...לֹא עָלֶיךָ הַמְּלָאכָה לִגְמֹר, וְלֹא אַתָּה בֶן חוֹרִין לִבָּטֵל מִמֶּנָּה...
(16) He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say: It is not your duty to finish the work, but neither are you at liberty to neglect it; ...
ספר ראשון. אכלול בו כל המצוות שהן עיקר דת משה רבנו, וצריך אדם לידע אותם תחילת הכול – כגון ייחוד שמו ברוך הוא, ואיסור עבודה זרה. וקראתי שם ספר זה ספר המדע.
FIRST BOOK. I include in it all the precepts which constitute the very essence and principle of the faith taught by Moses, our teacher, and which it is necessary for one to know at the outset; as for example, acceptance of the unity of God, and the prohibition of idolatry. I have called this book: the Book of Knowledge.
(א) יְסוֹד הַיְסוֹדוֹת וְעַמּוּד הַחָכְמוֹת לֵידַע שֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם מָצוּי רִאשׁוֹן. וְהוּא מַמְצִיא כָּל נִמְצָא. וְכָל הַנִּמְצָאִים מִשָּׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ וּמַה שֶּׁבֵּינֵיהֶם לֹא נִמְצְאוּ אֶלָּא מֵאֲמִתַּת הִמָּצְאוֹ:
(1) The foundation of foundations and firmest pillar of all wisdom is, To know that there is a First Being, that He caused all beings to be, and that all beings from heaven and earth, and from between them, could not be save for the truth of His Own Being.
(ב) וְאִם יַעֲלֶה עַל הַדַּעַת שֶׁהוּא אֵינוֹ מָצוּי אֵין דָּבָר אַחֵר יָכוֹל לְהִמָּצְאוֹת:
(ג) וְאִם יַעֲלֶה עַל הַדַּעַת שֶׁאֵין כָּל הַנִּמְצָאִים מִלְּבַדּוֹ מְצוּיִים הוּא לְבַדּוֹ יִהְיֶה מָצוּי. וְלֹא יִבָּטֵל הוּא לְבִטּוּלָם. שֶׁכָּל הַנִּמְצָאִים צְרִיכִין לוֹ וְהוּא בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לָהֶם וְלֹא לְאֶחָד מֵהֶם. לְפִיכָךְ אֵין אֲמִתָּתוֹ כַּאֲמִתַּת אֶחָד מֵהֶם:
(ד) הוּא שֶׁהַנָּבִיא אוֹמֵר (ירמיה י י) "וַה' אֱלֹהִים אֱמֶת". הוּא לְבַדּוֹ הָאֱמֶת וְאֵין לְאַחֵר אֱמֶת כַּאֲמִתָּתוֹ. וְהוּא שֶׁהַתּוֹרָה אוֹמֶרֶת (דברים ד לה) "אֵין עוֹד מִלְּבַדּוֹ". כְּלוֹמַר אֵין שָׁם מָצוּי אֱמֶת מִלְּבַדּוֹ כְּמוֹתוֹ:
(2) Thus, supposing that He is not, none else could have been called into existence.
(3) Conversely, supposing all other beings, save He alone, non-existent, His Being alone remains; for, He does not cease to be because of their non-existence, as all beings are dependent upon Him, but He, blessed is He! is not dependent upon them nor upon a single one of them; therefore, the truth of His Being is incomparable to the truth of any other individual being.
(4) This is as the prophet says: "But the Lord God is the true God" (Jer. 10.10); He alone is the Truth, and no other being possesses a truth similar to His Truth, even as the Torah says: "There is none other like unto Him" (Deut. 4.35), meaning, there is no other true being, besides Him, like unto Him.
