Abstract
In contradistinction to the epistemology of classical philosophers or, more precisely, in a carefully premeditated expansion of the classical epistemological doctrine which recognized sense perception, primary premises (axioms), and scientific data (derivative knowledge) as sources of knowledge, the epistemology of medieval religious philosophers recognized not only these three but also tradition, true reliable tradition (received from the prophets or the wise men), as a supplementary source of knowledge. Maimonides writes in the Letter on Astrology — a document of particular importance for understanding the significance of science and philosophy in his thought and in which, as he himself emphasizes, statements elaborated elsewhere are reflected — as follows:
Know, my masters, that it is not proper for a man to accept as trustworthy anything other than one of these three things. The first is a thing for which there is a clear proof deriving from man’s reasoning such as arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy. The second is a thing that a man perceives through one of the five senses such as when he knows with certainty that this is red and this is black. The third is a thing that man receives from the prophets or from the righteous.2
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Copyright Twersky. The following is the text of a lecture delivered at a Boston University colloquium on “Maimonides and the Sciences,” April 1987; only the most essential footnotes have been added. An expanded Hebrew version, fully annotated, appears in the Shenaton ha-Mishpat haIvri, v. XV.
“Letter on Astrology,” in I. Twersky, ed., A Maimonides Reader, p. 464. Hebrew text edited by A. Marx, HUCA III (1926) 350. Note that this is a three-fold formulation in which immediate and derivative scientific knowledge are combined and treated as one category. See the antecedent classification in R. Saadya Gaon, ’Emunot ve-De‘ot, introduction; VII 2. Also, M. Zucker, Perushe Rasag li-Bereshit, p. 13, n. 9. See H.A. Wolfson, Studies in the History of Philosophy and Religion, v. I, p. 593. A representative later classification is found in R. Menahem ha-Meiri, Perush Tehillim,psalm 123.
“Letter on Astrology,” p. 465.
Ibid.: “The great sickness and the ‘grievous evil’ (Eccles, 5:12, 15) consist in this: that all the things that man finds written in books are old.” See also his “Epistle to Yemen” in A Maimonides Reader, p. 454: “Do not consider a statement true because you find it in a book, for the prevaricator is as little restrained with his pen as with his tongue. For the untutored and uninstructed are convinced of the veracity of a statement by the mere fact that it is written; nevertheless its accuracy must be demonstrated in another manner.”
H.A. Wolfson, “The Double Faith Theory,” JQR XXXIII (1942) 222 and see 239. Note also in this connection Guide II, 33: knowledge of God is obtainable by demonstrative reasoning or by direct revelation.
Guide, I, 71.
See Guide, I, 5; II 23.
See m Introduction to the Code of Maimonides, my f pp. 365–367.
E.g. Hilkot Yesode ha-Torah, II, 1, 2; Teshuvah,X, 6. Non-Maimonideans repudiate this by affirming that the Torah is far superior to natural science as a source of the knowledge of God. See, e.g. B. Septimus in I. Twersky, ed., R. Moses Nahmanides, p. 23, n. 42.
See the comment on Rabad, Hilkot Kiddush ha-Hodesh, VII, 7.
S. Gandz, Studies in Hebrew Astronomy and Mathematics, ed. S. Sternberg, pp. 113ff.
Kiddush ha-Hodesh, XIX, 13.•
Guide, I, 71.
Op. cit., II 9.
Op. cit., II, 24.
“Letter on Astrology,” pp. 465–466.
Iggerot ha-Rambam, ed. D. Baneth, pp. 69–70. In an adjacent passage, Maimonides describes his hectic schedule; he complains that he has no time other than on the Sabbath, to study Torah and has no time whatsoever for the other sciences.
S. Pines, Translator’s Introduction, Guide of the Perplexed, p. cxxxii. See F. Rosner, Sex Ethics in the Writings of Moses Maimonides (New York, 1974), p. 4: Maimonides must have been an avid reader, since his medical writings show a profound knowledge of Greek and Moslem medical works. Hippocrates Galen and Aristotle were his Greek medical inspiration and Rhazes of Persia, Alfarabi of Turkey, Ibn Zuho and Avenzoar are Moslem authors frequently quoted by Maimonides.
