Arabic philosophy

the medieval period in the first century. More importantly, if one

begins medieval Jewish philosophy with Philo, there is no continuity.

From Philo to the ninth century, there are no writings that may

be considered Jewish philosophy.3 Moreover, although Wolfson can

speak of the recurrence of Philonic views in post-Philonic Islamic

and Jewish philosophy, Philo – as far as we know – was not translated

into Arabic or Hebrew and accordingly had no direct influence

upon Jewish philosophers until the Renaissance. For these reasons it

349

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

350 steven harvey

seems preferable to begin medieval Jewish philosophy in the ninth

and early tenth century – the same time that Islamic philosophy

begins – with figures such as Da¯wu¯ d al-Muqammas. (early ninth century),

Isaac Israeli (d. 955), and Saadia Gaon (882–942).

It is not a coincidence that philosophy emerges in Islam and

Judaism in the same period and in the same lands. The sudden awakening

of interest inphilosophy among Jews may be attributed directly

to the translation movements of the ninth and tenth centuries, centered

in Baghdad, that translated numerous Greek philosophic and

scientific works into Arabic; the ascendancy of Mu‘tazilite kala¯m

under the caliph al-Ma’mu¯ n in the first third of the ninth century in

Baghdad; and the influence of the first Muslimphilosopher, al-Kind¯ı,

in the first half of the ninth century, also inBaghdad. Thus, for example,

al-Muqammas. was a mutakallim whose views were similar to

those of contemporary Mu‘tazilite theologians; Israeli was a Neoplatonist

philosopher, influenced directly or indirectly by al-Kind¯ı;4

and Saadia, while much indebted to the structure and arguments of

the Mu‘tazilites, was an eclectic thinker whose major theologicalphilosophic

work, Kita¯b al-ama¯na¯ t wa al-i‘tiqa¯da¯ t (Book of Beliefs

and Opinions), reveals a familiarity with the teachings of a variety

of philosophic and theological schools.

the divergent paths of medieval islamic

and jewish philosophy

In short, the same factors that occasioned the birth of philosophy

in Islam in the ninth century made possible the renewed interest in

philosophy among Jews. Shlomo Pines, one of the leading scholars

of Jewish philosophy of the past century, has thus written:

Approximately from the ninth to the thirteenth centuries, Jewish philosophical

and theological thought participated in the evolution of Islamic philosophy

and theology and manifested only in a limited sense a continuity of its

own. Jewish philosophers showed no particular preference for philosophic

texts written by Jewish authors over those composed by Muslims.5

Yet while it is true that philosophy appears in the medieval period

at the same time among Jews as it does among Muslims and that

“Jewish philosophical and theological thought participated in the

evolution of Islamic philosophy and theology,” it would be amistake

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Islamic philosophy and Jewish philosophy 351

to assume that Jewish philosophy and Islamic philosophy pursued

parallel tracks from their beginnings in the ninth century to the

turn of the thirteenth century. In fact, their histories are in some

crucial respects quite different. This may be seen from the following

thumbnail sketches of the histories of medieval Islamic philosophy

and Jewish philosophy.

Islamic philosophy began in the ninth century with al-Kind¯ı, the

“philosopher of the Arabs,” a well-known and prolific author. After

al-Kind¯ı, philosophy in Islam spread in different directionswith various

Islamic sects finding Plotinus’ teachings, particularly as disseminated

in the so-called Theology of Aristotle, a key to understanding

their own theological doctrines. Here mention may be made

of the Ism¯a‘¯ıl¯ıs and their adoption and explication of Neoplatonic

teachings. The central role of al-Kind¯ı in the development of Islamic

philosophy, through his own writings, through the many important

Greek philosophic and scientific works that were translated for him

and his circle, and through his efforts to legitimize the philosophic

teachings of the ancients, is becoming more and more evident.6 Yet

despite al-Kind¯ı’s undisputed place in the history of Islamic philosophy,

he is often passed over in medieval Arabic listings of the leading

Islamic philosophers.7 It is al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı (ca. 870–950) who is recognized

as the first outstanding Islamic philosopher. He is the founder of

the tradition in Islamic philosophy rooted in the orderly study of

Aristotelian logic, physics, and metaphysics, and indebted to Plato

in matters of political philosophy. While al-Kind¯ı was familiar with

Aristotle’s writings, he was no Aristotelian; and while al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı’s

writings exhibit Neoplatonic features, he was no Neoplatonist.8 Al-

F¯ar¯ab¯ı was followed byAvicenna in the East and Ibn B¯ajja, IbnT.

ufayl,

and Averroes in the twelfth-century Spanish West. There are significant

differences among these thinkers, but all belong to the tradition

of Islamic philosophy founded by al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı. While it would not

be accurate to claim, as many have done, that philosophy in Islam

dies with the death of Averroes at the end of the twelfth century,

there is a sense in which this is true. The great tradition of Islamic

philosophy inaugurated by al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı comes to an abrupt end or is at

least muted. Later philosophers in Islam will fail to appreciate the

importance of Aristotelian logic and the orderly study of Aristotelian

natural science and in some cases will dilute their philosophy with

heavy doses of mysticism or esoterica.

