What do you think?
Rate this book
מורה הנבוכים #2
The Guide Of The Perplexed
About the Author:
Maimonides lived an eventful life in a time of widespread upheaval. Born Moses ben Maimon in Cordova, Spain, in AD 1135 to a distinguished local rabbi and his scandalously lower-class wife, he ultimately left his homeland, due to oppression, and began a journey, punctuated by temporary residencies in Morocco, Palestine, and Alexandria, that would end in Egypt. Maimonides became widely regarded as a legendary figure during his lifetime.
Maimonides lived an eventful life in a time of widespread upheaval. Born Moses ben Maimon in Cordova, Spain, in AD 1135 to a distinguished local rabbi and his scandalously lower-class wife, he ultimately left his homeland, due to oppression, and began a journey, punctuated by temporary residencies in Morocco, Palestine, and Alexandria, that would end in Egypt. Maimonides became widely regarded as a legendary figure during his lifetime.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1190
731 people are currently reading
5,904 people want to read
About the author
Maimonides
509books204followersMoses ben-Maimon, called Maimonides and also known as Mūsā ibn Maymūn ( موسى بن ميمون) in Arabic, or Rambam (רמב"ם � Hebrew acronym for "Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon"), was a preeminent medieval Jewish philosopher and one of the greatest Torah scholars and physicians of the Middle Ages. He was born in Córdoba, Spain on Passover Eve, 1135, and died in Egypt (or Tiberias) on 20th Tevet, December 12, 1204.[6] He was a rabbi, physician and philosopher in Morocco and Egypt.
His year of birth is disputed, with Shlomo Pines suggesting that he was born in 1138. He was born during what some scholars consider to be the end of the golden age of Jewish culture in Spain, after the first centuries of the Moorish rule. At an early age, he developed an interest in the exact sciences and philosophy. In addition to reading the works of Muslim scholars, he also read those of the Greek philosophers made accessible through Arabic translations. Maimonides was not known as a supporter of mysticism. He voiced opposition to poetry, the best of which he declared as false, since it was founded on pure invention - and this too in a land which had produced such noble expressions of the Hebrew and Arabic muse. This Sage, who was revered for his saintly personality as well as for his writings, led an unquiet life, and penned his classic works with the staff of the wanderer in his hand.[7] Maimonides studied Torah under his father Maimon, who had in turn studied under Rabbi Joseph ibn Migash.
The Almohades from Africa conquered Córdoba in 1148, and threatened the Jewish community with the choice of conversion to Islam, death, or exile.[7] Maimonides's family, along with most other Jews, chose exile. For the next ten years they moved about in southern Spain, avoiding the conquering Almohades, but eventually settled in Fez in Morocco, where Maimonides acquired most of his secular knowledge, studying at the University of Al Karaouine. During this time, he composed his acclaimed commentary on the Mishnah in the years 1166-1168[8].
Following this sojourn in Morocco, he lived briefly in the Holy Land, before settling in Fostat, Egypt, where he was physician of the Grand Vizier Alfadhil and Sultan Saladin of Egypt, and also treated Richard the Lionheart while on the Crusades.[9] He was considered to be the greatest physician of his time, being influenced by renowned Islamic thinkers such as Ibn Rushd and Al-Ghazali.[2][3] He composed most of his œuvre in this last locale, including the Mishneh Torah. He died in Fostat, and was buried in Tiberias (today in Israel). His son Avraham, recognized as a great scholar, succeeded Maimonides as Nagid (head of the Egyptian Jewish community); he also took up his father's role as court physician, at the age of eighteen. He greatly honored the memory of his father, and throughout his career defended his father's writings against all critics. The office of Nagid was held by the Maimonides family for four successive generations until the end of the 14th century.
Maimonides was a devoted physician. In a famous letter, he describes his daily routine: After visiting the Sultan’s palace, he would arrive home exhausted and hungry, where "I would find the antechambers filled with gentiles and Jews ... I would go to heal them, and write prescriptions for their illnesses ... until the evening ... and I would be extremely weak."[10]
He is widely respected in Spain and a statue of him was erected in Córdoba by the only synagogue in that city which escaped destruction, and which is no longer functioning as a Jewish house of worship but is open to the public.
His year of birth is disputed, with Shlomo Pines suggesting that he was born in 1138. He was born during what some scholars consider to be the end of the golden age of Jewish culture in Spain, after the first centuries of the Moorish rule. At an early age, he developed an interest in the exact sciences and philosophy. In addition to reading the works of Muslim scholars, he also read those of the Greek philosophers made accessible through Arabic translations. Maimonides was not known as a supporter of mysticism. He voiced opposition to poetry, the best of which he declared as false, since it was founded on pure invention - and this too in a land which had produced such noble expressions of the Hebrew and Arabic muse. This Sage, who was revered for his saintly personality as well as for his writings, led an unquiet life, and penned his classic works with the staff of the wanderer in his hand.[7] Maimonides studied Torah under his father Maimon, who had in turn studied under Rabbi Joseph ibn Migash.
The Almohades from Africa conquered Córdoba in 1148, and threatened the Jewish community with the choice of conversion to Islam, death, or exile.[7] Maimonides's family, along with most other Jews, chose exile. For the next ten years they moved about in southern Spain, avoiding the conquering Almohades, but eventually settled in Fez in Morocco, where Maimonides acquired most of his secular knowledge, studying at the University of Al Karaouine. During this time, he composed his acclaimed commentary on the Mishnah in the years 1166-1168[8].
Following this sojourn in Morocco, he lived briefly in the Holy Land, before settling in Fostat, Egypt, where he was physician of the Grand Vizier Alfadhil and Sultan Saladin of Egypt, and also treated Richard the Lionheart while on the Crusades.[9] He was considered to be the greatest physician of his time, being influenced by renowned Islamic thinkers such as Ibn Rushd and Al-Ghazali.[2][3] He composed most of his œuvre in this last locale, including the Mishneh Torah. He died in Fostat, and was buried in Tiberias (today in Israel). His son Avraham, recognized as a great scholar, succeeded Maimonides as Nagid (head of the Egyptian Jewish community); he also took up his father's role as court physician, at the age of eighteen. He greatly honored the memory of his father, and throughout his career defended his father's writings against all critics. The office of Nagid was held by the Maimonides family for four successive generations until the end of the 14th century.
Maimonides was a devoted physician. In a famous letter, he describes his daily routine: After visiting the Sultan’s palace, he would arrive home exhausted and hungry, where "I would find the antechambers filled with gentiles and Jews ... I would go to heal them, and write prescriptions for their illnesses ... until the evening ... and I would be extremely weak."[10]
He is widely respected in Spain and a statue of him was erected in Córdoba by the only synagogue in that city which escaped destruction, and which is no longer functioning as a Jewish house of worship but is open to the public.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews
May 10, 2022
As we all are beings living in the sublunary microcosm of life, this book is achromatic gift from the 12th century by a philosopher, physician (Saladin), astrologer and judge Maimonides. Evidence inside is revealed in the clandestine symphonies that are well—hidden—like chambers of the nautilus shell. Maimonides wrote his first book at the age of 16 in Arabic. This book required 15 years of his life and focus.
Though one comes to approach any read by RaMBaM with such reverence and humility this irradiates to a degree one is not accustomed to. Delving into “The Guide for the Perplexed� or in Hebrew Moreh nevukhim illuminates the symphonic intermingling of Aristotelian law, physics and measures of the stars, spheres and incorporeal/corporeal manifestations and their attributions.
“Yet all these things have no reality and are mere fictions. Abunazar Alfarabi in criticizing this proposition, has exposed all its weak points, as you will clearly perceive, when you study his book on the changeable beings earnestly and dispassionately. These are the principal arguments of the Mutakallimin in seeking to establish the creatio ex nihilo."
---Moses ben Maimon/Maimonides/Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon
Via erudition from an Aristotelian magnifying glass there is variation in the composition of things formed. In the spheres (all act at different levels and velocities). Abu-nasr confounds us given his revelation of the unconformity between the stars and spheres. Gently we are maneuvered to gaze upward with our body, mind and spirit. Velocity is another key that reveals position as well as size of the nature of a thing.
Arcadian with candor—only evident when written under inspiration of the incorporeal. Those on the ladder described by Abraham, Jacob and Man are intellects of the spheres (numbering four) emanating from a primal cause. Nature and the study of such provides a vehicle championed by loving-kindness, righteousness and justice (as known to Elijah). Much time is required to fully absorb the concepts within. Read, ponder and reflect.
***
نظرًا لأننا جميعًا كائنات تعيش في العالم الصغير للقمر ، فإن هذا الكتاب هو هدية أكترونية من القرن الثاني عشر من قبل فيلسوف وطبيب (صلاح الدين) والمنجم والقاضي ميمونيدس. يتم الكشف عن الأدلة في الداخل في السمفونيات السرية المخفية جيدًا --- مثل غرف قشرة نوتيلوس. كتب موسى بن ميمون كتابه الأول عن عمر 16 سنة باللغة العربية. تطلب دليل الحيرة 15 سنة من حياته وتركيزه.
على الرغم من أن المرء يقترب من أي قراءة يقرأها RaMBaM بمثل هذا التوقير والتواضع ، فإن هذا يشع إلى درجة لا يعتادها المرء. إن الخوض في "دليل الحيرة" أو بالعبرية موريه نيفوكيم يضيء التداخل السمفوني بين قانون أرسطو وفيزياء ومقاييس النجوم والمجالات والمظاهر الجسدية / الجسدية ونسباتها.
