| How Rambam's 'chasidim' may have sung his teachings: |
INTRODUCTION:
Many people - including those who have been religious all
their lives and even those in positions of religious leadership - are not always
aware of just how radical Rambam’s views on religion were.
Yes, some will claim to be expert in a ‘sanitized’ Rambam (1135-1204)
through their familiarity with his legal work, the Mishneh Torah which
was compiled (around 1170/80) and was directed at the general population - but his
deeper, theological and philosophical works, including the Moreh Nevuchim
(Guide of the Perplexed, compiled a decade later around 1190)[1]
express his personal vision of a Judaism for, what he describes as “people
of understanding.”
It is best to use Rambam’s own words to illustrate this
theological and intellectual chasm between what he calls the ‘simple masses
of the Torah observant ’and those of ‘us’ with ‘understanding’:[2]
My loose translation from Rambam’s later work, Ma’amar
Techiyat haMeitim (compiled in 1191), follows:
“Our desire -
and the desire of all those intellectual individuals (is to always first try to seek
a rational explanation instead of a mystical one).
This is opposite
to the common approach of the masses (who prefer a more mystical and
literal approach as their first option).
(It is evident
that) the most underlying principle held by the masses of Torah observant
people - because of their stupidity - is to regard Torah and human logic as
mutually exclusive!
These (Torah
observant people) take everything which they cannot understand with their
logic and (immediately) categorise it as miraculous.
They flee
from (any interpretation) which could explain a phenomenon as
natural.”
In this article, we shall explore some of Rambam’s profoundly radical views
on a Judaism that will seem almost foreign to many. And we will see how Rambam failed miserably in
terms of getting his ideas to be accepted by the mainstream, or even a
tributary thereof.
NOTE: The aim of this article is not to suggest any change in the way we perform
Halacha or view the spiritual realms but simply to highlight Rambam’s
little-known ideas about a religion we think we know. Some of Rambam’s views
may shock and upset the sensitive Reader.
I have drawn from the writing of Professor Menachem Kellner
who is widely regarded as a specialist in the thought and philosophy of
Maimonides.[3]
‘A NATURALIST RELIGION OF RADICAL RESPONSIBILITIES’:
Menachem Kellner describes Rambam’s vision of Judaism as a “remarkably
naturalist religion of radical responsibility.” Rambam tried desperately to divert both
myth and mystery - which were becoming more and more popular in his time, even
half a century before the publication of the Zohar - away from Judaism.
In his (unpopular) view, the events in the world essentially followed a natural
progression without much interference from G-d, and certainly not from the
heavenly spheres. Even the messianic era would follow a normative and less
miraculous series of events. [See Mashiach – a
Natural or Supernatural Event?].
Together with this extremely ‘naturalistic’ (as opposed to mystical
and supernatural) position which Rambam took, came a just as stark
understanding of the ‘radical responsibility’ that we ourselves carry.
There is no mystical theurgy or magic in Rambam’s system upon which one can
call to alleviate the ‘cause and effect’ and the subsequent inevitability of
reality. In his system, even the events of history are subject to a certain
‘randomness’.
CHARMS AND SEGULOT:
Kellner writes:
“Many of Maimonides’ opponents, in his day and ours, do indeed
accept the efficacy of charms and amulets, and fear the harm of demons and the
evil eye...
In such a world instructions from God, and contact with
the divine in general, must be mediated by a religious elite who alone can see
the true reality masked by nature.
This is the opposite of an empowering religion, since it
takes their fate out of the hands of Jews, and, in effect, puts it into the
hands of rabbis.”
Rambam wanted no share in such a construct of religion that involved any spiritually elite ‘middle-men’ and their ethereal wares.
Yet, Rambam was also an elitist, but of the intellectual kind:
AN ELITIST AND A UNIVERSALIST:
Ironically, Kellner explains that Rambam was “at one and the same
time deeply elitist and profoundly universalist.”
That Rambam was unashamedly an elitist is
clear from the many examples of him completely minimizing what he calls the ‘ignorant’ or
‘stupid religious masses.’ Or, to put it more bluntly, according to Kellner,
“the Jewish world in his day was...debased and paganized.”
