Review of Maimonides–Between Philosophy and Halakhah: Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik’s Lectures on The Guide of the Perplexed

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Michael Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Guide Of The Perplexed

scholarly journals Does Maimonides'sMishneh TorahForbid Reading theGuide of the Perplexed? On Platonic Punishments for Freethinkers

AJS Review ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 351-379
Author(s):  
Yehuda Halper
Keyword(s):  
Philosophical Inquiry ◽  
The City ◽  
Guide Of The Perplexed

AbstractIn one passage of theMishneh Torah, Maimonides explicitly forbids Jews from philosophical inquiry or even freethinking. This prohibition apparently includes a ban on reading or thinking about the topics of theGuide of the Perplexed. This paper argues that Maimonides'sMishneh Torahpresents a consistent rejection of open philosophical inquiry. However, what is prohibited in theMishneh Torahis not only permitted in theGuide, but the terms of the prohibition can be used as an outline of the structure of theGuide. That is to say, theGuidein a sense covers precisely the topics whose inquiry is forbidden to Jews in theMishneh Torah. In theMishneh TorahMaimonides does not suggest a punishment in this world for freethinkers, but in theGuidehe punishes freethinkers with more study, especially metaphysical inquiry. It is possible that theGuideitself is the punishment for freethinking as defined by theMishneh Torah. This kind of intellectual punishment has a parallel in Plato'sLaws, where freethinkers are sentenced to spend five years living in the center of the city, studying physics and metaphysics with city elders.

Honoring the Divine as Virtue and Practice in Maimonides

2008 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Don Seeman
Keyword(s):  
Human Life ◽  
Religious Language ◽  
Negative Theology ◽  
Visible Sign ◽  
Human Ability ◽  
Religious Teaching ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Guide Of The Perplexed

AbstractHonoring the divine is central to Maimonides' ethical and religious phenomenology. It connotes the recognition of radical divine incommensurability and points to the hard limits of human ability to know God. Yet it also signals the importance of philosophical speculation within those limits, indicating the intellectual and ethical telos of human life. For Maimonides, to honor or show kavod to God is closely related to the meaning of the divine glory (also known as kavod) that Moses demands to see in Exodus 33. Moses' demand to see the kavod is usually interpreted as a quest for some visible sign of God's presence or, at least, for a created light whose existence could testify to the authenticity of Moses' prophecy. Maimonides is alone among early interpreters in treating Exodus 33 as a parable of the philosophical quest to apprehend divine uniqueness, which leads first to negative theology and then to imitatio Dei. This article argues that the theme of divine kavod links Maimonides' philosophical, literary, and even medical concerns with his practical religious teaching, and connects the Guide of the Perplexed with his other legal and interpretive works. Maimonides' consistent fascination with Exodus 33 helps to organize his reflections on human perfection, ethics, and the relationship between idolatry and everyday religious language, distinguishing him from dominant trends in both Judaeo-Arabic and later kabbalistic thought.

Self-Cognizing Intellect and Negative Attributes in Maimonides' Theology

1994 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 461-472 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Kasher
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Introductory Essay ◽  
The One ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Guide Of The Perplexed ◽  
Negative Attributes

In his introductory essay on the philosophical sources of The Guide of the Perplexed, Shlomo Pines points out a well-known contradiction between two conceptions of God in Maimonides' theology. On the one hand, Maimonides borrowed the Aristotelian definition of God as the intellect that cognizes itself; on the other, in line with Avicenna's Neoplatonic theory of attributes, Maimonides denied the possibility of saying anything positive about God. Pines proposes two possible solutions; first, that Maimonides was well aware of the contradiction, or, second, that he fell into the contradiction inadvertently. As Pines himself admits, however, neither solution is satisfactory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document