What do you think?
Rate this book
Metaphysics of the Profane: The Political Theology of Walter Benjamin and Gershom Scholem
Walter Benjamin and Gershom Scholem are regarded as two of the most influential Jewish thinkers of the twentieth century. Together they produced a dynamic body of ideas that has had a lasting impact on the study of religion, philosophy, and literary criticism.
Drawing from Benjamin's and Scholem's ideas on messianism, language, and divine justice, this book traces the intellectual exchange through the early decades of the twentieth century―from Berlin, Bern, and Munich in the throws of war and revolution to Scholem's departure for Palestine in 1923. It begins with a close reading of Benjamin's early writings and a study of Scholem's theological politics, followed by an examination of Benjamin's proposals on language and the influence these ideas had on Scholem's scholarship on Jewish mysticism. From there the book turns to their ideas on divine justice―from Benjamin's critique of original sin and violence to Scholem's application of the categories to the prophets and Bolshevism. Metaphysics of the Profane is the first book to make this early period available to a wider audience, revealing the intricate structure of this early intellectual partnership on politics and theology.
Drawing from Benjamin's and Scholem's ideas on messianism, language, and divine justice, this book traces the intellectual exchange through the early decades of the twentieth century―from Berlin, Bern, and Munich in the throws of war and revolution to Scholem's departure for Palestine in 1923. It begins with a close reading of Benjamin's early writings and a study of Scholem's theological politics, followed by an examination of Benjamin's proposals on language and the influence these ideas had on Scholem's scholarship on Jewish mysticism. From there the book turns to their ideas on divine justice―from Benjamin's critique of original sin and violence to Scholem's application of the categories to the prophets and Bolshevism. Metaphysics of the Profane is the first book to make this early period available to a wider audience, revealing the intricate structure of this early intellectual partnership on politics and theology.
- GenresPhilosophyPolitics
352 pages, Paperback
First published April 15, 2003
5 people are currently reading
67 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 11, 2016
While Benjamin has garnered a fair amount of interest by the anarchist milieu in the past several years, Scholem remains largely unknown. To the extent that this book sheds light on the cross-pollination of their thinking, it is great. Yet, there is something missing with relation to how one behaves in the world (some may call this ethics).
The book is arranged into three parts, each with a chapter (mostly) on Benjamin and one on Scholem. The first part covers messianism, the second language, and the third, justice and judgement. For me, the first was the most interesting, in that it explores the anarchism and nihilism of both writers. For both Scholem and Benjamin, nihilism seems to refer more to a retreat from politics (due to its irrelevance) than a rejection of a more generalized meaning of the world. Their anarchism is equally unique and seems to rest on the idea that it is God, rather than a profane State, that can make any determination of how the world operates. For both of these ideas, Scholem seems to be partially influenced by the Sabbateans and Frankists, two radical Kabbalist sects from the 17th and 18th century who believed that (basically) the world needs to be completely destroyed before it can be rebuilt by the messiah/God. Unfortunately, the author (or possibly even Scholem, it’s unclear) admires the Sabbateans too dialectically, in that the negation by the Sabbateans opposed the Hassidim, which led to “enlightened Judaism” and the reform movement. There’s also some interesting conversation around how both Benjamin and Scholem were Zionist to different degrees, but a non-state-based Zionism. For Benjamin, Zionism consists of seeking Jewishness in everything everywhere, and for Scholem, it is localized in Palestine, but not at all as a State.
The second part of the book, on language, was just not interesting to me, but I might also be turned off due to how conservative and reactionary Benjamin’s thoughts were made out to be. It seems that basically Benjamin believed language precedes existence, which I probably disagree with but don’t really care to debate. The real problem though is Benjamin’s belief that that God imbued a weak manifesting power to humanity through Adam, by giving it the ability to name, which is what distinguishes humans from other animals and makes them superior. It’s always been a little unclear to me how much Benjamin actually believed in God in a non-metaphorical or symbolic sense, but if this interpretation is true, it’s pretty upsetting.
The last part mostly concerns Benjamin’s Critique of Violence and contains interpretations pretty in line with how I read the essay. What was most missing is what any of this means in terms of an ethics. We can read Critique of Violence and understand this distinction between law and Judgment and justice, and whatnot, but there’s no practice (praxis) associated with it. I find it hard to believe this was Benjamin through and through, especially when read alongside everything he says in Theses On the Concept of History with relation to (and paraphrasing since I don’t have it in front of me) the revolting proletariat’s weak messianic power. Surprisingly, there’s absolutely no mention of the Theses, even though it’s so strongly connected to Benjamin’s (and probably Scholem’s too) anarchism/politics and thoughts on messianism. I have to wonder if it was intentionally left out because of how it might contradict the arguments Jacobson tries to make.
Overall a solid 3.5 book for effort and depth, but lacking in completeness and at times being too mired in an academic writing style.
The book is arranged into three parts, each with a chapter (mostly) on Benjamin and one on Scholem. The first part covers messianism, the second language, and the third, justice and judgement. For me, the first was the most interesting, in that it explores the anarchism and nihilism of both writers. For both Scholem and Benjamin, nihilism seems to refer more to a retreat from politics (due to its irrelevance) than a rejection of a more generalized meaning of the world. Their anarchism is equally unique and seems to rest on the idea that it is God, rather than a profane State, that can make any determination of how the world operates. For both of these ideas, Scholem seems to be partially influenced by the Sabbateans and Frankists, two radical Kabbalist sects from the 17th and 18th century who believed that (basically) the world needs to be completely destroyed before it can be rebuilt by the messiah/God. Unfortunately, the author (or possibly even Scholem, it’s unclear) admires the Sabbateans too dialectically, in that the negation by the Sabbateans opposed the Hassidim, which led to “enlightened Judaism” and the reform movement. There’s also some interesting conversation around how both Benjamin and Scholem were Zionist to different degrees, but a non-state-based Zionism. For Benjamin, Zionism consists of seeking Jewishness in everything everywhere, and for Scholem, it is localized in Palestine, but not at all as a State.
The second part of the book, on language, was just not interesting to me, but I might also be turned off due to how conservative and reactionary Benjamin’s thoughts were made out to be. It seems that basically Benjamin believed language precedes existence, which I probably disagree with but don’t really care to debate. The real problem though is Benjamin’s belief that that God imbued a weak manifesting power to humanity through Adam, by giving it the ability to name, which is what distinguishes humans from other animals and makes them superior. It’s always been a little unclear to me how much Benjamin actually believed in God in a non-metaphorical or symbolic sense, but if this interpretation is true, it’s pretty upsetting.
The last part mostly concerns Benjamin’s Critique of Violence and contains interpretations pretty in line with how I read the essay. What was most missing is what any of this means in terms of an ethics. We can read Critique of Violence and understand this distinction between law and Judgment and justice, and whatnot, but there’s no practice (praxis) associated with it. I find it hard to believe this was Benjamin through and through, especially when read alongside everything he says in Theses On the Concept of History with relation to (and paraphrasing since I don’t have it in front of me) the revolting proletariat’s weak messianic power. Surprisingly, there’s absolutely no mention of the Theses, even though it’s so strongly connected to Benjamin’s (and probably Scholem’s too) anarchism/politics and thoughts on messianism. I have to wonder if it was intentionally left out because of how it might contradict the arguments Jacobson tries to make.
Overall a solid 3.5 book for effort and depth, but lacking in completeness and at times being too mired in an academic writing style.
Displaying 1 of 1 review