No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 April 2015
Is there anything that a contemporary (post-) modern legal theory could or even should learn from the traditional Jewish concept of law? Before we can look for an answer to this question, we should reply to an obvious objection. Apparently, our question implies that there is “the” Jewish understanding in a problematic singular, which can then be compared to “the” Christian or Islamic concept of law. Thus, in contrast to some attempts to describe the complex idea of “monotheism,” with all its multiple genealogies, transitions and recursive conjunctions, these different religions are portrayed as sharply disconnected, unitary phenomena. Yet we do not intend such an essentialistic perspective. We will neither neglect the fact that one can find totally different conceptions within the Jewish tradition nor claim that our view represents the “actual” Jewish conception, i.e. the conception most adequate in terms of the Jewish belief—not even in the paradoxical form that states that “controversy among authorities” is “the central unit in the study of Jewish law.” Our interest is not one stemming from the concerns of religious studies, but one of legal theory. Hence, what we claim is just this: there is within the Jewish tradition a concept of law which so closely interrelates text and interpretation that it undermines the classical hermeneutic idea of an author and the meaning that he wants to give to his text. This particular understanding of the law focused on the process of reading demonstrates a remarkable resemblance to certain post-structuralist analyses of the connection between a text and its reading. Within the Jewish tradition, we will argue, the constitution of language and the understanding of law are closely interrelated.
1. See Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Postmoderne Rechtstheorie. Selbstreferenz—Selbstorganisation—Prozeduralisierung (2d ed., Duncker & Humblot 1995) (German)Google Scholar.
2. See Legendre, Pierre, Die Fabrikation des Abendländischen Menschen, Zwei Essays 22 (Turia & Kant 2004) (German)Google Scholar; Luhmann, Niklas, Die Religion der Gesellschaft 63 (Suhrkamp 2000) (German)Google Scholar (speaking of “die jüdische Tradition,” i.e. “the Jewish tradition”).
3. For a critique of postmodern fetishism of Judaism and its radical otherness, see Žižek, Slavoj, The Puppet and the Dwarf: The Perverse Core of Christianity 8 (MIT 2003)Google Scholar. On the specific problem of “legal scholars reinterpreting the Jewish tradition in light of their particular concerns,” see Stone, Suzanne Last, In Pursuit of the Counter-Text: The Turn to the Jewish Legal Model in Contemporary American Legal Theory, 106 Harv. L. Rev. 813, 821 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Falk, Ze'ev W., Jewish Religious Law in the Modern (and Postmodern) World, 11 J.L. & Religion 465 (1994–1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
4. On the problem of monotheism and the question to what extent the concept of religion itself is already a Christian one, see Anidjar, Gil, The Jew, the Arab: A History of the Enemy (Stan. Univ. Press 2003)Google Scholar; Anidjar, Gil, Semites, Race, Religion, Literature (Stan. Univ. Press 2007)Google Scholar.
5. On the problem of the difference between an “authentic” and an “inauthentic” Judaism (disputing Sartre) and on the general problem of exemplarity, see Derrida, Jacques, Abraham, the Other, in Judeities: Questions for Jacques Derrida 7, 27et seq. (Bergo, Bettina, Cohen, Joseph & Zagury-Orly, Raphael eds., Fordham Univ. Press 2007)Google Scholar [hereinafter Judeities]; see also Derrida, Jacques, Interpretations at War: Kant, the Jew, the German, in 2 Psyche. Inventions of the Other 241 (Stan. Univ. Press 2008)Google Scholar. In general on the problem of the concept of “Jewishness,” see Legendre, Pierre, “Die Juden interpretieren verrückt”: Gutachten zu einem klassischen Text, 43 Psyche 20, 30 (1989)Google Scholar.
6. See Roth, Jeffrey I., The Justification for Controversy under Jewish Law, 76 Cal. L. Rev. 337, 339 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Even more radical is Derrida, Jacques, Edmond Jabès and the Question of the Book, in Writing and Difference 64, 75 (Univ. Chi. Press 1978)Google Scholar (“the Jew's identification with himself does not exist. The Jew is split, and split first of all between the two dimensions of the letter: allegory and literality.”).
7. See von Daniels, Justus, Religiöses Recht Als Referenz: Jüdisches Recht im Rechtswtssenschaftlichen Vergleich 129 (Mohr Siebeck 2009) (German)Google Scholar.
8. See Faur, José, Golden Doves with Silver Dots: Semiotics and Textuality in Rabbinic Tradition (Ind. Univ. Press 1986)Google Scholar; Handelman, Susan A., The Slayers of Moses: The Emergence of Rabbinic Interpretation in Modern Literary Theory (St. Univ. N.Y. Press 1982)Google Scholar. From the perspective of legal theory, see Augsberg, Ino, Die Lesbarkeit des Rechts: Texttheoretische Lektionen für Eine Postmoderne Juristische Methodologie (Velbrück Wissenschaft 2009) (German)Google Scholar.
9. See Novak, David, Natural Law in Judaism 146 (Cambridge Univ. Press 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10. See Nancy, Jean-Luc, Noli me Tangere: On the Raising of the Body 4 (Fordham Univ. Press 2008)Google Scholar. For a contrast between the Pauline and a Jacobinic reading of the law and the work, see Nancy, Jean-Luc, Dis-Enclosure: The Deconstruction of Christianity 51 (Fordham Univ. Press 2008)Google Scholar.
11. See Hartman, Geoffrey, Scars of the Spirit: The Struggle Against Inauthenticity 109 (Palgrave Macmillan 2002)Google Scholar.
12. See, e.g., Segal, Alan F., Paul's Jewish presuppositions, in The Cambridge Companion to Saint Paul 159, 163 (Dunn, James D.G. ed., Cambridge Univ. Press 2003)Google Scholar:
Paul's methods for demonstrating religious truths and his treatment of scripture are still distinctly Pharisaic. In short, Paul left Pharisaism for his own brand of Christianity, but he did not leave Judaism and he did not forget his Pharisaic training. Instead, he brought it to benefit his new Christian affirmation.
13. On such a structural approach differentiating between a “Rabbinic” and a “Patristic” model of interpretation, see Handelman, supra note 8, at XV.
14. Nancy, Dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 148; see id. at 32:
I will call “deconstruction of monotheism” the operation consisting in disassembling the elements that constitute it, in order to attempt to discern, among these elements and as if behind them, behind and set back from the construction, that which made their assembly possible and which, perhaps, still it remains, paradoxically, for us to discover and to think as the beyond of monotheism, in that it has become globalized and atheized. On Nancy's continuance of Derrida's project of deconstruction, see Mortn, Marie-Eve, Jenseits der Brüderlichen Gemeinschaft: Das Gespräch Zwischen Jacques Derrida und Jeanluc Nancy (Ergon 2006) (German)Google Scholar.
15. On the differentiation between human, non-human and inhuman, see Žižek, Slavoj, Lacan: Eine Einführung 67 (Fischer 2008) (German)Google Scholar.
