Summary of the Guide for the Perplexed

This sheet summarizes the main points of the Guide for the Perplexed.
First, we have a list of points that the Rambam makes.

Then, I'll show the sources in the second part.
The third part is a discussion of some topics.

This sheet can also be found as a google-doc here.

Overview:

1. Tanach and Midrash use metaphor.

2. We relate to God through the world.

3. The universe is orderly.

4. The intellect comprehends the truth.

Chapter 1: Tanach and Midrash use metaphor:

1. Overview:

   1. The Tanach employs metaphor, as a pedagogical tool.

   2. Midrashim employ metaphor.

   3. We should not believe in a literal interpretation of every story in the Bible.

2. Examples:

   1. Biblical references to God being in a place, moving, changing, having any attributes, feelings, or a body are all metaphors. ,,,

   2. The Bible refers to God doing things when they happen via people’s decisions, nature, or randomness.

   3. The creation story is not chronological. ,,,,

   4. The story of Adam & Eve is figurative. ,

   5. Some elements of the revelation at Sinai are metaphor. ,,

   6. All references to angels are metaphors for natural laws , and are seen or heard only in a vision.

   7. All references to God speaking are metaphors for the prophet’s interpretation of the vision.

   8. Stories that occur during prophesy are part of the vision.

   9. All references to permanent changes in nature, such as melting of mountains are metaphors.

   10. Excepting miracles of Moses, all public miracles are metaphors.

   11. All references to God altering the nature of Man, even temporarily, are metaphor.

   12. All miracles can be interpreted as metaphor, as long as it does not eliminate the hopes and fears of the people.

Chapter 2: We relate to God through the world:

1. Transcendence of God:

   1. God is the object that does not need to be created.,

   2. God is not an imaginable concept.

   3. We can understand God by understanding what God cannot be.,

   4. The less we think we know about God, the truer our perception.

   5. God is not human. ,

   6. God has no attributes ,, and is not in time or space. ,

   7. God does not change.,

   8. God did not create the world for a purpose.

   9. God cannot do the logically impossible. ,

   10. God cannot have a quality of having knowledge of the universe.

2. Actions of God:

   1. We can understand God through behavior ,,

   2. God uses the forces of the universe to manage the universe.

   3. All names of God are reference to behavior.

   4. God is called good, just, and wise in that God created laws of nature that are optimal to sustain life.

   5. Love of God is based on understanding God’s actions.

Chapter 3: The universe is orderly:

1. The Nature of Nature:

   1. It is fundamental to our faith that nature has not and will not change. ,,

   2. The laws of nature are the same everywhere.

   3. Plant, animal and human life are based on the natural laws of chemistry and physics.

   4. The intellect, and consciousness are based on the physical matter of our body, and follow the rules of physics and biology. ,,

   5. Existence is good.

   6. The laws of nature are perfect ,,,, but a given point of the creation on its own may not be good.

   7. The universe started as a single point, and through natural fixed law developed over time minerals, then plants, then animals, then humans. ,,,

   8. The universe has three parts.

2. Chaos:

   1. The process by which the world and the laws of nature were created was chaotic and did not follow the rules of nature.

   2. We cannot understand why the world was created.,,

   3. Randomness exists, but the order of nature is dominant.

3. Nature and Mitzvot:

   1. Mitzvot perform a function.

   2. The goal of mitzvot is the well-being of the mind and body. ,,,

   3. The goal of mitzvot is long-term well-being.

   4. Mitzvot do three things: impart an idea or a character trait, or improve society.

   5. The Torah is perfect on the whole of society. ,,

   6. Mitzvot work through natural law. ,

   7. The Laws in the Torah work through economic principles, giving man incentive to be helpful.

   8. God does not intervene miraculously in our Mitzvot performance.

   9. There cannot be a reason why God created the world requiring mitzvot performance.,

   10. Reward and punishment are performed by natural law.

Chapter 4: The intellect comprehends the truth:

1. The power of the Intellect:

   1. The Intellect can comprehend the true order of the world. ,

   2. Conclusions should incorporate observational data. ,,,,,,

   3. Man succeeds according to the perfection of his intellect ,,,insofar as it influences his behavior.

   4. We must follow our intellect, , even if it would mean leaving the Torah of Moses.

   5. We connect to God via our intellect. ,

   6. We can understand the function of mitzvot. ,,

   7. We must use our intellect to interpret the Torah correctly. ,

   8. Man does not sin from his intellect. , Moral sense comes from the intellect.,

   9. Man’s animal nature bars the intellect from perfect function.

   10. We do not understand the full depth of the Torah.

   11. The “Da’at” in the “Tree of Knowledge” refers to esthetic awareness not intellectual knowledge. ,

2. Prophecy:

   1. Logical proof is as reliable as prophecy.

   2. Prophesy works through intellect and imagination.

   3. Except for that of Moses, prophesy works through the laws of nature and the physical matter of the mind.

   4. Something can be judged as prophecy based on whether it is good for society. ,

   5. The “spirit of God” is an inspiration to do good for society.

   6. A “Holy Spirit” is induction or intellectual inspiration.

Discussion

The Intellect can comprehend the true order of the world.

1. Man’s intellect helps him make predictions.

2. The intellect can understand order.

3. Our observation is that the universe has order.

4. Understanding the order of the universe and acting in a way that aims for long-run success consonant to that understanding leads to long-run success.

5. We relate to God via the universe only.

6. We can understand our interaction with God by understanding the order of the universe.

7. God’s will is implied by long-run success.

The “Da’at” in the “Tree of Knowledge” refers to esthetic awareness not intellectual knowledge.

In 1:2, the Rambam expresses the idea that the Etz HaDaat represents system 1, the mental faculty in charge of esthetics and feelings. From this perspective, “Da’at Tov V’Ra'' means “awareness of pleasant and ugly.”

This is implied in the original Arabic, where the Rambam uses the hebrew “tov v’ra” when quoting the verse, the Arabic “kir” and “wshar” when talking about ethical good and evil, but Arabic “kabich” and “hasan” when explaining mefursamot, implying that “kabich” and “hasan” are not ethical good and evil. This is how the Abarbanel, Narboni, Shem Tov, and Givat Hamoreh learn the chapter.

This is consonant with the Rambam’s perspective on the intellect in the Guide. In the Guide, the intellect is the analytic faculty in man. The intellect is how Man emulates and connects with God, develops a sense of morality, and how Man succeeds. The Guide states that all of the mitzvot stem from an understanding of the world and all mitzvot have rational basis. This approach is consonant with the Rambam’s take on the story in 2:30, where he connects the Etz HaDaat with the Satan, and yetzer hara.

This is in line with the opinion in the Gemara and Zohar that the fruit of the Etz HaDaat is grapes, because they cause mourning or regret. Alcohol weakens the intellect. This is also the opinion reflected in the Zohar, that the Etz HaDaat parallels instability, evil, folly, and pleasure. This is also how Rav Soloveitchik explains the chapter in Worship of the Heart and Emergence of Ethical Man. This is also exactly how Seforno, a student of the Guide, explains the story.

Why would anyone explain the chapter differently?

What led Freidlander to translate “mefursamot” as ethical good and evil is a later part of the Moreh, in 2:33, where the Rambam explains that the first two commandments were intellectual (muskalot) but the following eight were “mefursamot.” It is impossible to denigrate eight of the ten commandments as purely esthetic, and must refer to something ethical.. Freidlander incorrectly applied “mefursamot” describing the solution to the “mefursamot” describing the problem. Note that later on, in 3:37, Ibn Tibbon and Kapach use the word “mefursamot” to describe the common erroneous beliefs and habits of pagan cultures.

Rav Soloveitchik, in the notes to the Moreh, also misinterprets this part, which is why Rav Soloveitchic grappled for so long without presenting a good answer. There is no question that the notes for the Worship of the Heart and Emergence of Ethical Man were written later, because they present a much more compelling interpretation.

