Samuel Tavakoli
Unit 6: Understanding Laws
In this unit, we read firsthand Maimonides’ account on normative practice of Jewish laws. To me, more interesting than what he states is how he says it. In reading his laws as seen in the Mishneh Torah, we see a continuation of a trend that we have seen previously: the weaving of normative statements on how commandments should be fulfilled, combined with philosophical reasons as to why the practice is the way that it is. The system Maimonides uses is unique, as he departs from previous standards of accounting topics by following the order as seen in the either the Mishnah or the Talmud. Maimonides presents his laws independently of those two norms, and provides “the original and independent presentation of halakhah overall”(Halbertal, 229). Some chapters from the Mishneh Torah in this unit are from his second book in the Mishneh Torah, Sefer Ahavah (The Book of Love). This is another example of his novel organization of Jewish laws. Halbertal provides a breakdown of the schematic organization of the Mishneh Torah, and we see that he is indeed creative and puts forth several topics that are not new in content, but in structure, and did not exist as independent topics in previous halakhic literature. Examples of this are “Laws Concerning the Foundations of the Torah and Laws Concerning Repentance”(Halbertal, 235).
We see in the text of the Mishneh Torah examples of Maimonides using historical reasons to defend certain practices. One thing that jumped out to me specifically was in his discussion on the Laws of Purity, specifically the laws on Uncleanliness of Foodstuffs. He states “The pious of former times used to eat their common food in conditions of cleanness, and all their days they were wary of every uncleanness. And it is they who were called the Pharisees, “separated ones” and this is a higher holiness” (Twersky, 154). He takes this historical context for a stringency and uses it as a base point for a spiritual defense of their practice. He continues “For separation leads to the cleansing of the body from evil deeds, and the cleansing of the body leads to hallowing of the soul from evil thoughts, and the hallowing of the soul leads to striving for likeness with the Shekhinah”(Twersky, 154). This excerpt to me is a prime example of connecting a legal practice with a philosophic rationale that is emblematic of Maimonides’ works. Further, he seamlessly jumps from a historical rationale to a spiritual one, using logic to deduce how cleanliness can bring one closer to the Divine, or Shekhinah. In a later section of the Mishneh Torah, the Laws of Mourning, we see an interesting juxtaposition. The Laws of Mourning are contrasted with a series of commandments that do not deal with mourning, rather they are a series of mitzvot that are Rabbinic and derived from the Biblical verse “And you shall love your neighbor as thyself” (Leviticus, 19:18). These laws include visiting the ill and escorting strangers. It is interesting to me that these laws are discussed under the umbrella of Laws of Mourning, as these do not involve death and ritual mourning in any direct capacity. Yet, at the end of this chapter, Maimonides states “It seems to me that the duty of comforting mourners takes precedence over the duty of visiting the sick, because comforting of mourners is an act of benevolence towards the living and the dead.” (Twersky, 215).
In Strauss’s piece, “Some Remarks on the Political Science of Maimonides and Al-Farabi”, he discusses a political philosophy that drove Maimonides work. In essence, it is the premise that men require laws to drive and shape their lives, towards not only moral perfection, but towards the understanding of “supreme truths and thereby towards supreme perfection”(Strauss, 4). In a time where church and state were one, religious law was political law, and “the prophet occupies in this medieval politics the same place the phisopher-kings occupy in Platonic politics”(Strauss, 5). Further, he points to a precedent set by Al-Farabi that Maimonides continues, namely uniting metaphysics (theology) and politics. This view is essential to understand, and this is a lens that Maimonides works through in order to reach his conclusions. Viewing the Torah as a supreme political document, to which all other laws are imitations qualifies many of Maimonides works, and gives us insight into the conclusions that he reaches.