See Y. Tzvi Langerman
Guide, II, 24.
Guide, Dedicatory Epistle.
See, e.g. my Introduction, p. 366, n. 28.
Kovez Teshuvot ha-Rambam, I, 25b.
See above, n. 1.
Ma’amar Tehiyyat ha-Metim, ed. J. Finkle, p. 4. Even in Sefer ha-Mizvot, negative commandment 179, Maimonides says that only the vulgus without knowledge of natural sciences will marvel at his statement.
L. Strauss, “Notes on Maimonides’ Book of Knowledge,” Studies in Mysticism and Religion Presented to G. Scholem, p. 269.
R. Moses Nahmanides, Torat ha-Shem Temimah,in H. Chavel, ed., Kitve ha-Rambam, v. I, p. 154.
Ma’amar Tehiyyat ha-Metim, p. 22.
Teshuvot ha-Rambam, n. 252 (p. 460). See Commentary on Mishnah, Kelim, II, 1.
When he is apparently scornful of “mere doctors” (e.g. Isaac Isaeli or Razi), it is because they were not at the same time philosophers and were nevertheless dabbling in philosophy.
Hilkot De’ot, IV, 20, 21.
See especially the medical tract published in Transactions of American Philosophical Society 54 (1964), p. 40. Revealed religion commands that which is useful in the world-to-come while the physician informs his patient concerning that which is useful to the body in this world.
See especially Commentary on the Mishnah, Pesahim, IV, 10; Guide, III, 37. Just as idolatrous practices are religiously useless, so they are also medically useless.
Hilkot Avel, IV, 5 and Radbaz, ad loc.
See S. Pines, Collected Works, v. II, p. 329; also, ibid., p. 191 and 361. R. McKeon, “The Empiricist and Experimentalist Temper in the Middle Ages,” Essays in Honor of John Dewey (New York, 1929), pp. 216–234. See L. Demaitre in Speculum 63 (1988) 118. Galenism meant “medicine was to be taught from a philosophical basis, with reason governing theory and guiding practice; the regula rationis distinguished it as an art..”
Commentary on the Mishnah, Yoma, VIII, 4; see Hilkot Shabbat, XIX, 13. Rabbi Solomon ibn Adret, Teshubot, 414, contends that Maimonides’ position is inconsistent and untenable.
Hilkot ‘Akum, XI:12; for the coupling of “Scroll or phylacteries,” see Hilkot Shevu ôt, XI:11. This entire halakah should be correlated with Hilkot Mezuzah, V:4. It is a universal custom to write the word Shad-dai (Almighty) on the other side of the mezuzah, opposite the blank space between the two sections. As this word is written on the outside, the practice is unobjectionable. They, however, who write names of angels, holy names, a Biblical text, or inscriptions usual on seals within the mezuzah, are among those who have no portion in the world to come. For these fools not only fail to fulfill the commandment but they treat an important precept that expresses the Unity of God, the love of Him, and His worship, as if it were an amulet to promote their own personal interests; for, according to their foolish minds, the mezuzah is something that will secure for them advantage in the vanities of the world.
See my Introduction, pp. 418ff.
This is completely congruent with what Maimonides says in his medical treatises, see, e.g. above, n. 31. The teleology is all-important in understanding the differences between religion and medicine. The Torah, while not intending “its words to cure the body,” is concerned with the wellbeing of the body (note in this context Guide, III, 27); it delegated the means to the science of medicine. To put it differently, the Torah allows for its suspension in order to prolong life, but the teleology of life in turn is completely subordinate to the Torah.
See R. Abraham Karelitz, Inyene Emunah u-Bittahon, ch. v.
See Kitve Ramban, I, p. 380.
Hilkot Avadim, 1, 5.
See Teshuvot Hakam Zevi, 18. (The Talmud does, of course, refer to tivah.) See, generally, W.J. Courtenay, Covenant and Causality in Medieval Thought (esp. ch. III, “Nature and the Natural in Twelfth-Century Thought”). J.A. Weisheipl, “Aristotle’s Concept of Nature: Avicenna and Aquinas,” in L.D. Roberts, ed., Approaches to Nature in the Middle Ages.
