Rambam and Aristotles - A Complex and Nuanced Relationship. (Part 5 of a Series)

Continuing with Elyahu’s comment on this post.

Elyahu said-

“First chapter of MT which Creation (ברא):
יסוד היסודות ועמוד החכמות, לידע
שיש שם מצוי ראשון.
והוא ממציא כל
הנמצא; וכל הנמצאים מן שמיים וארץ ומה
ביניהם, לא נמצאו אלא מאמיתת הימצאו. ואם יעלה על הדעת שהוא אינו מצוי, אין דבר אחר
יכול להימצאות. ואם יעלה על הדעת שאין כל הנמצאים מלבדו מצויים, הוא לבדו יהיה מצוי
ולא ייבטל הוא לביטולם: שכל הנמצאים צריכין לו; והוא ברוך הוא אינו צריך להם, ולא
לאחד מהם

As R. Yehuda Halevi, pointed out, no one prays to the הראשון מצוי but rather to the God of his fathers. In fact, the Bible never deals with the possibility of Ha-Shem's non-existence, but rather it goes at length to prove that he is present in history.
History is also the third issue.

Rambam clearly favors metaphysical interpretations over the historic experience like the Exodus:

וידיעת דבר זה מצות עשה, שנאמר "אנוכי ה' אלוהיך" (שמות כ,ב; דברים ה,ו).
וכל המעלה על דעתו שיש שם אלוה אחר, חוץ מזה--עובר בלא
תעשה, שנאמר "לא יהיה לך אלוהים אחרים, על פניי" (שמות כ,ב; דברים ה,ו); וכפר
בעיקר, שזה הוא העיקר הגדול שהכול תלוי בו.

He completely omitted אשר הוצאתיך מארץ מצרים, thus, which is the core of this passage. Only because God took us out of Egypt, can he demand our loyalty. "Just" God is a mere fact, with no moral implications.

While one could say that in the MN he addressed a "perplexed" audience, it is hard to justify his reasoning in the MT. I do not think that he really believed the Eternity of the world, but he was not sure, and he could not make himself rely on scriptures.”

Elyahu is arguing that Rambam interprets scriptural texts a-priori in conformity with his system. He argues that Rambam describes the belief in God as a belief in a First Cause, an impersonal God, rather than God of history who is deeply involved in our daily life. Basing himself on R. Yehudah Halevi, he claims that belief in God is based on an understanding of history, the God of our fathers, the God who freed us from Egypt, rather than God the Creator and First Cause. The scriptures, according to Elyahu, seem to follow this approach. Rambam ignores that and as proof text for his understanding he uses the verse where God declares, “I am your God” ignoring the second part of the sentence, “that took you out of the land of Egypt”. Clearly, Rambam just forces his theology into the text.

I believe that there is a misunderstanding of what Rambam is saying. He is not teaching us a philosophical fact, the existence of God and His hierarchical position in existence. He is just stating certain philosophical facts – beliefs – which the Mitzvah of knowing God commands us to investigate and to develop a deep understanding of those beliefs – each according to his ability. It is not sufficient to just believe but also to know why that is so and apprehend correctly, what it means. He does not prove God’s existence or what one has to believe about Him from the verse "אנוכי ה' אלוהיך but rather uses it as prooftext that there is a Mitzvat Asseh to engage in this kind of speculation. This becomes clear if we turn to Sefer Hamitzvot Asseh 1.

המצווה הראשונה
היא הציווי שנצטווינו להאמין באלהות, והוא: שנאמין שיש (שם) עילה וסיבה, שהיא הפועל לכל הנמצאים.
וזהו אמרו יתעלה: "אנכי ה' אלקיך" (שמות כ, ב ודברים ה, ו).
ובסוף גמרא מכות אמרו:
"תרי"ג מצוות נאמרו לו למשה בסיני.
מאי קרא? תורה ציווה לנו משה" (דברים לג, ד)
כלומר: מנין ת'ו'ר'ה'.
והקשו על זה ואמרו:
"תורה בגימטריא הכי הוי? שש מאות וחד סרי הוי!".
ובאה התשובה:
"אנכי ה' אלקיך' ו'לא יהיה לך' מפי הגבורה שמעום".
הנה נתבאר לך, שאנכי ה' מכלל תרי"ג מצוות, והוא ציווי להאמין, כמו שביארנו.