(ה) הַמָּצוּי הַזֶּה הוּא אֱלֹהֵי הָעוֹלָם אֲדוֹן כָּל הָאָרֶץ. וְהוּא הַמַּנְהִיג הַגַּלְגַּל בְּכֹחַ שֶׁאֵין לוֹ קֵץ וְתַכְלִית. בְּכֹחַ שֶׁאֵין לוֹ הֶפְסֵק. שֶׁהַגַּלְגַּל סוֹבֵב תָּמִיד וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיִּסֹּב בְּלֹא מְסַבֵּב. וְהוּא בָּרוּךְ הוּא הַמְסַבֵּב אוֹתוֹ בְּלֹא יָד וּבְלֹא גּוּף:
(5) This Being is the God of the universe, Lord of the whole earth, who guides the sphere with an infinite force, a force of perpetual motion; for the sphere revolves continuously, which would be impossible without some one causing it to revolve; and it is He, blessed is He! Who causes it to revolve without hand and without body.
(ו) וִידִיעַת דָּבָר זֶה מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כ ב) "אָנֹכִי ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ". וְכָל הַמַּעֲלֶה עַל דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם אֱלוֹהַּ אַחֵר חוּץ מִזֶּה עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כ ג) "לֹא יִהְיֶה לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים עַל פָּנָי". וְכוֹפֵר בָּעִקָּר שֶׁזֶּהוּ הָעִקָּר הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁהַכּל תָּלוּי בּוֹ:
(6) To know this matter is a mandatory commandment, saying: "I am the Lord thy God" (Ex. 20,2); therefore, whosoever supposes that there is another god besides This One, (1) violates a prohibitive commandment, saying: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ibid. –3), and is an atheist, denying the great principle upon which everything depends.
(ז) אֱלוֹהַּ זֶה אֶחָד הוּא וְאֵינוֹ שְׁנַיִם וְלֹא יֶתֶר עַל שְׁנַיִם. אֶלָּא אֶחָד. שֶׁאֵין כְּיִחוּדוֹ אֶחָד מִן הָאֲחָדִים הַנִּמְצָאִים בָּעוֹלָם. לֹא אֶחָד כְּמִין שֶׁהוּא כּוֹלֵל אֲחָדִים הַרְבֵּה. וְלֹא אֶחָד כְּגוּף שֶׁהוּא נֶחְלָק לְמַחְלָקוֹת וְלִקְצָווֹת. אֶלָּא יִחוּד שֶׁאֵין יִחוּד אַחֵר כְּמוֹתוֹ בָּעוֹלָם. אִלּוּ הָיוּ אֱלֹהוּת הַרְבֵּה הָיוּ גּוּפִין וּגְוִיּוֹת. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין הַנִּמְנִים הַשָּׁוִין בִּמְצִיאוּתָן נִפְרָדִין זֶה מִזֶּה אֶלָּא בִּמְאֹרָעִין שֶׁיֶּאֶרְעוּ בַּגּוּפוֹת וְהַגְּוִיּוֹת. וְאִלּוּ הָיָה הַיּוֹצֵר גּוּף וּגְוִיָּה הָיָה לוֹ קֵץ וְתַכְלִית שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִהְיוֹת גּוּף שֶׁאֵין לוֹ קֵץ. וְכָל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְגוּפוֹ קֵץ וְתַכְלִית יֵשׁ לְכֹחוֹ קֵץ וָסוֹף. וֵאלֹהֵינוּ בָּרוּךְ שְׁמוֹ הוֹאִיל וְכֹחוֹ אֵין לוֹ קֵץ וְאֵינוֹ פּוֹסֵק שֶׁהֲרֵי הַגַּלְגַּל סוֹבֵב תָּמִיד. אֵין כֹּחוֹ כֹּחַ גּוּף. וְהוֹאִיל וְאֵינוֹ גּוּף לֹא יֶאֶרְעוּ לוֹ מְאֹרְעוֹת הַגּוּפוֹת כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא נֶחְלָק וְנִפְרָד מֵאַחֵר. לְפִיכָךְ אִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיִּהְיֶה אֶלָּא אֶחָד. וִידִיעַת דָּבָר זֶה מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ו ד) "ה' אֱלֹהֵינוּ ה' אֶחָד":
(7) This God is One God; He is neither two nor more than two but One to whose Unity there is no comparison among the individual units in the universe; not like the unit of a genus which embraces many individual units, nor like the unit of a body which is divisible into parts and particles, but a Unit to Whose Unity no other unit in the universe is like. Supposing that there are many deities is equivalent to an admission that they are corporeal, because like individual beings do not differ save in chance traits characteristic of bodies and material things only. Thus supposing the Creator to be corporeal and material would force a conclusion that He is finite, for, it is impossible to imagine a body which does not end in dissolution; but our God, blessed is His Name! beholding that His power is infinite and uninterrupted, for lo, the universal sphere continues to revolve forever. His power is positively not a physical power. And, because He is Incorporeal, none of the chance traits, characteristic of bodies, so as to be divisible or an offshoot of another being, can be attributed to Him. Therefore, the impossibility for Him to be but One. And, the knowledge of this doctrine of Monotheism is a mandatory commandment, saying: "The Lord our God is One God" (Deut. 6.4).