16. See Koyré, Alexandre, Descartes und die Scholastik 37et seq. (Friedrich Cohen 1893) (German)Google Scholar.
17. See id. at 61. With reference to Descartes, see Heidegger, Martin, Gesamtausgabe BD. 17: Einführung in die Phänomenologische Forschung 149, 224 (Vittorio Klostermann 1994) (German)Google Scholar. On Augustine's theory of signs, see Handelman, supra note 8, at 83 et seq.
18. For the complex figure of turning heteronomy into autonomy, see Levinas, Emmanuel, Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence 148 (Kluwer Academic Publishers 1978)Google Scholar.
19. On the problem of this connection, see Lyotard, Jean-François & Gruber, Eberhard, The Hyphen—Between Judaism and Christianity (Humanity 1999) [hereinafter The Hyphen]Google Scholar.
20. 2 Cor 3:6 (All Biblical citations are taken from the English Standard Version.). Hereunto and on the tradition that followed, see Göttert, Karl-Heinz, Wider den toten Buchstaben: Zur Problemgeschichte eines Topos, in Zwischen Rauschen und Offenbarung: Zur Kultur-und Mediengeschichte der Stimme 93 (Kittler, Friedrich, Macho, Thomas & Weigel, Sigrid eds., Akademie Verlag 2002) (German)Google Scholar.
21. See Acts 15:8 et seq., describing the law as a yoke “that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear.” On this problem of the unaccomplishability of the law with reference to Nietzsche's interpretation of Saint Paul, see Kofman, Sarah, Scorning Jews: Nietzsche, the Jews, Anti-Semitism, in Sarah Kofman, Et Al., Selected Writings 123 (Stan. Univ. Press 2007)Google Scholar.
22. For this metaphor, see Acts 15:8 et seq., with reference to 10:44 et seq. For a more complex understanding of Paul's use of the word nomos that refers the notion back not only to the Torah, but also to rather general concepts of law, see Hollander, Harm W., The Meaning of the Term “Law “ (ΝΟΜΟΣ) in 1 Cor, 40 Novum Testamentum 117 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
23. Rom 10:4. For parallel antinomistic tendencies in Sabbatianism, see Scholem, Gershom, Die Krise der Tradition im jüdischen Messianismus, in Judaica 3: Studien zur Jüdischen Mystik 152, 165 (Suhrkamp 1973)Google Scholar; on Sabbatianism in general, see Scholem, Gershom, Sabbataizwi: der Mystische Messias 23 (Suhrkamp 1999) (German)Google Scholar.
24. See Kofman, supra note 21, at 131.
25. See generally, Segal, Alan F., Paul The Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee 187 (Yale Univ. Press 1990)Google Scholar. On the tension between Jew-Christians and Gentile Christians, see Taubes, Jacob, Die Politische Theologie des Paulus 28 (3d ed., Wilhelm Fink 2003) (German)Google Scholar.
26. See Schmitt, Carl, Der Nomos der Erde im Völkerrecht des Jus Publicum Europaeum 39 (3d ed., Duncker & Humblot 1988) (German)Google Scholar; see also Gross, Raphael, “Jewish Law and Christian Grace”—Carl Schmitt 's Critique of Hans Kelsen, in Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt: A Juxtaposition 101 (Diner, Dan & Stolleis, Michael eds., Bleicher 1999)Google Scholar. Once again, we would like to remind the reader that this is only meant to describe how Paul was read in a certain Christian tradition. With regard to the historical Paul, the description has to be more complex:
It seems clear now from the Qumran community, whose writings were lost until recently, and the scholarly reconsiderations of Jewish life attendant on those discoveries, that the primacy of the Torah in the lives of all the organized sects or parts of Judaea is assured. Since Paul continued to see himself as Jewish after his conversion to Christianity, it is at least conceivable that he continued to value Torah in some way after his conversion.
Segal, supra note 12, at 161.
27. See Geulen, Eva, Gründung und Gesetzgebung bei Badiou, Agamben und Arendt, in Hannah Arendt und Giorgio Agamben: Parallelen, Perspektiven, Kontroversen 59, 61 (Geulen, Eva & Mein, Georg eds., Wilhelm Fink 2007) (German)Google Scholar; Delorme, Bruno, Le Christ Grec 97, 105 (Bayard Centurion 2009) (French)Google Scholar.
28. Badiou, Alain, Paul, Saint: The Foundation of Universalism (Stan. Univ. Press 2003)Google Scholar; Žižek, Slavoj, The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology (Verso 1999)Google Scholar; see also Schneider, Manfred, Der König im Text, Zeitschrift für Ideengeschichte 48, 50 (2009) (German)Google Scholar. On Paul's conversion, see generally Segal, supra note 25.
29. See Rey, Jean-Michel, Paul ou les Ambiguities 8, 30, 41 (Editions de l'Olivier 2008) (French)Google Scholar.
30. See Rey, id. at 169-71.
31. See Nietzsche, Friedrich, Der Antichrist, Aph. 24 u. 25, in Werke, Kritische Gesamtausgabe, Bd. VI/3, at 162, 189et seq. (Colli, Giorgio & Montinari, Mazzino eds., de Gruyter 1969) (German)Google Scholar. For Nietzsche's interpretation of Judaism, see Kofman, supra note 21; see also Moses, Stephane, Nietzsche und der Gedanke des auserwählten Volkes, in Spuren der Schrift: Von Goethe bis Celan 39 (Jüdischer Verlag 1987)Google Scholar.
32. Agamben, Giorgio, The Time that Remains: A Commentary on the Letter to the Romans 117 (Dailey, Patricia trans., Stan. Univ. Press 2005)Google Scholar.
33. With reference to Nietzsche, see Kofman, supra note 21, at 135:
The “fiction” of a sublime, divine Law, incommensurable with all other laws, a law that by definition no man can “fulfill,” in effect enabled the Jews, when misfortune struck or in times of military defeat, to invent the correlative fiction of sin and to transform themselves into a people of infinitely guilty sinners, rather than acknowledge the possibility that God had abandoned them or that their supreme distinction had expired.
34. Paul, Robert A., Moses and Civilization: The Meaning Behind Freud's Myth 194 (Yale Univ. Press 1996)Google Scholar. For a specific interpretation of the Pauline thinking, see Badiou, supra note 26; Žižek, supra note 28, at 127 et seq. Critical of this position see Flynn, Thomas R., Das Ereignis lesen: Žižek liest Badiou über den heiligen Paulus, in Über Žižek: Perspektiven und Kritiken 191 (Vogt, Erik M. & Silverman, Hugh eds., Turia & Kant 2004) (German)Google Scholar.
