Part of a series on |
Jewish culture |
---|
Judaism portal |
Part of a series on |
Jews and Judaism |
---|
Jewish philosophy refers to the conjunction between serious study of philosophy and Jewish theology. In a broad sense, it refers to all philosophical activity carried out by Jews or in relation to the religion of Judaism. In the narrow sense, it is often used to refer to the views of the medieval Jewish scholastics, influenced by Aristotle to a greater or lesser extent.
Ancient Jewish philosophy
Biblical philosophy
Israel, as a nation of people, did not exist until the revelation at Mount Sinai. The origins of Judaism are uncertain - what is undeniable is the practices of daily prayer as proxy for temple sacrifices, observance of kashrut, family purity, and good deeds have been performed by the Nation of Israel for millenia. Technically speaking, any philosophy harbored by various Israelite tribes was not necessarily shared by all other tribes until King David united the Tribes. Rabbinic Tradition suggests that until Saadia Gaon there was no clear codification of Jewish Philosophy nor a defense of it in the face of challenges from emergent Christian, Karaite and Muslim philosophers.
Many have attempted to stipulate that the Patriarch Abraham introduced a philosophy into his teaching as he learned from Melchizedek. Whether this is true we cannot definitively delcare. [citation needed] Talmud Bereishis Rabba (39,1) tells how Abraham understood this world to have a creator and director by comparing this world to a house with a light in it, what is now called the "Argument from design". Nonetheless we have no historical works from which to derive Abraham's Biblical Philosophy. Many scholars assume that Melchizedek influenced Abram's views Genesis 14:17-24 tells how Abram returns from defeating king Chedorlaomer and his associates and meets with the king of Sodom. Abraham was the first documented human to conceive of a single God. Beyond monotheism we know nothing of Abraham's philosophy if he had one that was richer than monotheism.
The Book of Psalms contains appeals to philosophical speculation, such as invitations to admire the wisdom of God through his works. Other books of philosophical interest are Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.
Philo of Alexandria
Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE - 40 CE) was a Hellenized Jewish philosopher born in Alexandria, Egypt.
Philo included in his philosophy both the wisdom of Ancient Greece and Judaism, which he sought to fuse and harmonize by means of the art of allegory that he had learned as much from Jewish exegesis as from the Stoics. His work was not widely accepted in Judaism, though it later became important to Christian theologians. Philo made his philosophy the means of defending and justifying Jewish religious truths. These truths he regarded as fixed and determinate; and philosophy was used as an aid to truth, and as a means of arriving at it. With this end in view Philo chose from the philosophical tenets of the Greeks, refusing those that did not harmonize with the Jewish religion, as, e.g., the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity and indestructibility of the world.
Medieval Jewish philosophy
Early Jewish philosophy was heavily influenced by the philosophy of Plato, Aristotle and Islamic philosophy. Many early medieval Jewish philosophers (from the 8th century to end of the 9th century) were especially influenced by the Islamic Mutazilite philosophers; they denied all limiting attributes of God and were champions of God's unity and justice.
A path towards synthesis is to apply analytical philosophy to one's own religion in order to strengthen the basis of that faith. Among Jewish thinkers who had this view one may note Saadia Gaon, Gersonides, and Abraham Ibn Daud. In this latter case a religious person would also be a philosopher, by asking questions such as:
- What is the nature of God? How do we know that God exists?
- What is the nature of revelation? How do we know that God reveals his will to mankind?
- Which of our religious traditions must be interpreted literally?
- Which of our religious traditions must be interpreted allegorically?
- What must one actually believe to be considered a true adherent of our religion?
- How can one reconcile the findings of philosophy with religion?
- How can one reconcile the findings of science with religion?
According to some views, this may perhaps be the task of Jewish philosophy, but there is no way to end the debate conclusively. Over time Aristotle came to be thought of as the philosopher par excellence among Jewish thinkers. This tendency was no less marked in the Islamic, the Christian Byzantine and the Latin-Christian schools of thought.
Saadia Gaon
Saadia Gaon (born in Dilaẓ, Upper Egypt, 892; died at Sura 942) (a/k/a Saadia Ibn Yosef, a/k/a Sa'id al-Fayyumi)is considered one of the greatest of the early Jewish philosophers. His Emunoth ve-Deoth (Beliefs and opinions) was originally called Kitab al-Amanat wal-l'tikadat, the "Book of the Articles of Faith and Doctrines of Dogma". It was the first systematic presentation and philosophic foundation of the dogmas of Judaism, completed in 933.
In it he posits the rationality of the Jewish faith, with the restriction that reason must capitulate wherever it contradicts tradition. Dogma must take precedence of reason. Thus in the question concerning the eternity of the world, reason teaches since Aristotle, that the world is without beginning; that it was not created; in contrast, Jewish dogma asserts a creation out of nothing. Since the time of Aristotle it was held that logical reasoning could only prove the existence of a general form of immortality, and that no form of individual immortality could exist. Mainstream Jewish dogma, in contrast, maintained the immortality of the individual. Reason, therefore, must give way in Saadia's view.
In the scheme of his work Saadia closely followed the rules of the Mutazilites (the rationalistic dogmatists of Islam, to whom he owed in part also his thesis and arguments), adhering most frequently to the Mutazilite school of Al-Jubbai. Mas'udi, a Mohammedan author who died in 957, states that Saadia was a pupil of Abu Kathir[1], with whom Mas'udi himself carried on a disputation in Palestine. It was in his twentieth year (913) that Saadia completed his first great work, the Hebrew dictionary which he entitled "Agron." In his twenty-third year, according to a verse contained in Abraham ibn Ezra's "Yesod Mispar," he composed a polemical work against Anan, thus apparently beginning the activity which was to prove so important in opposition to Karaism and other heresies and in defense of traditional Judaism.
Saadia followed the Mutazilite Kalam, especially in this respect, that in the first two sections he discussed the metaphysical problems of the creation of the world (i.) and the unity of God (ii.), while in the following sections he treated of the Jewish theory of revelation (iii.) and of the doctrines of belief based upon divine justice, including obedience and disobedience (iv.), as well as merit and demerit (v.). Closely connected with these sections are those which treat of the soul and of death (vi.), and of the resurrection of the dead (vii.), which, according to the author, forms part of the theory of the messiah in whatever form a messiah may be recognnized (viii.). The work concludes with a section on the rewards and punishments of the future life (ix.)
Isaac Israeli ben Solomon
Isaac Israeli ben Solomon (c.Egypt, 832 – Kairouan, 932), (Hebrew: Yitzhak ben Shlomo ha-Yisraeli; Arabic: Abu Ya'qub Ishaq ibn Suleiman al-Isra'ili), also known as Isaac Israeli the Elder, was one of the foremost physicians and philosophers of his time. He is regarded as the father of medieval Jewish Neoplatonism. His works, which were translated into Hebrew, Latin and Spanish, were current throughout the Middle Ages and published as late as 1515.
Israeli's philosophical works exercised considerable influence on Christian and Jewish thinkers, and a lesser degree of influence among Muslim intellectuals of the Kalam School. In the twelfth century, a group of scholars in Toledo transmitted many Arabic works of science and philosophy into Latin. One of the translators, Gerard of Cremona, rendered Israeli's Book of Definitions and Book on the Elements into Latin. Israeli's work was quoted and paraphrased by a number of Christian thinkers including Gundissalinus, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, Vincent de Beauvais, Bonaventura, Roger Bacon and Nicholas of Cusa. Isaac Israeli's philosophical influence on Muslim authors is slight at best. The only known quotation of Israeli's philosophy in a Muslim work occurs in Ghayat al-Hakim, a book on magic, produced in eleventh-century Spain, translated into Latin and widely circulated in the West under the title Picatrix. Although there are passages which correspond directly to Israeli's writings, the author does not cite him by name.
His influence also extened to Moses Ibn Ezra (c. 1060-1139) who quotes Isaac Israeli without attribution in his treatise The Book of the Garden, explaining the meaning of Metaphor and Literal Expression. The poet and philosopher Joseph Ibn Tzaddiq of Cordoba (d. 1149) authored a work The Microcosm containing many ideas indebted to Israeli.
As Neoplatonist philosophy waned, in addition to the Galenic medical tradition of which Israeli was a part, the appreciable influence of Isaac Israeli diminished as well.
David Ibn Marwān al-Mukammas
David Abū Sulaymān Ibn Marwān Ar-raqqī Al-mukammas (a/k/a David (abu Sulaiman) ibn Merwan al-Mukkamas al-Rakkia, /k/a David Ha-Bavli, a/k/a David ben Merwan al-Mukammas, abt 900 CE - 937, Raqqah, Mesopotamia) Syrian philosopher and polemicist, is regarded as the father of Jewish medieval philosophy. Al-Mukammas was the first Jewish thinker to introduce the methods of Kalam (Arab religious philosophy) into Judaism and the first Jew to mention Aristotle in his writings. He cited Greek and Arab authorities, but his own Jewishness was not apparent in his writings, since he never quoted the Torah. Among the subjects presented in his work ʿIshrūn maqālāt are a proof of God’s existence and his creation of the world, a discussion of the reality of science, the substantial and accidental composition of the world, the utility of prophecy and prophets, and the signs of true prophets and prophecy. Al-Mukammas also wrote on Jewish sects.