(יא) וְכֵיוָן שֶׁנִּתְבָּרֵר שֶׁאֵינוֹ גּוּף וּגְוִיָּה יִתְבָּרֵר שֶׁלֹּא יֶאֱרַע לוֹ אֶחָד מִמְּאֹרְעוֹת הַגּוּפוֹת. לֹא חִבּוּר וְלֹא פֵּרוּד. לֹא מָקוֹם וְלֹא מִדָּה. לֹא עֲלִיָּה וְלֹא יְרִידָה. וְלֹא יָמִין וְלֹא שְׂמֹאל. וְלֹא פָּנִים וְלֹא אָחוֹר. וְלֹא יְשִׁיבָה וְלֹא עֲמִידָה. וְאֵינוֹ מָצוּי בִּזְמַן עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לוֹ רֵאשִׁית וְאַחֲרִית וּמִנְיַן שָׁנִים. וְאֵינוֹ מִשְׁתַּנֶּה שֶׁאֵין לוֹ דָּבָר שֶׁיִּגְרֹם לוֹ שִׁנּוּי. וְאֵין לוֹ לֹא מָוֶת וְלֹא חַיִּים כְּחַיֵּי הַגּוּף הַחַי. וְלֹא סִכְלוּת וְלֹא חָכְמָה כְּחָכְמַת הָאִישׁ הֶחָכָם. לֹא שֵׁנָה וְלֹא הֲקִיצָה. וְלֹא כַּעַס וְלֹא שְׂחוֹק וְלֹא שִׂמְחָה וְלֹא עַצְבוּת. וְלֹא שְׁתִיקָה וְלֹא דִּבּוּר כְּדִבּוּר בְּנֵי אָדָם. וְכָךְ אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים אֵין לְמַעְלָה לֹא יְשִׁיבָה וְלֹא עֲמִידָה וְלֹא עֹרֶף וְלֹא עִפּוּי:
(11) Since it is clear that He is Incorporeal, it clearly follows that none of the corporeal changes happen to Him; no joining and no separation, no place and no measure, no ascent and no descent, no right and no left, no face and no back, no sitting and no standing; neither is His being dependent on time to attribute to Him either a beginning, or an end, or number of years; nor is He undergoing any change as there is naught to cause any change in Him; He is neither subject to death nor to life similar to the life of a living body; to Him cannot be attributed either folly or wisdom similar to the wisdom of a wise man; no sleep and no awakening, no anger and no laughter, no joy and no sadness, no silence and no speech similar to human speech; and likewise have the sages declared: "Above there is neither sitting down nor standing up, no backward nor forward".