35. See Kofman, supra note 21, at 132 et seq., (speaking even more clearly of a “Hatred of the Law.”).
36. See Nancy, Dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 42 et seq.
37. See the different interpretations by Agamben, supra note 32; Žižek, supra note 3; Taubes, supra note 25, at 57 et seq. For the contemporary renaissance of St. Paul, see Finkeide, Dominik, Streit um Paulus. Annäherungen an die Lektüren von Alain Badiou, Giorgio Agamben und Slavoj Zizek, 53 Philosophische Rundschau 303 (12 1996) (German)Google Scholar; Finkelde, Dominik, Politische Eschatologie Nach Paulus. Badiou—Agamben—žižek—Santner (Diaphanes 2007) (German)Google Scholar.
38. See Aristotle, , Nicomachean Ethics V, 1137 bGoogle Scholar; see also Plato, , Politikos 294 bGoogle Scholar.
39. See, e.g., Teubner, Gunther, Self-subversive Justice: Contingency or Transcendence Formula of Law?, 72 Modern L. Rev. 1 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; critical of this position, see Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Das subjektive Recht und der Wunsch nach Gerechtigkeit als sein Parasit, 29 Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie 109 (2008) (German)Google Scholar.
40. See Lévinas, Emmanuel, Is Ontology Fundamental?, in Basic Philosophical Writings 1 (Peperzak, Adriaan T., Critchley, Simon & Bernasconi, Robert eds., Ind. Univ. Press 1996)Google Scholar; Adorno, Theodor W., Negative Dialektik, Gesammelte Schriften BD. 6, at 17 et seq (Suhrkamp 1973) (German)Google Scholar.
41. See Lévinas, Emmanuel, Totality and Infinity 304 (Duquesne Univ. Press 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
42. For a critique of a “juridism of thinking,” see Deleuze, Gilles, To Have Done With Judgement, in Essays Critical and Clinical 125 (Verso 1998)Google Scholar; see also Hörl, Erich, Römische Machenschaften. Heideggers Archäologie des Juridismus, in Urteilen/Entscheiden 236 (Vismann, Cornelia & Weitin, Thomas eds., Wilhelm Fink 2006) (German)Google Scholar; Augsberg, Ino, Shylocks Anspruch. Zur Kritik der Rechtskritik, in Normativität und Rechtskritik 257, 266et seq. (Bung, Jochen & Valerius, Brian & Ziemann, Sascha eds., Franz Steiner 2007) (German)Google Scholar.
43. See Agamben, supra note 30, at 119.
44. See Schmitt, Carl, Glossarium: Aufzeichnungen der Jahre 1947-1951, at 209 (von Medem, Eberhard Freiherr ed., Duncker & Humblot 1991) (German)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schmitt, Carl, Über die Drei Arten des Rechtswissenschaftlichen Denkens 9 (2d ed., Duncker & Humblot 1993) (German)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Gross, Raphael, Carl Schmitt, und die Juden: Eine Deutsche Rechtslehre (Suhrkamp 2000)Google Scholar; Augsberg, supra note 8, at 143 et seq.
45. See Mosès, Stéphane, L'ange de l'Histoire: Rosenzweig, Benjamin, Scholem 300 (Gallimard 2006) (French)Google Scholar.
46. See Roth, supra note 6, at 342 et seq.
47. See Legendre, supra note 5, at 33 et seq.
48. Lévinas, Emmanuel, The Strings and The Wood: On the Jewish Reading of the Bible, in Outside the Subject 126, 129 (Athlone Press 1993)Google Scholar.
49. Mosès, supra note 45, at 363.
50. Goodman-Thau, Eveline, Zeitbruch zur Messianischen Grunderfahrung in Der Jüdischen Tradition 22 (Akademie-Verlag 1995) (German)Google Scholar.
51. See Draï, Raphael, Freud et Moïse. Psychanalyse: Loi Juive et Pouvoir 195 (Anthropos 2004) (French)Google Scholar; see also Mosès, supra note 45, at 300; Paul, supra note 34, at 187; Rosenzweig, Franz, Der Stern der Erlösung 451 (Suhrkamp 1988) (German)Google Scholar.
52. Cotta, Sergio, Eschatologia, diritto, società: Sur la signification eschatologique du droit, 50 Rivista Internazionale di Filosofia del Diritto 209, 212 (1979) (French)Google Scholar. See also Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Kritik der Abwägung in der Grundrechtsdogmatik: Plädoyer für Eine Erneuerung der Liberalen Grundrechtstheorie 59, 76 (Mohr Siebeck 2004) (German)Google Scholar.
53. Novak, David, Judaism and Cosmopolitanism, in Law, Politics and Morality in Judaism 126, 134 (Walzer, Michael ed., Princeton Univ. Press 2006)Google Scholar.
54. Žižek, Slavoj, Das Unbehagen im Subjekt 16 (Passagen 1998)Google Scholar.
55. Žižek, supra note 54, at 108; Batnitzky, Leora, Leo Strauss and Emmanuel Lévinas: Philosophy and the Politics of Revelation 192 (Cambridge Univ. Press 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Seligman, Adam, Modernity's Wager: Authority, the Self, and Transcendence 37 (Princeton Univ. Press 2003)Google Scholar; see Vattimo, Gianni, Beyond Interpretation: The Meaning of Hermeneutics for Philosophy 8et seq. (Stan. Univ. Press 1997)Google Scholar.
56. See Žižek, supra note 15, at 62 et seq.
57. See Aubenque, Pierre, La Prudence Chez Aristote 211 (3d ed., Presses Universitaires de France 2002) (French)Google Scholar; MacDowell, Douglas, The Law in Classical Athens 44 (Cornell Univ. Press 1986)Google Scholar.
58. See Ober, Josiah, Democracy and Knowledge: Innovation and Learning in Classical Athens 180et seq. (Princeton Univ. Press 2008)Google Scholar.
59. Aubenque, supra note 57, at 50.
60. Salanskis, Jean-Michel, Territoires du Sens: Essais D'Ethanalyse 132 (Librairie Philosophiques Vrin 2007) (French)Google Scholar; Myriam Revault D'Allonnes, Le Pouvoir des Commencements: Essai sur L'Autorite 88 (Seuil 2006) (French)Google Scholar; Rey, supra note 29, at 8.
61. See Salanskis, supra note 60, at 132.
62. See Geulen, supra note 27, at 59, 62.
63. Paul, supra note 34, at 177.
64. See Moses, supra note 45, at 324 et seq. Within the community, however, the subject is conceived of as a “project,” as a product of conflict. See Eslin, Jean-Claude, Saint Augustin: L'Homme Occidental 37 (Michalon 2002) (French)Google Scholar.
65. See von Daniels, supra note 7, at 30 et seq., 35 et seq.
66. Stone, Suzanne Last & Seligman, Adam, Text, Tradition, and Reason in Comparative Perspective, 28 Cardozol. Rev. 1 (2006)Google Scholar; Žižek, Slavoj, On Belief 89 (Routledge 2001)Google Scholar.
67. See Stone & Seligman, supra note 66.
68. Sibony, Daniel, Psychanalyse et Judaisme: Questions de Transmission 260 (Champs Flammarion 2001) (French)Google Scholar (whereas the “Christian-Roman” concept finds an “alien” authority within the text via interpretation).