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

352 steven harvey

Medieval Jewish philosophy begins, as we have seen, in the late

ninth, early tenth century with Isaac Israeli and, a bit later, Saadia

Gaon.9 These are two very different thinkers. Israeli is a Neoplatonist

philosopher very much indebted to al-Kind¯ı, yet, as Husik has

pointed out, “he never quotes any Jewish works, and there is nothing

in his writings to indicate that he is a Jew and is making an

effort to harmonize Judaism with philosophy and science.”10 In contrast,

Saadia is intent on proving rationally the theological truths

of Judaism and showing the weaknesses and inadequacies of those

arguments that gainsay those truths. He thus explains:

We inquire into and speculate about matters of our religion with two objectives

in mind. One of these is to have verified in fact what we have learned

from the prophets of God theoretically. The second is to refute him who

argues against us in regard to anything pertaining to our religion.11

For Saadia, philosophy is thus at the service of religion, but for him

logical reasoning is also a valid source of truth in its own right. As a

source of truth, no less so than Scripture, the teachings of reason –

when properly understood – may be expected to accord with those

of Judaism. When this agreement is seen, our beliefs become concretized

and no doubts remain.

This view of reason is maintained by later thinkers even in

anti-rationalistic tracts such as Judah Halevi’s Kuzari, which says,

“Heaven forbid that there should be anything in the Bible to contradict

that which is manifest or demonstrated.”12 Jews like Saadia

thus turned to philosophy to strengthen Jewish belief, while others

like Israeli turned to philosophy for the sake of knowledge.

Whatever the motivations, what is remarkable is that few Jewish

philosophers or philosophic theologians from Saadia and Israeli to

the second half of the twelfth century exhibit any influence by or

interest in al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı, Avicenna (980–1037), Ibn B¯ajja (d. 1139), or any

of the other Islamic philosophers in the Farabian tradition of falsafa.

In fact, although Halevi’s Kuzari (1140) is in part a critique

of that stream of Aristotelian philosophy that was espoused by the

Islamic fala¯ sifa,13 it is hard to know what occasioned this particular

critique. As Pines has shown, his portrayal of the teachings of

the philosophers is based on those of Ibn B¯ajja and Avicenna,14 but

which Jewish philosophers of Halevi’s day were influenced by or

even well read in these philosophers? Halevi’s young friend Abraham

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Islamic philosophy and Jewish philosophy 353

ibn Ezra was certainly influenced by some of Avicenna’s writings –

for example, in his treatment of God’s knowledge of particulars and

in the distinction between necessary and possible existence – but

he is the exception and in any case can hardly be classified as a

philosopher in the Farabian mold. Similarly, the other known Jewish

philosophers in Spain at the time – the most important of whom

was Solomon ibn Gabirol (1021–58 or 1070) – may all be classed

as primarily Neoplatonist thinkers, who show little interest in the

fala¯ sifa. All this changes with Abraham ibn Da’ud (ca. 1110–80),

who, as Husik writes, was “the first Jewish philosopher who shows

an intimate knowledge of the works of Aristotle and makes a deliberate

effort to harmonize the Aristotelian system with Judaism.”15

IbnDa’ud’s debt to al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı and, in particular,Avicenna has recently

been delineated,16 yet his place as the first Jewish philosopher in the

fala¯ sifa tradition is quickly overshadowed by Maimonides (1138–

1204), the best-known and perhaps greatest of the medieval Jewish

thinkers. Maimonides’ own philosophic teachings are rooted in the

writings of al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı, Avicenna, and Ibn B¯ajja.

After Maimonides, Hebrew replaces Arabic as the primary language

of Jewish philosophic discourse. The works of the fala¯ sifa are

translated into Hebrew, and the Aristotelianism of Maimonides and

Averroes becomes the dominant school of the leading thirteenthand

fourteenth-century Jewish philosophers. Most philosophers

of this period do not strive for originality, but rather seek to

expound the true teachings of philosophy and science. One major

exception is Gersonides (1288–1344), who focused in his Wars

of the Lord on those problems that he believed had not been

treated philosophically and correctly.17 His target is often Maimonides,

the Jewish philosopher he admired most, whose views he

claims are not always based on philosophic principles, but sometimes

on “theological considerations.”18 Another major exception

is H. asdai Crescas (d. ca. 1411) who criticized Maimonides, the

Jewish philosopher whom he most respected, for being “seduced by

the discourses of the philosophers.”19 Crescas’ philosophic critique

of Aristotelian/Maimonidean science was based on principles of

Aristotelian science. The core of the post-Maimonidean philosophic

enterprise within Judaism thus accepted Aristotle and the Islamic

fala¯ sifa as the leading philosophic authorities. While there were

Neoplatonic trends within post-Maimonidean Jewish philosophy,

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

354 steven harvey

these were peripheral, had little impact, and need not concern us.20

Jewish interest in philosophy did not die out, but simply waned until

Spinoza heralded in a new period in the seventeenth century.

These two thumbnail sketches suggest that while philosophy

began in the medieval period in Islam and in Judaism at the same

time and in similar fashion, it developed in different ways or at

different paces in the two religious communities. The tradition of

Aristotelian philosophy in Islam begins with al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı in the first

half of the tenth century, continues with Avicenna in the East, and

moves to Spain in the early twelfth centurywith Ibn B¯ajja. It virtually

comes to an endwithAverroes’ death in 1198. This tradition does not

appear in Judaism until IbnDa’ud and Maimonides in the second half

of the twelfth century. Until this time Jewish philosophy is mostly

built upon the foundations of kala¯m or Neoplatonism. Averroes and

Maimonides were contemporaries. Averroes is the last great representative

of the Aristotelian tradition in Islam. Maimonides ushers

in this tradition within Judaism. Averroes and Maimonides would

become the two leading philosophic authorities among the Jews in

the centuries that followed them. It is in these centuries that the

Islamic fala¯ sifa would make their mark, in Hebrew translation, on

medieval Jewish thought. In what follows Iwill illustrate this impact

of the fala¯ sifa through select examples.

how did the fala￣ sifa come to influence

hebrew philosophy?

As we have seen, Islamic theology and philosophy, from their very

beginnings, exercised a direct influence upon contemporary Jewish

thought. Yet we have also seen that while the Mu‘tazilites and the

Muslim Neoplatonists impacted on their Jewish contemporaries, al-

Fa¯ ra¯bı¯ and his school of fala¯ sifa were all but neglected until the second

half of the twelfth century. In this light, how can their dominant

role in post-Maimonidean Hebrew philosophy be explained?

The answer lies in Maimonides. He was immediately recognized

as the outstanding thinker of his time, and in his Guide of the Perplexed

he expounded the Aristotelianism of the fala¯ sifa. Yet perhaps

the single most telling document regarding the influence of

the fala¯ sifa on post-Maimonidean Hebrew thought is Maimonides’

well-known letter to Samuel ibn Tibbon in which he recommends

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Islamic philosophy and Jewish philosophy 355

which philosophers to study and which to avoid. The two most

noticeable features of this part of Maimonides’ letter to Ibn Tibbon

are that he does not recommend a single Jewish thinker or a single

Neoplatonic work. Aristotle is the supreme philosopher, but he can

only be understood fully through the commentaries of Alexander

of Aphrodisias, Themistius, and Averroes. Apart from Aristotle,

Maimonides reserves his praise and recommendations for the Islamic

fala¯ sifa. Everything the scholar al-Fa¯ ra¯bı¯ wrote is “fine flour,” the

books of Avicenna, while not equal to those of al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı, are useful

and should be studied and reflected upon, and Ibn B¯ajja was a great

philosopher, whose words and compositions are all straightforward.

Maimonides’ recommendations in this letter to a remarkable extent

determined the philosophers and the philosophic texts that were to

be translated from Arabic into Hebrew.21 The Arabic philosophic

texts that were translated became the philosophic texts that were

accessible and hence studied by the medieval Jewish thinkers who

read no Arabic. Thus, for example, Aristotle, the Philosopher whose

books could not be fully understoodwithout commentary, was translated

into Hebrew in only a few instances, while all or nearly all of

Averroes’ thirty-six commentaries on his works were systematically

translated into Hebrew. Post-Maimonidean Jewish philosophers thus

studied Aristotelian philosophy and science through the commentaries

of Averroes.22

the influence of the political teachings

of the fala￣ sifa

The importance of political philosophy for the fala¯ sifa is now generally

appreciated. Leo Strauss was the first modern scholar to state

that al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı “presented the whole of philosophy proper within a

political framework.”23 Muhsin Mahdi, the leading scholar today of

medieval Islamic political philosophy in general and al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı in particular,

has in various studies explicated the nature of the Islamic

tradition of Platonic political philosophy founded by al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı.

According to Mahdi, al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı “brought to the fore the theme of the

relationship between philosophy and politics in a context where the

overriding question was the relationship between philosophy and

religion.”24 The political philosophy of the fala¯ sifa focuses on subjects

such as the true happiness and perfection of man and how one

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

356 steven harvey

ought to live one’s life in order to achieve these goals. Accordingly,

this philosophy is concerned with the various roles of religion and

of philosophy in the well-being of the city and in the attainment of

individual human happiness. The Islamic fala¯ sifa wrote asMuslims

living in an Islamic community and, in particular, sought to adapt

Plato’s political teachings to their own religious communities. To

what extent did their political teachings on the relationship between

religion and philosophy influence medieval Jewish thought?

The influence of the political teachings of the Islamic fala¯ sifa

upon Jewish thought is best seen in Maimonides.25 This influence

is reflected in his discussions of such topics as the purpose of law,

the differences between divine law and human law, the nature of

human perfection, the nature of prophecy, the relation between the

prophet and the philosopher, the role of the prophet in the city, and

the extent to which man is a political animal.

In his discussion of these topics it is possible that Maimonides

was influenced directly by Plato or by Galenic or Neoplatonic summaries

of Plato’s dialogues. It is certain, however, that the predominant

influence upon his political teachings was that of al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı and

to a lesser extent Avicenna and Ibn B¯ajja. After Maimonides, when

the primary language of philosophy for Jews in the West became

Hebrew, Jews who did not have access to Arabic or Latin translations

no longer had direct access to Plato or any Greek summaries

of the dialogues. The only version of a Platonic text translated into

Hebrew was Samuel ben Judah of Marseilles’ version of Averroes’

Commentary on Plato’s Republic, completed in 1320 and thus one

of the last of Averroes’ commentaries to be translated into Hebrew.

Samuel wrote that until his translation “no part of this science [i.e.,

political science] was translated or came into our possession, neither

from the pen of the Philosopher (i.e., Aristotle) nor from anyone

else, except what is to be found in the Book of the Principles of

Existing Things [that is, the Political Regime] of al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı.”26 While

Samuel’s statement is not completely accurate,27 it does reflect his

own knowledge, that of a learned Provenc﹐ al student of philosophy in

the early fourteenth century. Accordingly, not only did the Hebrew

reader not have access to the political teachings of Plato, he barely

had access to the political teachings of the fala¯ sifa. To the extent

that this was true, the fala¯ sifa exerted their influence upon Hebrew

thinkers in the area of political philosophy directly through a few

texts of al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı and mostly indirectly throughMaimonides’ Guide.

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006

Islamic philosophy and Jewish philosophy 357

Thus, for example, Nissim of Marseilles, writing in the first quarter

of the fourteenth century, is influenced by al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı’s Political

Regime in his discussion of the need for a ruler and the account of

the perfect ruler, by al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı’s Enumeration of the Sciences in his

approach to religion and philosophy, by Averroes’ Epitome of the

“Parva Naturalia” in his discussion of prophecy, but most of all

by Maimonides’ Guide.28 Within decades of Samuel’s translation,

new translations of political works by al-F ¯ar¯ab¯ı, Avicenna, Ibn B¯ajja,

Ibn T.

ufayl, and Averroes appeared and Hebrew commentaries were

written on many of them, but the prime conduit for propagating

the political teachings of the fala¯ sifa remained Maimonides’ Guide.

The situation was quite different in the areas of logic, physics, psychology,

and metaphysics, where major writings and commentaries

of the fala¯ sifa were translated into Hebrew, were well known, and

their influence more direct.

the art of writing of the fala￣ sifa and their

jewish followers

The influence of the fala¯ sifa upon Maimonides’ political teachings

in particular as well as upon later Jewish political thought

in general extended beyond the treatment of particular subjects

to the art of writing about them. Avicenna had written that “it

is not proper for any man to reveal that he possesses knowledge

he is hiding from the vulgar [al-‘a¯mma] . . . Rather, he should let

them know of God’s majesty and greatness through symbols and

similitudes.”29 Maimonides in a similar vein speaks of the “secrets

and mysteries of the Torah” and the need to conceal them from

the vulgar. He explains in the introduction to the Guide that his

“purpose is that the truths be glimpsed and then again be concealed,

so as not to oppose that divine purpose which one cannot

possibly oppose and which has concealed from the vulgar among

the people those truths especially requisite for his apprehension.”30

Maimonides relates that the sages, who possessed knowledge of God,

spoke in parables and riddles when they wished to teach something

of this subject matter.31 In his introduction, he discusses his own esoteric

method of writing the Guide and gives pointers to his qualified

readers on how to understand his meaning. Later in part I, he explains