Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages: Science, Rationalism, and Religion by T. M. Rudavsky;

Author:T. M. Rudavsky; [Rudavsky, T. M.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9780192557667
Publisher: OxfordUP
Published: 2018-06-29T00:00:00+00:00

VI Aristotelian Models of Creation: Maimonides, Gersonides, and Crescas

We turn now to those views of creation and time that are most influenced by the Aristotelian corpus. Maimonides, Gersonides, and Crescas all present theories that reflect a clear peripatetic influence, either supportive or critical of Aristotle’s views. And yet all three thinkers are writing in the context of Genesis, and so the question is how to reconcile Aristotelian and Neoplatonic science with Scripture. Is it possible to adopt “pieces” of Aristotelian cosmology and ontology without jeopardizing basic Judaic beliefs? We turn now to this set of topics.

Maimonides’ theory of creation is presented in Guide 2.13–30. In Guide 2.13, Maimonides describes three opinions on creation, and then in Guide 2.32 he describes three opinions on prophecy, stating that “the opinions of people concerning prophecy are like their opinions concerning the eternity of the world or its creation in time.”129 Is the word “like” supposed to posit a one-to-one correspondence between the two sets of opinions? If so, can Maimonides’ own position be linked with any one set of correspondences, or is his allegiance split? In answer to these questions, interpreters have suggested every possible combination of opinions, and have offered every possible strategy for determining which is Maimonides’ own view.130 In this chapter, I shall not enter the Maimonidean taxonomy controversy per se. My main concern, rather, is to elucidate the theory of temporality that evolves out of his discussion of creation. I shall, in the course of my discussion, however, offer evidence from Maimonides’ discussion of temporality to support the contention that Maimonides’ doctrine of the creation of the world incorporates important elements of Aristotelian eternity. In arguing thus, I clearly align myself with scholars who see in the Guide an esoteric text addressed to the intellectual elite. My own interpretation is that Maimonides recognizes internal difficulties with the view of Scripture having to do with issues of time, but that in the absence of definitive demonstrative argument in support of Aristotle, he is forced to an epistemological stance that incorporates both Platonic and Aristotelian elements.

In Guide 2.13 Maimonides states the three standard views on creation. The main features of these three views, characterized as the Law of Moses (Scriptural), Platonic, and Aristotelian, can be summarized as follows:

5.1 The Scriptural view: that the universe was brought into existence by God after “having been purely and absolutely nonexistent”; through his will and his volition, God brought into “existence out of nothing all the beings as they are, time itself being one of the created things”;131

5.2 The Platonic view: that inasmuch as even God cannot create matter and form out of absolute nonexistence (since this constitutes an ontological impossibility and so does not impute impotence to God), there “exists a certain matter that is eternal as the deity is eternal…He is the cause of its existence…and that He creates in it whatever he wishes.”132

5.3 The Aristotelian view: that matter cannot be created from absolute nonexistence, concluding that the heaven is not subject to generation/corruption and that “time and motion are perpetual and everlasting and not subject to generation and passing-away.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.