69. See Fox, Marvin, Judaism, Secularism and Textual Interpretation, in Modern Jewish Ethics 4, 14 (Fox, Marvin ed., Ohio St. Univ. Press 1975)Google Scholar.
70. Draï, supra note 51, at 183 et seq.; Cohen, Hermann, Religion der Vernunft Aus Den Quellen des Judentums: Eine Jüdische Religionsphilosophie 412 (Wiesbaden 2008) (German)Google Scholar; Goodman-Thau, supra note 50, at 52.
71. See Mosés, supra note 45, at 324; Paul, supra note 34, at 177.
72. See Stone & Seligman, supra note 66, at 10.
73. Id.
74. Id. at 9.
75. Manent, Pierre, La Raison des Nations: Réflexion sur la Démocratie en Europe 72 (Editions Gallimard 2006) (French)Google Scholar; Rosenzweig, supra note 51, at 130: (the God of Islam is “rich without all the world,” his power is demonstrated not in the paradoxical competence of legislature but in the “liberty of arbitrariness.”).
76. See Becker, Jürgen, Paulus: Der Apostel der Völker 413 (2d ed., Mohr Siebeck 1992) (German)Google Scholar, with reference to Letters to the Rom 7:7 et seq. On this figure of a desire caused by the prohibiting law, see also Lacan, Jacques, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis 83 (Routledge 1992)Google Scholar; Deleuze, Gilles, Coldness and Cruelty (published together with Venus in Furs by von Sacher-Masoch, Leopold), in Gilles Deleuze & Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, Masochism 9, 84et seq. (Zone Books 1989)Google Scholar.
77. See Žižek, Slavoj, Das Fragile Absolute: Warum es Sich Lohnt, Das Christliche Erbe zu Verteidigen 33et seq. (Volk und Welt 2000)Google Scholar.
78. See Bennington, Geoffrey, Ex-Communication, 5 Studies in Social and Political Thought 51 (2001)Google Scholar.
79. See Jean-François Lyotard, Mainmise, in The Hyphen, supra note 19, at 1, 3 er seq.
80. See Amstutz, Marc & Karavas, Vaios, Rechtsmutation. Zu Genese und Evolution des Rechts im transnationalen Raum, 8 Rechtsgeschichte 14 (2006) (German)Google Scholar; critical of this position, see Stone, Suzanne Last, Judaism and Postmodernism, 14 Cardozo L. Rev. 1681 (1993)Google Scholar.
81. Paul, supra note 34, at 211.
82. de Fontenay, Elisabeth, Une Tout Autre Histoire: Questions a Jean-François Lyotard 61 (Fayard 2006) (French)Google Scholar; Rosolato, Guy, Le Sacrifice: Reperes Psychanlytiques 133 (Presses Universitaires de France 2002) (French)Google Scholar.
83. Jean-François Lyotard, On a Hyphen, in The Hyphen, supra note 19, at 13, 24.
84. de Fontenay, supra note 82, at 244.
85. de Fontenay, supra note 82, at 40.
86. On the paradox of beginnings, see von Foerster, Heinz, Der Anfang von Himmel und Erde hat Keinen Namen: Eine Selbsterschaffung in 7 Tagen (Kadmos 2005) (German)Google Scholar.
87. Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Philosophische Untersuchungen (Suhrkamp 1984) (German)Google Scholar.
88. Dufour, Dany-Robert, L'Art de Reduire les Tetes: Sur la Nouvelle Servitude de L'Homme Libere a L'Ere du Capitalisme Total 153 (Editions Denoël 2003) (French)Google Scholar.
89. On this “yes” that has to precede any communication, see Derrida, supra note 5, at 3 et seq.
90. Wittgenstein, supra note 87, at § 5.
91. On this concept, see Krämer, Sybille, Medium, Bote, Übertragung: Kleine Metaphysik der Medialität 270et seq. (Suhrkamp 2008) (German)Google Scholar; see generally Jacques Derrida, Freud and the Scene of Writing, in Writing and Difference, supra note 6, at 196.
92. Gérard Bensussan, The Last, the Remnant…: (Derrida and Rosenzweig), in Judeities, supra note 5, at 36, 44.
93. See Pornschlegel, Clemens & Thüring, Hubert, Nachwort: Warum Gesetze? Zur Fragestellung Pierre Legendres, in Pierre Legendre, das Verbrechen des Gefreiten Lortie: Abhandlung Ober Den Vater 169, 169 (Alber 1998) (German)Google Scholar.
94. See de Kerckhove, Derrick, Schriftgeburten: Vom Alphabet zum Computer 95et seq. (Wilhelm Fink 1995) (German)Google Scholar.
95. Id. at 97 et seq.
96. See Menke, Bettine, Prosopopoiia: Stimme und Text Bei Brentano, Hoffmann, Kleist und Kafka 8, 137 (Wilhelm Fink 2000) (German)Google Scholar; Augsberg, supra note 8, at 27. A prosopopeia is a “figure of speech in which an imaginary or absent person is represented as speaking or acting.” Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2011), available at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prosopopoeia.
97. See Barthes, Roland, Writing Reading, in The Rustle of Language 29 (Univ. Cai. Press 1989)Google Scholar; Roland Barthes, The Death of the Author, in The Rustle of Language, supra, at 49; see Augsberg, supra note 8, at 95 et seq.
98. de Kerckhove, supra note 94, 97.
99. Gershom Scholem, Der Name Gottes und die Sprachtheorie der Kabbala, in Judaica 3, supra note 23, at 7, 51 (referring the opinion of Gikatilla).
100. See Scholem, Gershom, Offenbarung und Tradition als religiöse Kategorien im Judentum, in Über Einige Grundbegriffe des Judentums 90 (Suhrkamp 1970) (German)Google Scholar.
101. Scholem, supra note 23, at 153.
102. Luhmann, supra note 2, at 166 et seq., n. 33.
103. See Lyotard, supra note 83, at 24.
104. Lévinas, supra note 48, at 130.
105. Stone, supra note 3, at 828 (with reference to Robert Cover). For Stone's own, rather critical assessment of the possibility of transferring this concept to secular legal studies, see id., at 835.
106. See Roth, supra note 6.
107. de Kerckhove, supra note 94, at 97 et seq.
108. See Fish, Stanley, Interpreting the Variorum, in Is There a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretative Communities 147 (Harv. Univ. Press 1980)Google Scholar.
109. Critical of this position, see Schestag, Thomas, Para—Titus Lucretius Carus, Johann Peter Hebel, Francis Ponge—Zur Literarischen Hermeneutik 11 (Boer 1991) (German)Google Scholar; see, e.g., Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe, Typographie, in Sylvtane Agacinski, Et Al., Mimesis des Articulations 165 (Aubier-Flammarion 1975) (French)Google Scholar.
110. See Augsberg, supra note 8.
111. With reference to Walter Benjamin, see Weber, Samuel, Benjamin's Abilities 228 (Harv. Univ. Press 2008)Google Scholar.