(יב) וְהוֹאִיל וְהַדָּבָר כֵּן הוּא. כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הַלָּלוּ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרוּ בַּתּוֹרָה וּבְדִבְרֵי נְבִיאִים הַכּל מָשָׁל וּמְלִיצָה הֵן. כְּמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהילים ב ד) "יוֹשֵׁב בַּשָּׁמַיִם יִשְׂחָק". (דברים לב כא) "כִּעֲסוּנִי בְּהַבְלֵיהֶם". (דברים כח סג) "כַּאֲשֶׁר שָׂשׂ ה'" וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן. עַל הַכּל אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים דִּבְּרָה תּוֹרָה כִּלְשׁוֹן בְּנֵי אָדָם. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר (ירמיה ז יט) "הַאֹתִי הֵם מַכְעִסִים". הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר (מלאכי ג ו) "אֲנִי ה' לֹא שָׁנִיתִי". וְאִלּוּ הָיָה פְּעָמִים כּוֹעֵס וּפְעָמִים שָׂמֵחַ הָיָה מִשְׁתַּנֶּה. וְכָל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלּוּ אֵינָן מְצוּיִין אֶלָּא לַגּוּפִים הָאֲפֵלִים הַשְּׁפָלִים שׁוֹכְנֵי בָּתֵּי חֹמֶר אֲשֶׁר בֶּעָפָר יְסוֹדָם אֲבָל הוּא בָּרוּךְ הוּא יִתְבָּרַךְ וְיִתְרוֹמַם עַל כָּל זֶה:
(12) Now, since the matter is so, all such and other similar expressions in the Torah and in the words of the Prophets are merely proverbial and figurative; for example, it is said: "He that sitteth in heaven laugheth" (Ps. 2,4), "They have provoked Me with their vanities" (Deut. 32,21), "As the Lord rejoiced" (Ibid. 28, 63), and like verses. Concerning all these the wise men said "The words of the Torah is like human speech". It is, moreover said: "Do they provoke Me" (Jer.7,19), whereas it has been said: "For I the Lord change not" (Mal. 3,6 6); if He could sometimes be angry and sometimes mirthful, He would be subject to changes. Indeed, such and all kindred attributes are not present in any save in darkened, lowly bodies, inhabitants of houses of clay, whose origin is of dust; but He, blessed is He! in blessings is exalted above all this.
...אין התנצלות אם כן למי שלא יקבל מן המאמתים המעינים אם יהיה מקצר מן העיון שאני לא אחשוב לכופר מי שלא יביא מופת על הרחקת הגשמות אבל אחשוב לכופר מי שלא יאמין הרחקתה; וכל שכן במצוא פרוש אונקלוס ופרוש יונתן בן עוזיאל עליהם השלום ירחקו מן ההגשמה כל מה שאפשר. - וזאת היתה כונת זה הפרק
...There is no excuse whatever for those who, being unable to think for themselves, do not accept [the doctrine of the incorporeality of God] from the true philosophers. I do not consider those men as infidels who are unable to prove the incorporeality, but I hold those to be so Who do not believe it, especially when they see that Onkelos and Jonathan avoid [in reference to God] expressions implying corporeality as much as possible. This is all I intended to say in this chapter.
Micah Goodman, Maimonides and the Book That Changed Judaism Secrets of The Guide for the Perplexed, JPS, 2010, pages 8-9
The Foundation of Foundations?
God is the source of all motion, but there is nothing moving God. The immateriality of God negates any possibility that God might change. A God that is above time is also above motion and alteration.
It is written, I am God who does not change (Mal. 3:6). And if He were sometimes angry and sometimes happy, He would be changing. And these occurrences only happen to beings with dark, earthy bodies, those who dwell in houses of clay, and their foundation is dust. But He, may He be blessed, is far above all that. (MT, Hilkhot Yesodei HaTorah, 1:12)
A static, unchanging God is a God that does not hear prayer, does not pay attention to individual human needs and does not redeem history, for all of these assume change in God. The God that human beings reveal does not reveal Himself.
How can the Jewish religious system be based on the static God of Aristotle? The first chapter of the Mishneh Torah seems to undermine the doctrinal foundations of the Torah. But Maimonides does not identify the immutable unity of God as a threat to the Torah; rather, he understands this unity to be the foundation of all foundations and the pillar of all wisdom.
Yet without a God who reveals Himself to people and tells them to fulfill the commandments, what value is there to any of the mitzvot that Maimonides details throughout the Mishneh Torah? The God whose existence is provable by reason must somehow be compatible with the world of providence, revelation, prayer, and spiritual reward. However, in the Mishneh Torah there is no systematic, comprehensive attempt to mediate between the foundation of the one and other foundational beliefs, that is, between the static God and the dynamic elements of faith. Maimonides devoted another book to this project: The Guide for the Perplexed.