Rambam does not
go out of his way to look for synonyms to help him describe the Torah observant
community of his day which tried to create a culture of the miraculous and the incredulous. Instead, he tries to create a class of ‘yechidim’ or intellectually and theologically elite thinkers.[4]
That he was a universalist can be seen in the way he
downplayed the assumed special uniqueness of a Jew[5]
and spoke more about a humankind within a system which had a place for thinking
people of all creeds. [See How
Rashi and Rambam Part Ways on the Deepest of Issues.]
THE HOLY TONGUE:
Rabbi Professor Isadore Twersky describes Rambam’s view (controversial to
many) that the Hebrew language was not more ‘holy’ than other languages:
“Maimonides’ desacralization of language should be seen
as an expression of his consistent
opposition to hypostasized [i.e., to attribute
real identity to][6]
entities endowed with intrinsic sanctity.”
HOLY ENTITIES:
Again, expressing a surprising view of Rambam with far
reaching consequences, Kellner continues:
“Among the entities which Maimonides seeks to
‘de-hypostasize’[i.e., to divest real identity from,][7]
are the property of holiness, the Hebrew language, the land of Israel, the
people of Israel, the divine glory (kavod ), the divine
presence (shekhinah), angels, and sin.
Consistent with this
approach, he seeks to present distinctions fundamental to Judaism, such as
holy/profane, ritually pure/ritually impure, permissible/impermissible, and,
especially, Jew/Gentile as institutional, sociological, and historical issues,
and not as ontological [actual][8]
matters.”
In other words, all of these ideas which are usually taken, and
taught, as real and actual spiritual truths, are - according to Rambam - not
real entities but mere ideas which form, not a spiritual function, but a
sociological, historical or institutional function instead.
Many (most) religious people today, understandably, would
have a fundamental problem with Rambam’s de-hypostasized and desacralized definition
of these concepts.
RELIGIOUS ‘STATUS’:
In more contemporary terms, Kellner gives a common example
of where the modern mainstream approach is decidedly anti-Maimonidean:
Today,
newly observant Jews generally (although certainly not exclusively) marry other
newly observant Jews. In some Chareidi (so-called ultra-Orthodox)
circles it is rare for an established religious person to marry a newly
observant person. This is because the newly observant individual was not
conceived in ‘purity’.
In Rambam’s system, however, this would not be an issue as there
would be no ontological significance in such cases.
RAMBAM HAS NO HOME TODAY:
People often think that mysticism is synonymous with Chasidism.
That is not the case because even the Lithuanian and the non-Chasidic Chareidi
world today, have largely adopted the basic ethos of the mystical approach
even if they do not profess to be Chasidim or Kabbalists.
Kellner makes the fascinating point that the theological (as
opposed to the legal) Rambam has no home, anywhere, within contemporary Judaism:
“...the fact that all contemporary Orthodoxy, hasidic and
mitnagdic, is infused with kabbalistic motifs makes it clear beyond the need of
demonstration that Maimonides’ ‘de-hypostasization’ [i.e., desanctification] of these notions has few
echoes in contemporary Judaism”
And not only is this true of Orthodoxy, but
fascinatingly:
“...there seems to be no substantial distinction between
Orthodoxy on the one hand, and Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist, and New
Age Judaism on the other; all have enthusiastically adopted kabbalistic
motifs.”
A DISDAIN FOR ‘METAPHYSICAL CLUTTER’:
For Rambam, the greatest theological divide exists between
mysticism and rationalism.[9]
When Rambam confronts G-d, he goes silent. G-d is
transcendent and truly a pure, single unknowable entity.[10]
On the other hand, when the mystics confront G-d, they wax
lyrical with constructs of complicated hierarchies of energies; with sefirot
and attributes, with fallen sparks that require uplifting , with the divisions
of ‘before’ and ‘after’ the creation and with tzimtzumim (contractions) which
co-exist with the notion of the Infinite Ain Sof.
For Rambam the space between man and G-d was clear, clean
and uncluttered. There were no angels [See Angels
in Rabbinic Literature.] or demons or evil eyes or predestiny[11]
[See A
Leaf Falls From a Tree], and G-d was indeed incorporeal [See The
Notion that G-d has a Body.]
Anthony Julius, put this very aptly when he
said that Rambam sought to “depopulate” the heavens.
