Q&A: The Basis of Maimonides’ Mistake
The Basis of Maimonides’ Mistake
Question
Hello Rabbi!
Hope you’re well.
When I was sitting near you in the study hall at Bar-Ilan, I asked you about The Guide for the Perplexed, and you told me that you hadn’t read it cover to cover—because the whole foundation of Maimonides’ philosophy is based on a mistake. I would be happy if the Rabbi could explain the mistake, and also ask specifically—regarding Maimonides’ claim that something perfect cannot change, and therefore God does not change—what is the flaw in that claim?
Thank you
Answer
I no longer remember. I don’t think I said anything that sweeping. As far as I know, there isn’t one single philosophical foundation for the entire book, so I don’t see how one could say such a thing.
If you specify exactly which claim of Maimonides you mean (with a source), maybe I can try to address it.
Discussion on Answer
These are the kinds of questions that I don’t see much point in dealing with. There are speculative assumptions here that are not necessary, and one can always argue either way. The creation of the world is not necessarily a change in Him. Especially since it is possible that the time axis itself was created along with creation, in which case there isn’t much meaning to talking about what was before it.
Beyond that, something perfect can change. Why assume that perfection is a single state? Maybe there are several states of perfection that one can move between.
And in general, on the subject of change in the Holy One, see my article on Zeno’s Arrow, and there have also been discussions here on the site about perfection and perfecting oneself… You can search for them.
See Column 170
Hi Rabbi,
I asked you, before this question, whether you had studied the Guide, and you answered jokingly that the foundation of Maimonides’ philosophy is outdated / mistaken (not sure which), and that only in places that like studying old things, like yeshivas, do they still study that book—so you hadn’t read it cover to cover, but you do know it…
In any case, my question now is this: as I understand it, the foundation on which Maimonides’ philosophy rests is God’s unchangeability, since something perfect cannot change—which is the Aristotelian understanding of God—and therefore a God who is perfect in the utmost sense cannot change. And if so, He cannot act in the world at any particular time, because if He acts now, that means that before this He did not act, and therefore He changed… In my opinion this leads Maimonides in the direction that God does not intervene, and never did intervene, because He could not change… I know your view that God does not intervene in our time, but as I understood you, you have no principled problem with saying that God intervened in the past…
So to sum up, my question is: is Maimonides’ understanding—that God is unchangeable because the perfect cannot change, and therefore He cannot act / intervene…—basically an old Aristotelian understanding of God that is no longer accepted by everyone? I’m just not sure why. I would appreciate your comments.