112. Lyotard, supra note 83, at 17.
113. Handelman, supra note 8, at 31.
114. See Faur, supra note 8, at 10 et seq.
115. de Fontenay, supra note 82, at 62; Salanskis, Jean-Michel, Talmud, Science et Philosophie 33 (Belles Lettres 2004) (French)Google Scholar.
116. Mack, Michael, Between Kant and Kafka: Benjamin's Notion of Law, 85 Neophilologus 257, 263 (2001)Google Scholar.
117. Salanskis, Talmud, Science et Philosophie, supra note 115, at 311.
118. Rosenzweig, supra note 51, at 451.
119. Salanskis, Talmud, Science et Philosophie, supra note 115, at 311.
120. DiCenso, James, Kant, Freud and the Ethical Critique of Religion, 61 Int'l J. Phil. Religion 161, 169 (2007)Google Scholar.
121. Derrida, Jacques, Glas 58a (Univ. Neb. Press 1986)Google Scholar.
122. See Derrida, Interpretations at War, supra note 5; Bennington, Geoffrey, Jacques Derrida 292 (Univ. Chi. Press 1999)Google Scholar.
123. de Fontenay, supra note 82, at 61 et seq.
124. Cover, Robert, The Origins of Judicial Activism in the Protection of Minorities, in Narrative, Violence, and the Law: The Essays of Robert Cover 13, 24 (Minow, Martha, Ryan, Michael & Sarat, Austin eds., Univ. Mich. Press 1995)Google Scholar.
125. We can see here once again how close the Jewish understanding comes to postmodern concept of texts. See Wellbery, David, Die Äußerlichkeit der Schrift, in Schrift 337, 342et seq. (Gumbrecht, Hans Ulrich & Pfeiffer, K. Ludwig eds., Wilhelm Fink 1993) (German)Google Scholar.
126. DiCenso, supra note 120, at 167.
127. Seligman, supra note 55, at 93.
128. Salanskis, supra note 60, at 133.
129. Id.; Ogien, Albert, Les Formes Social de la Pensée, la Sociologie Apres Wittgenstein 114 (Armand Colin 2007) (French)Google Scholar.
130. Batnitzky, supra note 55, at 188-89.
131. Spinoza intensifies the concept to the imagination of God as perfecting knowledge. See Nadler, Stephan, Baruch Spinoza and the Naturalization of Judaism, in The Cambridge Companion to Modern Jewish Philosophy 14, 20 (Morgan, M.L. & Gordon, Peter Eli eds., Cambridge Univ. Press 2007)Google Scholar.
132. Batnitzky, Leora, Idolatry and Representation: The Philosophy of Franz Rosenzweig Reconsidered 166 (Princeton Univ. Press 2000)Google Scholar; Nadler, supra note 131, at 20.
133. Santner, Eric L., On The Psychotheology of Everyday Life 69 (Univ. Chi. Press 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
134. Id. at 61.
135. Mosès, supra note 45, at 326; Rey, supra note 29, at 41, 51.
136. Draï, supra note 51, at 183; Salanskis, supra note 115, at 211.
137. Santner, supra note 133, at 5.
138. de Fontenay, supra note 82, at 61.
139. On the connection of law and praxis, see Nancy, dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 54 et seq.
140. See Draï, supra note 51, at 183. On the importance of institutions, see Revault D'Allonnes, supra note 60; Seligman, supra note 55, at 17; Seligman, Adam, Ritual and Its Consequences: An Essay on the Limits of Sincerity (Oxford Univ. Press 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
141. Salanskis, supra note 115, at 26.
142. Finkelde, supra note 37, at 26, 104; Ladeur, Karl-Heinz & Augsberg, Ino, Auslegungsparadoxien: Zu Theorie und Praxis juristischer Interpretation, 36 Rechtstheopje 143, 170et seq. (2005) (German)Google Scholar.
143. Santner, supra note 133, at 26; Finkelde, supra note 37, at 104.
144. Salanskis, supra note 60, at 134.
145. Marx, Tzvi, Judaic Doctrine of Scripture, in Holy Scriptures in Judaism, Christianity and Islam 48 (Vroom, H.M./Gort, Jerals eds., Rodopi 1997)Google Scholar.
146. Ochs, Peter, An Introduction to Postcritical Scriptural Interpretation, in The Return to Scripture in Judaism and Christianity 4 (Ochs, Peter ed., Wipf & Stock Publishers 2008)Google Scholar.
147. Sanders, E.P., Paul, the Law and the Jewish People 157 (Augsburg Fortress 1985)Google Scholar.
148. Marx, supra note 145, at 43, 48.
149. Fishbane, Michael, Inner Biblical Exegesis: Types and Strategies of Interpretation in Biblical Israel, in Midrash and Literature 19, 26, 36 (Hartman, Geoffrey H. & Budick, Sanford eds., Yale Univ. Press 1986)Google Scholar.
150. Geoffrey H. Hartman, The Struggle for the Text, in Midrash and Literature, supra note 149, at 12.
151. Id. at 16; Morgan, Donn F., Between text and Community: The ‘Writings’ in Canonical Interpretation 14, 17 (Augsburg Fortress 1990)Google Scholar; Lévinas, supra note 48, at 129 et seq.; Haddad, Gerard, Lacan et le Judaïsme 49et seq. (3d ed., Le Livre de Poche 2003) (French)Google Scholar.
152. Geoffrey H. Hartman & Sanford Budick, Introduction, in Midrash and Literature, supra note 149, at IX, XII; Morgan, supra note 151, at 15.
153. le Rider, Jacques, Freud, de L'Acropole au Sinai: Le Retour a L'Antique des Modernes Viennois 258 (Presses Universitaires de France 2002) (French)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; de Man, Paul, Metaphor (Second Discourse), in Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust 135, 152 (Yale Univ. Press 1979)Google Scholar.
154. Le Rider, supra note 153, at 258.
155. See Vattimo, supra note 55.
156. For a “pluralistic hermeneutics,” see Stäheli, Urs, Sinnzusammenbrüche: Eine Dekonstruktive Lektüre von Niklas Luhmanns Systemtheorie 112et seq. (Velbrück Wissenschaft 2000) (German)Google Scholar.
157. Hartman, supra note 150, at 4.
158. Derrida, Jacques, Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression 1 (Univ. Chi. Press 1996)Google Scholar.
159. Zaltzman, Nathalie, L'Esprit du Mal 51et seq. (Editions de l'Olivier 2007) (French)Google Scholar.
160. Stäheli, Sinnzusammenbrüche, supra note 156, at 118. This concept is not completely overcome by modern continuations emphasizing the “social embeddedness” of “interpretive constructions.” See Lenk, Hans, Interpretationskonstrukte als Interpretationskonstrukte, in Zeichen und Interpretation I, at 36, 50 (Simon, Josef ed., Suhrkamp 1994) (German)Google Scholar.
