Who is moses ben maimon

Home News Rabbi Moses ben Maimon. Rabbi Moses ben Maimon. Latest News. View All. Online: 9. According to Maimonides, ethics and religion are indissolubly linked together, and all the precepts aim either directly or indirectly at morality. Thus, for instance, the object of the laws concerning the sacrifices lies in the accompanying prayers and devotions; as to the sacrifices themselves, they were only a concession to the idolatrous habits of the people.

This happiness can not consist in the activity which he has in common with other animals, but in the exercise of his intellect, which leads to the cognition of truth. The highest cognition is that of God and His unity; consequently the "summum bonum" is the knowledge of God through philosophy. The first necessity in the pursuit of the "summum bonum" is to subdue sensuality and to render the body subservient to reason. In order that man should be considered the aim and end of the creation of this world he must be perfect morally and intellectually.

Virtue and vice have their source in the five faculties of the soul: the nutritive, the sensitive, the imaginative, the appetitive, and the deliberative. The soul is to intellect what matter is to form: it is susceptible to both good and evil, according to the choice made by the deliberative faculty. Human excellence is either of the appetitive faculty moral virtues or of the deliberative faculty intellectual virtues.

The vices of the appetitive faculty are the opposite of the appetitive virtues; for instance, cowardice and rashness are the opposite extremes of courage, and both are vices. Virtue is a proficiency in willing what is approved by reason, developed from the state of a natural potentiality by action. The development of virtue requires exercise and intelligence. Ethical virtue is that permanent direction of the will which maintains the mean of conduct, as determined by the reason of the intelligent.

Courage is the mean between cowardice and temerity; temperance, the mean between inordinate desire and stupid indifference. In the field of personal ethics Maimonides established rules deduced from the teachings of the Bible and of the Rabbis. These rules deal with man's obligations to himself and to his fellow men. To the former belongs the obligation to keep oneself in health by regular living, by seeking medical advice in sickness, by cleanliness, by earning a livelihood, etc.

The conditions essential to the soundness of the soul are contentment, and moderation in joy and grief. Pity is a generous quality of the soul; to develop this sentiment the Law forbade cruelty to animals. Mutual love and sociability are necessary to men. The sentiment of justice prescribed by the Law consists in respecting the property and honor of others, even though they be one's slaves.

The "Moreh" was completed by Maimonides at the age of fifty-two. It was the climax of his literary career in the field of Judaism. After having in his previous works systematized all the Biblical and rabbinical laws and ceremonies and drawn up the thirteen Articles of Faith in which every Israelite is bound to believe, he shows, in the "Moreh," that Judaism is the very expression of human intelligence and that there is nothing in Scripture or rabbinical literature, if properly explained, that contradicts true philosophy.

As might be expected, the adversaries of Maimonides' code declared war against the "Moreh. Maimonides' theory of the unity of souls comp. Alexander of Aphrodisias was declared by them to be an outright denial of the immortality of the soul.

Maimonides disdained these attacks and continued his laborious life, enriching medical literature with some valuable works and enlightening his admirers and disciples upon a multitude of questions. Among these was an inquiry concerning astrology, addressed to him from Marseilles.

In his answer Maimonides says that, in his opinion, man should believe only what can be supported either by rational proof, by the evidence of the senses, or by trustworthy authority. He affirms that he has studied astrology and that it does not deserve to be described as a science. The supposition that the fate of a man could be dependent upon the constellations is ridiculed by him; he argues that such a theory would rob life of purpose and would make man a slave of destiny.

With the completion of the "Moreh," Maimonides was at the zenith of his glory. He had the satisfaction of seeing his work translated into Hebrew and received with great admiration by enlightened Jews; even Mohammedans studied it and admired the genius of its author.

The latter's greatness as a physician was no less recognized, and the Arabic poet and cadi Al-Sa'id ibn Surat al-Mulk sang it in ecstatic verse, which, translated into English, reads as follows:. Galen's art heals only the body, But Abu Imram's [Maimonides'] the body and the soul.

With his wisdom he could heal the sickness of ignorance. If the moon would submit to his art, He would deliver her of her spots at the time of full moon, Cure her of her periodic defects, And at the time of her conjunction save her from waning. The last years of Maimonides' life were marked by increasing physical ailments; he died in his seventieth year, mourned by many congregations in various parts of the world.

In Fostat both Jews and Mohammedans observed public mourning for three days. His body was taken to Tiberias, and his tomb became a place of pilgrimage. With the death of Maimonides the "Moreh" became the occasion for a long and bitter fight between conservative and liberal Jews in France and Spain. So bitter, indeed, was the contest that fierce invectives were speedily followed by anathemas and counter-anathemas, issued from both camps. Finally, about , the dispute was referred to the Christian authorities, who ordered Maimonides' works to be burned.

