Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Maimonides and Averroes shared in many respects a philosophical-religious outlook and have been described as disciples of al-Fârâbî, the founder of the school of Arabic Aristotelianism ( falsafa ). At first view, however, their legacy could hardly be more different : while Averroes wrote almost only commentaries on Aristotle, Maimonides did not write a single work that, strictly speaking, falls into a traditional philosophical genre. He is, on the other hand, a prominent commentator as well — only that instead of explicating Aristotle, he comments on the Law of Moses. The main question I address in this paper is whether this strikingly different relation to philosophy and exegesis in Averroes and Maimonides can be explained as two ways of implementing a conceptual framework established by al-Fârâbî. I first examine al-Fârâbî’s project, which I suggest is determined by a twofold task : to take up and continue the project of ancient philosophy and to define its place in a society in which the authority of the divine Law is undisputed. Then I argue that while Averroes’ work can on the whole be understood as continuing al-Fârâbî’s project, this is only in a qualified way true for Maimonides who in part creatively transforms al-Fârâbî and in part relies on premises that can clearly not be derived from al-Fârâbî. Maimonides’ position on philosophy and exegesis is in important respects different from the standard position of the falâsifa — and this had far-reaching implications for later medieval Jewish philosophy.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Carlos Fraenkel
McGill University
Laval théologique et philosophique
McGill University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Carlos Fraenkel (Thu,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0f315c14089a5783bdd462 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/018536ar