161. See Grondin, Jean, Einführung in die Philosophische Hermeneutik 150et seq. (Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1991) (German)Google Scholar; Hufnagel, Erwin, Einführung in die Hermeneutik 46et seq. (Kohlhammer 1976) (German)Google Scholar.
162. With reference to Derrida, see Grondin, supra note 161, at 176 et seq.
163. See Derrida, Jacques, Rogues: Two Essay on Reason 145 (Stan. Univ. Press 2005)Google Scholar.
164. Salanskis, supra note 60, at 204; Grondin, supra note 161, at 150; Hufnagel, supra note 161, at 46 et seq.
165. Within the rabbinic tradition the flip side of community binding was always present: the danger of a merely formal obedience to the law. See Sanders, supra note 147, at 156; Žižek, supra note 66, at 129. This danger could be limited by an ethics of institutions. See Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Verantwortung für Institutionen: Zu einer ‘Ethik der Regeln,’ in Staat Ohne Verantwortung? 391 (Heidbrink, Ludger/Hirsch, Alfred eds., Campus 2007) (German)Google Scholar.
166. Batnitzky, supra note 132, at 222, 225; in a perspective on Wittgenstein, see Ogien, supra note 129, at 130: The interpretation of rules is no reflexive act finding “the right” after deliberation; it does not remove ignorance. Thus it is more a process of adaption and of operating with possibilities offered within a network of relations, possible and necessary connections. The judgment, whether an interpretation has been fruitful, can only come afterwards.
167. Batnitzky, supra note 132, at 166; Descombes, Vincent, Le Raisonnement de L'Ours 289 (Seuil 2007) (French)Google Scholar.
168. Batnitzky, supra note 132, at 216.
169. Lindbeck, George A., The Nature of Doctrine: Religion and Theology in the Postliberal Age 19 (Westminster John Knox Press 1984)Google Scholar. Thus the movement perpetuates in a paradoxical, regressive way the “most extreme” form of Christianity; its “complete lostness in the individual feeling, the sinking into the divine spirit.” Rosenzweig, supra note 51, at 459.
170. Batnitzky, supra note 132, at 191.
171. Lindbeck, George A., The Church in a Postliberal Age (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ'g Co. 2003)Google Scholar; Batnitzky, supra note 132, at 216.
172. Žižek, supra note 54, at 108; Depoortere, Frederiek, Christ in Postmodern Philosophy: Gianni Vattimo, René Girard, and Slavoj žiŽek 111 (T&T Clark 2008)Google Scholar; Waldenfels, Bernhard, Verfremdung der Moderne: Phänomenologische Grenzgänge 17 (Wallstein 2001) (German)Google Scholar.
173. Depoortere, supra note 172, at 111.
174. Id.
175. Lindbeck, supra note 169; Batnitzky, supra note 132, at 216. This demonstrates another characteristic difference: the community of Christians is beyond the limited spatial (communal) community of the church itself. Rey, supra note 29, at 121.
176. See Faur, José, The Horizontal Society: Understanding the Covenant and Alphabetic Judaism 1 (Academic Studies 2008)Google Scholar.
177. Novak, David, Covenantal Rights: A Study in Jewish Political Theology 80 et seq., 100 (Princeton Univ. Press 2000)Google Scholar; Novak, David., The Jewish Social Contract: an Essay in Jewish Political Theology 180 (Princeton Univ. Press 2005)Google Scholar; Novak, supra note 9, at 82.
178. Novak, Covenantal Rights, supra note 177, at 82. In general Ogien, supra note 129, at 49, 114.
179. Žižek, Slavoj, Neighbors and Other Monsters: A Plea for Ethical Violence, in Slavoj Zizek, Eric L. Santner & Kenneth Reinhard, The Neighbor: Three Inquiries in Political Theology 134, 145et seq. (Univ. Chi. Press 2006)Google Scholar; Kenneth Reinhard, Toward a Political Theology of the Neighbor, in The Neighbor, supra, at 11.
180. Jameson, Fredric, A Singular Modernity: Essay on the Ontology of the Present 37 (Verso 2002)Google Scholar.
181. Ogien, supra note 129, at 36.
182. Mack, supra note 116, at 263.
183. Rey, supra note 29, at 121. On Wittgenstein, see Ogien, supra note 129, at 36.
184. Serres, Michel, Le Tiers Instruit 81 (Edition François Bourin 1991) (French)Google Scholar.
185. Santner, supra note 133, at 26, 97; Finkelde, Politische Eschatologie Nach Paulus, supra note 37, at 104; Rasch, William, Guilt as religion: Benjamin, in Sovereignty and Its Discontents: On the Primacy of Conflict and the Structure of the Political 79, 81et seq. (Birkbeck 2004)Google Scholar; Depoortere, Christ in Postmodern Philosophy, supra note 172, at 111.
186. Freud, Sigmund, Gesammelte Werke: Nachtragsband 426 (Fischer 1999) (German)Google Scholar.
187. Žižek, Slavoj, Das Reale des Christentums 15 (Suhrkamp 2006)Google Scholar.
188. See Benjamin, Walter, Zur Kritik der Gewalt, in Gesammelte Schriften BD. II/I, at 179 (Suhrkamp 1977) (German)Google Scholar; see Derrida, Jacques, Force of Law: The “Mystical Foundation of Authority,” in Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice 3 (Cornell, Drucilla, Roseneid, Michel & Carlson, David Gray eds., Routledge 1992)Google Scholar; Cover, supra note 124, at 24; Rosenzweig, Der Stern Der Erlösung, supra note 51, at 370. The violence, the foundation remains steady in the tension of renewal and conservation. The place is then also occupied by the state.
189. Strauss, Leo, Gesammelte Schriften, Bd. 2: Philosophie und Gesetz, Frühe Schriften 63 (Metzler 1997) (German)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Paul, supra note 34, at 177.
190. Salanskis, supra note 60, at 204 (with reference to Schleiermacher).
191. Žižek, supra note 54, at 96; E.L. Santner, Miracles Happen: Benjamin, Freud, Rosenzweig, and the Matter of the Neighbor, in Žižek, Santner & Reinhard, the Neighbor, supra note 179, at 76, 96.
192. See Debord, Guy, The Society of the Spectacle (Zone Books 1995)Google Scholar.
193. See Franck, Georg, Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit: Ein Entwurf (Hanser 1998) (German)Google Scholar; Kahn, Laurence, Faire Parler le Destin 215 (Klincksieck 2005) (French)Google Scholar; Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Das Medienrecht und Die Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit: In Sachen Dieter Bohlen, Maxim Biller, Caroline von Monaco U.A. (Halem 2007) (German)Google Scholar.
194. Mongin, Olivier, La société des écrans, 75 Communications 219 (2004) (French)Google Scholar.
195. See Dufour, supra note 88, at 149; Bonz, Jochen, Flüchtige Identifikationen: Das Reale in der Kultur des Tracks, in VerschräNkungen von Symbolischem und Realem: Zur Aktualität von Lacans Denken in Den Kulturwissenschaften 243, 250 (Bonz, Jochenet al. eds., Kadmos 2006) (German)Google Scholar.