Goodman, pages 10-11
The God of Maimonides and the God of the Bible
Maimonides’s God, who resists all description, seems very different from the God of the Bible, who is merciful, gracious, and a great many other things besides. Actually, however, there is no inconsistency.
Monotheism, the biblical faith revolution, was not just a mathematical operation. Monotheism did not simply reduce the number of gods from many to one. There was a period in which ancient Egyptians also believed in one God, the Sun God, but that was still an idolatrous culture. The biblical revolution focused more on the uniqueness of God than on His oneness. As opposed to the pagan world, which understood nature to be the place where the gods lived and identified different divinities with particular natural forces, the Bible removes God from nature. This is the true core of the biblical revolution: making a partition between God and the world. God is not a part of nature and is not subject to the laws of nature. He created heaven and earth and is therefore distinct from heaven and earth. But if the Bible takes God out of the world, language still leaves Him in it. Even though it is in opposition to the anthropomorphic, scriptural conception of God, Maimonides’s move nevertheless is congruent with the Bible. It brings the biblical theological process to completion: removing God from the world begins with God’s liberation from nature in the Book of Genesis and ends with liberation from language in the Guide.
(א) דע - כי אמיתת הנבואה ומהותה הוא שפע שופע מאת האלוה ית' וית' באמצעות השכל הפועל על הכח הדברי תחלה ואחר כן ישפע על הכח המדמה. וזאת היא היותר עליונה שבמדרגות האדם ותכלית השלמות אשר אפשר שימצא למינו; והענין ההוא הוא תכלית שלמות הכח המדמה...
(1) PROPHECY is, in truth and reality, an emanation sent forth by the Divine Being through the medium of the Active Intellect, in the first instance to man's rational faculty, and then to his imaginative faculty; it is the highest degree and greatest perfection man can attain: it consists in the most Perfect development of the imaginative faculty. ...
(א) דעות בני אדם בהשגחה - חמש דעות והם כולם קדומות - רצוני לומר שהם דעות נשמעו בזמן הנביאים מעת הגלות התורה האמיתית המאירה לאלה המחשכים כולם:
...
(ח) ואשר אאמינהו אני בזאת הפינה - רצוני לומר בהשגחה אלוקית - הוא מה שאספר לך. ... ואולם ההשגחה האלוקית לפי דעתי ולפי מה שאני רואה היא נמשכת אחר השפע האלוקי - והמין אשר נדבק בו השפע ההוא השכלי עד ששב בעל שכל ונגלה לו כל מה שהוא גלוי לבעל שכל הוא אשר התחברה אליו ההשגחה האלוקית ושיערה לו כל פעולותיו על צד הגמול והעונש. אמנם אם טבעה הספינה ומה שבתוכה כמו שזכר ונפל הגג על מי שבבית אם היה זה במקרה לפי דעתנו אבל ברצון אלוקי - לפי הדין במשפטיו אשר לא יגיעו דעותינו לידיעת סדרם ...
(1) THERE are five different theories concerning Divine Providence; they are all ancient, known since the time of the Prophets, when the true Law was revealed to enlighten these dark regions. ...
(8) My opinion on this principle of Divine Providence I will now explain to you. ... Divine Providence is connected with Divine intellectual influence, and the same beings which are benefited by the latter so as to become intellectual, and to comprehend things comprehensible to rational beings, are also under the control of Divine Providence, which examines all their deeds in order to reward or punish them. It may be by mere chance that a ship goes down with all her contents, as in the above-mentioned instance, or the roof of a house falls upon those within; but it is not due to chance, according to our view, that in the one instance the men went into the ship, or remained in the house in the other instance: it is due to the will of God, and is in accordance with the justice of His judgments, the method of which our mind is incapable of understanding. ...
James A. Diamond and Menachem Kellner, Reinventing Maimonides in Contemporary Jewish Thought, The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2019
Had the Rambam not lived:
- Would there have been a Tur or a Shulchan Aruch?
- Would it be possible to speak of Jewish orthodoxy?
- Would there be room for rationally oriented Jews in the Middle Ages and today?