The correct interpretation here is that the latter eight commandments rectify problems that humans have, and are not objective logical necessities. That is, the commandments are intellectual solutions to problems that arrive from the imagination, or system 1, referred to as the Etz HaDaat. This is supported by the Guide in 3:8, where the Rambam says that the whole point of mitzvot is to subdue desires. This is alluded to in the clothing that Adam & Eve make for themselves. See Seforno there, who explains that before eating from the tree, nakedness was not a problem. After they ate, it presented a problem, and the intellect drove Adam to solve it by wearing clothes.

The Gemara, in suggesting that the Etz HaDaat is figs and wheat imply that the tree is more than just the yetzer hara. However, the tree is not just knowledge, it represents the idea of the torah either educating the system 1, or even using the system 1’s weakness for our own good. An example of this is the chagorot, belts made of fig leafs, which represent rules of modesty and tzitzit, in the Zohar. This perspective on the Torah, as not being purely intellectual theory, but catering to the animal element of our mind is what the Rambam means later on. All law and din is there to redirect selfishness toward helpful behavior. The Zohar frames it as handling the evil instinct. Jewish rituals, in the Rambam’s framework, are symbolic and serve to create an esthetic sensual reality that affects our system 1. This is exactly how Seforno, a student of the Guide for the Perplexed, explains the story.

In 2:25, the Rambam sheds more light on his perspective. He mentions that we cannot know why God created the necessity for various mitzvot. In the Rambam’s framework, most mitzvot are not logical necessities, but are instead responses to our deficiencies. Those deficiencies are not logical necessities, but just are generated through “chidush haOlam” chaotic creation of the world. This is what makes them “mefursamot” instead of “muskalot.” The first two commandments are logical necessities that can be proven. The others are a response to our condition. See 3:31, where the Rambam gives three categories for the function of all mitzvot.

Given the question that’s asked in 1:2, we know the emphasis of the Rambam’s answer in 1:2.

The Guide interprets“elohim” to mean human judges. This implies that the skills to lead come from the Etz HaDaat. This is the advice of the snake, who was lying. The truth is that eating from the Etz HaDaat does not actually lead to successful leadership, but that leadership is best driven from the intellect.

We must follow our intellect

There are three lines of reasoning that we can follow to derive that the Guide holds that we must follow the intellect.

This is a sevara, which means it’s true independent of source. We know this because in 2:25, the Rambam says that had Aristotle proved the eternity of the universe, we would seek other philosophies. In addition, the Rambam views following the intellect as core to Judaism.

As for a source in the Torah, the closest thing to it would be the verse the Rabmam mentions in 2:34, regarding listening to a prophet. There, a prophet is called a “malach” , messenger or Angel, because the prophet is inspired by the intellect, which, as described in 2:6, is referred to as a “malach” or angel. We can apply a kal-va-chomer to derive that a person must listen to his own intellect. If a person must listen to a prophet because the prophet is enlightened by the intellect, all the more so a person must follow his own intellect. This is why the verse uses only the term “malach” or Angel, which ambiguously refers to both the prophet and the intellect.

The Rambam identifies messages of the intellect with those coming directly from God. In 1:37, the Rambam says “In the same sense the word is used in the following passage, "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face," i.e., both being present, without any intervening medium between them…and also "The Lord talked with you face to face" (Deut. 5:4); instead of which we read more plainly in another place, "Ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude: only ye heard a voice" (ib. 4:12).” Friedlander mistranslates “intermediary” as “similitude.” Because Israel prophesied via their intellect, per the Rambam’s opinion in 2:29, and the intellect interacts directly with God, their prophecy is considered “face to face” on the same level as Moses. Thus, even if Moses’ prophecy was directly to the intellect, without any imagination, it would still be considered direct and “face to “face.”

Note the Rambam’s insistence in 2:34 that all prophets used an angel except for Moses, while in 2:6 points out that angel as opposed to cherub is a reference for the imagination, and Moses heard prophecy from between the cherubs. “The intelligent reader will find here a clear statement that man's imaginative faculty is also called "angel," and that "cherub" is used for man's intellectual faculty.”