"لكن كل هذه الأشياء ليس لها حقيقة وهي مجرد خيال. وقد كشف أبو نظار الفارابي في انتقاده لهذا الاقتراح ، جميع نقاط ضعفه ، كما ستدرك بوضوح ، عندما تدرس كتابه عن الكائنات المتغيرة بجدية وبلا تحيز. هذه هي الحجج الرئيسية للمتكالميين في سعيهم إلى إنشاء المبدع.
--- موسى بن ميمون / موسى بن ميمون / الحاخام موشي بن ميمون
من خلال التحلل من عدسة مكبرة أرسطية ، هناك اختلاف في تكوين الأشياء المتكونة. في المجالات كلها تعمل على مستويات وسرعات مختلفة. أبو نصر يربكنا لأنه كشف عن عدم التوافق بين النجوم والمجالات. بلطف مناور للتحديق للأعلى بجسدنا وعقلنا وروحنا. السرعة هي مفتاح آخر يكشف عن الموقف وكذلك حجم طبيعة الشيء.
أركاديان بصراحة واضحة فقط عند كتابته بإلهام من غير مضمن. أولئك الموجودون على السلم الموصوفين من قبل إبراهيم ويعقوب وإنسان هم عقول في المجالات التي يبلغ عددها أربعة تنبع من قضية أساسية. توفر الطبيعة ودراسة مثل هذه السيارة دافعًا عن اللطف المحبة والبر والعدل كما يعرفه إيليا. مطلوب الكثير من الوقت لاستيعاب المفاهيم بالكامل
Though one comes to approach any read by RaMBaM with such reverence and humility this irradiates to a degree one is not accustomed to. Delving into “The Guide for the Perplexed� or in Hebrew Moreh nevukhim illuminates the symphonic intermingling of Aristotelian law, physics and measures of the stars, spheres and incorporeal/corporeal manifestations and their attributions.
“Yet all these things have no reality and are mere fictions. Abunazar Alfarabi in criticizing this proposition, has exposed all its weak points, as you will clearly perceive, when you study his book on the changeable beings earnestly and dispassionately. These are the principal arguments of the Mutakallimin in seeking to establish the creatio ex nihilo."
---Moses ben Maimon/Maimonides/Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon
Via erudition from an Aristotelian magnifying glass there is variation in the composition of things formed. In the spheres (all act at different levels and velocities). Abu-nasr confounds us given his revelation of the unconformity between the stars and spheres. Gently we are maneuvered to gaze upward with our body, mind and spirit. Velocity is another key that reveals position as well as size of the nature of a thing.
Arcadian with candor—only evident when written under inspiration of the incorporeal. Those on the ladder described by Abraham, Jacob and Man are intellects of the spheres (numbering four) emanating from a primal cause. Nature and the study of such provides a vehicle championed by loving-kindness, righteousness and justice (as known to Elijah). Much time is required to fully absorb the concepts within. Read, ponder and reflect.
***
نظرًا لأننا جميعًا كائنات تعيش في العالم الصغير للقمر ، فإن هذا الكتاب هو هدية أكترونية من القرن الثاني عشر من قبل فيلسوف وطبيب (صلاح الدين) والمنجم والقاضي ميمونيدس. يتم الكشف عن الأدلة في الداخل في السمفونيات السرية المخفية جيدًا --- مثل غرف قشرة نوتيلوس. كتب موسى بن ميمون كتابه الأول عن عمر 16 سنة باللغة العربية. تطلب دليل الحيرة 15 سنة من حياته وتركيزه.
على الرغم من أن المرء يقترب من أي قراءة يقرأها RaMBaM بمثل هذا التوقير والتواضع ، فإن هذا يشع إلى درجة لا يعتادها المرء. إن الخوض في "دليل الحيرة" أو بالعبرية موريه نيفوكيم يضيء التداخل السمفوني بين قانون أرسطو وفيزياء ومقاييس النجوم والمجالات والمظاهر الجسدية / الجسدية ونسباتها.
"لكن كل هذه الأشياء ليس لها حقيقة وهي مجرد خيال. وقد كشف أبو نظار الفارابي في انتقاده لهذا الاقتراح ، جميع نقاط ضعفه ، كما ستدرك بوضوح ، عندما تدرس كتابه عن الكائنات المتغيرة بجدية وبلا تحيز. هذه هي الحجج الرئيسية للمتكالميين في سعيهم إلى إنشاء المبدع.
--- موسى بن ميمون / موسى بن ميمون / الحاخام موشي بن ميمون
من خلال التحلل من عدسة مكبرة أرسطية ، هناك اختلاف في تكوين الأشياء المتكونة. في المجالات كلها تعمل على مستويات وسرعات مختلفة. أبو نصر يربكنا لأنه كشف عن عدم التوافق بين النجوم والمجالات. بلطف مناور للتحديق للأعلى بجسدنا وعقلنا وروحنا. السرعة هي مفتاح آخر يكشف عن الموقف وكذلك حجم طبيعة الشيء.
أركاديان بصراحة واضحة فقط عند كتابته بإلهام من غير مضمن. أولئك الموجودون على السلم الموصوفين من قبل إبراهيم ويعقوب وإنسان هم عقول في المجالات التي يبلغ عددها أربعة تنبع من قضية أساسية. توفر الطبيعة ودراسة مثل هذه السيارة دافعًا عن اللطف المحبة والبر والعدل كما يعرفه إيليا. مطلوب الكثير من الوقت لاستيعاب المفاهيم بالكامل
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 21, 2017
This treatise has as its principal object to clarify the meaning of certain terms in the Bible.
Moses Maimonides, born in 1135, was and remains the most famous Jewish theologian in history, and this is his most influential book. Well, this is a part of his most influential book; more specifically, this is about a quarter of the whole work, the other three quarters having been pruned away by the editors of this volume. This was ideal for me, dabbler that I am, especially considering that the abridgement, so far as I can tell, was made with taste and skill.
The first striking aspect of this book is its accessibility. Maimonides writes simply and directly; indeed, sometimes I found the tone a bit pedestrian. The sentence I quoted above, the first sentence of the book, is quite typical of Maimonides. The work is written in the form of a (very long) letter to a perplexed pupil, broken into bite-sized chapters for easy comprehension. The only technical terms are those derived from Aristotle—essence, form, matter, etc.—which posed no problem for me.
The second striking aspect of The Guide is how similar Maimonides’s intellectual approach is to that of Thomas Aquinas. Indeed, the aim of both thinkers was more or less the same: to provide a rational defense and systemization of their respective faiths. Both lean heavily on Aristotle for this task, adopting his doctrines, terms, arguments, and philosophical style.
Of course this isn’t a coincidence. The attempt to harmonize Greek thought, specifically Aristotle, with religious thinking originated, I believe, with Muslim philosophers, and later spread to Europe. Maimonides himself was born in Muslim Spain (Al-Andalus), wrote in Arabic, and was clearly well read in Islamic philosophy. Later on, the works of Aristotle, translated from Greek into Arabic, entered Europe through Toledo, where they were translated from Arabic into Latin so that people like Aquinas could read them. Aquinas also read Maimonides, by the way.
Thus the three Abrahamic religions were engaged in almost the same philosophical project during this time. But of course, being of different faiths, the thinkers reached different conclusions. For example, Maimonides’s conception of God is strikingly different from Aquinas's. Instead of expounding on all the different perfections of God, as does Aquinas—his omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, necessary existence—Maimonides holds that God’s essence cannot be described in any satisfactory way. In fact, Maimonides’s conception of God strongly reminded me of, and was perhaps influenced by, the Neo-Platonist conception of The One, the mystical, mysterious, ineffable fountainhead of all existence. Like Plotinus says of The One, Maimonides asserts that we cannot even attribute existence to God, since he holds that existing things are always composite, while there is nothing composite about God.
But for me, Maimonides’s most interesting opinion was his explanation of rituals, worship, and animal sacrifices. As he points out, “what is the purpose of His worship, since God’s perfection is not increased even if everything He has created worships Him and apprehends Him to the utmost possible degree, nor is it at all diminished if there is nothing in existence beside Him?�
For Maimonides the purpose of religious practice is not to please God through worship, but to know Him by training the mind and purifying the soul. The reason that God commanded rituals and sacrifices was only because the original Chosen People were still accustomed to idolatry, and thus they would not have accepted the true religion if they were not allowed to practice their religious customs. The rituals were, therefore, a kind of transitional device, allowing the people to turn their thoughts from idols to the true God. I found this explanation remarkable, since it anticipates the modern, historical approach to religion, while remaining within the bounds of orthodoxy.
Maimonides insists that the exterior forms of a ceremony are totally irrelevant if the practitioner is not thinking of God. It is the mental state of the worshipper, not their ritual actions, that are essential. This doctrine also reminded me of Neo-Platonic mysticism, wherein the final goal is a direct knowledge of the The One through mental discipline. But Maimonides is not so straightforwardly mystical as Plotinus, as he places much more emphasis on rational argument and the holding of the correct metaphysical and theological opinions.
