5. Those who “have come into the ante-chamber”—that is, “those who
undertake to investigate the principles of religion,” or those who have
“learnt to understand Physics.”
6. Those who have reached the highest stage, that of being “with the
king in the same palace.” These are they “who have mastered
Metaphysics—who have succeeded in finding a proof for everything that
can be proved—who have a true knowledge of God, so far as true knowledge
can be attained, and are near to the truth wherever only an approach to
the truth is possible.”[130]
In this classification Maimonides sets forth his ethical system in plain
terms, with perfect coldness and calm, as though there were nothing
startling about it. We of the present day feel our moral sense
particularly outraged by his cruel treatment of the second class—“those
who happen to hold false doctrines”—though we can understand that a
logical thinker like Maimonides, who always went the whole length of his
convictions, was bound to draw this conclusion from his philosophical
system. For that system regards “true opinions” as something much more
than “opinions”: it attributes to them the wonderful power of turning
the reasoning faculty into a separate and eternal being, and sees
therefore in the opposite opinions a danger to life in the most real
sense. But in Maimonides’ day the persecution of men for holding false
opinions was a common thing (though it was done in the name of religion,
not of philosophy); and even this piece of philosophic ruthlessness
created no stir and aroused no contemporary protest. What did stir
contemporary feeling to its depths was another conclusion involved in
his classification: namely, “that philosophers who occupy themselves
with physics and metaphysics are on a higher plane than men who occupy
themselves with the Torah.”[131] Whoever knows in what esteem our
ancestors of that period held the study of the _Torah_ will not be
surprised that “many wise men and Rabbis” were driven to the conclusion
that “this chapter was not written by the Master, or if it was, it
should be suppressed, or, best of all, burnt.”[132]
Poor, simple men! They did not see that this chapter could not be either
suppressed or burnt except in company with all the other chapters of
Maimonides’ system, which led him inevitably to this extreme conclusion.
But there were other men in Israel who saw more clearly, and actually
condemned all the chapters to the fire. To them we shall return later.
III
The supremacy of Reason! Can we to-day, after the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries, conceive how tremendous, how fundamental a
revolution the phrase implied in the time of Maimonides?
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