In 2:45, the vision of an angel is one step before God. The Rambam’s levels follow a chain of command: God tells the angel, which, as an intellect, is like a man, which gives a voice, which generates a vision. This vision is then interpreted by the prophet, using his intellect, as relating a message, spoken by an intelligent being, which is a messenger of God (angel) which ultimately expresses the will of God. Given that the angel is above a “man” and the symbolism of “man” in prophecy is consistently given by the Rambam as referring to the intellect, such as by Cherubs, “face of a man” , and even hands of man in the Merkava, the angel would be a source of intelligence.

As the Rambam describes in the 3rd part, our intellect can be untrained or misled, due to its material origins. As a result, any intelligent person uses information from all sources when making decisions, including tradition, memes, and other people, when it comes to figuring out what practices lead to success.

Providence, Mitzvot, Good and Evil

The philosophy of providence, mitzvot, and good and evil must be consonant. The will of God is intuited from what is rewarding. Thus, if good is the will of God, then this must be consonant with providence. Mitzvot, defined as actions that conform to the will of God, must therefore have the function of producing good and thereby working with the mechanics of providence to lead to some reward. This consonance is true irrespective of what the theory of mitzvot is.

We see the Rabmam utilizing this triple identity in 3:17, when describing pain to animals. The lack of providence for animals corresponds to not having a mitzvah prohibiting harming animals, and this is not a violation of the justice of God. Although the Rambam does not bring the example, the commandment given to Noah to save the species of animals also conforms to this identity.

We can clarify what the Guide holds by applying what it says on providence, mitzvot and good and evil where he may be ambiguous on one of those. For example, if mitzvot operate on the societal level and are perfect only on the whole and not on the individual level, than providence regarding compliance on those mitzvot also operate on a societal level. If mitzvot function through natural law, then so does providence. If providence does not rely on the afterlife the realization of divine justice, then the mitzvot do not function on the afterlife. Similarly, if good and evil are defined in terms of life and death, then we can also figure that the function of mitzvot is to promote life, and that providence rewards the promotion of life. If providence rewards a refined intellect, we must figure that a refined intellect leads to more good and that mitzvot work to promote a refined intellect.

Reward and punishment are performed by natural law.

In the Rambam’s perspective, a mitzvah performs something that’s good in God’s perspective. What we view as good in God’s perspective must be substantiated by our observations of what nature itself sustains and protects. The providence of God works through nature, so that which nature preserves is under the providence of God. We observe that nature preserves entire species but does not grant eternal life to individuals. Thus, we cannot say that God cares for individual animals, but, by setting the laws of nature, God cares for the web of life and ecological balance that we observe. Aristotle was not aware of species coming in and out of existence.

In correspondence, in 3:17, the Rambam notes that giving pain to animals is not because there is something inherently evil with giving pain to animals, but because of the psychological impact on humans.

The Rambam, in 3:17, 3:18 details two types of Hashgacha, providence. One applies to all species, and is implemented through natural law. The other, which applies to man only, is a function of his intellect. It is not so much that God rewards him for his intellect, but that God guides him through his intellect, so that he can better his life by using his intellect. This is Aristotle's perspective, with the caveats that the Rambam describes. Decisions a person makes through use of his intellect or by ignoring his intellect, engender results that are in line with providence. Given that the human intellect conforms to natural law, it follows that hashgacha or providence is a function of natural law. We observe that nature preserves and protects them much more than animals as a function of their use of the intellect to develop liberating technologies and memes. We also observe a wide variation among outcomes for people based on their behavior and decisions that we do not observe in the wild.

For this approach to correspond with our observations and mathematical realities, we’d propose that the Rambam would say there is a two-dimensional continuum, where both dimensions of individual behavior, and social context interact to protect the person. The behavior and perfection of the society a person is a part of will help just as an individual’s perfection. To have exceptional protection from God, one needs to have exceptional intellect and behavior. But, if a person is part of a just society, they don’t need exceptional behavior. In summary, the Guide would hold that outcomes are a function of nature, nurture, skill and luck. Nurture is basically the perfection of the mind, and skill is the use of the intellect. Nature is hashgacha of the species, and luck is just that.

