I am strictly a lay person with no background in Judaism other than that of the average participant in Jewish ritual and tradition.It seems to me that Hartman is attempting to rescue the relevance of Judaism, ( Torah and Talmudic discourse) for contemporary Jews.In raising issues he is both affirming tradition and questioning it.His approach is religious but he does not eschew secular approaches to meaning and normativity.He wants members to be active rather than passive recipients of tradition and is trying to blend tradition with innovation which requires freedom from the hegemony of text and "tradition".It is regrettable that he didnt live to finish the work because he was exceptional in his effort to explore and affirm his understanding of tradition and innovation. A philosophical approach is rare in contemporary Jewish religious commentary. That takes courage.I found it helpful that Hartman raises issues that thinking Jews are attempting to address in their own lives and practices. The book hinges on comparison and contrasts between three seminal Jewish thinkers: Soloveichik,Leiberman and Maimonides.Hartman examines what he sees as the flaws in Soloveichik's "Lonely Man of Faith" and Leibowitz's reiteration and practice regardless of meaning or insight.Issues raised by Hartman are autonomy versus conformity to received doctrine;metaphysical versus human priorities in considering the normative;repressive versus emancipatory trends in Jewish practice and understanding;the compatibility of secular versus religious approaches to received tradition from Sinai;the expunging and restoration of individuality in practice and insight;the mindlessness of reiterative practice versus the importance of experience and history;the pathology of solipsism, ( "the lonely man of faith") versus intersubjectivity and reaching out to others; the tensions between "Creation" and creativity; and the tensions between divine rule and rationality, (Maimonides).Each one of these issues would deserve a tome unto itself, although his approach is integrative.It seems to me that Hartman despite his criticism of Spinoza does not see humanism as inimical to Judaism. I admire Hartman for challenging authoritarian and hegemonic approaches to tradition, practice and identity and his challenging of insular approaches to Jewish continuity.