In 1898 Abraham Harkavy discovered, in the Imperial Library of St. Petersburg, fifteen of the twenty chapters of David's philosophical work entitled Ishrun Maḳalat (Twenty Chapters). The subject-matter of these fifteen chapters is as follows:
1. The Aristotelian categories 2. Science and the reality of its existence 3. The creation of the world 4. The evidence that it is composed of substance and accidents 5. The properties of substance and accident 6. A criticism of those who maintain the eternity of matter 7. Arguments in favor of the existence of God and His creation of the world 8. The unity of God, refuting the Sabians, the Dualists, and the Christians 9. The divine attributes 10. Refutation of anthropomorphism and Christian ideas 11. Why God became our Lord 12. Showing that God created us for good and not for evil, and combating absolute pessimism as well as absolute optimism 13. The utility of prophecy and prophets 14. Signs of true prophecy and true prophets 15. Mandatory and prohibitive commandments.
David is the first Jewish author who mentions Aristotle (Jew. Quart. Rev. xiii.450)
Yitzhkak ben Yaakob HaKohen Alfasi "The Rif"
Rabbi Yitzhkak ben Yaakob HaKohen Alfasi (1013 - 1103) (a/k/a Isaac Alfasi, a/k/a "The Rif" (רי"ף) - was a Talmudist and posek. He is best known for his work of halakha, the legal code Sefer Ha-halachot, considered the first fundamental work in halakhic literature. He was born near Fes in Morocco, and spent the majority of his career there, and is therefore known as Alfasi ("of Fes" in Arabic ).
Firstly, "the Rif" succeeded in producing a Digest, which became the object of close study, and led in its turn to the Mishneh Torah by Maimonides and Shulchan Aruch of Rabbi Joseph Karo. Secondly, it served as one of the "Three Pillars of Halachah", as an authority underpinning both the Arba'ah Turim and the Shulchan Aruch. Rabbi Nissim of Gerona (the RaN) compiled a detailed and explicit commentary on this work; In yeshivot "the Rif and the RaN" are regularly studied as part of the daily Talmudic schedule.
This work was published prior to the times of Rashi and other commentaries, and resulted in a profound change in the study practices of the scholarly Jewish public in that it opened the world of the gemara to the public at large. It soon became known as the Talmud Katan ("Little Talmud"). At the close of the Middle Ages, when the Talmud was banned in Italy, Alfasi's code was exempted so that from the 16th to the 19th centuries his work was the primary subject of study of the Italian Jewish community. Alfasi also occupies an important place in the development of the Sephardi method of studying the Talmud. In contradistinction to the Ashkenazi approach, the Sephardim sought to simplify the Talmud and free it from casuistical detail; see for e.g. Chananel Ben Chushiel. Rashi (1064-1105), whose genial activity began before the first crusade, opened up Jewish religious literature to the popular mind, by his systematic commentaries on Torah and Talmud. On the other hand, the Tosafists, the school of commentators succeeding him, by their seemingly petty quibbling and hairsplitting abuse of casuistry made the Talmudic books more intricate and less intelligible. Where the Spehardim wanted Jewish scholarship to be available to all Jews, albeit in a simplified codification, the Ashkenazic community wanted study and training in Torah and Talmud to be the central role of Jewish Life; leaving Rabbis central to Rabbinic Judaism.
Notable students of Alfasi include Judah Ha-Levi and the Rambam's father. The Rambam later wrote that Alfasi's work "has superseded all the geonic codes…for it contains all the decisions and laws which we need in our day…"
Avicebron, Solomon ibn Gabirol
The Jewish poet-philosopher Solomon Ibn Gabirol is also known as Avicebron. He was born in Málaga about 1021, died about 1058 in Valencia. He was influenced by Plato. His classic work on philosophy was Mekor Chayim, "The Source of Life". His work on ethics is entitled Tikkun Middot HaNefesh, "Correcting the Qualities of the Soul".
In Gabirol's work Plato is the only philosopher referred to by name. Characteristic of the philosophy of both is the conception of a Middle Being between God and the world, between species and individual. Aristotle had already formulated the objection to the Platonic theory of ideas, that it lacked an intermediary or third being between God and the universe, between form and matter. This "third man," this link between incorporeal substances (ideas) and idealess bodies (matter), is, with Philo, the Logos; with Gabirol it is the divine will. Philo gives the problem an intellectual aspect; while Gabirol conceives it as a matter of volition, approximating thus to such modern thinkers as Schopenhauer and Wundt.
Gabirol was one of the first teachers of Neoplatonism in Europe. His role has been compared to that of Philo. Philo had served as the intermediary between Greek philosophy and the Oriental world; a thousand years later Gabirol occidentalized Greco-Arabic philosophy and restored it to Europe. The philosophical teachings of Philo and Ibn Gabirol were largely ignored by their fellow Jews; the parallel may be extended by adding that Philo and Gabirol alike exercised a considerable influence in extra-Jewish circles: Philo upon early Christianity, and Ibn Gabirol upon the scholasticism of medieval Christianity.
Gabirol's philosophy made little impression on later Jewish philosophers. His greatest impact is in the area of the Jewish liturgy. His work is quoted by Moses ibn Ezra and Abraham ibn Ezra. Christian scholastics, including Albertus Magnus and his pupil, Thomas Aquinas, defer to him frequently and gratefully.
Karaite philosophy
Karaism is a mosaic of various Jewish groups in Mesopotamia, that rejected Talmudic tradition as innovation. Kariates may also be the remnant of the Sadducees, the Second Temple priestly class who rejected the Pharisees' claim to an "Oral Law". Some suggest that the major impetus for the formation of Karaism was a reaction to the rise of Shi'a Islam, which recognized Judaism as a fellow monotheistic faith, but claimed that it detracted from this monotheism by deferring to rabbinic authority.
In the 9th century CE Anan ben David and his followers absorbed sects such the Isawites (followers of Abu Isa al-Isfahani), Yudghanites and the remnants of the pre-Talmudic Sadducees and Boethusians. It must be noted that the Boethusians were an offshoot movement of the Sadducees that differed on issues of purity, and calendarical issues. Anan led a polemic with the rabbinical establishment and later non-Ananist sects emerged, like the Ukbarites.
The dispute between Saadiah Gaon and the Karaites helped to consolidate the split between them. [2]
Bahya ben Joseph ibn Paquda
Bahya ibn Paquda lived in Spain in the first half of the eleventh century. He was the author of the first Jewish system of ethics, written in Arabic in 1040 under the title Al Hidayah ila Faraid al-hulub, "Guide to the Duties of the Heart", and translated into Hebrew by Judah ben Saul ibn Tibbon in 1161-1180 under the title Chovot ha-Levavot, 'Duties of the Heart'.
Though he quotes Saadia Gaon's works frequently, he belongs not to the rationalistic school of the Motazilities whom Saadia follows, but, like his somewhat younger contemporary, Solomon ibn Gabirol (1021-1070), is an adherent of Neoplatonic mysticism. He often followed the method of the Arabian encyclopedists known as "the Brethren of Purity".
Inclined to contemplative mysticism and asceticism, Bahya eliminated from his system every element that he felt might obscure monotheism, or might interfere with Jewish law. He wanted to present a religious system at once lofty and pure and in full accord with reason.
ibn Paquda's Religious Philosophy, The Ḥobot ha-Lebabot is divided into ten sections termed "gates," corresponding to the ten fundamental principles which, according to his view, constitute man's spiritual life. The essence of all spirituality being the recognition of God as the one maker and designer of all things, Baḥya makes the "Sha'ar ha-Yiḥud" (Gate of the Divine Unity, or of the monotheistic faith) the first and foremost section. Taking the Jewish Confession, "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God the Lord is One," as a starting-point, the author emphasizes the fact that for religious life it is not so much a matter of the intellect to know God as it is a matter of the heart to own and to love Him. Yet it is not sufficient to accept this belief in God without thinking, as the child does, or because the fathers have taught so, as do the blind believers in tradition, who have no opinion of their own and are led by others. Nor should the belief in God be such as might in any way be liable to be understood in a corporeal or anthropomorphic sense, but it should rest on conviction which is the result of the most comprehensive knowledge and research. Far from demanding blind belief—which is anything but meritorious—the Torah, on the contrary, appeals to reason and knowledge as proofs of God's existence, as is shown, for instance, in Deut. iv. 6. It is therefore a duty incumbent upon every one to make God an object of speculative reason and knowledge, in order to arrive at true faith.
Without intending to give a compendium of metaphysics, Baḥya furnishes in this first gate a system of religious philosophy that is not without merit. Unfamiliar with Avicenna's works, which replaced Neoplatonic mysticism by clear Aristotelian thought, Baḥya, like all the Arabian philosophers and theologians before him, bases his arguments upon Creation. He starts from the following three premises: (1) Nothing creates itself, since the act of creating necessitates its existence (so also Saadia, "Emunot," i. 2); (2) the causes of things are necessarily limited in number, and lead to the presumption of a first cause which is necessarily self-existent, having neither beginning nor end, because everything that has an end must needs have a beginning; (3) all composite beings have a beginning; and a cause must necessarily be created. The world is beautifully arranged and furnished like a great house, of which the sky forms the ceiling, the earth the floor, the stars the lamps, and man is the proprietor, to whom the three kingdoms—the animal, the vegetable, and the mineral—are submitted for use, each of these being composed of the four elements. Nor does the celestial sphere, composed of a fifth element —"Quinta Essentia," according to Aristotle, and of fire, according to others—make an exception. These four elements themselves are composed of matter and form, of substance and accidental qualities, such as warmth and cold, state of motion and of rest, and so forth. Consequently the universe, being a combination of many forces, must have a creative power as its cause. Nor can the existence of the world be due to mere chance. Where there is purpose manifested, there must have been wisdom at work. Ink spilled accidentally upon a sheet of paper can not produce legible writing.