Mitzvot perform a function

The Guide asserts in 3:31 that all mitzvot must have a function that is communicable and understandable and enviable. The discussion in 3:26 regarding the role of details in mitzvot appears to contradict 3:31.

We can resolve the inconsistency by saying that the Rambam differentiates between mitzvot that function physically, such as making a fence around one’s roof, and those that operate either symbolically, that are the result of practical limitations that prevent people from realizing an ideal, or enabling coordination by mandating an arbitrary standard.

The notion that all mitzvot must operate physically would imply that there are many unobserved physical dynamics that connect things like sacrifices to physical outcomes such as rain. Because they are unobserved, we would not be able to have any intuition about how mitzvot operate. This precludes understanding mitzvot in the same way that thinking there is no rationale behind mitzvot. This would lead to the conclusion that the intellect is not useful in understanding mitzvot, which the Rambam rejects.

Mitzvot, in the Guide’s perspective, do not include all behavior that could possibly be good or evil. Rather, mitzvot serve as a salve to remedy common problems people have with practically living in accordance with a perfect mind.

The goal of mitzvot is the well-being of the mind and body

Even the most abstract articles of faith are mandated because of the impact they have on the wellbeing of civilization. In 3:31, the Guide assets that all mitzvot have a purpose which is understandable, communicable, and enviable.

Monotheism is important because it engenders practices that work. This is implied from Rambam's explanation that idolatry is bad because it leads to practices that do not work. This implies that monotheism’s importance lies in enabling inquiry and development on the premise of universal consistent law. Consider the following: “This mode of considering the universe is, as will be explained, indispensable, that is to say, it is very useful for demonstrating the unity of God; it also helps to elucidate the principle that He who is One has created only one being.” To the Guide, the notion of one coherent universe is identified with the experience of one God.

This explains the passage in 1:76 “observe how they rushed, as it were, from the ashes into the fire, this is because they denied the nature of existence, misrepresented the properties of heaven and earth…” Translation from Ibn Tibbon. This statement explains what the Rambam found so troubling about the Mutakallim. The whole point of monotheism is faith in one cosmic order. Because a “God” “El” refers to a power, monotheism is synonymous with a single cosmic law. Rejecting an understandable, consistent cosmic order, while keeping faith in a creator is worse than adopting faith in a single cosmic order and rejecting creation of the world. It is by name monotheism, but in practice no better than idolatry. Thus, even faith in a creator, when detached from it’s function is problematic.

In a similar vein, belief in the creation of the world is subordinate to belief in miracles as implied in 2:25. In 1:71, the Guide rejects the notion that God’s existence is dependent on the existence of miracles or the creation of the world. Belief in miracles is only important because it impacts the fears and aspirations of the people, which in turn impacts their behavior.

This functional approach to dogma corresponds with the Guide’s use of metaphor.

Afterlife

The Rabmam did not view the function of any mitzvah as mere preparation for an afterlife.

The Guide, in 3:17 rejects the opinion that God performs actions in this world that serve no other purpose besides boosting reward in another world. The Guide, in 3:17 also rejects the opinion that God tests man, putting him in uncomfortable situations to test his loyalty and earn reward. The Guide, in 3:26 rejects the idea that there could be a mitzvah without a purpose. The Guide also mentions that the intellect is a “nivdal” or separate, and as such has no material and does not exist in space or time. The Guide limits this afterlife to the intellect, meaning that it cannot serve as a place of reward for non-intellectual mitzvot.

The Guide is insistent that the intellect has a supreme practical function in terms of enabling man to succeed. , In 3:28, he describes how required articles of faith are necessary for society to function. Thus, Guide does not need to resort to an afterlife to describe the function of mitzvot that perfect the intellect.

