What do you think?
Rate this book
On Maimonides: The Complete Writings
Leo Strauss is widely recognized as one of the foremost interpreters of Maimonides. His studies of the medieval Jewish philosopher led to his rediscovery of esotericism and deepened his sense that the tension between reason and revelation was central to modern political thought. His writings throughout the twentieth century were chiefly responsible for restoring Maimonides as a philosophical thinker of the first rank. Yet, to appreciate the extent of Strauss’s contribution to the scholarship on Maimonides, one has traditionally had to seek out essays he published separately spanning almost fifty years. With Leo Strauss on Maimonides , Kenneth Hart Green presents for the first time a comprehensive, annotated collection of Strauss’s writings on Maimonides, comprising sixteen essays, three of which appear in English for the first time. Green has also provided careful translations of materials that had originally been quoted in Hebrew, Arabic, Latin, German, and French; written an informative introduction highlighting the original contributions found in each essay; and brought references to out-of-print editions fully up to date. The result will become the standard edition of Strauss’s writings on Maimonides.
- GenresPhilosophyJudaism
691 pages, ebook
First published December 1, 2012
1 person is currently reading
95 people want to read
About the author
Leo Strauss
156 books373 followersLeo Strauss was a 20th century German-American scholar of political philosophy. Born in Germany to Jewish parents, Strauss later emigrated from Germany to the United States. He spent much of his career as a professor of political science at the University of Chicago, where he taught several generations of students and published fifteen books.
Trained in the neo-Kantian tradition with Ernst Cassirer and immersed in the work of the phenomenologists Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger, Strauss authored books on Baruch Spinoza and Thomas Hobbes, and articles on Maimonides and Al-Farabi. In the late 1930s, his research focused on the texts of Plato and Aristotle, retracing their interpretation through medieval Islamic and Jewish philosophy, and encouraging the application of those ideas to contemporary political theory.
Trained in the neo-Kantian tradition with Ernst Cassirer and immersed in the work of the phenomenologists Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger, Strauss authored books on Baruch Spinoza and Thomas Hobbes, and articles on Maimonides and Al-Farabi. In the late 1930s, his research focused on the texts of Plato and Aristotle, retracing their interpretation through medieval Islamic and Jewish philosophy, and encouraging the application of those ideas to contemporary political theory.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 14, 2014
This book is a comprehensive collection of Leo Strauss' writings about Maimonides. Also included in the collection is a useful essay on how to read medieval philosophy. Strauss emphasizes that the reader must understand the medieval philosopher as he understood himself, and avoid the anachronism (and shallow analysis) that comes from trying to understand the writer BETTER than he understood himself. If we do not approach the writer as possibly having something to teach us, we shall not understand or learn from him.
Here I'll touch on only two of the essays in this collection. Other, shorter essays discuss the approach to the Guide for the Perplexed, and the Mishnei Torah (Hilkhot Da'at).
Strauss' essay on Spinoza's critique of Maimonides is an in-depth analysis of the fundamental dividing point between these philosophers which led them to different conclusions. Maimonides' argues that the Oneness of God speaks for the POSSIBILITY of the earth's having been created a finite time ago on the past. Spinoza, in contrast, sees the world as being eternal in age. That precludes the possibility of miracles, according to Spinoza. (Spinoza's thinking is that God's will is coterminous with his power, so he made the world ideally, and therefore in no need of subsequent divine tinkering.)
Since the Earth may be of finite age, and since the testimony of the Torah asserts that it is, Maimonides sees miracles as being possible. But both philosophers agree that nature is rule-regulated. Miracles, therefore, must be part of the very nature of things, cooked in to the fundamental structure, but actual used only when ended to serve God's plan of human need. An explanatory example: a person raised in the tropics who had never seen ice, would deem it miraculous if water froze allowing him to flee from a battle in a cold place. We see it as being in the nature of water to freeze at 0 degrees Centigrade. Similarly, Maimonides would argue that, just as a body of water will freeze due to temperature, so the Reed Sea would split when the Children of Israel needed to traverse it.