Yehuda Halevi and the Kuzari
The Jewish poet-philosopher Yehuda Halevi (1075–1141) in his polemical work Kuzari made strenuous arguments defending traditional rabbinic Judaism against rival systems, including Aristotelian philosophy, Christianity and Karaism. Karaism was ascendant in Al Andalus at that time.
The position of Judah ha-Levi in the domain of Jewish philosophy is parallel to that occupied in Islam by Al-Ghazali [Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-Ghazālī (1058-1111)], by whom he was influenced. Like Al-Ghazali, Judah endeavored to liberate religion from the bondage of the various philosophical systems. In a work written in Arabic, and entitled Kitab al-Ḥujjah wal-Dalil fi Nuṣr al-Din al-Dhalil, كتاب الحجة و الدليل في نصرة الدين الذليل, (known in the Hebrew translation of Judah ben Saul ibn Tibbon by the title Sefer ha-Kuzari), Judah ha-Levi expounded upon his view of Judaism, which he defended against the positions of non-Jewish philosophers, against Karaism, Mozarabic Christianity and those he viewed as "heretics" who practiced what he considered distorted means of Torah study. The Kuzari describes representatives of different religions and of philosophy disputing before the king of the Khazars concerning the respective merits of the systems they stand for, the victory being ultimately awarded to Rabbinic Judaism.
Ha-Levi wrote before Maimonides, and it would be anachronistic to regard him as an "anti-Maimonidean": rather, his attack was aimed at an unthinking acceptance of the philosophy of Avicenna. However, many of his arguments were reprised by the Anti-Maimonidean movement of the thirteenth century. This school considered Maimonidean rationalism equivalent to Karaism and concluded Maimonidean rationalism to be false and illusory - thereby undermining rabbinic tradition, including Gaonic Rationalism as expressed by Rav Saadiah Gaon; rather inward illumination based on truths instilled by God in the human soul is considered paramount.
As among the Arabs, Avicenna and Averroes leaned more and more on Aristotle, so among the Jews did Abraham ibn Daud and Maimonides and all of the great minds of Al Andalus until the arrival of Frankish anti-Maimonideans, in Barcelona, who recruited Catholic Dominican monks to burn the writings of Maimonides.[3]
Abraham ibn Daud
Abraham ibn Daud (Hebrew Avraham ben David ha-Levi; Arabic ابراهيم ابن داود) was a Spanish-Jewish astronomer, historian, and philosopher; born at Toledo, Spain about 1110-died a martyr abt 1180. He is sometimes known by the abbreviation Rabad I or Ravad I. His chronicle, a work written in 1161 under the title of Sefer ha-Kabbalah (Book of Tradition), in which he fiercely attacked the contentions of Karaism and justified rabbinical Judaism by the establishment of a chain of traditions from Moses to his own time, is replete with valuable general information, especially relating to the time of the Geonim and to the history of the Jews in Spain. An astronomical work written by him in 1180 is favorably noticed by Isaac Israeli the Younger ("Yesod 'Olam," iv. 18). His philosophical work, Al-'akidah al-Rafiyah (The Sublime Faith), written in 1168, in Arabic, has been preserved in two Hebrew translations: one by Solomon ben Labi, with the title Emunah Ramah; the other by Samuel Motot. Labi's translation was retranslated into German and published by Simshon Weil.
Ibn Daud was by no means an original thinker, nor did he produce a new philosophy; but he was the first to introduce that phase of Jewish philosophy which is generally attributed to Maimonides and which differs from former systems of philosophy mainly in its more thorough systematic form derived from Aristotle. Accordingly, Hasdai Crescas mentions Ibn Daud as the only Jewish philosopher among the predecessors of Maimonides (Or Adonai, ch. i.). But having been completely overshadowed by Maimonides' classical work, the Moreh Nebukim, Abraham ibn Daud's Emunah Ramah ("Sublime Faith"), a work to which Maimonides himself was indebted for many valuable suggestions, received scant notice from later philosophers.
The only Jewish philosophical works that Ibn Daud had before him, according to his own statement ("Emunah Ramah," p. 2, or in German trans., p. 3), were Saadia's Emunot we-De'ot, and "The Fountain of Life" by Solomon ibn Gabirol. On the one hand, he fully recognizes the merits of Saadia Gaon, although he does not adopt his views on the freedom of the will, notwithstanding that the solution of this problem was to be the chief aim and purpose of his whole system ("Emunah Ramah," p. 98; German trans., p. 125). On the other hand, his attitude toward Gabirol is entirely antagonistic, and even in the preface to his "Emunah Ramah" he pitilessly condemns Gabirol's "Fountain of Life." See Kaufmann, "Studien über Solomon ibn Gabirol," Budapest, 1899.
Being the first strict Aristotelian among the Jews—who considered Aristotle and his Arabic commentators, Alfarabi and Ibn Sina, to be the only true philosophers (ib. pp. 23, 50, 62; German trans., pp. 30, 65, 78)—Ibn Daud feels himself provoked to constant opposition by the doctrines of Gabirol, who represents the Neoplatonic philosophy. Impartial enough to accord to childlike faith its full rights, Ibn Daud desires also to defend the rights of reason, and, consequently, resists with the utmost energy any attempt to set bounds to science; regarding this as a culpable encroachment upon the plan of the Divine Ruler, who did not endow man with the faculty of thought without intent.
True philosophy, according to Ibn Daud, does not entice us from religion; it tends rather to strengthen and solidify it. Moreover, it is the duty of every thinking Jew to become acquainted with the harmony existing between the fundamental doctrines of Judaism and those of philosophy, and, wherever they seem to contradict one another, to seek a mode of reconciling them. Ibn Daud insists that, however highly philosophy may be valued, the religion of Judaism is preferable.
It has not yet been established with any certainty whether Abraham ibn Daud is one and the same person as the twelfth-century Arabic-Latin translator Avendauth, also known as “Avendeut philosophus israelita”, who collaborated with Dominicus Gundissalinus in Toledo. However, the fact that three of Ibn Daud's major sources relate to the translation activities of Avendauth and Gundissalinus seems to suggest that they are indeed the same person.
Abraham ibn Daud's importance lies in the fact that he was the first to present a coherent systematic interpretation of Judaism in light of the new challenge, namely Muslim Aristotelianism. The sustained use of Aristotelian doctrines and logical reasoning clearly distinguishes ER from the writings of earlier Jewish philosophers. Moreover, the manner in which he incorporates his Muslim (and to a lesser extent) Jewish sources in a carefully structured system in order to solve a religious problem is noteworthy. His thought develops along the following lines: substance – form – motion and transition from potentiality into actuality – soul – God – intelligences – prophet – freedom of the will – correspondence between correct knowledge and correct conduct – perfection.
Nonetheless, it should be noted that Ibn Daud's thought contains a number of “loose ends”; the promised harmony between religion and philosophy is certainly not always achieved. Cases in point are his ambiguous position with regard to the origin and status of matter and the way in which he skirts around the issue of creation versus emanation. The inconsistencies and undetermined issues in ER are partly the result of the influence of neo-Platonism. The Aristotelianism of the Muslim peripatetics still contains an appreciable number of neo-Platonic notions that have made an impact on Ibn Daud. Arfa's evaluation of Ibn Daud's philosophic activity “at the point where it has rejected neo-Platonism but has not yet freed itself of many of its fundamental doctrines and thought habits, and on the other hand has espoused Aristotelianism but has not yet assimilated the full meaning of its world outlook” hits the nail right on the head (Arfa 1954: 4). For another part, the flaws in Ibn Daud's thought are due to his conception of philosophical knowledge as the foundation on which religion should be built. For all the importance he attaches to the use of philosophical speculation, his bias is religious, which is why he prefers to remain vague about or to omit Aristotelian doctrines like the eternity of motion. When harmony between religion and philosophy seems to be impossible, Ibn Daud shrinks from accepting the consequences of Aristotle's doctrines and instead chooses to seek refuge in the limitations of the human intellect, claiming that the philosophers tend to overreach themselves. The weaknesses in his thought notwithstanding, Ibn Daud's significance for the development of Jewish philosophy can hardly be underestimated.
Maimonides
Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (1135 - 1204), רבי משה בן מיימון, known commonly by his Greek name Maimonides, was a Jewish rabbi, physician, and philosopher.
Through the Guide for the Perplexed and the philosophical introductions to sections of his commentaries on the Mishnah, Maimonides exerted an important influence on the Rationalist philosophers of Judaism. He was himself a Jewish Rationalist was educated more by reading the works of Arab Muslim philosophers than by personal contact with Arabian teachers, he acquired an intimate acquaintance not only with Arab Muslim philosophy, but with the doctrines of Aristotle. Maimonides strove to reconcile Aristotelian philosophy and science with the teachings of the Torah. In some ways his position was parallel to that of Averroes: in reaction to the attacks of those like ha-Levi and Ghazali on the Avicennian version of Aristotelianism, he embraced and defended a stricter Aristotelianism shorn of some of its Neoplatonic additions.
Maimonides held that no positive attributes can be predicated of God. The number of His attributes would seem to prejudice the unity of God. In order to preserve this doctrine undiminished, all anthropomorphic attributes, such as existence, life, power, will, knowledge - the usual positive attributes of God in the Kalâm - must be avoided in speaking of Him. Between the attributes of God and those of man there is no other similarity than one of words (homonymy), no similarity of essence ("Guide," I 35, 56). The negative attributes imply that nothing can be known concerning the true being of God, which is what Maimonides really means. Just as Kant declares the Thing-in-itself to be unknowable, so Maimonides declares that of God it can only be said that He is, not what He is.
Maimonides wrote his thirteen principles of faith, which he stated that all Jews were obligated to believe. The first five deal with knowledge of the Creator. The next four deal with prophecy and the Divine Origin of the Torah. The last four deal with Reward, Punishment and the ultimate redemption.
The principle which inspired all of Maimonides' philosophical activity was identical those of Abraham Ibn Daud: there can be no contradiction between the truths which God has revealed and the findings of the human mind in science and philosophy. Moreover, by science and philosophy he understood the science and philosophy of Aristotle. In some important points, however, he departed from the teaching of the Aristotelian text, holding, for instance, that the world is not eternal, as Aristotle taught, but was created ex nihilo'.
The publisher of the Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, in Hebrew, was Moshe Shaltiel a descendant of the Perfet branch of Mar Shaltiel's family in Barcelona[4]
Jewish philosophy after Maimonides
Jewish community controversies concentrated on the themes of Maimonides. The philosopher initiated the controversies himself when he attacked the geonim, honorary title of leaders of Jewish academies, by describing the gaon Samuel b. Ali as "one whom people accustom from his youth to believe that there is none like him in his generation," and he sharply attack the "monetary demands" of the academies. To Illustrate this point, Samuel ben Ali at Bagdad, the chief opponent of Maimonides in the East, by Daud Ibn Hodaya al Daudi (Exilarch of Mosul). Samual ben Ali was an anti-maimonidean operating in Babylon to undermine the works of Maimonides and his patrons.
In return, Maimonides' Mishneh Torah was fiercely condemned by Abraham ben David of Posquieres; and scholars such as Meir Abulafia were appalled by Maimonides rejection of the doctrine of the "resurrection of the dead." A herem, excommunicatory ban, was pronounced on Maimonides' philosophical work. Nahmanides was aware that Maimonides' ideas were welcomed by the assimilated and prosperous Jews of Spain and Provence, and argued that "but for the fact they lived out of the mouth of his works…they would have slipped almost entirely." Nonetheless, he believed that Maimonides' ideas were heretical.
In the West, the controversy was halted by the burning of Maimonides' books by Christian Dominicans in 1232. Abraham, Maimonides' son, continued fighting for his father's beliefs in the East, although the desecration of Maimonides' tomb at Tiberias was a profound shock to all concerned. The controversy flared up once more at the beginning of the fourteenth century when Solomon b. Abraham Adret issued a herem on "any member of the community who, being under twenty-five years, shall study the works of the Greeks on natural science and metaphysics." Such tension between the anti-rationalists and rationalists continued through the Middle Ages, and could be recognized in the sixteenth-century disputes between Moses Isserles and Solomon b. Jehiel.
Yosef ben Yehuda of Ceuta
Yosef Ibn Yehuda of Ceuta [a/k/a Joseph ben Judah of Ceuta (born about 1160 Cueta - died 1226 Aleppo) was a student and disciple of Maimonides; it is for him that Guide for the Perplexed is written. Yosef had a hungry mind, he traveled from Alexandria to Fusṭaṭ (Cairo) and studied logic, mathematics, and astronomy under Maimonides. Maimonides likewise expounded the writings of the Prophets, because Yosef seemed perplexed as to the possibility of reconciling the teachings of the Prophets with the results of metaphysical research. Maimonides advised patience and systematic study; but the disciple left before Maimonides had completed his course of lectures on the Prophets (Maimonides, "Moreh Nebukim,"). His stay with Maimonides was short - less than two years.
Yosef ben Judah went further east and settled in Aleppo (Halab). Here he established himself as a medical practitioner, married, and made a successful commercial journey which enabled him to live henceforth independently and free from care. It was probably in the course of this journey that he witnessed at Baghdad the burning of the works of the Muslim philosopher 'Abd al-Salam(1192).
Yosef abandoned his other pursuits and wished to open a school to teach what he learned from Maimonides. Maimonides dissuaded him from the undertaking, unless he should do it without seeking material profit from his teaching. When, thirty years later, Al-Ḥarizi visited Aleppo (1217) he found Yosef in the zenith of his glory. He praised him as the "Western light," and applied to him the words of Scripture, "and Yosef was ruler over the whole land; he supplied food for all" ("Taḥkemoni," xlvi., l.). He must indeed have had great authority when he defended his master and silenced the opposition expressed by some rabbis in Bagdad against the works of Maimonides. Maimonides exhorted Yosef to moderation, begging him, being young in years, not to oppose an old rabbi whose authority was recognized in the congregation (see "Birkat Abraham," Lyck, 1859; "Zikronot," ii.: a letter written by Maimonides in 1192).
Shemtob Ben Joseph Ibn Falaquera
Shemtob Ben Joseph Ibn Falaquera (a/k/a Shem-Tov ibn Falaquera also spelled Palquera (1225 – c. 1290)) was Spanish-born Jewish philosopher and translator who propagated a reconciliation between Jewish Orthodoxy and philosophy and defended Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed against the attacks of the anti-Maimonideans. His numerous works include Dialogue Between a Philosopher and a Man of Piety; an ethical treatise known as The Balm of Sorrow; an introduction to the study of the sciences entitled Reshit ḥokhma (“The Beginning of Wisdom”), which reproduces al-Farabi’s Aims of the Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle and which was translated into Latin at the end of the 15th century; Sefer ha-maʿalot (“Book of Degrees”), which advocates the Neoplatonic ideal of the contemplative life; a commentary on Maimonides’ Guide under the title More ha-more (“Guide of the Guide”); and an abstract of Ibn Gabirol’s influential Fons vitae in Hebrew.
Gersonides
Rabbi Levi ben Gershon, also known as Gersonides, or the Ralbag, (1288-1345) is best known for his work Milhamot HaShem (or just Milchamot), ("Wars of the Lord"). Among scholastics, Gersonides was perhaps the most advanced; he placed reason above tradition. The Milhamot HaShem is modelled after the Guide for the Perplexed of Maimonides. It may be seen as an elaborate criticism from a philosophical point of view (mainly Averroistic) of the syncretism of Aristotelianism and Jewish orthodoxy as presented in that work.
Moses Narboni
Moses ben Joshua, also known as Moses of Narbonne, Maestro Vidal Blasom, and Moses Narboni. Moses was an admirer of Averroes; he devoted a great deal of study to his works and wrote commentaries on a number of them. Perhaps ben Joshua's best know work is his "Treatise on the Perfection of the Soul."
He believed that Judaism was a guide to the highest degree of theoretical and moral truth. In common with others of his era he believed that the Torah had both a simple, direct meaning accessible to the average reader as well as a deeper, metaphysical meaning accessible to thinkers. He rejected the belief in miracles, instead believing they could be explained, and defended man's free will by philosophical arguments.
Hasdai ben Abraham Crescas
Hasdai Crescas (born in Barcelona,c. 1340 – 1410/1411) was a Jewish philosopher and a renowned halakhist (teacher of Jewish law). Along with Rambam, Ralbag, and Albo, he is known as one of the major practitioners of the rationalist approach to Jewish philosophy, and his positions on issues of natural law and free will in Or Adonai can be seen as precursors to those of Spinoza.
Hasdai Crescas came from a family of scholars; he was a disciple of the Talmudist and philosopher Nissim ben Reuben, known as The RaN. Following in the footsteps of his teacher he became a Talmudic authority and a philosopher of great originality. He is considered important in the history of modern thought for his deep influence on Baruch Spinoza. While Crescas was not an official Rabbi, he was active as a teacher. Among his fellow students and friends, Isaac ben Sheshet (known as the RIBaSH), famous for his responsa, takes precedence. Joseph Albo is the best known of his pupils, but at least two others have won recognition, Rabbi Mattathias of Saragossa, and Rabbi Zechariah ha-Levi.
Crescas was a man of means. As such he was appointed sole executor of the will of his uncle Vitalis Azday by the King of Aragon in 1393. Still, though enjoying the high esteem even of prominent non-Jews, he did not escape the common fate of his coreligionists. Imprisoned upon a false accusation in 1378, he suffered personal indignities because he was a Jew. His only son died in 1391, a martyr for his faith, during the anti-Semitic persecutions of that period. Nevertheless he kept his faith.
His concise philosophical work Or Adonai, The Light of the Lord became a classical Jewish refutation of medieval Aristotelianism, and a harbinger of the scientific revolution in the 16th century.
Three of his writings have been preserved:
1. His primary work, Or Adonai, The Light of the Lord. 2. An exposition and refutation of the main doctrines of Christianity. This "tratado" was written in Catalan in 1398. The Catalan original is no longer extant; but a Hebrew translation by Joseph ibn Shem-Tov, with the title ("Refutation of the Cardinal Principles of the Christians"), has been preserved. The work was composed at the solicitation of Spanish noblemen. Crescas' object in writing what is virtually an apologetic treatise on Judaism was to present the reasons which held the Jews fast to their ancestral faith. 3. His letter to the congregations of Avignon, published as an appendix to Wiener's edition of "Shevet Yehudah" (see above), in which he relates the incidents of the persecution of 1391.