This book was obviously not intended for me, since I am a nonbeliever, and Maimonides considers nonbelievers beneath contempt and not even worth responding to. Thus this book was of purely historical interest for me. This is, of course, not a bad thing, and indeed as a historical document it is rewarding. But I cannot say I found it an exhilarating read, since I not only disagreed with Maimonides’s conclusions but with his methods and his premises. Nevertheless, I am very glad to have read the book, if only because I have been intending to ever since my trip to Córdoba, his birthplace, and stood next to his statue in the Jewish district of that old city. Just like walking through those crooked, cobblestone streets, reading this book is a voyage in time.
April 12, 2025
Guiding the people of the world’s oldest monotheistic faith through the labyrinth of medieval philosophy was a task that Moses Maimonides took very seriously; and any reader, regardless of their religious faith or philosophical belief, can benefit from seeing how Maimonides sought to reconcile the teachings of Aristotle with the tenets of the Jewish faith in his book The Guide for the Perplexed.
Moses Maimonides was born in Córdoba in 1138, as a time when Spain was part of the Almoravid Empire. He was a Sephardic rabbi and an astronomer, and he was also a physician who cared for Saladin himself. His exhaustive reading of classical philosophy, and of the Torah and the Talmud, informed the way in which he sought to vindicate the teachings of the Jewish faith, in a world where the teachings of that faith were increasingly coming under question.
This edition of The Guide for the Perplexed benefits from commentary by Julius Guttmann, a long-time professor of Jewish philosophy at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Guttmann points out that “Maimonides was almost the first to base his philosophical interpretation of Judaism on the system of Aristotle� (p. 1). Also present here is the commentary of philosopher Daniel H. Frank of Purdue University; Frank quotes Guttmann as saying that “Knowledge of God is here raised above all other human perfections…but its subject is not the metaphysical existence of God but His moral government�, and adds that “Faith in the power of human reason is in Maimonides� mind combined with a profound consciousness of the limits of human understanding� (p. 7).
The ideas of philosophy scholars Guttmann and Frank, taken together, do much to help frame the modern reader’s initial introduction to Maimonides and his ideas.
In his own introduction to The Guide for the Perplexed, Maimonides states that � “The aim of our treatise is…not to explain all these terms to the vulgar crowd, or to mere beginners in philosophy, or even to those who study nothing but the Law � i.e., the legal and the ritual aspects of our religion�, and adds that “Its aim is rather to stimulate the mind of the religious man who has arrived at deep-set belief in the truth of our faith, and who is perfect in the religious and moral sense� (p. 41).
The modern reader might take issue with the way Maimonides differentiates between the “vulgar� and the more “perfect�, as when Maimonides writes that “The exposition of all these things is therefore clothed in words with several meanings, so that the vulgar can take them, according to their lights, in one sense, while the perfect and educated man will take them in quite a different sense� (p. 45). At the same time, it does remind one that the medieval era was nothing if not hierarchical.
Maimonides worked within a centuries-old tradition of careful Biblical exegesis, and many of the most fascinating passages from The Guide for the Perplexed occur when Maimonides is wishing to clarify his readers� perceptions regarding what different Biblical passages mean. With regard, for example, to God’s declaration in Genesis 1:26 that “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness�, Maimonides takes care to remind readers that the making of humankind in the image and likeness of God has nothing to do with any sort of physical form:
Since man is distinguished by a very remarkable function, which does not exist in anything else beneath the sphere of the moon, namely intellectual perception, which is not exercised by any of the senses or outer limbs or inner organs, this is compared with divine perception, which needs no tool � though this is not a true comparison, but a superficial first impression. Because of this function, the divine intellect bestowed upon him, it is said of man that he is in the image and likeness of God, not because God is a body and therefore possesses a shape. (p. 53)
The Guide for the Perplexed is particularly interesting when Maimonides takes on Aristotle’s cosmological views regarding the world and the universe. Aristotle’s cosmology centered around the belief in an Earth that occupied the center of the universe, was eternally unmoved, and therefore did not need to be created. Such a belief, of course, was bound to conflict with the devout Maimonides� belief that, in accordance with the Book of Genesis, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth�, and that at its beginnings, “the earth was without form, and void�. The earth could not be both created and uncreated � something that led Maimonides to define the problem thus:
We, the followers of Moses and Abraham, believe that the world came into being in a certain fashion, and that certain things arose from certain others, and certain things were created after certain others. Aristotle contradicts us, deriving his arguments from the nature of the established, completed, actual universe. We are assuring him that its state after its establishment and completion does not in the least resemble its state when it came into being, and that it was brought into existence after absolute non-existence. (p. 104)
Maimonides holds “that there is no point in the search for a purpose of the universe as a whole, either according to our view that the world is created, or according to the view of Aristotle that it is uncreated� (p. 151); yet he works very hard to vindicate the Biblical vision of a created universe, as opposed to the Aristotelian idea of an uncreated universe.
The Guide for the Perplexed may work best, for modern readers, as a guide to human improvability, particularly in those passages where Maimonides suggests that “the perfection of man, in which he can truly glory, is that achieved by him who has attained comprehension of God to the extent of his powers, and [who] knows in what manner God provides for His creatures in creating them and governing them, and who, after comprehending this, aims in his own conduct at mercy, justice, and righteousness, so as to imitate God’s actions� (p. 201).
The Guide for the Perplexed provides a fascinating look at how philosophical traditions meet, merge, and sometimes come into conflict. One gets a strong sense of Maimonides� erudition, and of his dedication to living an ethical life and encouraging others to do likewise.
Moses Maimonides was born in Córdoba in 1138, as a time when Spain was part of the Almoravid Empire. He was a Sephardic rabbi and an astronomer, and he was also a physician who cared for Saladin himself. His exhaustive reading of classical philosophy, and of the Torah and the Talmud, informed the way in which he sought to vindicate the teachings of the Jewish faith, in a world where the teachings of that faith were increasingly coming under question.
This edition of The Guide for the Perplexed benefits from commentary by Julius Guttmann, a long-time professor of Jewish philosophy at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Guttmann points out that “Maimonides was almost the first to base his philosophical interpretation of Judaism on the system of Aristotle� (p. 1). Also present here is the commentary of philosopher Daniel H. Frank of Purdue University; Frank quotes Guttmann as saying that “Knowledge of God is here raised above all other human perfections…but its subject is not the metaphysical existence of God but His moral government�, and adds that “Faith in the power of human reason is in Maimonides� mind combined with a profound consciousness of the limits of human understanding� (p. 7).
The ideas of philosophy scholars Guttmann and Frank, taken together, do much to help frame the modern reader’s initial introduction to Maimonides and his ideas.
In his own introduction to The Guide for the Perplexed, Maimonides states that � “The aim of our treatise is…not to explain all these terms to the vulgar crowd, or to mere beginners in philosophy, or even to those who study nothing but the Law � i.e., the legal and the ritual aspects of our religion�, and adds that “Its aim is rather to stimulate the mind of the religious man who has arrived at deep-set belief in the truth of our faith, and who is perfect in the religious and moral sense� (p. 41).
The modern reader might take issue with the way Maimonides differentiates between the “vulgar� and the more “perfect�, as when Maimonides writes that “The exposition of all these things is therefore clothed in words with several meanings, so that the vulgar can take them, according to their lights, in one sense, while the perfect and educated man will take them in quite a different sense� (p. 45). At the same time, it does remind one that the medieval era was nothing if not hierarchical.
Maimonides worked within a centuries-old tradition of careful Biblical exegesis, and many of the most fascinating passages from The Guide for the Perplexed occur when Maimonides is wishing to clarify his readers� perceptions regarding what different Biblical passages mean. With regard, for example, to God’s declaration in Genesis 1:26 that “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness�, Maimonides takes care to remind readers that the making of humankind in the image and likeness of God has nothing to do with any sort of physical form:
Since man is distinguished by a very remarkable function, which does not exist in anything else beneath the sphere of the moon, namely intellectual perception, which is not exercised by any of the senses or outer limbs or inner organs, this is compared with divine perception, which needs no tool � though this is not a true comparison, but a superficial first impression. Because of this function, the divine intellect bestowed upon him, it is said of man that he is in the image and likeness of God, not because God is a body and therefore possesses a shape. (p. 53)
The Guide for the Perplexed is particularly interesting when Maimonides takes on Aristotle’s cosmological views regarding the world and the universe. Aristotle’s cosmology centered around the belief in an Earth that occupied the center of the universe, was eternally unmoved, and therefore did not need to be created. Such a belief, of course, was bound to conflict with the devout Maimonides� belief that, in accordance with the Book of Genesis, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth�, and that at its beginnings, “the earth was without form, and void�. The earth could not be both created and uncreated � something that led Maimonides to define the problem thus:
We, the followers of Moses and Abraham, believe that the world came into being in a certain fashion, and that certain things arose from certain others, and certain things were created after certain others. Aristotle contradicts us, deriving his arguments from the nature of the established, completed, actual universe. We are assuring him that its state after its establishment and completion does not in the least resemble its state when it came into being, and that it was brought into existence after absolute non-existence. (p. 104)
Maimonides holds “that there is no point in the search for a purpose of the universe as a whole, either according to our view that the world is created, or according to the view of Aristotle that it is uncreated� (p. 151); yet he works very hard to vindicate the Biblical vision of a created universe, as opposed to the Aristotelian idea of an uncreated universe.
