipates them. Nevertheless, the Babylonian Talmud stands as a shining example of escape from that ghost. Hence, the questions: Are there any conditions under which a disagreement entails a genuine and final relationship between finite minds? Do agreements always only create temporary steps toward final agreement? Must a community of disagreement always imply an agreement, as in an agreement to disagree? Dolgopolski's What is Talmud? The Art of Disagreement rethinks the task of philological, literary, historical, and cultural analysis of the Talmud. The book introduces a new aspect of this task that has been, in different areas of study, best approximated by philosophical-anthropological and/or ontological interrogation of human being in relationship to the Other - animal, divine, and human. In both engagement and disengagement with post-Heideggerian tradition of thought, Dolgopolski complements existing philological-historical and cultural approaches to the Talmud with a rigorous anthropological and ontological and, as it will become clear, Talmudic inquiry. To that end, he redefines the place of the Talmud and its study, both traditional and academic, on the intellectual map of the West, arguing that Talmud is a scholarly art of its own and represents a fundamental intellectual discipline, not a mere application of either logical, grammatical, or even rhetorical arts for the purpose of textual hermeneutics. The book reveals and describes the intellectual art of Talmud. In Talmudic art, disagreement is a fundamental category; as such, Talmudreassesses heretofore dominant auxiliarist approaches to disagreement. Having always been a means, and never a goal, disagreement now appears in a new Talmudic light. The What is Talmud? returns Talmud as an intellectual art to the Talmud as a book, and rediscovers an intellectual perspective on disagreement as the ultimate condition of finite human existence or co-existence.