It is at this point that Maimonides’ task becomes difficult. Armed with
this _a priori_ judgment, he comes to close quarters with the _Torah_:
and he finds that in many matters, both of theory and of practice, it
is, if taken at its face value, diametrically opposed to what his
pre-conceived ideas would lead him to expect. The beliefs embodied in
the _Torah_ seem to be directly opposed to the most fundamental
philosophical truths of Maimonides’ system; the actions prescribed in
the _Torah_ contain much that it is difficult to reconcile with the
social purpose of the divine religion as conceived by that system. What
course, then, was open to Maimonides? To compromise between
philosophical and religious truth, as many had done before, was for him
impossible. For every compromise means simply that both sides give way;
and how could Maimonides, with his conviction that the attainment of
truth by means of proof is the end of human existence and the only way
to eternal happiness, give up one jot of this truth for the sake of
another truth, of inferior value inasmuch as it has come to us only
through tradition? Thus he has but one possible course. Necessity
compels him to subdue religion absolutely to the demands of philosophy:
in other words, to explain the words of the _Torah_ throughout in
conformity with the truth of philosophy, and to make the _Torah_ fulfil
in every part the function which philosophy imposes on it.
This necessity worked wonders. By dint of enormous labour Maimonides
discovered various extraordinary ways of interpreting the _Torah_; with
wonderful skill he found support for his interpretations in words and
phrases scattered about the Scriptures and the Talmud; until at last he
succeeded in making religion what it had to be according to his belief.
This is not the place to explain Maimonides’ methods of exegesis in
detail. For us to-day they are but a sort of monument to the weakness of
the written word in the face of a living psychological force which
demands that “yes” shall become “no” and “no” be turned into “yes.” This
psychological force led Maimonides to turn the “living God” of the
_Torah_ into an abstract philosophical conception, empty of all content
except a collection of negations; to make the “Righteous Man” of Judaism
a philosopher blessed with “acquired intellect”; to transform the
“future world” of the Talmud into the union of the acquired intellect
with the “active intellect”; to metamorphose the Biblical penalty of
“cutting off” into the disappearance of the form when the matter is
resolved: and so forth. All this he did in conformity with his
“philosophic truth,” of which he refused to change one atom.[123]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account