The Guide for the Perplexed may work best, for modern readers, as a guide to human improvability, particularly in those passages where Maimonides suggests that “the perfection of man, in which he can truly glory, is that achieved by him who has attained comprehension of God to the extent of his powers, and [who] knows in what manner God provides for His creatures in creating them and governing them, and who, after comprehending this, aims in his own conduct at mercy, justice, and righteousness, so as to imitate God’s actions� (p. 201).
The Guide for the Perplexed provides a fascinating look at how philosophical traditions meet, merge, and sometimes come into conflict. One gets a strong sense of Maimonides� erudition, and of his dedication to living an ethical life and encouraging others to do likewise.
December 25, 2018
Looking to reconcile Aristotelian philosophy and Jewish theology, Moses Maimonides wrote The Guide for the Perplexed. A three part letter to his student, the book was influential not only to Jewish thought but Christian and Islamic thought throughout the Middle Ages while still giving those in the 21st Century insights to consider.
The first part focuses on Maimonides arguing against the anthropomorphism of God, basically stating God is incorporeal, and all references in the Bible to God doing physical things are essentially figurative language to allow the human mind to understand the works of God. This leads into a discussion by Maimonides that states that God cannot be described in positive terms only negative conceptions because while positive terms put limits on God, the negative does not. This leads into a discussion of philosophy and mysticism of various kinds. The second part begins on Maimonides expounding on the physical structure of the universe, an essentially Aristotelian world-view, which eventually leads into a debate on if the universe is eternal or created. Though Maimonides admits that Aristotle’s arguments for an eternal universe are better, Divine Revelation decides the matter. Maimonides then expounds on the Creation presented in Genesis and theories on the possible end of the world. The last part is explained as the climax of the whole work as Maimonides expounds on the mystical passage of the Chariot found in Ezekiel, which isn’t supposed to be directly taught only hinted at though over time direct instruction has become the normal. This is followed by analysis of the moral aspects of the universe and explaining the reasons for the 613 laws in the Torah. Maimonides ends the book with how God is worshipped correctly, through wisdom.
The comparison of and thesis of complimenting of long held Jewish theological thought and Aristotelian philosophy by Maimonides could have been hard to follow, the text was more than readable and thus the arguments very understandable. While his arguments and logic are insight and enlightening, Maimonides is yet another religious individual who has married ‘pagan� philosophy with divine revelation to the determinant of the latter like many of his Christian contemporaries were doing and their predecessors before them and many would do after. This is the book’s biggest flaw, but instead of being a reason not to read it is the main one to read it and thus understand the arguments of those who want to merge two separate worldviews into one.
The Guide for the Perplexed was intended by Maimonides for learned individuals to give his view on philosophy more than theology, however the two could not be connected within the text. While I do not adhere to the vast majority of the thoughts the author expounded upon, the insight into medieval thought were invaluable and insightful.
The first part focuses on Maimonides arguing against the anthropomorphism of God, basically stating God is incorporeal, and all references in the Bible to God doing physical things are essentially figurative language to allow the human mind to understand the works of God. This leads into a discussion by Maimonides that states that God cannot be described in positive terms only negative conceptions because while positive terms put limits on God, the negative does not. This leads into a discussion of philosophy and mysticism of various kinds. The second part begins on Maimonides expounding on the physical structure of the universe, an essentially Aristotelian world-view, which eventually leads into a debate on if the universe is eternal or created. Though Maimonides admits that Aristotle’s arguments for an eternal universe are better, Divine Revelation decides the matter. Maimonides then expounds on the Creation presented in Genesis and theories on the possible end of the world. The last part is explained as the climax of the whole work as Maimonides expounds on the mystical passage of the Chariot found in Ezekiel, which isn’t supposed to be directly taught only hinted at though over time direct instruction has become the normal. This is followed by analysis of the moral aspects of the universe and explaining the reasons for the 613 laws in the Torah. Maimonides ends the book with how God is worshipped correctly, through wisdom.
The comparison of and thesis of complimenting of long held Jewish theological thought and Aristotelian philosophy by Maimonides could have been hard to follow, the text was more than readable and thus the arguments very understandable. While his arguments and logic are insight and enlightening, Maimonides is yet another religious individual who has married ‘pagan� philosophy with divine revelation to the determinant of the latter like many of his Christian contemporaries were doing and their predecessors before them and many would do after. This is the book’s biggest flaw, but instead of being a reason not to read it is the main one to read it and thus understand the arguments of those who want to merge two separate worldviews into one.
The Guide for the Perplexed was intended by Maimonides for learned individuals to give his view on philosophy more than theology, however the two could not be connected within the text. While I do not adhere to the vast majority of the thoughts the author expounded upon, the insight into medieval thought were invaluable and insightful.
February 9, 2020
Lepers are not deserving of entering the temple or receiving blessings since they deservedly have received their affliction due to committing slander and a goat should be sacrificed as vicarious compensation and red heifers are best of all for vicarious redemption otherwise. Menstruating women need to be avoided, and circumcision is not only necessary after the eighth day of birth as part of the Abrahamic covenant since it deadens the desire for sex beyond procreation and we all know that is for the best, besides some women will say non-circumcised men such as the Sabaeans prolong sex past the point of acceptability, damn those Sabaeans they caused the Israelites to have a lot of those what seem foolish to us today (1150 CE) esoteric rituals and practices because of their idolatry (and almost nothing is worse than idolatry), they are almost as troublesome as the Egyptians and with their moon worshipping and their other silly superstitions, why can’t they be rational in their irrationality as Maimonides thinks he is.
Everything makes sense when one starts off with non-negotiable etch in stone starting premises and while all contradictions are explained by homonyms.
Apparently an incorporeal God doesn’t like three things: idolatry (a major no, no), adultery (unless you happen to be a king and legitimize it by saying kings are special and are entitled to harems, or in order to make adultery even more muddled you also have different taboos for your mother’s brother’s kids than for your father’s sister’s kids), or murder. God must be loved and feared and only a fool in his heart can think that God is anything but not corporeal. Maimonides tells one what God is not and won’t get at what He is.
Here’s the thing, I really enjoyed this book. Rational thought excites me and in Maimonides superstitious craziness there is rationality. Logic never creates knowledge or justified true beliefs about the world, it can only preserve truth up to as good as the starting premises were. Our beliefs need a ground that must stand in relation to what we believe else wise. Maimonides knows the Kalam Cosmological proof for the existence of God is silly and only those who are fools in their heart would say otherwise. He’s convinced that the universe was created out of nothing but mostly can only assert that since he has read it somewhere. Humans are special and every kind (species) of animal knows their place and oxen and horses should not plow together and it takes a special designer to create humans and the organs can’t work by themselves without a creator steering the creation.
A quick definition for a scholastic would be one who uses Aristotle to defend ones understanding of one’s own understanding about their place in the world. St. Thomas Aquinas, Spinoza and Maimonides are scholastics, and they all overlap in their thought and rationality processes. When I got lost with what Maimonides was saying I would find my orientation by asking what Aquinas or Spinoza thought about that and then that would bring me back to what Maimonides was getting at.
God’s essence is His existence according to Aquinas and Maimonides. His complete knowledge makes Him absolute. Maimonides (and Aquinas) put reason before faith and by doing that they open up a window for science that will later embrace the systematic use of logic, empirical observation, analysis and a compelling story in order to thrive.
To read Aquinas one feels the echoes of Maimonides and both are similarly re-working Aristotle such that they are preserving their necessary universe with an all knowing and all powerful incorporeal God who is His own cause but all awhile opening up a window to the world to embrace the real instead of the imaginary incorporeal entity (and really what is an ‘incorporeal entity� except a cleverly worded oxymoron) they believe in, after all Maimonides does prove that a corporeal God is nonsense while angels are real since they are intelligences from the quintessential heavens and of the spheres and both will say that angels are of a species and not sui generis unlike Duns Scotus who will show they are one of a kind . (There was a surprising amount of Plotinus, a neo-Platonist within this book, of all the books for those with a mystical streak, I would recommend Plotinus� Enneads).
Everything makes sense when one starts off with non-negotiable etch in stone starting premises and while all contradictions are explained by homonyms.
Apparently an incorporeal God doesn’t like three things: idolatry (a major no, no), adultery (unless you happen to be a king and legitimize it by saying kings are special and are entitled to harems, or in order to make adultery even more muddled you also have different taboos for your mother’s brother’s kids than for your father’s sister’s kids), or murder. God must be loved and feared and only a fool in his heart can think that God is anything but not corporeal. Maimonides tells one what God is not and won’t get at what He is.
Here’s the thing, I really enjoyed this book. Rational thought excites me and in Maimonides superstitious craziness there is rationality. Logic never creates knowledge or justified true beliefs about the world, it can only preserve truth up to as good as the starting premises were. Our beliefs need a ground that must stand in relation to what we believe else wise. Maimonides knows the Kalam Cosmological proof for the existence of God is silly and only those who are fools in their heart would say otherwise. He’s convinced that the universe was created out of nothing but mostly can only assert that since he has read it somewhere. Humans are special and every kind (species) of animal knows their place and oxen and horses should not plow together and it takes a special designer to create humans and the organs can’t work by themselves without a creator steering the creation.
