tradition and transformationencounter with what is other — in the past as well as in the present; but
equally, within, as well as outside of, the tradition (although it is not
always obvious where this line should be drawn). Considering the
latter aspect, I believe the new multi-religious situation, which the
extensive migration the recent decades has brought about, not only
offers unique possibilities for, but also necessarily calls for, this kind
of critical renegotiation of the limits of each singular tradition.
However, in order for this to be achieved in a constructive way, it is
important to underline that such renegotiation not only entails the
challenge of recognizing oneself in the other (and the other in oneself),
but also of discovering and respecting what is essentially other in the
other tradition.
Let me finally touch upon the futural aspect of Levinas’ messianic
argument. This aspect, I believe, reminds us that religious traditions
always exist, in a certain way, on promissory notes. In other words, it
reminds us that a tradition does not consist of a completed set of
truths and convictions to preserve and guard, but rather of a promise
to respond to continuously. Such a perspective has important implica-
tions for what claims we make in the name of the tradition — as well
as for how we make these claims. To state that a tradition lives on
promissory notes is to admit that even though we intend the perfect
and infinite with our claims, most of the time they deliver the finite.
This is precisely, as I pointed out at the outset of this article, why tra-
ditions are constantly in need of critique and self-critique — affirming
the distance between the finitude of the present and the infinite prom-
ise that is embedded in the idea or vision towards which the tradition
strives.^28
Furthermore, there lies in this perspective an important ethical
dimension, which brings us back to Levinas’ refusal to accept the
idealistic notion of history itself as the ultimate court of universal
judgment. Stating that a tradition lives on promissory notes accord-
ingly implies never giving in to the idea that our convictions and the
- Cf. John D. Caputo, “Temporal transcendence: The very idea of à venir in
Derrida,” in Transcendence and Beyond: A Postmodern Inquiry, eds. John D. Caputo
and Michael J. Scanlon, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Fordham University
Press, 2007, 188–203.