>>15754355
I understand it's value and scope, but holy shit is it verbose to the point of nausea. They just go on random tangents and wishy-washy descriptions, which is really why the book is so fucking huge.
I would say Landau-Lifshitz GR chapters of Volume 2 (The Classical Theory of Fields) are way better if you want to accustom yourself with the guts of the theory. It suffers from the opposite problem as it can be very dry at times.
Wald's General Relativity sits somewhere in between the two and I would suggest that if you're interested in purely classical gravity and its geometric interpretation.
If you are a QFT autist like me, Weinberg's Gravitation is the perfect match. It formulates GR as a field theory first, geometric theory second. It makes connections between gravity and other fundamental forces of nature way more apparent if you're going after that.
Finally, let's not forget The Meaning of Relativity by the man himself. It's a very short, but digestible read that explains the guts of the theory a la Landafshitz, but in an even more concise manner. It does not, however, go into cosmology (obviously) and only covers precession of Mercury, light deflection around the Sun, and how EM enters into the field equations. The edition I got also treats time as an imaginary component in Euclidian space, which is not how modern theorists treat it as there are problems with this approach.