A quick definition for a scholastic would be one who uses Aristotle to defend ones understanding of one’s own understanding about their place in the world. St. Thomas Aquinas, Spinoza and Maimonides are scholastics, and they all overlap in their thought and rationality processes. When I got lost with what Maimonides was saying I would find my orientation by asking what Aquinas or Spinoza thought about that and then that would bring me back to what Maimonides was getting at.
God’s essence is His existence according to Aquinas and Maimonides. His complete knowledge makes Him absolute. Maimonides (and Aquinas) put reason before faith and by doing that they open up a window for science that will later embrace the systematic use of logic, empirical observation, analysis and a compelling story in order to thrive.
To read Aquinas one feels the echoes of Maimonides and both are similarly re-working Aristotle such that they are preserving their necessary universe with an all knowing and all powerful incorporeal God who is His own cause but all awhile opening up a window to the world to embrace the real instead of the imaginary incorporeal entity (and really what is an ‘incorporeal entity� except a cleverly worded oxymoron) they believe in, after all Maimonides does prove that a corporeal God is nonsense while angels are real since they are intelligences from the quintessential heavens and of the spheres and both will say that angels are of a species and not sui generis unlike Duns Scotus who will show they are one of a kind . (There was a surprising amount of Plotinus, a neo-Platonist within this book, of all the books for those with a mystical streak, I would recommend Plotinus� Enneads).
September 27, 2012
I'll start with something good. If you are interested in linguistics then this book is for you. Hebrew is such a fascinating language where, unlike English, almost any word is up to interpretation. Maimonides explores its countless homonyms in passages that have been written about God and presents many interesting angles that I would not have thought of.
Other than that though, I had problems with the book. As much as he acknowledges that we can never find absolute answers or understand the greatness of God, this acknowledgement usually comes off as empty and he seems to think he has indeed found the answers (which I suppose is why he feels he is in a position to guide the perplexed). Worse, he presents BELIEFS.. which is what they are.. about God and the universe etc. as these logical proofs that ought to be indisputable.
For example, he talks at length analogizing the human body to the universe. It's interesting. But later he specifies that while "the faculty of thinking is a force inherent in the body, not separated from it, God is not a force inherent in the body of the universe... How God rules the universe and provides for it is a complete mystery: man is unable to solve it. For, on the one hand, it can be proved that God is separate from the universe, and in no contact with it; but, on the other hand, His rule and providence can be proved to exist in all parts of the universe, even in the smallest. Praised be He whose perfection is above our comprehension."
What are you talking about, proved? (He does have an earlier "proof" that he's talking about but you can gather its weakness. Why can't God be a part of the universe the way our intellect is part of our body? Above our comprehension indeed.
Other than that though, I had problems with the book. As much as he acknowledges that we can never find absolute answers or understand the greatness of God, this acknowledgement usually comes off as empty and he seems to think he has indeed found the answers (which I suppose is why he feels he is in a position to guide the perplexed). Worse, he presents BELIEFS.. which is what they are.. about God and the universe etc. as these logical proofs that ought to be indisputable.
For example, he talks at length analogizing the human body to the universe. It's interesting. But later he specifies that while "the faculty of thinking is a force inherent in the body, not separated from it, God is not a force inherent in the body of the universe... How God rules the universe and provides for it is a complete mystery: man is unable to solve it. For, on the one hand, it can be proved that God is separate from the universe, and in no contact with it; but, on the other hand, His rule and providence can be proved to exist in all parts of the universe, even in the smallest. Praised be He whose perfection is above our comprehension."
What are you talking about, proved? (He does have an earlier "proof" that he's talking about but you can gather its weakness. Why can't God be a part of the universe the way our intellect is part of our body? Above our comprehension indeed.
January 2, 2024
This work appears on several recommended classics lists, and since I was perplexed, I decided to delve into it.
Alas, I am still perplexed.
The hard cover sells for textbook prices; I recommend the soft cover or a used version—there is no need to pay top dollar for what turns out to be, in addition to some metaphysical insight, a collection of Talmud interpretations, a summary of Jewish Law and nearly one hundred pages of medieval chemistry and physics.
*** SPOILER ALERT***
Much is cleared away at the outset of this tome, primarily by this bunker buster: God is incorporeal; He does not have locomotion or voice, He cannot be seen with the human eye, He does not have hands or feet, He does not “sit� on a throne, and He does not have any human imperfections including the need to rest or eat, or emotions, including, of course, anger, love, angst, jealousy, or the need for revenge. (One might add by this logic that God has no gender either, so really should be referred to as “It� or “The Force� rather than “He� or perhaps, following the tradition, not even be referred to at all.) ... So why does the Torah/Old Testament include all these human characteristics of God, why is it written in “the language of man?”—so that (paraphrasing only a bit) “youth, women and common people� can understand it.
You may well ask, if God does not have human imperfections such as emotion, why the anger and jealousy about idolators? Answer: because it seems God has a purpose (after all). But, and here is my first perplexity, isn’t the will to a purpose a form of human imperfection? I have found in raising children that the fastest path to anger is impatience. Impatience about what? Impatience about the lack of movement toward MY expectations, the lack of progress to realizing MY plans. I think God would be smarter than this. But of course “smart� also being a human characteristic—so it never ends. And we find in reading that even Maimonides, after his strong refutation of an anthropomorphic divinity, still cannot resist the pull of the anthropomorphic.
Next issue: Does God have a hand in the world or not? The answer to this question is elided by Maimonides; there is a system of merits (there must be in order for this world/religious view to have some practical purchase), but the logic of the system, i.e., the “mind� or “purpose� of God, is admittedly unknowable. On unknowability, much ink is spilled. The story of Job is the primary teaching exhibit.
The importance of secrecy in teaching about God and “His� ways is restated multiple times, e.g.:
“Even the traditional Law, as you are well aware, was not originally committed to writing, in conformity with the rule to which our nation generally adhered, ‘Things which I have communicated to you orally, you must not communicate to others in writing.� With reference to the Law, this rule was very opportune; for while it remained in force it averted evils which happened subsequently, viz., great diversity of opinion, doubts as to the meaning of written words, slips of the pen, dissensions among the people, formation of new sects, and confused notions about practical subjects. � Care having been taken, for the sake of obviating injurious influences, that the Oral Law should not be recorded in a form accessible to all, it was but natural that no portion of “the secrets of the Law� (i.e., metaphysical problems) would be permitted to be written down or divulged for the use of all men. These secrets, as has been explained, were orally communicated by a few able men to others who were equally distinguished. Hence the principle applied by our teachers, “The secrets of the Law can only be entrusted to him who is a councillor, a cunning artificer, etc.� � Nothing but a few remarks and allusions are to be found in the Talmud and the Midrashim, like a few kernels enveloped in such a quantity of husk, that the reader is generally occupied with the husk, and forgets that it encloses a kernel.�
Maimonides channels the “you must feel it in your heart� of Martin Luther, but with a clubbier, “only smart people can see it.�
In the section on Jewish Law we see one aspect of the Law that made Jesus angry at the Pharisees and Scribes--tribalism. According to this interpretation of the Law, while followers are under a general encouragement to be merciful to slaves and the poor, and be fair in dealing with workers, there is a clearer obligation to take care of your in-group—your family and the people who have done you favors in the past—people you have a relationship with. To this, Christ practically yells: “If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? . . . If you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you?� (Luke) And of course, there is the story of the Good Samaritan.
The most saddening discovery for me was finding the strains of the Prosperity Gospel here in medieval folds of the anti-Gospel:
“Their mind [Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob] was so identified with the knowledge of God, that He made a lasting covenant with each of them. �. and that in the same measure was Divine Providence attached to them and their descendants. When we therefore find them also, engaged in ruling others, in increasing their property, and endeavoring to obtain possession of wealth and honor, we see in this fact a proof that when they were occupied in these things, only their bodily limbs were at work, whilst their heart and mind never moved away from the name of God. I think these four [Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob] reached that high degree of perfection in their relation to God, and enjoyed the continual presence of Divine Providence, even in their endeavors to increase their property, feeding the flock, toiling in the field, or managing the house, only because in all these things their end and aim was to approach God as much as possible. � Those who are perfect in their perception of God, whose mind is never separated from Him, enjoy always the influence of Providence.�
And from there it’s just a few twists of logic to “God wants you to be rich and happy!�
Alas, I am still perplexed.
The hard cover sells for textbook prices; I recommend the soft cover or a used version—there is no need to pay top dollar for what turns out to be, in addition to some metaphysical insight, a collection of Talmud interpretations, a summary of Jewish Law and nearly one hundred pages of medieval chemistry and physics.
*** SPOILER ALERT***
Much is cleared away at the outset of this tome, primarily by this bunker buster: God is incorporeal; He does not have locomotion or voice, He cannot be seen with the human eye, He does not have hands or feet, He does not “sit� on a throne, and He does not have any human imperfections including the need to rest or eat, or emotions, including, of course, anger, love, angst, jealousy, or the need for revenge. (One might add by this logic that God has no gender either, so really should be referred to as “It� or “The Force� rather than “He� or perhaps, following the tradition, not even be referred to at all.) ... So why does the Torah/Old Testament include all these human characteristics of God, why is it written in “the language of man?”—so that (paraphrasing only a bit) “youth, women and common people� can understand it.