- Would we have modern orthodoxy and Yeshiva University?
- Would the Zohar and Hasidut have been possible without the provocation of the Rambam's rationalism?
- Would the mystical religious Zionism of Rav Kook or the messianism of Chabad be possible?
- Without the Rambam's universalist vision would all Jews today be even more particularist than they are?
(my paraphrases of a section from the Introduction)
(א) הָאֵל הַנִּכְבָּד וְהַנּוֹרָא הַזֶּה מִצְוָה לְאָהֳבוֹ וּלְיִרְאָה אוֹתוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ו ה) "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ". וְנֶאֱמַר (דברים ו יג) "אֶת ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ תִּירָא":
(ב) וְהֵיאַךְ הִיא הַדֶּרֶךְ לְאַהֲבָתוֹ וְיִרְאָתוֹ. בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁיִּתְבּוֹנֵן הָאָדָם בְּמַעֲשָׂיו וּבְרוּאָיו הַנִּפְלָאִים הַגְּדוֹלִים וְיִרְאֶה מֵהֶן חָכְמָתוֹ שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עֵרֶךְ וְלֹא קֵץ מִיָּד הוּא אוֹהֵב וּמְשַׁבֵּחַ וּמְפָאֵר וּמִתְאַוֶּה תַּאֲוָה גְּדוֹלָה לֵידַע הַשֵּׁם הַגָּדוֹל. כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמַר דָּוִד (תהילים מב ג) "צָמְאָה נַפְשִׁי לֵאלֹהִים לְאֵל חָי". וּכְשֶׁמְּחַשֵּׁב בַּדְּבָרִים הָאֵלּוּ עַצְמָן מִיָּד הוּא נִרְתָּע לַאֲחוֹרָיו וִיפַחֵד וְיוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהוּא בְּרִיָּה קְטַנָּה שְׁפָלָה אֲפֵלָה עוֹמֶדֶת בְּדַעַת קַלָּה מְעוּטָה לִפְנֵי תְּמִים דֵּעוֹת. כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמַר דָּוִד (תהילים ח ד) "כִּי אֶרְאֶה שָׁמֶיךָ מַעֲשֵׂי אֶצְבְּעֹתֶיךָ" (תהילים ח ה) "מָה אֱנוֹשׁ כִּי תִזְכְּרֶנּוּ". וּלְפִי הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלּוּ אֲנִי מְבָאֵר כְּלָלִים גְּדוֹלִים מִמַּעֲשֵׂה רִבּוֹן הָעוֹלָמִים כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיוּ פֶּתַח לַמֵּבִין לֶאֱהֹב אֶת הַשֵּׁם. כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים בְּעִנְיַן אַהֲבָה שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ כָּךְ אַתָּה מַכִּיר אֶת מִי שֶׁאָמַר וְהָיָה הָעוֹלָם:
(1) It is mandatory to love and fear this Glorified and Awe-inspiring God, for it is said: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God" (Deut. 6,5); and as it is said: "The Lord thy God thou shalt fear." (Ibid. 6, 13).
(2) But how may one discover the way to love and fear Him? When man will reflect concerning His works, and His great and wonderful creatures, and will behold through them His wonderful, matchless and infinite wisdom, he will spontaneously be filled with love, praise and exaltation and become possessed of a great longing to know the Great Name, even as David said: "My soul thirsts for God, for the living God," (Ps. 42,2); and when he will think of all these matters, he will be taken aback in a moment and stricken with awe, and realize that he is an infinitesimal creature, humble and dark, standing with an insignificant and slight knowledge in the presence of the All Wise, as David said: "For when I see Thy heavens, the wonderful works of Thy fingers, of what use is man that Thou mayest remember him?" (Ibid. 8,4). And, in harmony with these matters, I elucidate great, general principles of the works of the Lord of the universe, so that they might serve as an opening for one who understands by which to love the Name, as some sages said on the subject of love: "Out of it thou wilt recognize the One who spoke, and the universe was called into existence."