(BTW, although www.Daat.co.il claims that this internet version of Sefer Hamitzvot is the Rav Kapach translation – it is definitely not).

Ramban disagrees vehemently with Rambam who counts this as a Mitzvat Asseh. He sees the passuk as a statement of fact. Ramban does not accept the possibility that philosophical speculation can be commanded. Rambam on the other hand confronts the Gemara in Makot that clearly counts the Mitzvah based on the verse and the correct reading - מפי הגבורה שמעום. He understands גבורה to mean the power of the mind and God commanding to use our minds to understand these two Mitzvot. These two Mitzvot are both issues that deal with speculation rather than action. ו'לא יהיה לך' is not an act of worship of Avodah Zara, that is a separate negative command, it is a prohibition to accept polytheism and one has to arrive at that by rational conviction to fulfill the mitzvah properly. In Sefer Hamitzvot Rambam just lists and discusses the source and sometimes the reason for Mitzvot without going into detail about how they are practiced. In MT, he explains the Halacha, the practical aspect of the Mitzvah. In the Halacha above, he tells us that the two Mitzvot, the Asseh and the Lo Ta’asseh are linked. A proper understanding of God is one that negates the possibility of another god(s). The proof texts are
אנכי ה' אלקיך' ו'לא יהיה לך' which the Gemara explained meant philosophical speculation according to Rambam’s interpretation. If that is the case הוצאתיך מארץ מצרים is not a proof or a pointer to God but rather a statement of fact. The idea that what obligates loyalty to God is the redemption is a Nachmanidean concept and not a Maimonidean. Rambam sees it as the obligation of every human being to develop his uniqueness – the Sechel – and therefore want to find and attach himself to Truth. That is why, earlier in the Halacha, in his description of what one has to demonstrate rationally, the emphasis is Truth.

לפיכך אין אמיתתו כאמיתת אחד מהם. [ד] הוא שהנביא אומר "וה' אלוהים אמת" (ירמיהו י,י)--הוא לבדו האמת, ואין לאחר אמת כאמיתו. והוא שהתורה אומרת "אין עוד, מלבדו" (דברים ד,לה), כלומר אין שם מצוי אמת מלבדו כמותו.

Couple this with Hilchot Teshuvah Perek 10

העובד מאהבה, עוסק בתורה ובמצוות והולך בנתיבות החכמה--לא מפני דבר בעולם, לא מפני יראת הרעה, ולא כדי לירש הטובה: אלא עושה האמת, מפני שהוא אמת; וסוף הטובה לבוא בכלל

History to Rambam is important as a fact, an understanding of how human nature developed, we are the sum total of our past and our ancestors, but History is not a religious issue. Yetziat Mitzraim is remembered because it formed us as a nation and we made a covenant with God at the time and put us on the trajectory we are on through history. It made us into what we are and how we act in the world. Even Matan Torah, unlike Halevi, is not based on Historical facts but on Philosophical/Theological concepts. But that is a completely different subject.

Rambam does pray to the הראשון מצוי - the First Existent or Cause. His Tefilah is not the same as Ramban’s. It is meditation and contemplation as part of the obligation to speculate about God. I will hopefully have an article explaining this in detail in next Hakirah.

Rambam did not believe in the Eternity of the World, not because he had scientific proof to the contrary. He held, rightfully so, that such proof is not possible and does not exist and never will in our physical existence. He could not accept it theologically, and that is the only criteria that one can have for this non-scientific issue, because it negates will to HKBH. Will is one of the pillars upon which we base how we understand HKBH.

Elyahu, I thank you for a very edifying comment. It gave me an opportunity to really clarify these Halachot in Rambam and points out his unique approach.