Perhaps it is at this point that Scholem's work and that of his friend Walter Benjamin come into the closest proximity. Certainly the function of Jewish messianism in Benjamin's thought finds a precise articulation here. Messianism allows him to move through, or better, to displace the double bind of rescue and reification, of dialectical image and cultural monument, in which he would otherwise be caught. Work done (life lived) in deferment means that the text upon which the critic operates is always being placed at a distance; as Benjamin says of the Arcades Project, "In order for a part of the past to be touched by the present, there must be no continuity between them." The provisional quality of even Benjamin's most authoritative criticism (such as the late essays on Leskov, Kafka, and Baudelaire) arises from just this fortunate discontinuity, which obtains for contemporary phenomena as surely as for those of the past. The critic encounters the text at a messianic distance, aware of the unreality or incompleteness of an endeavor in which every second of time might be "the strait gate through which the Messiah might enter." Critical discourse is thus cast in the conditional; it seeks to "de-territorialize" its assertions at every turn. Likewise, it is anti-hagiographic: though Benjamin and his subjects are now canonized, within his own writing he resists canonization as strenuously as he can. Deferment too is a kind of redemption.
|
This is not to say that Benjamin fulfills himself despite his endeavors' obvious incompleteness. Rather, when historical materialism is cast in messianic colors, fulfillment must be redefined. It becomes a function of the negative, to be found, as it were, in the gap between rescue and reification. Marx speaks of the moment when the theories of the philosophers become the intellectual weapons of the masses. For Benjamin, it is a moment of both dread and exaltation (for Scholem, the student of Shabbetai Zevi, it is simply a disaster). And in this double bind there can be no displacement.
|
At this point we must take note of some troubling circumstances. Jacob Neusner takes issue with Scholem on the subject of Jewish messianism, asserting that "the Messianic Idea in Judaism" is in itself a most misleading formulation. In his exhaustive study of the foundations of Judaism, Neusner declares:
|
| | Scholem provide[s] portraits of a composite that, in fact, never existed in any one book, time, or place, or in the imagination
|
|