THE ZOHAR AND
THE GUIDE IN THE SAME RELIGION?
While, as mentioned earlier, although Rambam would
not have known about the Zohar as it hadn’t yet been published, Kellner
writes:
“The world of the Zohar is so unlike
that of Maimonides that at times it appears impossible that it and Maimonides’ Guide of
the Perplexed should both be accepted as authoritative in the same
religious tradition.”[12]
A ‘TRAGIC FIGURE’:
Moshe Idel, ironically,
describes Rambam - known as the Great Eagle and usually regarded as the dominating and powerful giant of the
mind - in a rather tragic way: He explains that Rambam crystallized and
formulated his rational views, in opposition to the popular and rising mystical
trends within the Jewish world during his time.
Yet, ironically, his
rationalism unleashed such a wave of opposition and push-back that it caused the very
mysticism he sought to undermine, to emerge even more powerfully; and flourish
to the extent that it became and remained the mainstream of future Judaism even to this day,
eight hundred years later. This appears to have occurred, not despite Rambam,
but tragically because of him.
This series of events
relegated “Maimonideanism to the status of a largely ignored backwater.”
MORE RADICAL THAN THE HIRSCHIAN MODEL OF TORAH IM DERECH ERETZ:
Rambam raised the value of secular science and physics to
the level of Torah study and even to the realm of the metaphysical.
R. Shimshon Refael Hirsch (1808-1888) was the founder of the
Modern Orthodox movement which espoused a ‘modern’ philosophy of Torah Im
derech Eretz which sought to combine Torah and secular studies. This, as
opposed to the ultra-Orthodox movement which was founded in 1865 and which only
permitted Torah study and nothing else. [See The
Reforms of the Ultra-Orthodox.]
R. Hirsch was regarded as an outlier for his desire to
include secular wisdom together with Torah knowledge in the study curriculum,
and he was severely criticised for that.
The interesting thing is that Rambam had a far more radical
position to that of R. Hirsch:
After considered analysis Kellner explains that according to
Rambam:
“...God is ‘author’ of two books—one called cosmos and
the other called Torah. For Maimonides (and Gersonides after him), one who
wishes to know God must ‘read’ God’s entire oeuvre [library][13];
this can only be done if one combines study of Torah with study of science.”
This is something that Rambam himself clearly writes in his explanation
as to why the Torah begins with the creation narrative instead of going
straight into the biblical religious laws. He calls religious laws ‘divine
science’ and physics ‘natural science’:
“...divine science cannot become actual except after a
study of natural science [al-‘ilm al-tiba’i].
This is so since natural science borders on divine
science [al-‘ilm al-ilahi], and its study precedes that of divine
science...
Hence God... caused His book to open with the “Account of
the Beginning,” which, as we have made clear, is natural science.”[14]
Thus, in Rambam’s view, the Torah opens with the creation
narrative to teach that the path to G-d must begin with an understanding of the
role of physical science (al-‘ilm
al-tiba’i) as a precondition to religious study or divine science (al-‘ilm
al-ilahi).
THE FIRST COMMANDMENT:
There are different rabbinic models as to how to count the
613 commandments. According to Rambam, the first commandment in the Torah is
not to be fruitful and multiply but to know G-d
exists. One can only know G-d exists, according to Rambam, by studying his ‘book’
of the cosmos, which, according to Rambam, is science.
This view will hardly resonate practically with anyone
within our religious establishments today, other than perhaps a vague
attribution to it through lip service.
In Kellner’s words:
“...Maimonides’ position is much more radical than any
put forward in modernity. That being the case, it should come as no surprise
that it has few, if any adherents today.
Indeed, it is rarely recognized for what it is...”
If I understand Kellner correctly, Rambam’s wrote his Mishneh
Torah as a summary of the entire Talmud, to free up time for the student to
also get involved with the study of science as part of the Torah study
programme.
This is one step even beyond the ‘Torah and Science’ model
because now the science and the physics becomes part of the Torah itself.
“Maimonides wrote the Mishneh
Torah as part of an attempted curricular reform, one which
would have brought into the Talmudic academy the study of
science.
Did he succeed in this reform? I do not believe that
there is today or has ever been a single yeshiva or rabbinical seminary in the
world operating on these principles.”
It is interesting to note that the Yemenite Maimonidean
scholar, R. Yosef Kapach (d. 2000) wanted science to be a part of Limudei
Kodesh (religious studies) in modern-day Israel. In fact, according to R.
Kapach, the study of science was to be considered a positive commandment of the
Torah, because, in his view, it brings one closer to an appreciation of the
First Mover. [See R.
Yosef Kapach – The Suppression of a Rationalist Tradition?]
HOW MAIMONIDES GETS SANITIZED:
Kellner shows how, in his view, some of the leading rabbis
of modern times often do not allow for full expression of Rambam’s
worldview.
A case in point is the
esteemed Rabbi Aharon Kotler[15]
(1890-1962) who is best known for creating[16],
in 1943, the full-time Torah learning system, the Kollel (where married men are
paid to study Torah all day) in Lakewood, America.
Rambam writes in (as it happens, the exact mid-point of) his
Mishneh Torah that not only was the tribe of Levi consecrated as the
priestly tribe and dedicated to the work of the Holy of Holies, but also ‘each and every
individual human being’[17] could
personally rise to such equivalent levels as well.
The expression ‘each and every individual human being’ (kol
ba’ei olam) is always used to refer to all peoples, not just Jews.
This idea played out in the Tannaic
debate between the school of Rabbi Akiva, who maintained that the Torah was
revealed to the Jews alone; and the school of Rabbi Yishmael, who insisted that
the Torah was also given to kol ba’ei olam, ‘each and every individual human being,’
i.e., to non-Jews as well.
Rambam, following along similar lines to R. Yishmael, is expressing his
view that not just Jews but any person of noble statue can attain the level of
‘holy of holies.’ This idea fits well with Rambam’s other statements to
the effect that worthy non-Jews can attain just as holy levels as worthy Jews.
That being said, R. Aharon Kotler somehow insisted on interpreting the
expression ‘each and every individual human being,’ in Rambam’s
text above, as referring only to ‘ha benei Torah’ the Torah
scholars who only study Torah and nothing else. These exclusive Torah scholars,
R. Kotler claimed, are the group Rambam was referring to who were likened to
the elevated status of the tribe of Levi!
And, he continued using Rambam as his support text, just like the tribe of
Levi did not work but was supported by the nation, now (in 1943) the full-time
Kollel students would have to be supported by the charity of other Jews who worked
and did not study full-time in the Kollel system.
In insisting on this
interpretation, R. Kotler also reworked another well-known (but just as contentious) principle
of Rambam that Torah scholars should not be paid by members of the community.[18]
Rambam actually wrote:
“One who makes up his
mind to study Torah and not work but live on charity, profanes the name of God,
brings the Torah into contempt, extinguishes the light of religion, brings evil
upon himself and deprives himself of life hereafter….The end of such a person
will be that he will rob his fellow creatures.”[19]
Yet, despite this, R. Kotler turned
Rambam into a modern Chareidi leader who encouraged full-time Kollel
students to live off charity.
Kellner sums this up as
follows:
“This is stunning; Rabbi Kotler turns Maimonides inside
out. The man who...wanted advanced yeshiva students to study science, and the
man notorious for his objection
to the practice of paying individuals to study Torah, is
transformed into a major prop for an institution, the kollel (an institute
for the subsidized study of Talmud by married men), which he [Rambam][20]
would have had to oppose!...
Rabbi Kotler has done two things to Maimonides here:
turned the referent of our passage from all human beings to some Jews, and
found a way to draft Maimonides’ support for the kind of institution which he
himself created.”
Kellner makes it clear that he does not believe that R. Aharon
Kotler purposely misrepresented Rambam, but even more alarmingly, it shows how:
“Maimonides’ views were not understood, let alone
adopted.
The hardwired
particularism of Halevi, Kabbalah, Maharal and Hasidism has become so much part
of the warp and woof of yeshiva Orthodoxy in the last century that only a rare
product of that world can read what Maimonides actually wrote, without seeking
to force him into the accepted matrix.”
Rambam’s views are so radical yet little-known and perhaps, intentionally, well-hidden. They turn many of our important mainstream concepts - which most take for granted as being essential elements of Jewish faith - absolutely on their heads. Recognizing this, Kellner observes:
“If...Maimonides’ overall aim in his writings was...the use of philosophy to purify what he held to be a corrupted and paganized Torah, then he must be adjudged one of great failures in Jewish history.”