See Hilkot Roze’ah, I, 9. Birth changes the role of the embryo. The fetus no longer poses a threat to the mother; that one of two people may die is within the realm of nature (tivo shel blam). Note also Teshuvah, VI, 5; Hilkot Avel, XIII, II, and Taaniyot, I, 3; Commentary on Mishnah, Niddah, III, 2.
As we shall soon see, there is a symmetry in the attitudes to and attempted changes of nature; physical nature may be changed temporarily by divine miraculous acts whereas human nature may be disciplined and directed by divine laws. For other examples of psychological explanation, see also Hilkot Shabbat, X, 10;’Issure Bi’ah, 1, 9; Gerushin, II, 20; Sanhedrin, XVIII, 6; Commentary on Mishnah, Shabbat, II, 5, Sanhedrin, VI, 1, 2; Guide, III, 46.
Hilkot Shevu’ot,V, 22. We may surmise that this halakah becomes elitist inasmuch as knowledge of the relevant facts depends on general scientific sources (see Hilkot Yesode ha-Torah, III, 6; Kiddush ha-Hodesh, XVII, 25). Only one sensitive to the importance of science will seek to acquire such knowledge. See also Commentary on the Mishnah, Introduction, p. 37: Ptolemy’s Almagest is the source of this information.
Hilkot Shehitah, X, 12–13.
Hilkot Roze’ah, II, 8. See Min hat Hinnuk on Sefer ha-Hinnuk, mizvah 34.
Teshuvot, 1, n. 98. See also R. Isaac b. Sheshet, Teshuvot, n. 45. There is a very interesting discussion in the work of a great-grandson of the Hatam Sofer: R. Moshe S. Glazner, Dor Revi’i, introduction p. 4. Rashbah, he says, wants to “deny reality.”
Shehitah, VIII, 16, 23 and X, 9, Teshuvot, n. 315 (p. 585).
Guide, III, 34: “governance of the law ought to be absolute and universal.”
Hilkot Nazir, II, 10, 11.
Commentary on the Mishnah, ’Eruvin, I, 5. See S. Sternberg’s introduction to S. Gandz, Studies, p. xxxiii. As S. Sternberg put it: “Maimonides explains that since it is an irrational number, we have to be satisfied with some approximation. The acceptable degree of approximation then becomes a legal matter.” In other words, the halakah creates a reality which may differ from purely scientific reality; in any event, the halakah is not stumped by a scientific impasse.
See S. Pines, Collected Works, p. 189.
It was this cautious, restrictive approach to miracles which irked R. Moses Nahmanides.
Hilkot Tume’at Zara at, XVI, 10.
See, e.g. Hilkot Roze’ah, VI, 12.
See H.A. Wolfson, Philo, I, p. 137.
Judah Halevi, Cuzari, IV, 31.
The formulation in Tume’at Zaraceat, XVI, 10 is fully congruent with Commentary on the Mishnah, Neg’aim, XII, 5 and Guide, III, 47. Note that in Tuttle’ at Zarawat,X, 7 the isolation of the leper is not because “leprosy is contagious and that almost by nature all men find it disgusting,” but is rather a punishment which makes the repetition of slander impossible.
See the lucid comments of B. Septimus, Hispano-Jewish Culture in Transition, p. 91.
Guide, III, 30. Guide, III, 51, suggests that providence protects one from evil; the lack or absence of providence leaves one exposed to the impartial law of nature. Note also that in the “Letter on Astrology” Maimonides emphasizes the total lack of utility in mythological-astrological belief; true belief is naturally linked to usefulness (to‘elet).
Hilkot Tao?aniyot, I, 2, 3.
S. Pines, Collected Works, p. 355.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Twersky, I. (2000). Aspects of Maimonides’ Epistemology: Halakah and Science. In: Cohen, R.S., Levine, H. (eds) Maimonides and the Sciences. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 211. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2128-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2128-8_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5348-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-2128-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive