Page:Jewish Encyclopedia Volume 2.pdf/94

58 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

By way of a general statement, one may say that the Neoplatonic philosophy among the Jews of the eleventh century marks a transitional epoch, leading either to the pure philosophy of the Peripatetics or to the mysticism of the Cabala. The twelfth century saw the apotheosis of pure philosophy and the decline of the Kalam, which latter, being attacked by both the philosophers and the orthodox, perished for lack of champions. This supreme exaltation of philosophy was due, in great measure, to Gazzali (1005-1111) among the Arabs, and to Judah ha-Levi (1140) among the Jews. In fact, the attacks directed against the philosophers by Gazzali in his work, " Tuhfat al-Falasafa " (The Destruction of the Philosophers), not The only produced, by reaction, a current Apotheosis favorable to philosophy, but induced of the philosophers themselves to profit Phiby his criticism, they thereafter ma-

losophy.

king their theories clearer and their

logic closer. The influence of this reaction brought forth the two greatest philosophers that the Arabic Peripatetic school ever produced, name-

Ibn Baja (Aven Pace) and Ibn Roshd (Averroes), both of whom undertook the defense of philosophy. Since no idea and no literary or philosophical movement ever germinated on Arabian soil without leaving its impress on the Jews, Gazzali found an imitator in the person of Judah ha-Levi. This illustrious poet took upon himself to free religion from ly,

the shackles of speculative philosophy, and to end wrote the "Cuzari," in which he sought to credit all schools of philosophy alike.

this dis-

He

passes severe censure upon the Motekallamin for seeking to support religion by philosophy. He says, "I consider him to have attained the highest degree of perfection who is convinced of religious truths without having scrutinized them and reasoned over them" ("Cuzari," v.). Then he reduced the chief propositions of the Motekallamin, to prove the unity of God, to ten in number, describing them at length, and concluding in these terms " Does the Kalam give us more information concerning God and His attributes than the prophet did?" (lb. iii. and iv.) Aristotelianism finds no favor in his eyes, for it is

no

less

given to details and criticism



Neoplatonism

alone suited him somewhat, owing to its appeal to his poetic temperament. But the Hebrew Gazzali was no more successful than his Arabian prototype; and his attacks, although they certainly helped to discredit the Kalam for which no one cared any longer were altogether powerless against Peripatetic philosophy, which soon found numerous defenders. In fact, soon after the " Cuzari " made its appearance, Abraham ibn Daud published his "Emunah Ramah" (The Sublime Faith), wherein he recapitulated the teachings of the Peripatetics, Al-Parabi and Ibn Sina, upon the physics and metaphysics of Aristotle, and sought to demonstrate that these theories were in perfect harmony with the doctrines of Judaism. "It is an error generally current," says Ibn Daud in the preface of his book, " that the study of specula-

—

philosophy is dangerous to religion. philosophy not only does not harm religion,

True

tive

firms

and strengthens

—

—

"

Arabic Philosophy Arabic Poetry

it.

it

con-

58

of Ibn Daud, however, did not permanence to Aristotelianism in Judaism. This accomplishment was reserved for Maimonides, who endeavored to harmonize the philosophy of Aristotle with Judaism and to this end the author of the " Yad ha-Hazakah" composed his immortal work, "Dalalat al-Hairin"

The authority

suffice

to give



Maimonides,

—

(Guide of the Perplexed) known betunder its Hebrew title "Moreh Nebukim " which served for many ter

—

centuries as the subject of discussion and comment by Jewish thinkers. In this work, Maimonides, after refuting the propositions of the Motekallamin, considers Creation, the Unity of God, the Attributes of God, the Soul, etc., and treats them in accordance with the theories of Aristotle to the extent in which For exthese latter do not conflict with religion. ample, while accepting the teachings of Aristotle

upon matter and form, he pronounces against eternity of matter.

Nor does he accept

the

Aristotle's

theory that God can have a knowledge of universals and not of particulars. If He had no knowledge of particulars, He would be subject to constant change. Maimonides argues: "God perceives future events before they happen, and this perception never fails Him. Therefore there are no new ideas He knows that such to present themselves to Him. and such an individual does not yet exist, but that he will be born at such a time, exist for such a period, and then return into non-existence. When then this individual comes into being, God does not learn any new fact nothing has happened that He knew not of, for He knew this individual, such as he is now, before his birth" ("Moreh," i. 20). While seeking thus to avoid the troublesome conseonly,



quences certain Aristotelian theories would entail religion, Maimonides could not altogether escape those involved in Aristotle's idea of the unity of souls and herein he laid himself open to the at-

upon



tacks of the orthodox. Ibn Koshd (Averroes), the contemporary. of Maimonides, closes the philosophical era of the Arabs. The boldness of this great commentaAverroism. tor of Aristotle aroused the full fury of the orthodox, who, in their zeal, attacked all philosophers indiscriminately, and had all philosophical writings committed to the flames. The theories of Ibn Roshd do not differ fundamentally from those of Ibn Baja and Ibn Tufail, who only follow the teachings of Ibn Sina and Al-Farabi.

Like all Arabic Peripatetics, Ibn Roshd admits the hypothesis of the intelligence of the spheres and the hypothesis of universal emanation, through which motion is communicated from place to place to all parts of the universe as far as the supreme world hypotheses which, in the mind of the Arabic philosophers, did away with the dualism involved in Aristotle's doctrine of pure energy and eternal matter. But while Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, and other Arab philosophers hurried, so to speak, over subjects that trenched on religious dogmas, Ibn Roshd delighted in dwelling upon them with full particularity and stress. Thus he says, " Not only is matter eternal, but form is potentially inherent in matter; otherwise, it were a creation ex nihilo (Munk,

"Melanges,"

p.

444).

According

to

this

theory,