Kellner is correct because if Rambam intended to get this message out to the masses, he was an outright failure in this regard. And even if he directed these ideas towards his imagined ‘elite’ group of 'yechidim', then that group was so small and voiceless as to be rendered non-existent to the extent that it was drowned by the floodwaters of mainstream mysticism.
There are so many areas of religious life
today that are extremely popular and most people assume these practices have
always been part of the uncontested fabric of Judaism. These include the notion
of visiting graves, using mezuzot as talismans against tragedy, singing Shalom
Aleichem to angels on Friday nights[21], and
the professionalization of the rabbinate to mention just a few.
Again, to be absolutely clear, this is not
to suggest that these mystical practices, beliefs and protocols should or should not be disbanded,
but this does show how Rambam’s view of religion certainly did not take root
within popular Judaism.
It is likely that Rambam
never intended for his views to become mainstream, but it is unlikely that he
imagined his views to vanish almost entirely from Jewish practice, to essentially become a
‘lost religion’.
It is in this sense that one might say that to the delight of the many and the disappointment of the few, Rambam’s model of Judaism turned out to be the grandest practical failure in rabbinic history.
[1] One
would also include Rambam’s Iggeret or Ma’amar Techiyat haMeitim, which he
wrote in 1191 in response to the Gaon Ali of Baghdad, who had accused Rambam of
not believing in the Revival of the Dead. It is a fair assumption that each
subsequent work in time expressed Rambam’s deeper and more personalised
thoughts.
[2]
Ma’amar Techiyat haMeitim 370
[3]
Maimonides’ Disputed Legacy, by Menachem Kellner.
[4] It
is so interesting to see how modern Chasidim take a very similar approach and
have also developed a degree of, not rational but mystical elitism:
When R. Shneur Zalman of Liadi, the first Chabad Rebbe
was released from prison, he demanded that Chasidim act humbly as a result of
the victory of his release, and not look down or sneer at the opponents of
Chasidut.
Generations, later, the Frerdiker Rebbe added; that
means even a sneer of Kedusha or holiness, meaning looking down on
someone because you are privileged to be following a more sophisticated path in
the service of Hashem.
[5]
Kellner explains this to mean: “Maimonides can fairly be said to have maintained that the election of
Israel was not a fact built into the universe or its history from creation,
but, rather, a consequence of the fact that Abraham was the first person to
rediscover God.” (See link for more elaboration on this.)
[6]
Parenthesis mine.
[7]
Parenthesis mine.
[8]
Parenthesis mine.
[9]
See Mysterious
‘Secret Document’ Attesting that Rambam was a Mystic for a different view.
[10]
Rambam also maintained that one cannot change G-d’s mind through supplications
and prayer. He amended the Talmudic statement which said ‘just like He is
merciful so shall you be merciful’ to rather read ‘called merciful’ as
he refused to engage in detailed speculation on matters concerning G-d.
[11]
In the way in which these ideas are normally expressed.
[12]
Not everyone holds this position, as there are also kabbalistic commentaries on
the Zohar.
[13]
Parenthesis mine.
[14]
Guide I, Pines (Chicago 1963), p.9.
[15]
See Mishnat Rabbi Aharon (Lakewood 1992),
vol. 3, p. 147.
[17] The full text reads:
“Not only the Tribe of
Levi, but each and every individual human being, whose spirit moves him
and whose knowledge gives him understanding to set himself apart in order to
stand before the Lord, to serve Him, to worship Him, and to know Him, who walks
upright as God created him to do, and releases himself from the yoke of the
many foolish considerations which trouble people—such an individual is as
consecrated as the Holy of Holies, and his portion and inheritance shall be in
the Lord forever and ever. The Lord will grant him adequate sustenance in this
world, the same as He had granted to the priests and to the Levites.” (Laws of Sabbatical Year and Jubilee, 13:12-13).
[18]
See Rambam’s commentary to M. Avot IV.6.
[19] Laws of Torah Study, 3:1.
[20]
Parenthesis mine.
[21]
And Machnisei Rachamim at the end of the Selichot service.