Joseph Albo
Joseph Albo (c. 1380–1444) was a Jewish philosopher and rabbi who lived in Spain during the fifteenth century, known chiefly as the author of Sefer ha-Ikkarim ("Book of Principles"), the classic work on the fundamentals of Judaism. Albo limited the fundamental Jewish principles of faith to three: (1) The belief in the existence of God; (2) in revelation; and (3) in divine justice, as related to the idea of immortality. Albo finds opportunity to criticize the opinions of his predecessors, yet he takes pains to avoid heresy hunting. A remarkable latitude of interpretation is allowed; so much so, that it would indeed be difficult under Albo's theories to impugn the orthodoxy of even the most theologically liberal Jews. Albo rejects the assumption that creation ex nihilo is an essential implication of the belief in God. Albo freely criticizes Maimonides' thirteen principles of belief and Crescas' six principles.
According to Albo, the first of his fundamental root-principles, the belief in the existence of God, embraces the following shorashim, or secondary radicals:
1. God's unity 2. God's incorporeality 3. God's independence of time 4. God's perfection: in God there can be neither weakness nor other defect.
The second root-principle—the belief in revelation, or the communication of divine instruction by God to man—leads him to derive the following three secondary radicals:
1. The Hebrew prophets are the mediums of God's revelation 2. The belief in the unique greatness of Moses as a prophet 3. The binding force of the Mosaic law until another shall have been divulged and proclaimed in as public a manner (before six hundred thousand men). No later prophet has, consequently, the right to abrogate the Mosaic dispensation.
From the third root principle, the belief in divine justice, he derives one secondary radical: the belief in bodily resurrection.
According to Albo, therefore, the belief in the Messiah is only a "twig". It is not necessary to the soundness of the trunk. It is, hence, not an integral part of Judaism. Nor is it true that every law is binding. Though every ordinance has the power of conferring happiness in its observance, it is not true that every law must be observed, or that through the neglect of a part of the law, a Jew would violate the divine covenant or be damned. Observant Jews, however, believe that the Jewish person is divinely obligated to fulfill every applicable commandment.
Don Isaac Abravanel
Isaac Abravanel (Lisbon, 1437 – Venice, 1508), also spelled Abravanel or Abarbanel, commonly referred to as The Abarbanel, was a Portuguese Jewish statesman, philosopher, Bible commentator, and financier who commented on Maimonides' thirteen principles in his Rosh Amanah. According to him, if one must reduce Judaism to a set of credal propositions, Maimonides' attempt cannot be improved upon. At the same time, the actually binding part of Judaism is the entire body of 613 mitzvot rather than any set of beliefs.
The tension between rationalists and anti-rationalists never abated throughout the Middle Ages. Among the beleaguered Jews of 15th-century Christian Spain, Maimonidean rationalism was seen by many as the root cause of the misfortunes and the reason for *apostasy. On the other hand, a man like Abraham *Bibago, throughout his Derekh Emunah, defended rationalism, not only as being justified but as the very essence of Judaism. Proudly calling himself "a pupil of Maimonides," he believed that the Jewish people are the bearers of reason – weak in this world as reason is weak against the unreasonable passions. Generalizing the traditional rationalistic view, he stated:
The reasonable creature having reason has to study the sciences; and being a believer, he will study Torah and acquire faith and its roots and dogmas. The first study will be a kind of carrier and vessel to bear the second study. In the same way that life is an assumption and carrier by which humanity and speech are carried, so through the form of reason – by whose accomplishment one studies and acquires the sciences – Torah study will be assumed and carried. Thus faith will be complete and without doubt, and the one attitude [faith], will not conflict with the other [philosophy]. Therefore did the sage say, 'Reason and faith are two lights.' To solve all doubts we must explain that 'Greek wisdom' cannot be the above-mentioned wisdom of reason belonging to man insofar as he is a man. Hence it is a human wisdom and not a Greek one. The wisdom called [by talmudic sages] 'Greek wisdom,' must be something peculiar to the Greeks and not to another nation. That views like this were acceptable also among 16th-century Ashkenazi Jewry is proved by the fact that the Sefer ha-Miknah by *Joseph b. Gershom of Rosheim is in reality a kind of synopsis of Bibago's Derekh Emunah. In Renaissance Italy Jehiel ben Samuel of Pisa wrote a detailed treatise (Minḥat Kena'ot) against rationalism, while the life and works of many of his contemporaries and countrymen constituted a clear espousal of it. In Poland-Lithuania in the 16th–17th centuries the tension between Maimonideans and anti-Maimonideans likewise continued, as evidenced, for example, by the dispute between Moses Isserles and Solomon ben Jehiel Luria (see Moses Isserles, Resp., nos. 687; and see also his Torat ha-Olah).
The problems of the synthesis between Judaism and other cultures, of the proper content of Jewish education, and of the right way to God – through reason or through mystic union – has remained, though formulations and expressions have changed considerably. The old hierarchical basis of Jewish leadership, wholeheartedly hated by Maimonides, has disappeared, but the leadership of the individual scholar, even after Maimonides, retained many hierarchical and sacral elements (Smichah). The Mishneh Torah did not supersede the Talmud, and Maimonides' aristocratic opposition to monetary support for Torah study failed completely. So strong was his personality, however, that most of his opponents made great efforts to say that they opposed not Maimonides himself but some element of his teaching or, better still, some misguided interpretation or citation of his work. The Maimonidean controversy is both very specifically at the heart of Jewish culture and, at the same time, part or a set of problems central to Judaism, Islam, and Christianity alike.
Leone Ebreo
Judah Leon Abravanel (a/k/a León Hebreo, in Spanish; Leone Ebreo,in Italian; Leo the Hebrew, in English; and יהודה בן יצחק אברבנאל [Yehuda ben Yitzhak Abravanel]) (c. 1465 - c. 1523) was a Jewish Portuguese physician, poet and philosopher. His work Dialoghi d'amore (Dialogues of Love) was one of the most important philosophical works of his time. He was born of Spanish Jewish heritage in Lisbon, and wrote his most important work in Italian.
The year 1492 brought a turbulent change to the Abravanel family and to all Jews in Spain, as Isabel and Fernando ordered the conversion or expulsion of all Jews in Spain. Dom Isaac, in a desperate plea, threw himself at the feet of the Catholic Kings and begged them to revoke their decree, but to no avail. He made plans to move his family to Naples, Italy. A plot was hatched to kidnap Judah’s son as an attempt to persuade the Abravanel family to convert to Christianity and, ultimately, to remain in the service of Los Reyes Católicos. In an attempt to circumvent the plot, Judah sent his son to Portugal with a nurse, but by order of the king, the son was seized and baptized. This occurrence was a devastating insult to Judah and to his family, and was a source of bitterness throughout Judah’s life and the topic of his writings years later.
Through his travels, Judah was well-acquainted with many Italian humanists and with the Neapolitan Court. Some say he may have met Giovanni Pico della Mirandola while in Florence and composed for him a discourse on the “Harmony of the Skies.” If so, he also probably associated with Elia de Medigo, teacher of Pico della Mirandola, Johann Alemanno (another Jewish writer influenced by the Medici court and mysticism and author of Song of songs), Giovanni Pontano, Mario Equicola and monk Egidio da Viterbo.
Judah Leon was surrounded by humanists interested in the topic of Love. The Chancellor of Florence, Marsilio Ficino commented on Plato’s Symposium (1474-75), while Girolamo Benivieni composed his Canzone d’amore (1486), which Pico della Mirandola analyzed soon after. Equicola’s Libro della natura d’amore (1495), Pietro Bembo’s Asolani and Francesco Cattani da Diacceto’s De amore were published while Judah was writing. Abravanel’s Dialoghi is regarded as the finest of these works. Menéndez Pelayo describes it as the most monumental work of Platonic philosophy since Plotinus's Enneads. Similar to other humanist works, Dialoghi is strongly influenced by Plato and Aristotle. Menéndez Pelayo states that Abravanel employs Platonic ideals in his work, but filtered through his heritage. That is, his Neo-platonism derived from the Hispanic Jewish community, especially the works of Ben-Gabirol and Maimonides. A disciple of these renowed Jewish scholars, Abravanel was also influenced by the Hellenic spirit of the Renaissance. Platonic notions of reaching towards a nearly impossible ideal of beauty, wisdom, and perfection encompass the whole of the work.
In his Dialoghi d'amore, Judah Leon Abravanel seeks to define love in philosophical terms. He structures his three dialogues as a conversation between two abstract and mostly undeveloped “characters”: Philo, representing love or appetite, and Sophia, representing science or wisdom, in other words, Philo+Sophia (philosophy).
Dialoghi d'amore was an important work in Spanish culture as it brought Renaissance ideals to Spain. Otis Green argues in his España y la tradición occidental that in Abravanel's work human love is spiritualized, placing it in connection with divine love, by posing the necessity of going beyond physical union to merge minds and souls.