Goodman, p. 245
What is the true purpose of life? In part 3 of the Guide, Maimonides presents three possibilities: in chapter 51, mystical contemplation; in chapter 52, stronger dedication to halakhah; and in chapter 54, a life of social and political action. Which path does the Guide direct its readers to follow? ... Maimonides does not proclaim that any one of these options is superior to the others.
(א) זה הפרק אשר נזכרהו עתה אינו כולל תוספת ענין על מה שכללו אותו פרקי זה המאמר ואינו רק כדמות חתימה עם באור עבודת משיג האמיתיות המיוחדות באלוה ית' אחר השגתו אי זה דבר הוא - והישירו להגיע אל העבודה ההיא אשר היא התכלית אשר יגיע אליה האדם והודיעו איך תהיה ההשגחה בו בעולם הזה עד שיעתק אל 'צרור החיים':
(ב) ואני פותח הדברים בזה הפרק במשל שאשאהו לך. ואומר כי המלך הוא בהיכלו ואנשיו כולם - קצתם אנשי המדינה וקצתם חוץ למדינה ואלו אשר במדינה - מהם מי שאחוריו אל בית המלך ומגמת פניו בדרך אחרת ומהם מי שרוצה ללכת אל בית המלך ומגמתו אליו ומבקש לבקר בהיכלו ולעמוד לפניו אלא שעד היום לא ראה פני חומת הבית כלל; ומן הרוצים לבוא אל הבית - מהם שהגיע אליו והוא מתהלך סביבו מבקש למצוא השער ומהם מי שנכנס בשער והוא הולך בפרוזדור ומהם מי שהגיע עד שנכנס אל תוך הבית והוא עם המלך במקום אחד שהוא בית המלך; ולא בהגיעו אל תוך הבית יראה המלך או ידבר עמו אבל אחר הגיעו אל תוך הבית אי אפשר לו מבלתי שישתדל השתדלות אחרת ואז יעמוד לפני המלך ויראהו מרחוק או מקרוב או ישמע דבר המלך או ידבר עמו: והנני מפרש לך זה המשל אשר חדשתי לך ואומר אמנם אשר הם חוץ למדינה הם כל איש מבני אדם שאין לו אמונת דת לא מדרך עיון ולא מדרך קבלה כקצות התורן המשוטטים בצפון והכושיים המשוטטים בדרום והדומים להם מאשר אתנו באקלימים האלה. ודין אלו כדין בעלי חיים שאינם מדברים ואינם אצלי במדרגת בני אדם ומדרגתם בנמצאות - למטה ממדרגת האדם ולמעלה ממדרגת הקוף אחר שהגיע להם תמונת האדם ותארו והכרה יותר מהכרת הקוף:
(ג) ואשר הם במדינה אלא שאחוריהם אל בית המלך - הם בעלי אמונה ועיון אלא שעלו בידם דעות בלתי אמיתיות אם מטעות גדול שנפל בידם בעת עיונם או שקבלו ממי שהטעם והם לעולם מפני הדעות ההם כל אשר ילכו - יוסיפו רוחק מבית המלך. ואלו יותר רעים מן הראשונים הרבה ואלו הם אשר יביא הצורך בקצת העיתים להרגם ולמחות זכר דעותם - שלא יתעו זולתם:
(ד) והרוצים לבוא אל בית המלך ולהכנס אצלו אלא שלא ראו בית המלך כלל - הם המון אנשי התורה - רצוני לומר 'עמי הארץ העוסקים במצוות': והמגיעים אל הבית ההולכים סביבו - הם התלמודיים אשר הם מאמינים דעות אמיתיות מצד הקבלה ולומדים מעשי העבודות ולא הרגילו בעיון שרשי התורה ולא חקרו כלל לאמת אמונה: ואשר הכניסו עצמם לעין בעקרי הדת כבר נכנסו לפרוזדור; ובני אדם שם חלוקי המדרגות בלא ספק: אבל מי שהגיע לדעת מופת כל מה שנמצא עליו מופת וידע מן הענינים האלוקיים אמיתת כל מה שאפשר שתודע אמיתתו ויקרב לאמיתת מה שאי אפשר בו רק להתקרב אל אמיתתו כבר הגיע עם המלך בתוך הבית: ...