However, in spite of the strenuous opposition of the orthodox, perhaps because of this opposition, the "Moreh" became the "guide" of enlightened Jews for many generations, and its study produced philosophers like Spinoza, Solomon Maimon, and Moses Mendelssohn. Nor was its fame confined to the narrow pale of Judaism; as early as the thirteenth century portions of it were translated into Latin, and many Christian scholastics, like Albertus Magnus , Duns Scotus , Alexander of Hales, etc.

Maimonides' correspondence and some consultations appeared at first without place or date, and later, under the title "Teshubot She'elot we-Iggarot," at Constantinople The fundamental purpose of all the halakic works of Maimonides was to bring system and order into the tremendous mass of traditional law and to promote the knowledge thereof by presenting it in a comparatively clear and brief form.

This self-imposed task was the necessary consequence of his views regarding the mission and the purpose of the Jews and their relation to the revealed law; for in his eyes the Law, which the Jew was bound to follow, was not confined to the written code, but, in accordance with the traditional view see Oral Law adopted by Maimonides, embraced oral explanations, regulations, and provisions that had been given to Moses. These precepts and regulations were of equal validity with the written law, as were all those which scholars had deduced from the Bible by rules of logic or hermeneutics.

There were, moreover, precepts set forth by prophets and sages which had no connection with the written law, although they were accepted by the entire people and were obligatory Commentary on the Mishnah, Introduction. A necessary condition for the observance of the Law was a knowledge of it, and the Jew was obliged to enter upon scientific studies that he might rightly understand the truths contained in the Torah and attain spiritual perfection; thus he was unable to devote his entire time to the investigation of the commandments of the Law.

A fixed code, therefore, became necessary if each man was to know the Law and its precepts, and in it the rules and regulations must be contained with pregnant brevity. The Mishnah of Judah ha-Nasihad once been such a code, but it then had no commentary, and the Talmud, designed to fill this want, fell short of its object.

The treatment of the Mishnah in the Talmud was often unintelligible, as when it asserted that a given mishnah contained this or that when such was not stated in the Mishnah itself, or that one mishnah was incomplete, while another required correction.

Nor was the general plan of the Talmud as a commentary satisfactory, for it frequently explained a mishnah by discussions which were too detailed and too involved, while the language employed was unintelligible to the majority. It was often impossible to interpret a mishnah except by statements scattered through two or more treatises, so that a thorough knowledge of the entire Talmud, which few could attain, was necessary to determine the exact ruling of the mishnah in practical matters.

Maimonides set himself the task of meeting this want. This he sought to do by commenting on the Mishnah and making it available as a code, from which decisions of practical bearing might be deduced without the necessity of working through many involved disquisitions Introduction.

The two methods of commentary and codification were, in the opinion of Maimonides, the only ones open to every author to follow, the model of the one being the Talmud and of the other the Mishnah Responsa, No. It thus becomes possible to distinguish between the commentatorial and the codificatory contributions of Maimonides to the religious law.

By contrast, Avicenna held that because the first intelligence is aware of God and duality in itself, it generates three things. The difference need not concern us here.

The process continues until we get the ten intelligences and nine primary spheres that make up the standard picture of medieval cosmology. Maimonides criticizes this account in two ways. First if the originator of a causal sequence is one and simple, there is no way for complexity to arise, and everything else in the sequence should be one and simple as well GP 2. Even if the sequence contains thousands of members, there is no way to account for the complexity of a celestial sphere, which is a composite of matter and form.

When we get to the inner spheres, we have to account for even more because not only is there the sphere itself but the stars or planets attached to it. They too are composites of matter and form.

How can we have such complexity if we start with something that is radically one? Second, there are features of the heavenly bodies that defy scientific explanation and thus appear to be contingent in the sense that they were chosen rather than necessitated GP 2. If the outer spheres impart motion to the inner ones, we would expect spherical motion to slow as we move closer to the earth.

But this is hardly the case. As Maimonides points out GP 2. We see that in case of some spheres, the swifter of motion is above the slower; that in the case of others, the slower of motion is above the swifter; and that, again in another case, the motions of the spheres are of equal velocity though one be above the other. There are also other very grave matters if regarded from the point of view these things are as they are in virtue of necessity. If there is no explanation for why the spheres behave in this fashion, or why some stars and planets emit more light than others, or why some regions of the heavens are relatively crowded while others are empty, there is no reason to think the phenomena in question are what they are by virtue of necessity.