Position in the history of thought
The rationalist approach to interpretation of the Bible and religious tradition is based on the fundamental doctrine that Torah and reason cannot be in conflict, and that an individual therefore need not adopt any position on matters religious which transgresses against reason. The basic spirit of Jewish rationalism — its motivation and method — is well captured by these two statements from Bachya and Ralbag:
And if he does not delve into the truth and certainty of the matter, he is disgraceful and is considered to be intellectually and functionally lax. He would be like the patient who knew all about his disease and its cure, but who depended entirely on his doctor to heal him, and was reluctant to use his own knowledge and judgment to determine if the doctor was doing the right thing or not... — Bachya ibn Pakuda (pakuda_96)
... when the Torah, interpreted literally, seems to conflict with doctrines that have been proved by reason, it is proper to interpret these passages according to philosophical understanding, so long as none of the fundamental principles of the Torah are destroyed... It is even more proper that we not disagree with philosophy when the Torah itself does not disagree with it. — Ralbag (feldman_84)
Thus, there is shame and disgrace attached to the failure to investigate matters of religious principle using the fullest powers of human reason. One cannot be considered wise or perceptive if one does not attempt to understand the origins, and establish the correctness, of one's beliefs. Moreover, at least on Ralbag's view, the "claim of reason" occupies a higher place than the "claim of tradition," and traditional understandings must be brought into conformity with the demonstrations of philosophy, rather than vice versa, to whatever extent this is possible.
Of course, one challenge of the "religion of reason" is that the dictates of reason change over time, and this approach — if it is to be pursued over the long term — demands a never-ending reinterpretation of tradition. This is because, as new principles are discovered and new facts uncovered, what earlier seemed a "reasonable" position slowly becomes an unconvincing, and, finally, untenable position. It is then replaced by a position that is more "reasonable" in light of current knowledge (and biases). This being the case, if Torah and reason are to remain free from contradiction, then the interpretation of Torah may need to change as often as do the artifacts of reason.
This observation has no doubt caused many to dismiss as foolhardy any effort to reconcile religion and reason. Those of a scholarly mindset will argue that the inevitable "tortured reconciliations" forfeit the original meaning and message of the text (e.g., Spinoza, sarna_66), while those more inclined to skepticism will wonder at the usefulness of a document whose only apparent remaining purpose is to be periodically "reconciled" with external evidence.
Historical replacement of Medieval Philosophy by Kabbalah
Part of a series on |
Kabbalah |
---|
On the other hand, Jewish Mysticism (Kabbalah in its contemporary form), as a replacement for Philosophical Rationalism, is a set of esoteric teachings that is meant to explain the relationship between an infinite, eternal and essentially unknowable Creator with the finite and mortal universe of His creation. In solving this paradox, Kabbalah seeks to define the nature of the universe and the human being, the nature and purpose of existence, and various other ontological questions. It also presents methods to aid understanding of these concepts and to thereby attain spiritual realization. Kabbalah originally developed entirely within the milieu of Jewish thought and constantly uses classical Jewish sources to explain and demonstrate its esoteric teachings. These teachings are thus held by kabbalists to define the inner meaning of both the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) and traditional rabbinic literature, as well as to explain the significance of Jewish religious observances.
"Do not inquire into what overwhelms you, and do not delve into what is hidden from you. Reflect upon what you have inherited instead; for you have no business occupying yourself with mysteries" (3:21)
Aside from early opposition from some Medieval Rabbinic scholars and Rational Philosophers, Kabbalah spread quickly from its 11th-13th Century circles, and achieved its main expression in its central text of the Zohar. For the next 200 years, attempts were made to rationally systemise and synthesise its theology. Kabbalah received its second wave of development in the 16th Century mystical school in Safed. After the catastrophe of the Jewish expulsion from Spain, leading Rabbinic and mystical scholars such as Joseph Karo, Moshe Alshich and Moshe Cordovero saught new spiritual consolations and scholarly depth in Jewish mysticism. Their scholarly community in the Galilee was also in the central mainstream development of Rabbinic legal and exegetical thought.
The universal acceptance by this time of Kabbalah within both scholarly Rabbinic circles and the popular imagination, attested to its replacement of previous Medieval Rational Philosophy (called "Hakirah" in contrast) as the mainstream traditional Jewish theology. Maimonides' philosophy became secondary in Jewish circles to the mystical influence of his near contemporary Nachmanides, who developed the new dissemination of Kabbalah in his time. With the 16th Century Safed school, the transmission of Kabbalah reached a new culmination. Moses Cordovero achieved the first accepted, rational, complete synthesis of its different schools (Cordoveran Kabbalah). He was influeced by his admiration and knowledge of Medieval Jewish Philosophy, such as Maimonides, and sought to utilise parallel rational processes to the tradition and exegesis of Kabbalah. Immidiately after this, Isaac Luria taught a completely new paradigm and doctrine for interpreting the Zohar and the previous Kabbalistic thought (Lurianic Kabbalah). This described cosmic mystical processes and their rectification, and further extended the radical thesophical tendency in Jewish mystical thought. Nonetheless, the esoteric ideas of Kabbalah remained traditionally conservative, as they taught an inner meaning to normative Halachic Judaism, whether the common person was aware of the deeper meanings or not. It was left to breakaway heresies of Sabbateanism and Frankism to distort the required Kabbalistic interdependence with Halacha.
Jewish Mysticism, Kabbalah
The word "Kabbalah" is used in older Jewish texts to mean simply "tradition", see Abraham Ibn Daud's Sefer HaQabbalah also known as "the book of our Tradition", and does not necessarily refer to mysticism of any kind. In Talmudic times there was a secret mystical tradition in Judaism, known as Maaseh Bereshith (the work of creation) and Maaseh Merkavah (the work of the chariot); Maimonides interprets these texts as referring to something similar to Aristotelian physics and metaphysics as interpreted in the light of Torah. The tradition of Sefer HaQabbalah is not represented in contemporary meanings of Kabbalah and should not be confused therewith.
Contemporary Jewish Kabbalah is an esoteric system of interpretation of the Scriptures based upon a tradition originating with Moses de León and expounded upon by Yitzhak Ben Shlomo Ashkenazi Isaac Luria . Despite claims of antiquity, the contemoprary system appears to have been given its earliest formulation in the 11th cent by Judah ben Samuel of Regensburg in Germany, then to Moses ben Jacob of Coucy in France, and from there spread most notably to Spain. There were undoubtedly precedents, however; kabbalistic elements are discernible in the literature of earlier Merkavah mysticism (fl. after c.A.D. 100) inspired by the vision of the chariot-throne (“merkavah”) in the Book of Ezekiel. Beyond specifically Jewish notions contained within contemporary Kabbalah, some scholars believe that it reflects a strong Neoplatonic influence, especially in its doctrines of emanation and the transmigration of souls (see Neoplatonism). In the Rennaisance of the late 15th and 16th cent., Christian thinkers found support in pre-Lurianic Kabbalah for their own doctrines, out of which they developed a Christian version. Kabbalistic interpretation of Scripture was based on the belief that every word, letter, number, and even accent contained mysteries interpretable by those who knew the secret. The names for God were believed to contain miraculous power and each letter of the divine name was considered potent; in the independent tradition of Practical Kabbalah, kabbalistic signs and writings were used as amulets and in magical practices.[5]
The two principal foundational texts of Kabbalists are the Sefer Yezirah (tr. Book of Creation, 1894) and the Zohar (tr. 1949; The Book of Enlightenment, 1985; The Book of Splendor, 1995). The first develops, in a series of monologues supposedly delivered by Abraham, the doctrine of the Sefirot (the powers emanating from God, through which the world is created and its order sustained), using the primordial numbers of the later Pythagoreans in a system of numerical interpretation. It was probably written in the 3d cent. The Zohar consists of mystical commentaries and homilies on the Pentateuch. It was written by Moses de León (13th cent.) but attributed by him to Shimon bar Yohai, the great scholar of the 2d cent. A.D. Following the expulsion (1492) of the Jews from Spain, kabbalah became more messianic in its emphasis, as developed by the Lurianic school of mystics at Safed, Palestine. Kabbalah in this form was widely adopted and created fertile gound for the movement of the pseudo-Messiah Sabbatai Zevi. It was also a major influence in the development of Hasidism. Kabbalah still has adherents, especially among Hasidic Jews.[6]
Because it is by definition esoteric, no popular account (including an encyclopedia) can provide a complete, precise, and accurate explanation of contemporary Kabbalah. However, a number of scholars from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, including Gershom Scholem, Joseph Dan, Yehuda Liebes, Rachel Elior, and Moshe Idel, as well as some from other locations, such as Arthur Green and Daniel Matt, have made Kabbalist texts objects of modern scholarly scrutiny. Some scholars, notably Gershom Scholem and Martin Buber, have argued that modern Hasidic Judaism represents a popularization of Lurianic Kabbalah.[20] According to its adherents, intimate understanding and mastery of Lurianic Kabbalah brings one spiritually closer to God and enriches one's experience of Jewish sacred texts and law.
Rabbinic criticism of Kabbalah
Rabbi Saadia Gaon teaches in his book Emunot v'Deot that Jews who believe in gilgul (reincarnation) have adopted a non-Jewish belief.
Maimonides rejected many of the texts of the Heichalot, particularly Shi'ur Qomah whose starkly anthropomorphic vision of God he considered heretical.
Rabbi Abraham ben Moses ben Maimon, in the spirit of his father Maimonides, Rabbi Saadiah Gaon, and other predecessors, explains at length in his book Milhhamot HaShem that the Almighty is in no way literally within time or space nor physically outside time or space, since time and space simply do not apply to His Being whatsoever. This is in contrast to certain popular understandings of modern Kabbalah which teach a form of panentheism, that His 'essence' is within everything.
Around the 1230s, Rabbi Meir ben Simon of Narbonne wrote an epistle (included in his Milhhemet Mitzvah) against his contemporaries, the early Kabbalists, characterizing them as blasphemers who even approach heresy. He particularly singled out the Sefer Bahir, rejecting the attribution of its authorship to the tanna R. Nehhunya ben ha-Kanah and describing some of its content as truly heretical.
Rabbi Yitzchak ben Sheshet Perfet, (The Rivash), 1326–1408. Although as is evident from his responsa on the topic the Rivash was skeptical of certain interpretations of Kabbalah popular in his time,; he is quoted as saying that "Kabbalah was worse than Christianity", as it made God into 10, not just into three. Most followers of Kabbalah have never followed this interpretation of Kabbalah, on the grounds that the concept of the Christian Trinity posits that there are three persons existing within the Godhead, one of whom became a human being.[citation needed] In contrast, the mainstream understanding of the Kabbalistic Sefirot holds that they have no mind or intelligence; further, they are not addressed in prayer and they cannot become a human being. They are conduits for interaction, not persons or beings. Nonetheless, many important poskim, such as Maimonidies in his work Mishneh Torah, prohibit any use of mediators between oneself and the Creator as a form of idolatry.
Rabbi Leone di Modena, a 17th century Venetian critic of Kabbalah, wrote that if we were to accept the Kabbalah, then the Christian trinity would indeed be compatible with Judaism, as the Trinity closely resembles the Kabbalistic doctrine of the Sefirot. This critique was in response to the knowledge that some European Jews of the period addressed individual Sefirot in some of their prayers, although the practise was apparently uncommon. Apologists explain that Jews may have been praying for and not necessarily to the aspects of Godliness represented by the Sefirot.
Rabbi Yaakov Emden, 1697–1776, wrote the book Mitpahhath Sfarim (Veil of the Books), a detailed critique of the Zohar in which he concludes that certain parts of the Zohar contain heretical teaching and therefore could not have been written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. Opponents of his work claim[citation needed] that he wrote the book in a drunken stupor. Emden's rationalistic approach to this work, however, makes neither intoxication nor stupor seem plausible.
Rabbi Yihhyah Qafahh, an early 20th century Yemenite Jewish leader and grandfather of Rabbi Yosef Qafih, also wrote a book entitled Milhhamoth HaShem, (Wars of the L-RD) against what he perceived as the false teachings of the Zohar and the false Kabbalah of Isaac Luria. He is credited with spearheading the Dor Daim who continue in R. Yihhyah Qafahh's view of Kabbalah into modern times. Dor Daim form part of a wider body of opinion called talmide-ha-Rambam (Maimonideans), who stand for a strict adherence to the views of Maimonides in matters of philosophy as well as Jewish law.
Yeshayahu Leibowitz 1903–1994, brother of Nechama Leibowitz, though Modern Orthodox in his world view, publicly shared the views expressed in R. Yihhyah Qafahh's book Milhhamoth HaShem and elaborated upon these views in his many writings.
There is dispute among modern Haredim as to the status of Isaac Luria's, the Arizal's, kabbalistic teachings. While a portion of Modern Orthodox Rabbis, Dor Daim and many students of the Rambam, completely reject Lurianic Kabbalah teachings, as well as deny that the Zohar is authoritative, or from Shimon bar Yohai, all three of these groups completely accept the existence and validity of Ma'aseh Merkavah and Ma'aseh B'resheet mysticism as defined by Maimonides. Their only disagreement concerns whether the Kabbalistic teachings promulgated today are accurate representations of those esoteric teachings to which the Talmud refers. Within the Haredi Jewish community one can find both rabbis who sympathize with such a view, while not necessarily agreeing with it, as well as rabbis who consider such a view absolute heresy.
What advantages do Kabbalists harbor in their belief system that Rationalists continue to wrestle with? Lurianic Kabbalah helps people understand how evil people seemingly benefit from the suffering of good and righteous people. In the aftermath of the Andalusian pogroms of 1391; Spanish Inquisition Expelling Jews from Spain in 1492; expulsion from Portugal in 1497; 1648-9 mass murders of jews in Tulchin, Polonnoye, Volhynia, Bar, Lvov and Nemirov; and the Holocaust. Millions of Jews killed, and evil people profit and prosper...
Renaissance Jewish philosophy
Divergent Jewish philosophies continued through the Renaissance period. Sephardic and Mitnagdishe Rationalism had a strong following in Arab lands, Ottoman Empire, and Lithuania...and Lurianic Kabbalistic Judaism continued with a rapid growth upon acceptance, and spread, of Hasidism.
Judaism saw the development of a brand of Jewish philosophy drawing on the teachings of Torah mysticism derived from the esoteric teachings of the Zohar and the teachings of Rabbi Isaac Luria. This was particularly embodied in the voluminous works of Rabbi Judah Loew ben Bezalel known as the Maharal of Prague. While the teachings of the Maharal are based on Jewish mysticism, it presents these ideas in philosophical forms, avoiding Kabbalistic terminology.
One work that gained considerable influence in the Christian world was the Dialoghi d'Amore of Judah Leon Abravanel (known as Leone Ebreo). This took the form of a series of dialogues between "Philo" and "Sophia", and may be compared with the Renaissance Platonism of Ficino and Pico della Mirandola, but had no explicit Jewish content.
Enlightenment Jewish philosophers
Baruch Spinoza adopted Pantheism and broke with Orthodox Judaism. Nevertheless the Jewish influence in his work, for example from Maimonides and Leone Ebreo, is evident. Some contemporary critics (e.g. Wachter, Der Spinozismus im Judenthum) claimed to detect the influence of the Kabbalah, while others (e.g. Leibniz) regarded Spinozism as a revival of Averroism; another word for Maimonidean rationalism.
Post-Enlightenment Jewish philosophers
- Samuel Hirsch (belonging to Reform Judaism.)
- Solomon Formstecher
- Samson Raphael Hirsch philosophy of Torah im Derech Eretz; belonged to the Neo-Orthodox movement of 19th century Germany, combating Reform Judaism
- Jacob Abendana Sephardic Rabbi and Philosopher
- Isaac Orobio de Castro Sephardic Philosopher
- Moses Mendelssohn German Jewish philosopher
- Moses (Moshe) Hess a secular Jewish philosopher and one of the founders of socialism.
- Emmanuel Levinas a French philosopher and Talmudic commentator
- Thomas Nagel a Serbia-born Jewish Philosopher, though not necessarily embraced by prevailing talmudic authorities.
Contemporary Jewish philosophy
Revival of Maimonides
Reinvigoration of Maimonidean Rationalism is a rapidly growing movement in Judaism. Dor Daim, and Talmid HaRambam Rambamists are two (2) groups who reject mysticism (Kabbalah) as a "superstitious" addition to an otherwise clear and succinct set of Laws and rules with which we live. Generally speaking, Spanish-Portuguese Sephardim and Yemenites harbor nearly identical Philosophies.
Modern Orthodoxy affords its subscribers the latitude to decide for themselves how many esoteric additions, or rationalism, they wish to include in their toolbox of Divine Devotion.
Jewish Existentialism
One of the major trends in contemporary Jewish philosophy was the attempt to develop a theory of Judaism through existentialism. One of the primary players in this field was Franz Rosenzweig. While researching his doctoral dissertation on the 19th-century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Rosenzweig reacted against Hegel's idealism and favored an existential approach. Rosenzweig, for a time, considered conversion to Christianity, but in 1913, he turned to Jewish philosophy. He became a philosopher and student of Hermann Cohen. Rozensweig's major work, Star of Redemption, is his new philosophy in which he portrays the relationships between God, humanity and world as they are connected by creation, revelation and redemption. Later Jewish existentialists include Conservative rabbis Neil Gillman and Elliot N. Dorff.
Reconstructionist theology
Perhaps the most controversial form of Jewish philosophy that developed in the early 20th century was the religious naturalism of Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan. His theology was a variant of John Dewey's philosophy. Dewey's naturalism combined atheist beliefs with religious terminology in order to construct a philosophy for those who had lost faith in traditional Judaism. In agreement with the classical medieval Jewish thinkers, Kaplan affirmed that God is not personal, and that all anthropomorphic descriptions of God are, at best, imperfect metaphors. Kaplan's theology went beyond this to claim that God is the sum of all natural processes that allow man to become self-fulfilled. Kaplan wrote that "to believe in God means to take for granted that it is man's destiny to rise above the brute and to eliminate all forms of violence and exploitation from human society."
Process theology
One of the more recent trends has been a reframing of Jewish theology through the lens of process philosophy, and more specifically process theology. Process philosophy suggests that fundamental elements of the universe are occasions of experience. According to this notion, what people commonly think of as concrete objects are actually successions of these occasions of experience. Occasions of experience can be collected into groupings; something complex such as a human being is thus a grouping of many smaller occasions of experience. In this view, everything in the universe is characterized by experience (which is not to be confused with consciousness); there is no mind-body duality under this system, because "mind" is simply seen as a very developed kind of experiencing.