You may well ask, if God does not have human imperfections such as emotion, why the anger and jealousy about idolators? Answer: because it seems God has a purpose (after all). But, and here is my first perplexity, isn’t the will to a purpose a form of human imperfection? I have found in raising children that the fastest path to anger is impatience. Impatience about what? Impatience about the lack of movement toward MY expectations, the lack of progress to realizing MY plans. I think God would be smarter than this. But of course “smart� also being a human characteristic—so it never ends. And we find in reading that even Maimonides, after his strong refutation of an anthropomorphic divinity, still cannot resist the pull of the anthropomorphic.
Next issue: Does God have a hand in the world or not? The answer to this question is elided by Maimonides; there is a system of merits (there must be in order for this world/religious view to have some practical purchase), but the logic of the system, i.e., the “mind� or “purpose� of God, is admittedly unknowable. On unknowability, much ink is spilled. The story of Job is the primary teaching exhibit.
The importance of secrecy in teaching about God and “His� ways is restated multiple times, e.g.:
“Even the traditional Law, as you are well aware, was not originally committed to writing, in conformity with the rule to which our nation generally adhered, ‘Things which I have communicated to you orally, you must not communicate to others in writing.� With reference to the Law, this rule was very opportune; for while it remained in force it averted evils which happened subsequently, viz., great diversity of opinion, doubts as to the meaning of written words, slips of the pen, dissensions among the people, formation of new sects, and confused notions about practical subjects. � Care having been taken, for the sake of obviating injurious influences, that the Oral Law should not be recorded in a form accessible to all, it was but natural that no portion of “the secrets of the Law� (i.e., metaphysical problems) would be permitted to be written down or divulged for the use of all men. These secrets, as has been explained, were orally communicated by a few able men to others who were equally distinguished. Hence the principle applied by our teachers, “The secrets of the Law can only be entrusted to him who is a councillor, a cunning artificer, etc.� � Nothing but a few remarks and allusions are to be found in the Talmud and the Midrashim, like a few kernels enveloped in such a quantity of husk, that the reader is generally occupied with the husk, and forgets that it encloses a kernel.�
Maimonides channels the “you must feel it in your heart� of Martin Luther, but with a clubbier, “only smart people can see it.�
In the section on Jewish Law we see one aspect of the Law that made Jesus angry at the Pharisees and Scribes--tribalism. According to this interpretation of the Law, while followers are under a general encouragement to be merciful to slaves and the poor, and be fair in dealing with workers, there is a clearer obligation to take care of your in-group—your family and the people who have done you favors in the past—people you have a relationship with. To this, Christ practically yells: “If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? . . . If you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you?� (Luke) And of course, there is the story of the Good Samaritan.
The most saddening discovery for me was finding the strains of the Prosperity Gospel here in medieval folds of the anti-Gospel:
“Their mind [Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob] was so identified with the knowledge of God, that He made a lasting covenant with each of them. �. and that in the same measure was Divine Providence attached to them and their descendants. When we therefore find them also, engaged in ruling others, in increasing their property, and endeavoring to obtain possession of wealth and honor, we see in this fact a proof that when they were occupied in these things, only their bodily limbs were at work, whilst their heart and mind never moved away from the name of God. I think these four [Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob] reached that high degree of perfection in their relation to God, and enjoyed the continual presence of Divine Providence, even in their endeavors to increase their property, feeding the flock, toiling in the field, or managing the house, only because in all these things their end and aim was to approach God as much as possible. � Those who are perfect in their perception of God, whose mind is never separated from Him, enjoy always the influence of Providence.�
And from there it’s just a few twists of logic to “God wants you to be rich and happy!�
September 11, 2009
To find this amazing book was an interesting adventure. The finding was almost as intense as the wisdom gained therein...
For those that wish to derive a better understanding of the Torah, and its spiritual, literal and metaphysical interpretations, then this is the read for you! You may just open the doors to YOUR relationship with God, Society & Yourself.
Moses Maimonides, a Cordova born rabbi of the 12th Century AD, can be considered the "greatest Jewish thinker of the middle ages if not of all time." He was inspired by the rationalism of Aristotle and felt that the modern philosopher must learn all of the natural sciences before they can truly dive "into" the concept of God (via the Torah).
Plan to read some of the 1-2 page chapters over and over again, because those fleeting paragraphs are jam packed with hidden truths and amazing wisdom.
For those that wish to derive a better understanding of the Torah, and its spiritual, literal and metaphysical interpretations, then this is the read for you! You may just open the doors to YOUR relationship with God, Society & Yourself.
Moses Maimonides, a Cordova born rabbi of the 12th Century AD, can be considered the "greatest Jewish thinker of the middle ages if not of all time." He was inspired by the rationalism of Aristotle and felt that the modern philosopher must learn all of the natural sciences before they can truly dive "into" the concept of God (via the Torah).
Plan to read some of the 1-2 page chapters over and over again, because those fleeting paragraphs are jam packed with hidden truths and amazing wisdom.
March 8, 2017
You must keep this in mind concerning this addition: the font is so small that each page is equivalent to 3 or 4 standard pages. The true book length would be between 1200 - 1400 pages. Do you want to commit yourself to reading this difficult book? (Difficult in that one must have read the works of the philosophers and theologians who preceded him and the Old Testament.)
The first section concerns homonyms and is used, as necessary in philosophy, to settle on definitions before progressing to thesis. Here, Maimonides is concerned with disabusing a primitive mind of its anthropomorphic concepts of God. Some literalists will be appalled. This is a good thing. God has no dimension because He is limitless. Therefore, He has no face, feet, arms, etc. Nor, does He figuratively "pass by" anything. This vital section of M's work is by necessity boring to those of a higher understanding. One must endure this in order to arrive at the more enjoyable sections. It is enjoyable to read his blistering destruction of the Kalam (Islamic scholastic theology).
The second section compares and contrasts the various philosophical works with those espoused by the sages of Jewish theology. Obviously, Maimonides's position is espoused and seems irrefutable until Thomas Aquinas nails his objections.
The third section explains the enlightened Jewish position for perplexing problems posed in the Torah. Very insightful.
If you can concentrate on philosophical/theological arguments, your mind will become elevated beyond the mundane world and you will enjoy a form of bliss only attained by very few. God is.
The first section concerns homonyms and is used, as necessary in philosophy, to settle on definitions before progressing to thesis. Here, Maimonides is concerned with disabusing a primitive mind of its anthropomorphic concepts of God. Some literalists will be appalled. This is a good thing. God has no dimension because He is limitless. Therefore, He has no face, feet, arms, etc. Nor, does He figuratively "pass by" anything. This vital section of M's work is by necessity boring to those of a higher understanding. One must endure this in order to arrive at the more enjoyable sections. It is enjoyable to read his blistering destruction of the Kalam (Islamic scholastic theology).
The second section compares and contrasts the various philosophical works with those espoused by the sages of Jewish theology. Obviously, Maimonides's position is espoused and seems irrefutable until Thomas Aquinas nails his objections.
The third section explains the enlightened Jewish position for perplexing problems posed in the Torah. Very insightful.
If you can concentrate on philosophical/theological arguments, your mind will become elevated beyond the mundane world and you will enjoy a form of bliss only attained by very few. God is.
Want to read
April 8, 2008Third most dense tome I've ever tried to slog my way through.
March 2, 2019
A fairly wide ranging treatise on the nature of God and theology. Not too long and makes some interesting comments here and there often responding to his contemporaries. Maimonides promotes a view that we cannot make positive claims about the attributes of God, that the universe didn't always exist, that God is the maker, the form of the world and at the same time it's purpose.
November 23, 2008
Translations of writings by Rabbi Maimonides. "It is impossible for any Truths arrived at by human intellect to contradict those revealed by God." A Talmudic scholar, he talks about the bible and tries to find harmony with Aristotle's philosophies. A masterpiece :-)
June 9, 2024
I read this classic in my university days and faired poorly in the follow-on tutorial. I added the title to my “gotta read it again coz I didn’t get it the first time� list (which is depressingly long�.)and finally did pick it up this year.
Whilst this 12 century rabbinical scholar’s works might be seen as decidedly arcane for contemporary, secular humanists, I am richer for having returned to this work. The writings are valuable beyond providing a codification/application of Jewish law and thinking, and provide insights into a wide range of topic areas, irrespective of one’s religious affiliation.
We should all recall his most famous advice, “There is no greater wealth than knowledge�
Whilst this 12 century rabbinical scholar’s works might be seen as decidedly arcane for contemporary, secular humanists, I am richer for having returned to this work. The writings are valuable beyond providing a codification/application of Jewish law and thinking, and provide insights into a wide range of topic areas, irrespective of one’s religious affiliation.
We should all recall his most famous advice, “There is no greater wealth than knowledge�
October 13, 2022
Detta är en av de där böckerna som jag har påbörjat flera gånger. Skönt att avsluta den. Enligt uppgift är den en av portalverken i judisk medeltida filosofi. Jag hade snarare förstått den som ett portalverk i filosofisk teologi. Väldigt mycket handlar om att förklara de exoteriska delarna av judendomens tolkning av profetior och regler i moseböckerna. Det är tyvärr därför av begränsat intresse, och inte självklart en tidsinvestering som är befogad, alldeles oavsett de övriga kvaliteterna i boken.
April 15, 2025
Lo leí casi todo aunque no lo terminé porque me terminó cansando; para peor tenía que leerlo online porque está difícil de conseguir (gracias, archive.org!)