If there is no necessity, there are no grounds for eternity. The alternative is to say that God created the world as a result of a free choice and fashioned it in a particular way. Maimonides recognizes GP 2. Just because science cannot explain something now, it does not follow that it will never be able to explain it.

As he himself admits, science can and does make progress. But in the case of the heavenly bodies, he thought progress very unlikely. Because they too far away to make close observations, and too high in rank, we can only rely on inferences based on accidental qualities size, speed, and direction.

As long as this is true, we will never know their essential natures and will never be able to support claims of necessity. As long as this is true, creation, though not demonstrated, will always be preferable to eternity. Maimonides GP 2. Beyond this there is a textual reason: belief in creation does less violence to scripture than belief in eternity.

He concludes that the theory of Moses offers the best alternative, while that of Plato, which retains the idea of creation de novo , is acceptable. Though some people fault Maimonides for not coming up with a stronger argument on behalf of Moses, he would reply by saying that given the limits of our knowledge, this is the strongest argument we can expect.

Although Maimonides is often seen as part of the Aristotelian tradition, and often expresses praise for Aristotle, his account of creation indicate that he is willing to depart from Aristotle when he thinks the arguments lead in that direction. We have already seen that for Maimonides the highest perfection is intellectual and consists in ascertaining in divine matters everything that can be ascertained. Proper behavior, whether for the individual or the community, is a means to this end GP 3.

On a political level, this means that the state must do more than protect life and property; it must see to it that all its citizens are educated in religious matters and that a small number achieve mastery GP 2.

On a personal level, it means that morality is not an end in itself but a way of controlling the passions and creating an atmosphere in which science and philosophy can flourish GP 3.

While intellectual perfection is oriented to truth and falsity and aims at demonstration, moral perfection is oriented to good and bad and rests on commonly accepted opinions. Although this knowledge cannot be known with scientific precision, it does not follow that it is arbitrary. On the contrary, it is among the most basic customs one can imagine. Maimonides expresses this point GP 2. Just as those with sick bodies seek a physician, those with sick souls need to seek the wise rulers, who are physicians of the soul.

Not surprisingly major portions of his work attempt to show that Jewish law is based on a thorough understanding of the soul and the conditions needed for its perfection. Chief among them is the attainment of a mean between extremes. Like Aristotle, Maimonides recognizes there will be variations from one person to another and that sometimes a person may have to overshoot the mean for therapeutic reasons Eight Chapters 4 and MT 1, Character Traits, 2.

Also like Aristotle, he stresses that virtue is a habit that can only be developed by practice. Maimonides claims his theory is sound in its own right and can be distilled from the sayings of the prophets and sages. He also connects adherence to the mean with the doctrine of imitatio Dei imitation of God , by arguing that GP 2. It is true, as Maimonides says many times, that Jewish law does not ask people to live as hermits, starve themselves, beat themselves, or jeopardize their health.

The qualities that really matter are good judgment, kindness, and compassion — all things Maimonides explains by going back to the doctrine of the mean. People are asked to give to charity, honor their parents, refrain from certain sexual relations, not hate or take vengeance, and not eat certain foods in order establish a moderate disposition.

By the same token, the holidays are arranged so that some involve rejoicing while others involve moderate forms of self-denial. In no case does the law require anything for the sake of obedience alone.

Maimonides points out there are cases where the analogy between body and soul breaks down, in particular the fact that legal reasoning is different from medical reasoning. The physician does not treat the concept humanity but the particular person who comes to her. That is why the law is not dependent on time and place but tries to establish a standard that is absolute and universal.

To take a modern example, the law prescribes a limit to the amount of alcohol a person can have in his blood and still be able to drive. Undoubtedly there are variations among individuals that allow one person with a certain amount of alcohol to be much more alert than another. But it is not the purpose of the law to take these differences into account. All it can do is set a norm and enforce it equally. Still anyone familiar with Maimonides will see that acceptance of the mean is hard to reconcile with other aspects of his thought.

When he describes God as governor of the universe balancing justice with mercy, the doctrine of the mean makes good sense; when he describes God as lacking emotion and incomparable to anything in the created order, it does not. Similarly, when he describes prophets as law-givers, the mean is an appropriate standard; when he describes them as people who begrudge the time they spend with others and prefer to contemplate God alone in silent meditation GP 3.

Fortunately we do not have to survey all of this literature because the problem arises in the space of a few paragraphs in MT 1, Character Traits, 1.