196. Rosenzweig, supra note 51, at 337 (“historical experience is no fixed point in the past…, but an always close, actually not passed, but always present remembrance; each individual shall regard the passage out of Egypt as if he had moved out personally.”).
197. Benjamin, Walter, Über einige Motive bei Baudelaire, in Gesammelte Schriften BD. 1/2, at 637 (Suhrkamp 1991) (German)Google Scholar.
198. Mosès, supra note 45, at 216.
199. Neusner, Jacob, The Religious Meaning of the Torah, 11 Rev. Rabbinic Judaism 1 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
200. Mosès, supra note 45, at 259.
201. See Faur, supra note 8, at 51 et seq.
202. Goodman-Thau, supra note 50, at 41.
203. See Deleuze, Gilles, Difference and Repetition (Continuum 2004)Google Scholar.
204. Žižek, Slavoj, Organs Without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences 12 (Routledge 2003)Google Scholar; see also Nancy, Dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 1.
205. See Yerushalmi, Yosef Hayim, Freud's Moses: Judaism Terminable and Interminable 94 (Yale Univ. Press 1991)Google Scholar; see also Santner, supra note 133, at 109; Jennings, Theodore W., Reading Derrida/Thinking Paul on Justice 45et seq. (Stan. Univ. Press 2006)Google Scholar.
206. Lyotard, Jean-François & Thebaud, Jean-Loup, Au Juste 61 (Christian Bourgeois 1979) (French)Google Scholar.
207. See Derrida, supra note 188.
208. See Cornell, Drucilla, From the Lighthouse: the Promise of Redemption and the Possibility of Legal Interpretation, 11 Cardozo L. Rev. 1687 (1990)Google Scholar.
209. See Derrida, Jacques, Type Writer Ribbon: Limited Ink II, in Without Alibi 71, 73 (Stan. Univ. Press 2002)Google Scholar; Derrida, Jacques, The Pit and the Pyramid: Introduction to Hegel's Semiology, in Margins of Philosophy 69, 107et seq. (Univ. Chi. Press 1982)Google Scholar.
210. See Derrida, supra note 188, at 4.
211. Mayer, Linda Ross, Catastrophe: Plowing up the Ground of Reason, in Law and Catastrophe 19, 23 (Sarat, Austinet. al. eds., Stan. Univ. Press 2007)Google Scholar.
212. See Lyotard & Thébaud, supra note 206, at 48.
213. See Teubner, supra note 39.
214. Derrida, supra note 188, at 10; Derrida, supra note 163, at 186.
215. Freud, Sigmund, Gesammelte Werke, BD. XII, at 11 (Fischer 1947) (German)Google Scholar.
216. Kelsen, Hans, Reine Rechtslehre, Studienausgabe Der 1. Auflage 99 (1934) (Jestaedt, Matthias ed., Mohr Siebeck 2008) (German)Google Scholar.
217. Id. at 108.
218. See Deleuze, On Four Poetic Formulas That Might Summarize the Kantian Philosophy in, Essays Critical and Clinical, supra note 42, at 27, 32; Deleuze, Coldness and Cruelty, supra note 76, at 82 et seq.; see also Žižek, supra note 28, at 364 et seq. On the emptiness of the Kantian law, see also Rosenzweig, supra note 51, at 239.
219. Descombes, Vincent, Le Complement de Sujet: Enquete Sur le Fait D'Agir de Soi-Meme 464 (Editions Gallimard 2004) (French)Google Scholar.
220. See Schmitt, supra note 26, at 36; see also Gross, supra note 44; Augsberg, Ino, Carl Schmitts Fear: Nomos—Norm—Network, 23 Leiden J. Int'L L. 741 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On Schmitt's “hidden dialogue” with certain, yet very specific aspects of Jewish thought as represented by Leo Strauss, see Meier, Heinrich, Carl Schmitt & Leo Strauss, The Hidden Dialogue (Univ. Chi. Press 1995)Google Scholar. On Strauss's relationship to Judaism and its concept of law, see Batnitzky, supra note 55, at 118; Lazier, Benjamin, God Interrupted: Heresy and the European Imagination Between the World Wars 87 (Princeton Univ. Press 2008)Google Scholar.
221. Žižek, supra note 179, at 151.
222. Id.
223. Mongin, supra note 194; Kahn, supra note 193, at 215.
224. Seligman, supra note 55, at 93.
225. Gauchet, Marcel, L'Avenement de la Democratie, Vol. 1: La Revolution Moderne 123, 165 (Editions Gallimard 2007) (French)Google Scholar; Gauchet, Marcel, L'Avenement de la Democratie, Vol. 2: La Crise Du Liberalisme 17, 107 (Editions Gallimard 2007) (French)Google Scholar; Descombes, supra note 167, at 113.
226. DiCenso, supra note 120, at 163. For a comparative perspective on the Jewish understanding of law, see Salanskis, supra note 115, at 132.
227. Seligman, supra note 55, at 37.
228. Gauchet, L'Avenement de la Democratie: Vol. 1: La Revolution Moderne, supra note 225, at 165.
229. Manent, supra note 75.
230. Descombes, supra note 219, at 464.
231. Margolis, Joseph, The Arts and the Definition of the Human: Toward a Philosophical Anthropology 154 (Stan. Univ. Press 2009)Google Scholar.
232. Boureau, Alain, La Religion de L'Etat: La Construction de La Republique Etatique Dans le Discours Theologique de L'Occident Medieval (1250-1350) 249 (Belles Lettres 2006) (French)Google Scholar.
233. Seligman, supra note 55, at 67 et seq.; Žižek, supra note 66, at 127.
234. Luhmann, Niklas, Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft 120et seq. (Suhrkamp 1990) (German)Google Scholar; Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg, Iterationen (Merve 2005) (German)Google Scholar.
235. See Rey, supra note 29, at 169, (underlining the violent character of foundation that crushes the relationship with community and culture of the “founder.”).
236. Batnitzky, Leora, Encountering the Modern Subject in Levinas, 104 Yale French Stud. 6, 10 (2004)Google Scholar.
237. Rosolato, supra note 82, at 134.
238. See Yerushalmi, supra note 205; see also Derrida, supra note 158. See in general on the connection of Judaism and psychoanalysis Žižek, Lacan, supra note 15, at 130 et seq.
239. Paul, supra note 34.
240. See Derrida, Jacques, There Is No One Narcissism, in Points … Interviews, 1974-1994, at 196, 205 (Weber, Elisabeth ed., Stan. Univ. Press 1995)Google Scholar; furthermore, see the contributions in Judeities, supra note 5; in particular, Derrida, Abraham, the Other, supra note 5.