Inherent to this worldview is the notion that all experiences are influenced by prior experiences, and will influence all future experiences. This process of influencing is never deterministic; an occasion of experience consists of a process of prehending other experiences, and then a reaction to it. This is the process in process philosophy. Process philosophy gives God a special place in the universe of occasions of experience. God encompasses all the other occasions of experience but also transcends them; thus process philosophy is a form of panentheism.
The original ideas of process theology were developed by Charles Hartshorne (1897-2000), and influenced a number of Jewish theologians, including British philosopher Samuel Alexander (1859-1938), and Rabbis Max Kaddushin, Milton Steinberg and Levi A. Olan, Harry Slominsky and to a lesser degree, Abraham Joshua Heschel. Today some rabbis who advocate some form of process theology include Donald B. Rossoff, William E. Kaufman, Harold Kushner, Anton Laytner, Gilbert S. Rosenthal, Lawrence Troster and Nahum Ward.
Non-Orthodox revival of Kabbalah
Perhaps the most unexpected change in Jewish religious thinking in the latter 20th century was the resurgence of interest in Kabbalah. In academic studies, Gershom Scholem began the critical investigation of Jewish mysticism, while in non-Orthodox Jewish denominations, Jewish Renewal and Neo-Hasidism, spiritualised worship. Many philosophers do not consider this to be a form of philosophy, as Kabbalah is a form of mysticism. Mysticism is generally understood as an alternative to philosophy, and not a variant of philosophy.
Haredi theology
At the same time, Haredi Judaism has seen a resurgence of a systematic philosophical format for its beliefs. The founder of this system was Rabbi Eliyahu Eliezer Dessler, a student of the Kelm mussar yeshiva and later Mashgiach (spiritual supervisor) of Ponevezh yeshiva. Although never formally committing his ideas for publication, after his death in 1953 his students compiled and organized his numerous manuscripts in a five-volume work titled "Michtav Ma'Eliyahu", later translated into English and published as "Strive for Truth". His ideas have been popularized and promulgated by many Haredi educators. Notable among them are his student Rabbi Aryeh Carmel (main redactor of "Michtav Ma'Eliyahu") and Rabbi Dr. Akiva Tatz (author of many works and a well known lecturer and activist in the kiruv (outreach) movement).
Haredim consider the fusion of religion and philosophy as difficult because classical philosophers start with no preconditions for which conclusions they must reach in their investigation, while classical religious believers have a set of religious principles of faith that they hold one must believe.
Some maintain, however, that in reality it is incorrect to direct this criticism solely at religious philosophy. Rabbi Eliyahu Eliezer Dessler (Strive for Truth Vol. 1) contends that no human being can possibly claim objectivity in philosophical investigations with moral implications: "..a person senses in advance that the answer will make a significant difference...On the solution will depend whether he will be obliged for the rest of his life to struggle with his baser desires...or whether he will be able to live without a higher responsibility". On this basis Dessler maintains that only those who have spent years concentrating on the subjugation of their desires to their intellect, can even begin to claim intellectual impartiality. Indeed, according to this it is more likely for religious philosophy to succeed in attaining the truth then secular philosophy.
Some, however, hold that one cannot simultaneously be a philosopher and a true adherent of a revealed religion. In this view, all attempts at synthesis ultimately fail. For example, Rabbi Nachman of Breslov, seen as the most imaginative and poetic Hasidic mystic, views all philosophy as untrue and heretical. In this he represents one strand of Hasidic thought, with creative emphasis on the emotions. Approaching this point of view from the opposite direction, Baruch Spinoza, a pantheist, views revealed religion as inferior to philosophy, and thus saw traditional Jewish philosophy as an intellectual failure.
Others hold that a synthesis between the two is possible. One way to find a synthesis is to use philosophical arguments to prove that one's religious principles are true. This is a common technique found in the writings of many religious traditions, including Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but this is not generally accepted as true philosophy by philosophers. One example of this approach is found in the writings of Lawrence Kelemen, in his Permission to Believe, (Feldheim 1990). A synthesis on a more profound level is seen in the works of the Hasidic leaders, who express an intellectual articulation of Hasidic thought, most notably in Habad, which seeks to bring Hasidism into complete intellectual analysis. On this they take a different view of mainstream philosophy to Rabbi Nachman of Breslov. In the writings of Habad, Hasidus is seen as able to unite all parts of Torah thought, from the schools of philosophy to mysticism, by uncovering the illminating Divine essence that permeates and transcends all approaches. One example of this is given by Schneur Zalman of Liadi in the early chapters of the Tanya. In a parenthetical side-column to the main text, the Kabbalists are said to agree with Maimonides' description that "God is the knower, the knowledge, and the known", but that this statement only applies to certain, stated Kabbalistic levels of Divinity, and no higher. For a fuller treatment of the nature and essence of Hasidic thought, and its relation to other disciplines in Judaism, see Hasidic philosophy.
Hasidic philosophy
Hasidic philosophy is the thought and teachings of the Hasidic movement founded by the Baal Shem Tov. It expressed the Kabbalistic tradition in a new paradigm in relation to man, and so could be conveyed to the Jewish masses. As the movement grew, it developed into various different interpretations, formed by the circles of close followers of the Baal Shem Tov, and his successor Dov Ber of Mezeritch. In the school of Chabad, formed by Schneur Zalman of Liadi, the mystical revivalism of the early Hasidic Masters was brought into a systematic philosophical articulation, that brought the esoteric Kabbalah of Isaac Luria into understanding. Interpreting the verse from Job, "from my flesh I see God", Shneur Zalman explained the inner meaning, or "soul", of the Jewish mystical tradition in intellectual form, by means of analogies drawn from the human realm. As explained and continued by the later leaders of Chabad, this enabled the human mind to grasp concepts of Godliness, and so enable the heart to feel the love and awe of God, emphasised by all the founders of hasidism, in an internal way. This development, the culminating level of the Jewish mystical tradition, in this way bridges philosophy and mysticism, by expressing the transcendent in human terms. See Hasidic philosophy for a more detailed treatment.
Holocaust theology
Judaism has traditionally taught that God is omnipotent (all powerful), omniscient (all knowing) and omnibenevolent (all good). Yet, these claims are in jarring contrast with the fact that there is much evil in the world. Perhaps the most difficult question that monotheists have confronted is "how can one reconcile the existence of this view of God with the existence of evil?" or "how can there be good without bad?" "how can there be a god without a devil?" This is the problem of evil. Within all the monotheistic faiths many answers (theodicies) have been proposed. However, in light of the magnitude of evil seen in the Holocaust, many people have re-examined classical views on this subject. How can people still have any kind of faith after the Holocaust? This set of Jewish philosophies is discussed in the article on Holocaust theology.
Jewish philosophical influences today
The following philosophers have had a substantial impact on the philosophy of modern day Jews who identify as such. They are writers who consciously dealt with philosophical issues from within a Jewish framework.
Sephardic Philosophers
- Abraham Ibn Daud
- Isaac Israeli ben Solomon
- David Ibn Marwān al-Mukammas
- Maimonides
- Isaac Alfasi
- Baruch Spinoza
- Isaac ben Judah Abrabanel
- Miguel de Barrios
- Isaac Cardoso
- Isaac Nathan ben Kalonymus
- Elia del Medigo
- Abraham Bar Hiyya Ha-Nasi
- Hasdai ben Abraham Crescas
- Rabbi Dr. Jose Faur
Philosophers of Orthodox Judaism
- Eliezer Berkovits
- Eliyahu Eliezer Dessler
- Daniel Rynhold
- Samson Raphael Hirsch
- Abraham Isaac Kook
- Joseph Soloveitchik
Philosophers of Conservative Judaism
- Solomon Schecter
- Bradley Shavit Artson
- Elliot N. Dorff
- Neil Gillman
- Abraham Joshua Heschel
- Max Kadushin
- William E. Kaufman
- Harold Kushner
Philosophers of Reform Judaism
See also
References
- ^ The geonim of Babylonia and the shaping of medieval Jewish culture By Dr. Robert Brody
- ^ Oesterley, W. O. E. & Box, G. H. (1920) A Short Survey of the Literature of Rabbinical and Mediæval Judaism, Burt Franklin:New York.
- ^ Cohen, Gerson D. translation of 'Sefer HaQabbalah' originally written by Abraham Ibn Daud
- ^ Shaltiel: One Family's Journey Through History by Moshe Shaltiel-Gracian (2005) ISBN 0-89733-534-1 Pg 114
- ^ G. Scholem, On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism (1965) and Kabbalah (1974)
- ^ J. Dan and F. Talmage, ed., Studies in Jewish Mysticism (1982)
- Daniel H. Frank and Oliver Leaman (eds.), History of Jewish Philosophy. London: Routledge, 1997. ISBN 0415080649
- Colette Sirat, A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press, 1990. ISBN 0521397278
External links
- Adventures in Philosophy - Jewish Philosophy Index (radicalacademy.com)
- Survey of Jewish Philosophy (jct.ac.il)
- Jewish Philosophy, The Dictionary of Philosophy (Dagobert D. Runes)
- Rabbi Haim Lifshitz-articles review Jewish Philosophy
- Society of Jewish Science
- California society of Jewish Science
Further reading
- Template:He icon Material by topic, daat.ac.il
- Template:He icon and Template:En icon Primary Sources, Ben Gurion University
- Template:He icon Online materials, Halacha Brura Institute
- Template:He icon From the Israeli high-school syllabus, education.gov.il
- Template:He icon Articles on Jewish Philosophy-Haim Lifshitz and Isaac Lifshitz