As Maimonides puts it, a person whose character traits are balanced can be called wise hakham , while a person who goes beyond the mean when circumstances warrant is known as pious hasid :. Piety then involves going beyond the mean to a higher standard.

In this connection Maimonides cites Numbers , which does not say that Moses was meek but that he was very meek. For Aristotle [ Nicomachean Ethics b31—a8] a person should be praised for being angry with the right people in the right way and at the right time. A person who allows himself to be abused by insults without getting angry lacks feeling and behaves in a manner that is slavish.

Virtue is worthy of honor. Just as it is wrong to ask for too much, it is equally wrong to ask for too little. For Aristotle meekness indicates a loss of self-esteem; for Maimonides it is not a virtue but virtue par excellence. By ascribing it to Moses, he implies that it represents the highest level a person can achieve. A similar sentiment is expressed earlier in the Mishneh Torah 1, Basic Principles, 4. He concludes with praise for those who are lowly of spirit:.

It is not that Maimonides has abandoned the idea that nature avoids excess or deficiency but that he seems to be saying the highest level of human excellence sometimes requires an extreme. In other places, Maimonides argues that our goal should not be to moderate emotion but to rise above it. We saw that God is not subject to emotion. Maimonides takes this to mean that the ideal state is one in which a person acts in a completely dispassionate way deciding cases on their merit without recourse to feeling.

While such a person must still make the appropriate judgment, there will be no character trait or disposition from which it springs. In the treatise on Character Traits, he admits that there may be times when it is necessary for a person to show anger, but insists that inwardly she should remain completely tranquil.

What happened to balance and the idea of mental health? The answer is that while they are still valuable, they are not ends in themselves. But in the end, moral perfection is only a necessary condition for intellectual perfection. Like Plato, Maimonides believes in the therapeutic effects of philosophy. In the last chapter of the Guide 3.

In the end, the relation between moral and intellectual virtue is more complicated than Maimonides first presents. It is not just that the former is a means to the latter but that after the latter is achieved, after one comes to see that earthly goods are fleeting and ultimately unsatisfying, his behavior will undergo a transformation: rather than aim for a moderate amount of earthly goods, he will forgo them and spend as much time as possible in a state of awe and reverence, where the distinction between moral and intellectual perfection may even break down.

By rejecting literal interpretation and playing down the importance of miracles, he knew he was taking a controversial stand. As he notes in the Introduction to the Guide , Jewish law prohibits one from discussing esoteric matters like the Account of the Beginning or the Account of the Chariot in public. The idea is that these matters should only be discussed with an advanced student capable of finding the truth on her own.

The reason for this is that the people who read them have different levels of comprehension. But Maimonides goes further, saying that in some cases it is necessary for an author to contradict himself. Of the seven reasons for using contradictions, Maimonides says he will avail himself of two.

The second is more troublesome: on very obscure matters, it is necessary to launch a discussion that proceeds according to one assumption and later launch one that proceeds according to another. This raises several questions. In order to make the Mishneh Torah accessible to the entire Jewish world, Maimonides organized it topically and composed it in clear, concise Hebrew.

In a radical departure from tradition, Maimonides omitted from the MT both the names of earlier scholars and most of their opinions, preserving only those rulings he deemed correct.

Critics attacked him for this decision, spawning an even greater literature that grows even to this day. Among his fiercest critics was Abraham ben David, the Ravad, c.

While he envisioned a broad audience for the Mishneh Torah , Maimonides intended the Guide of the Perplexed primarily for students accomplished in both Jewish studies and philosophy. Unlike the MT, which is written in clear, accessible Hebrew, the Guide is written in a more difficult, less commonly understood Judeo-Arabic — the language of Jews living in Muslim lands at the time.

Maimonides also seeded the Guide with inconsistencies, sometimes stating one thing but intending another. His authorial circumlocutions were intended to safeguard particularly powerful and dangerous knowledge about God, creation, and the afterlife. Although he denied there was anything incompatible about Greek philosophy and Jewish teachings, Maimonides may nevertheless have secretly believed things that were anathema to normative Judaism.

Scholars debate the particulars fiercely, though; we will likely never know all of his true views with certainty. We do, however, know the central points of contention.

In his Commentary on the Mishnah , Maimonides outlined 13 principles of Jewish belief, itself a controversial undertaking in predominantly non-creedal Judaism. Many Jews sing a poetic adaptation of these 13 principles called Yigdal at the end of Shabbat prayer services each week. Although a universal premise today, it was not necessarily so in 12th-century Judaism.

Maimonides taught that biblical descriptions of God are allegorical, intended to help humans better understand lofty matters.