Traditional philosophy can be said to be holistic. That is, it is a mode
of thought that identifies the self with reason and extends itself outward
through rational analysis to include everything it encounters. To under-
stand everything is to make it rationally present and, therefore, part of
the same system that is doing the analysis. Nothing can stand outside
this system.

From this mode of thinking we develop ways of speaking and living
in the world that deny the possibility of "something" that is not the
same as ourselves. Since we deny the possibility of "something" that is
not the same as ourselves, everything is "ours." We can do with it as
we please. This is the totalism that Levinas is responding to and the to-
talistic thinking that he contends lays the foundation for totalitarianism.

Levinas identifies the Talmud as an example of rational discourse, of
language, that resists totality. Its logic is not that of the traditional West;
its arguments do not always end in single, final solutions. It allows for
the interruption of its own totality, primarily by the claims of human
beings -- human beings who are seen not as extensions of some imper-
sonal self-in-being, but, rather, as approaching from outside any system
I could devise to define them.

I do not want to do the work of this book in the preface. However, I
think it is important to understand how I understand this connection
between the work of Emmanuel Levinas and the Talmud in order to
have a better picture of my world, into which I am inviting you.

-x-