(1) THE present chapter does not contain any additional matter that has not been treated in the [previous] chapters of this treatise. It is a kind of conclusion, and at the same time it will explain in what manner those worship God who have obtained a true knowledge concerning God; it will direct them how to come to that worship, which is the highest aim man can attain, and show how God protects them in this world till they are removed to eternal life.
(2) I will begin the subject of this chapter with a simile. A king is in his palace, and all his subjects are partly in the country, and partly abroad. Of the former, some have their backs turned towards the king's palace, and their faces in another direction; and some are desirous and zealous to go to the palace, seeking "to inquire in his temple," and to minister before him, but have not yet seen even the face of the wall of the house. Of those that desire to go to the palace, some reach it, and go round about in search of the entrance gate; others have passed through the gate, and walk about in the ante-chamber; and others have succeeded in entering into the inner part of the palace, and being in the same room with the king in the royal palace. But even the latter do not immediately on entering the palace see the king, or speak to him; for, after having entered the inner part of the palace, another effort is required before they can stand before the king--at a distance, or close by--hear his words, or speak to him. I will now explain the simile which I have made. The people who are abroad are all those that have no religion, neither one based on speculation nor one received by tradition. Such are the extreme Turks that wander about in the north, the Kushites who live in the south, and those in our country who are like these. I consider these as irrational beings, and not as human beings; they are below mankind, but above monkeys, since they have the form and shape of man, and a mental faculty above that of the monkey.
(3) Those who are in the country, but have their backs turned towards the king's palace, are those who possess religion, belief, and thought, but happen to hold false doctrines, which they either adopted in consequence of great mistakes made in their own speculations, or received from others who misled them. Because of these doctrines they recede more and more from the royal palace the more they seem to proceed. These are worse than the first class, and under certain circumstances it may become necessary to slay them, and to extirpate their doctrines, in order that others should not be misled.
(4) Those who desire to arrive at the palace, and to enter it, but have never yet seen it, are the mass of religious people; the multitude that observe the divine commandments, but are ignorant. Those who arrive at the palace, but go round about it, are those who devote themselves exclusively to the study of the practical law; they believe traditionally in true principles of faith, and learn the practical worship of God, but are not trained in philosophical treatment of the principles of the Law, and do not endeavour to establish the truth of their faith by proof. Those who undertake to investigate the principles of religion, have come into the ante-chamber; and there is no doubt that these can also be divided into different grades. But those who have succeeded in finding a proof for everything that can be proved, who have a true knowledge of God, so far as a true knowledge can be attained, and are near the truth, wherever an approach to the truth is possible, they have reached the goal, and are in the palace in which the king lives. ...
Maimonideanism for Roth meant monotheism, and monotheism meant rationalism, universalism, and ethics. The unity of God, he thought, implies the unity and intelligibility
of nature, and the unity and equality of man: in sum, it makes science and ethics possible. "The real miracle of the universe," he wrote, "lies in the fact that God made it a universe: one world, one truth, one law." His views on Maimonideanism and its "modernity" are summarized in the epilogue of his The Guide of the Perplexed: Moses Maimonides:
I have tried ... to give a general account of a great medieval figure, but I have tried to reveal not his medievalism but his greatness ...
But it is a pity that sound doctrine should receive a date at all. That religion has an intellectual content ...; that social institutions have an educational reference; that living demands discipline and that virtue should ask for no reward - these and similar characteristic teachings of Maimonides would seem to deserve attention even though they were enunciated ... many centuries ago.We may reject (though why should we?) his vision of God as the centre towards which all creation yearns; but we should do well to ponder many other lessons ... and perhaps learn from them for our own need: that Biblical texts in order to remain fruitful must be re-interpreted ...; that the world is an ordered whole open to the mind of man ...; that design and law do not conflict, and that law and not miracle is the sign-manual of the deity ...; that all knowledge is revelation and all thinking inspiration.
...All this is "modern" enough ... After all, life is much the same in every age...
The ultimate question for us is not therefore what Maimonides actually said but what Maimonides would have said if he had lived in our day.