Lo quería leer hace muchísimo pero no es tan profundo como esperaba aunque sí bastante repetitivo... por más que tiene algunas ideas que me parecieron interesantes, me terminó aburriendo rápidamente... finalmente decidí dejarlo aunque leí más de la mitad... quizás lo retome en algún momento o lea capítulos específicos.
Lo quería leer hace muchísimo pero no es tan profundo como esperaba aunque sí bastante repetitivo... por más que tiene algunas ideas que me parecieron interesantes, me terminó aburriendo rápidamente... finalmente decidí dejarlo aunque leí más de la mitad... quizás lo retome en algún momento o lea capítulos específicos.
November 14, 2009
When I read books like this or Heschel's God in Search of Man, I feel like a person who's just mastered basic math and loves it opening a book on theoretical calculus. In other words, my understanding of the Torah and of God has a long way to go before I understand much of what is in the Guide, but the journey is worth the effort.
The best part of the book is Maimonides' explanation of some of the laws laid down, particularly in Vayikra (Leviticus). Reading these laws in the Torah without context makes it difficult in some cases to see the point, but Maimonides suggests the reasoning behind many laws was to further separate the monotheistic Hebrews from the polytheistic (read: "idolatrous") Canaanites that surrounded them at the time the Torah was given.
The book also offers a section on Hebrew homonyms designed to clarify some confusion in the original Hebrew and makes an interesting tangent into medieval astronomy and metaphysics.
To sum up: not exactly a beach read, but worth it.
The best part of the book is Maimonides' explanation of some of the laws laid down, particularly in Vayikra (Leviticus). Reading these laws in the Torah without context makes it difficult in some cases to see the point, but Maimonides suggests the reasoning behind many laws was to further separate the monotheistic Hebrews from the polytheistic (read: "idolatrous") Canaanites that surrounded them at the time the Torah was given.
The book also offers a section on Hebrew homonyms designed to clarify some confusion in the original Hebrew and makes an interesting tangent into medieval astronomy and metaphysics.
To sum up: not exactly a beach read, but worth it.
Want to read
July 25, 2021I read this many many years ago, in my BGR years, but as I have no memory of it other than that I read it, I suppose that does not count, so I will just keep this on my to-read shelf -- which gets heavier every day.
February 25, 2024
Maimonides reconciles Judaism and reason by interpreting the former as metaphors and parables. He offers negative theology and an almost naturalist philosophy.
Read
December 3, 2017أولا من الواضح أن المطلعين على الكتاب في هذا الموقع ، من غير المتدينين، يعتبرونه فلسفة محضة واطلاعا ، لذا لم يؤثر التأثير المهم ، لكنني وجدته يعرض المبادئ العبرية بوضوح،من احتقار الفقر، والمكيافيلية، بصرف النظر عن بعض أحكام متوازية قليلا مع مبادئنا ،ورغم أن ابن ميمون تلميذ ابن رشد فعليا، فقد كان الكتاب ذو منهجية إسلامية فقط،، لكن مضمونه المشفر لم يتعد الفكر الأصل، الترجمة العربية كانت سيئة جدا ، لذا احتاج لقراءته بلغة أخرى، و لعل ضخامة الكتاب وتوصيل الفكرة بطرق ملتوية، كان متعبا جدا.
July 26, 2022
Read this before reading Rambam's blurb in Leo Straus' History of Political Philosophy. I think More Nevuchin (Hebrew name for this) is stronger than most credit it for. On a very first glance, Aristotleanism and Judaism seem largely at odds in perception of creation of the universe, but Maimonides really thinks it through. Wriitng isn't even too dense. Can't wait to see what he publishes in 2022.
June 1, 2019
Much less perplexed in regards to Hebrew homonyms, still perplexed as regards almost all other things. This is my own fault, not Maimonides. He says right in the book that you shouldn't let children, women, or uneducated men try to study things that they aren't ready to study, and I take turns being all of those things.
January 12, 2015
Jewish Aristotle who actually paid attention in his writing class.
Read
November 13, 2021i got about 1/3 of the way through this puppy. i could appreciate what it was trying to do but found it mostly impenetrable. i enjoyed what of it i read.
May 6, 2017
Acho que nunca demorei tanto para ler um livro, mas a jornada valeu a pena! Essa obra de filosofia/teologia foi escrita no século XII (sim, doze!) pelo médico e filósofo judeu Maimônides à luz da redescoberta das obras de Aristóteles. O nome, Guia dos Perplexos, elucida o seu objetivo: ajudar as pessoas a conciliar fé e ciência (assim como ela é descrita nas obras do filósofo grego).
Ao longo das páginas, Maimônides explica como várias passagens das escrituras não devem ser lidas ao pé da letra (mil anos atrás já se sabia muito bem disso!), como Deus só pode ser conhecido pela negação (a impossibilidade de se fazer afirmações verdadeiras sobre Deus) e como se prova que o mundo foi criado (ou seja, não é eterno). Ele também explica detalhadamente o que está por trás das diversas regras de conduta judaica (muitas delas são para diferenciar quem as segue dos idólatras, por exemplo) e finaliza com como encontramos o sentido da vida (spoiler alert: por meio do conhecimento verdadeiro acerca de Deus).
O livro é uma viagem incrível no tempo e na história do pensamento humano. Recomendo a todos que querem entender um pouco mais da nossa própria era.
Ao longo das páginas, Maimônides explica como várias passagens das escrituras não devem ser lidas ao pé da letra (mil anos atrás já se sabia muito bem disso!), como Deus só pode ser conhecido pela negação (a impossibilidade de se fazer afirmações verdadeiras sobre Deus) e como se prova que o mundo foi criado (ou seja, não é eterno). Ele também explica detalhadamente o que está por trás das diversas regras de conduta judaica (muitas delas são para diferenciar quem as segue dos idólatras, por exemplo) e finaliza com como encontramos o sentido da vida (spoiler alert: por meio do conhecimento verdadeiro acerca de Deus).
O livro é uma viagem incrível no tempo e na história do pensamento humano. Recomendo a todos que querem entender um pouco mais da nossa própria era.
February 16, 2017
Ich bin auf diese (meine) Ausgabe aufmerksam geworden, weil ich gar nicht damit gerechnet hatte, dass der einflussreiche (jüdische) Schocken Verlag im Jahre 1935 noch Bücher veröffentlichen durfte. Ich dachte er hätte damals schon aus dem Exil operiert. Leider ist das auch das einzig interessante an dem Buch. Das ist wirklich nur etwas für jüdische Theologen. Weder ist der Text aus sich heraus verständlich, noch wendet er sich auch nur im Ansatz an einen sekularisierten Leser.
Read
June 24, 2023Lido aos poucos por cerca de dois anos, creio que me perdi no emaranhado de contradições que o Rambam usou para esconder suas opiniões. Quando estudo as interpretações e esclarecimentos sobre o Guia, fico intrigado de ter perdido minúcias. O grande argumento sobre teologia negativa é fascinante, mas ultimamente é corrosivo. Toda a ideia de negar a realidade tende a um niilismo que impede criação e afirmação. Apesar disso, a forma que Maimônides encara a unidade de Deus e de todas as formas abre caminho para uma naturalização de Deus no universo. A racionalização das leis da Torah permite que sejam reinterpretadas para que se mantenham conforme o espírito da lei ao invés de sua forma, i.e. sigam o princípio de elevação moral e espiritual acima dos comandos mesquinhos. Eu preciso de mais guias para esse guia. Essa leitura é o começo da jornada e não sua conclusão.
November 29, 2022
read excerpts for hum
what the fuck was he saying the entire time
seems very pretentious and very much not the vibe
what the fuck was he saying the entire time
seems very pretentious and very much not the vibe
September 11, 2012
If you are interested in ancient Jewish philosophy or commentaries on the Biblical text by one of the greatest Jewish thinkers ever - this book is a must read.
April 30, 2021
Maimonides presents an analysis of Jewish beliefs and Aristotelian concepts...
June 4, 2024
A TRUE “CLASSIC� OF MEDIEVAL JEWISH PHILOSOPHICAL THOUGHT
Moses ben Maimon (1135-1204; often known as the 'Rambam') was a medieval Sephardic Jewish philosopher who was one of the most influential Torah scholars of the Middle Ages. This book was written in about 1190.