Spinoza further concludes from the identity of intellect and will in God that revelation
of divine Law is impossible. Maimonides argues that God lacks attributes, and therefore to even question whether there is distinction between will and identity is meaningless.
Spinoza perforce must reject the possibility of miracles, and therefore the validity of Scripture testimony. Maimonides, in contrast, has a different challenge, viz., to harmonize the apparently logic-defying aspects of the Torah with human reason. He does much of this by interpreting those passages as metaphorical, just as we do now with expressions like "the White House replied to critics," or "I have my eye on you."
In a separate essay, Strauss analyzes Hermann Cohen's understanding of Rambam [sic, not "Maimonides"] vis-a-vis Aristotle and Plato. Strauss brings arguments against Cohen's position of seeing Rambam as an Aristotelian. Rather, argues Strauss, Rambam posits the prophet as law-giver, whose purpose is to establish the ideal state, a state first described in Plato's Republic. Political philosophy then, is a species of ethics, the subset of philosophy which was the cornerstone of Cohen's concern.
Strauss is not light reading. There were many passages I read several times to be sure I understood them. I don't recommend this book for someone who wants a reader-friendly overview of Maimonides. However, for a reader who seeks a deep scholarly exegesis on Maimonides, there is no substitute for this book.
Here I'll touch on only two of the essays in this collection. Other, shorter essays discuss the approach to the Guide for the Perplexed, and the Mishnei Torah (Hilkhot Da'at).
Strauss' essay on Spinoza's critique of Maimonides is an in-depth analysis of the fundamental dividing point between these philosophers which led them to different conclusions. Maimonides' argues that the Oneness of God speaks for the POSSIBILITY of the earth's having been created a finite time ago on the past. Spinoza, in contrast, sees the world as being eternal in age. That precludes the possibility of miracles, according to Spinoza. (Spinoza's thinking is that God's will is coterminous with his power, so he made the world ideally, and therefore in no need of subsequent divine tinkering.)
Since the Earth may be of finite age, and since the testimony of the Torah asserts that it is, Maimonides sees miracles as being possible. But both philosophers agree that nature is rule-regulated. Miracles, therefore, must be part of the very nature of things, cooked in to the fundamental structure, but actual used only when ended to serve God's plan of human need. An explanatory example: a person raised in the tropics who had never seen ice, would deem it miraculous if water froze allowing him to flee from a battle in a cold place. We see it as being in the nature of water to freeze at 0 degrees Centigrade. Similarly, Maimonides would argue that, just as a body of water will freeze due to temperature, so the Reed Sea would split when the Children of Israel needed to traverse it.
Spinoza further concludes from the identity of intellect and will in God that revelation
of divine Law is impossible. Maimonides argues that God lacks attributes, and therefore to even question whether there is distinction between will and identity is meaningless.
Spinoza perforce must reject the possibility of miracles, and therefore the validity of Scripture testimony. Maimonides, in contrast, has a different challenge, viz., to harmonize the apparently logic-defying aspects of the Torah with human reason. He does much of this by interpreting those passages as metaphorical, just as we do now with expressions like "the White House replied to critics," or "I have my eye on you."
In a separate essay, Strauss analyzes Hermann Cohen's understanding of Rambam [sic, not "Maimonides"] vis-a-vis Aristotle and Plato. Strauss brings arguments against Cohen's position of seeing Rambam as an Aristotelian. Rather, argues Strauss, Rambam posits the prophet as law-giver, whose purpose is to establish the ideal state, a state first described in Plato's Republic. Political philosophy then, is a species of ethics, the subset of philosophy which was the cornerstone of Cohen's concern.
Strauss is not light reading. There were many passages I read several times to be sure I understood them. I don't recommend this book for someone who wants a reader-friendly overview of Maimonides. However, for a reader who seeks a deep scholarly exegesis on Maimonides, there is no substitute for this book.
Displaying 1 of 1 review