241. See Derrida, supra note 5.
242. See on the problem Augsberg, Steffen, “Denken vom Ausnahmezustand her”-Über die Unzulässigkeit der anormalen Konstruktion und Destruktion des Normativen, in Freiheit—Sicherheit—Öffentlichkeit 17 (Arndt, Felixet. al. eds., Nomos 2009) (German)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
243. See Derrida, supra note 188; see also Augsberg, supra note 8, at 88 et seq.
244. On the relationship of Mishna and Talmud, see von Daniels, supra note 7, at 22 et seq.
245. Amstutz/Karavas, supra note 80, at 15.
246. See Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang, Methoden einer anwendungsorientierten Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft, in Methoden der Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft 9, 34et seq. (Schmidt-Aßmann, Eberhard & Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang eds., Nomos 2004) (German)Google Scholar.
247. See Global Law Without a State (Teubner, Gunther ed., Dartmouth 1997)Google Scholar.
248. See on such a “global community of courts,” Anne-Marie Slaughter, a New World Order (Princeton Univ. Press 2004)Google Scholar.
249. See Fischer-Lescano, Andreas & Teubner, Gunther, Regime-Collisions: The Vain Search for Legal Unity in the Fragmentation of Global Law, 25 Mich. J. Int'L L. 999, 1000 (2004)Google Scholar, (naming the “astonishing figure of 125 international institutions, in which independent authorities reach final legal decisions.”).
250. Fischer-Lescano & Teubner, supra note 249, at 1017.
251. Stone, supra note 3, at 828.
252. Novak, supra note 53, at 134.
253. Nancy, Dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 38.
254. Badiou, Alain, L'Être et L'Événement 68 (Seuil 1988) (French)Google Scholar; Badiou, Alain, Infinite Thought: Truth and the Return to Philosophy 12et seq. (Continuum 2005)Google Scholar; Geulen, Gründung und Gesetzgebung bei Badiou, Agamben und Arendt, supra note 27, at 61; Nancy, Jean-Luc, The Creation of the World (St. Univ. N.Y. Press 2007)Google Scholar. Very critical of Badiou, see Lilla, Mark, Wer wird Lenins Nachfolger? Die Linke entdeckt den Apostel Paulus, 716 Merkur 10 (2009) (German)Google Scholar.
255. Nancy, Dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 38.
256. Id. at 146.
257. Id. at 145.
258. See id. at 154 et seq. On the “culpabilisation” of self-reference, see also Sloterdijk, Peter, Luhmann, Anwalt des Teufels: Von der Erbsünde, dem Egoismus der Systeme und den neuen Ironien, in Nicht Gerettet: Versuche Nach Heidegger 82 (Suhrkamp 2001) (German)Google Scholar.
259. Nancy, Dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 10.
260. See Morgan, supra note 151, at 14, 17.
261. See Nancy, Jean-Luc, Die Herausgeforderte Gemeinschaft 41et seq. (diaphanes 2007) (German)Google Scholar. Another possible connection follows from the fact that according to Christian understanding of the Biblical text one can, besides God, accept the human writers as authors, too. See Rein Fernhout, The Bible as God's Word: A Christological View, in Holy Scriptures in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, supra note 145, at 57, 60.
262. See Nancy, Dis-Enclosure, supra note 10, at 10, 16.
263. See id. at 9.
264. Id.
265. On the historical turbulence in the emergence of Christianity “as church,” see Veyne, Paul, Quand Notre Monde Est Devenu Chrétien (Albin Michel 2007) (French)Google Scholar. On the constitution of the Christian corpus of “writings,” see Fishbane, supra note 149, at 19, 36. On the abolition of the tension between the real and the symbolic order in Christianity, representing the inscription of Roman power into the text, see Legendre, supra note 5, at 38. By contrast, the Jewish approach places the signifier, the “letter,” in the center of interpretation.
266. See Delorme, supra note 27, at 105; Rey, supra note 29, at 36.
267. Hirt, Jean-Michel, Le Miroir du Prophète: Psychanalyse et Islam 18 (Grasset 1993) (French)Google Scholar.
268. See, following Foucault, Michel, Giorgio Agamben, was Ist Ein Dispositiv? 26 (diaphanes 2008) (German)Google Scholar.
269. Eslin, supra note 64, at 35.
270. See Delorme, supra note 27, at 97, 116.
271. Faur, supra note 176, at 27, 167.
272. Hirt, supra note 267, at 55.
273. On the foundation of Christian-Western individual, see Eslin, supra note 64, at 50 et seq.
274. Haddad, supra note 151, at 49.
275. Lindbeck, George, Progress in Textual Reasoning: From Vatican II to the Conference at Drew, in Textual Reasoning: Jewish Philosophy and Text Study at the end of the Twentieth Century 252, 253 (Ochs, Peter & Levene, Nancy eds., Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ'g Co. 2003)Google Scholar.
276. Nancy Levene, Introduction, in Textual Reasonings, supra note 275, at 15, 18.
277. See the contributions in Textual Reasonings, supra note 275.
278. Hartman, supra note 150, at 3.
279. See Morgan, supra note 151, at 1, 17.
280. Hartman, supra note 150, at 13.
281. Peter Ochs, Epilogue: On the Lived Reality of Textual Reasoning, in Textual Reasonings, supra note 275, at 289, 294.
282. Hartman, supra note 150, at 14.
283. On the relevance of the “trace” for Jewish thinking, see Bernheim, Gilles, Le Souci des Autres Au Fondements de la Loijuive 160et seq. (Calmann-Lévy 2002) (French)Google Scholar.
284. Roman law becomes more and more the law of experts, thus distinguishing itself from religious law as the Jewish law. See Schiavone, Aldo, Ius: L'Invention du Droit en Occident 17 et seq., 42, 110 (Belin 2008) (French)Google Scholar; Goodman, Martin, Rome and Jerusalem: The Clash of Ancient Civilizations 318et seq. (Knopf 2007)Google Scholar.
285. Wischmeyer, Oda, Die Paulinische Mission als Religiöse und Literarische Kommunikation, in: Die Anfänge des Christentums 90, 105 (Graf, Friedrich Wilhelm & Wiegandt, Klaus eds., Fischer 2009) (German)Google Scholar, (underlines that Paul used “the language of Roman state administration” in his communications with the churches. This is the other side of universalism not affiliating—as the Jewish Community—to a given common ground, the text of the law founding the unity of one specific group of people, but including all people. This “mission” has to refer to orality, to rhetoricity, not to the reading of a common text. However, the motif of common reading reappears later in post-Reformation times, in particular in the Puritan communities in America). See also Meltzer, Mitchell, Secular Revelations: The Constitution of the United States and Classic American Literature 83 (Harv. Univ. Press 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Fessenden, Tracy, Culture and Redemption: Religion, the Secular, and American Literature (Princeton Univ. Press 2007)Google Scholar; Lambert, Frank, The Founding Fathers and The Place of Religion in America (Princeton Univ. Press 2007)Google Scholar.
286. See Faur, supra note 176, at 167.
287. Lyotard, supra note 83, at 13.