He wrote in the Introduction, “This treatise has as its principal object to clarify the meaning of certain terms in the Bible. Of these, some are words bearing several meanings� and ignorant people persist in taking them always in one of those meanings. Others are used in a metaphorical sense: these same people take them in their primary sense. Others are of an ambiguous � character, making sometimes the impression of being employed in their conventional sense, and sometimes of possessing several meanings. The aim of our treatise is, however, not to explain all these terms to the vulgar crowd or to mere beginners in philosophy, or even to those who study nothing but the Law---i.e., the legal and the ritual aspects of our religion�
“Its aim is rather to stimulate the mind of the religious man who has arrived at deep-set belief in the truth of our faith and who is perfect in the religious and moral sense. If such a man has also made a study of the philosophical sciences and grasped their meaning, and feels attracted to rationalism and at home with it, he may be worried about the literal meaning of some scriptural passages � as they are explained to him. He will thus fall into confusion and be faced by a dilemma: either he follows his reason and rejects those expressions as he understands them: then he will think that he is rejecting the dogmas of our religion. Or else he continues to accept them in the way he has been taught and refuses to be guided by his reason� and yet he cannot help feeling that his faith has been gravely impaired� This treatise has a second purpose, namely, to throw light on some exceedingly recondite similes which appear in the prophetic books…Only when one � points out that they are similes, can he find the right way and be relieved of his perplexity. This is the reason why I have called this treatise ‘Guide of the Perplexed.’� (Pg. 41-42)
He requests, “I implore every reader of this treatise � not to interpret even a single word of it to anyone else unless it clearly agrees with the opinions expressed by former authoritative writers on our Law. If he understands any of it in such a way as not to agree with the views of my illustrious predecessors, let him not so interpret it to others� for it may well be that he has misunderstood my words.� (Pg. 46)
He recounts, “Some years ago a certain man well versed in the sciences� said that from the simple meaning of Scripture it appeared that at first it had been intended for man to be like the other animals without intellect� and without any ability to distinguish between good and evil When he had rebelled� his rebellion brought him that immense perfection which makes man so unique� What else is this than the story we are told of a man who was rebellious and exceedingly wicked, and in the end was transformed into a star and placed into the sky?... I said: You go in for philosophy � and you think you can understand a book, which has guided ancients and moderns, in passing, in a few moments snatched from drinking and lovemaking, just as you would glance at a book of histories or of poetry? Stay and think, for the matter is not as it appears to you at first blush, but as will emerge when we give our full consideration to the passage.� (Pg. 54)
He explains, “The discussion of [God’s] attributes� are profound matters, true ‘secrets of the Law.� � The rejection of anthropomorphism� are matters that must be publicly declared and explained to everyone according to his power of comprehension� Acknowledgement of the unity of God is not possible without denying that He has a body, because a body is not One, but composed of matter and form---that is two in one---and is divisible and consists of parts.� (Pg. 64)
He argues, “There is� no possible true relation between Him and anything He has created, because relation can at any time be only between two things of the same immediate species, but if they are merely of the same class no relation can exist between them� How then could there be any relation between God and any creature when there is that immense difference in the nature of existence, greater than which no difference can ever be.� (Pg. 70)
He states, “According to our view� it is obvious that [things, and the world] are there by intention, not by necessity. It is possible that He who intended can change them and have another intention� My purpose� is to demonstrate to you with arguments almost amounting to proof that this universe of ours indicates to us that it is necessarily due to intention.� (Pg. 109-110)
He asserts, “our reason for rejecting the eternity of the world is not to be sought in any text of the Torah which says that the world is created. The passages which indicate that the world is created are no more numerous than those that indicate that God is a body. The method of allegorical interpretation is not less possible or permissible in the matter of the world being created than in any other� our belief that God is not a body does not destroy in our eyes any of the ordinances of the Law or belie the statements of any prophet. There is nothing contrary to Scripture in it, except that the ignorant think it is� there is no contradiction, but this is the real intention of the text.� (Pg. 114-115)
He observes, “Nothing like the mission of Moses to us ever took place in any society known to us from Adam until Moses, nor has any similar mission every been accorded after him to any of our prophets. It is, indeed, the foundation of our Law that no other will ever take place. Therefore, according to our opinion, there never was nor ever will be more than one Law, namely that of Moses.� (Pg. 140)
He notes, “I believe that divine providence extends� only and alone to human individuals. The human species is the only one in which all conditions of individuals and the good and evil that befalls them are according to deserts� With regard to other animals, and still more so to plants and other things, my view is identical with that of Aristotle: I do not believe � that this leaf has fallen because of any providential act, or that this spider has caught that fly through the personal and actual will of God� All this I hold to be pure chance, just as Aristotle does. Divine providence, in my opinion, follows in the wake of divine emanation.� (Pg. 166)
He concludes, “This, then, is all that I intended to lay down in this treatise, believing that it would be of great benefit to the likes of you. I hope for your sake that after thorough study you will grasp every idea which I have included in this book with the help of God.� (Pg. 202)
This book will be “must reading� for students of Jewish philosophy and theology, and Medieval philosophy.�
Moses ben Maimon (1135-1204; often known as the 'Rambam') was a medieval Sephardic Jewish philosopher who was one of the most influential Torah scholars of the Middle Ages. This book was written in about 1190.
He wrote in the Introduction, “This treatise has as its principal object to clarify the meaning of certain terms in the Bible. Of these, some are words bearing several meanings� and ignorant people persist in taking them always in one of those meanings. Others are used in a metaphorical sense: these same people take them in their primary sense. Others are of an ambiguous � character, making sometimes the impression of being employed in their conventional sense, and sometimes of possessing several meanings. The aim of our treatise is, however, not to explain all these terms to the vulgar crowd or to mere beginners in philosophy, or even to those who study nothing but the Law---i.e., the legal and the ritual aspects of our religion�
“Its aim is rather to stimulate the mind of the religious man who has arrived at deep-set belief in the truth of our faith and who is perfect in the religious and moral sense. If such a man has also made a study of the philosophical sciences and grasped their meaning, and feels attracted to rationalism and at home with it, he may be worried about the literal meaning of some scriptural passages � as they are explained to him. He will thus fall into confusion and be faced by a dilemma: either he follows his reason and rejects those expressions as he understands them: then he will think that he is rejecting the dogmas of our religion. Or else he continues to accept them in the way he has been taught and refuses to be guided by his reason� and yet he cannot help feeling that his faith has been gravely impaired� This treatise has a second purpose, namely, to throw light on some exceedingly recondite similes which appear in the prophetic books…Only when one � points out that they are similes, can he find the right way and be relieved of his perplexity. This is the reason why I have called this treatise ‘Guide of the Perplexed.’� (Pg. 41-42)
He requests, “I implore every reader of this treatise � not to interpret even a single word of it to anyone else unless it clearly agrees with the opinions expressed by former authoritative writers on our Law. If he understands any of it in such a way as not to agree with the views of my illustrious predecessors, let him not so interpret it to others� for it may well be that he has misunderstood my words.� (Pg. 46)
He recounts, “Some years ago a certain man well versed in the sciences� said that from the simple meaning of Scripture it appeared that at first it had been intended for man to be like the other animals without intellect� and without any ability to distinguish between good and evil When he had rebelled� his rebellion brought him that immense perfection which makes man so unique� What else is this than the story we are told of a man who was rebellious and exceedingly wicked, and in the end was transformed into a star and placed into the sky?... I said: You go in for philosophy � and you think you can understand a book, which has guided ancients and moderns, in passing, in a few moments snatched from drinking and lovemaking, just as you would glance at a book of histories or of poetry? Stay and think, for the matter is not as it appears to you at first blush, but as will emerge when we give our full consideration to the passage.� (Pg. 54)
He explains, “The discussion of [God’s] attributes� are profound matters, true ‘secrets of the Law.� � The rejection of anthropomorphism� are matters that must be publicly declared and explained to everyone according to his power of comprehension� Acknowledgement of the unity of God is not possible without denying that He has a body, because a body is not One, but composed of matter and form---that is two in one---and is divisible and consists of parts.� (Pg. 64)
He argues, “There is� no possible true relation between Him and anything He has created, because relation can at any time be only between two things of the same immediate species, but if they are merely of the same class no relation can exist between them� How then could there be any relation between God and any creature when there is that immense difference in the nature of existence, greater than which no difference can ever be.� (Pg. 70)
He states, “According to our view� it is obvious that [things, and the world] are there by intention, not by necessity. It is possible that He who intended can change them and have another intention� My purpose� is to demonstrate to you with arguments almost amounting to proof that this universe of ours indicates to us that it is necessarily due to intention.� (Pg. 109-110)
He asserts, “our reason for rejecting the eternity of the world is not to be sought in any text of the Torah which says that the world is created. The passages which indicate that the world is created are no more numerous than those that indicate that God is a body. The method of allegorical interpretation is not less possible or permissible in the matter of the world being created than in any other� our belief that God is not a body does not destroy in our eyes any of the ordinances of the Law or belie the statements of any prophet. There is nothing contrary to Scripture in it, except that the ignorant think it is� there is no contradiction, but this is the real intention of the text.� (Pg. 114-115)
He observes, “Nothing like the mission of Moses to us ever took place in any society known to us from Adam until Moses, nor has any similar mission every been accorded after him to any of our prophets. It is, indeed, the foundation of our Law that no other will ever take place. Therefore, according to our opinion, there never was nor ever will be more than one Law, namely that of Moses.� (Pg. 140)
He notes, “I believe that divine providence extends� only and alone to human individuals. The human species is the only one in which all conditions of individuals and the good and evil that befalls them are according to deserts� With regard to other animals, and still more so to plants and other things, my view is identical with that of Aristotle: I do not believe � that this leaf has fallen because of any providential act, or that this spider has caught that fly through the personal and actual will of God� All this I hold to be pure chance, just as Aristotle does. Divine providence, in my opinion, follows in the wake of divine emanation.� (Pg. 166)
He concludes, “This, then, is all that I intended to lay down in this treatise, believing that it would be of great benefit to the likes of you. I hope for your sake that after thorough study you will grasp every idea which I have included in this book with the help of God.� (Pg. 202)
This book will be “must reading� for students of Jewish philosophy and theology, and Medieval philosophy.�
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.