Given that the Guide promotes non-literal interpretation of the Tanach, and statements of Chazal, we can propose that the Guide itself uses metaphor. Note Narboni’s remark in his commentary on 2:30, that the Guide refers to eternal success through the expression “permanent life.” See also Yerushalmi Shekalim “Did David imagine that he would live and endure forever?!”

The mind, consciousness, soul, are based on the physical matter of our body, and follow the rules of physics and biology.

The Rambam describes animals as having imagination 1:72, and feelings of pain in 3:48. Thus, the sensation of experience, or consciousness, belongs to the imaginative faculty. The Rambam in 1:72 describes the intellectual capability of man, called the “koach medaber”, as part of the human body. He also states there “it is impossible that any of the members of a human body should exist by themselves, not connected with the body, and at the same time should actually be organic parts of that body”

In 3:17, the Rambam describes the intellect as being developed from minerals via natural processes. In 1:72 he describes the intellect as being driven by the spheres, in the same manner as everything else.

However, the Rambam asserts, in 1:72, that the “acquired intellect” is separate from the body. This would equate to the “form of God” as, according to 1:7, Cain and Abel did not have this because they were not educated. This is also the part of the body that remains after a person dies. The Rabmam gives no indication that this part of the body is supernatural in any sense, and also expresses in 1:72 his own uncertainty regarding what or where it exists. It is not clear that the “acquired intellect” is a bodily faculty in the Rambam’s eye. Note the wording in 1:71: “is from without, brought into contact with the body”. The “acquired intellect” may refer to pure information acquired by the person.

Given the connection between the human intellect and the Separate Intelligences, we can suppose that the Rambam viewed learned truths as connecting a person’s physical mind to the laws running the universe. When the human brain learns fundamental truths of how the world operates, it attaches itself to and becomes identified with the Separate Intelligences that run the universe. In this sense, this part of the person lives for eternity, just as the Separate Intelligences run the universe eternally. We see this expressed in the Talmud’s “These and these are the words of the Living God.” Also, see Tanya, which describes this unity.

Fourth Part

The Rambam did not know that species come in and out of existence. Similarly, he did not know about societal progress that does not revert. The notion that technological change occurs regularly was not current until the 19th century. This is why he finds the rationale for mitzvot sufficient even when dependent on a primarily agricultural economy, and is only bothered a little by the extinction of pagan cultures.

This implies that the rationale for mitzvot must be discoverable to accommodate changes in humanity.

The Universe has Three Parts

2:11 "the whole Creation is divided into three parts, viz. (1) the pure Intelligences; (2) the bodies of the spheres endowed with permanent forms--(the forms of these bodies do not pass from one substratum to another, nor do their substrata undergo any change whatever); and (3) the transient earthly beings, all of which consist of the same substance."

The Rambam included this in his Laws of the Foundations of the Torah because his organization of the universe describes how we relate to God through the universe. In the Rambam’s perspective the three levels are as below.

The Separate Intelligences:

The existence of this place is extrapolated from the human intellect. By “intellect” the Greeks did not mean literal intellect, but that it functions similarly to the way the intellect functions in humans in that it causes action by thought.

In the Torah, this area is referred to as the “shmei hashamayim” or the “Heaven of Heavens” , the Face of God, and the waters above the firmament. This area is symbolized in the Temple as the Holy of Holies,, and the place of the throne in the vision of Ezekiel.

In this domain are the laws of nature transcendent of time and space. These never change, are eternal, intelligent, in that they engender order and life. In other literature, these are the “Seraphim” which are snake angels. In the Guide, they are called “Cherubs” In Lurianic Kabbalah, this domain is called “briya” creation and in the Sefer Yetzirah, it is referee to as “Olam” meaning “hidden”.

The “active intellect.” is the causal-bridge between the Intelligences and the Spheres.

The Spheres:

The existence of this place is based on observations of stars and extrapolating from the bond in people between the mind and the body, which is called “spirit” or “ruach.”

In the Torah, this area is referred to as the “rakiya” or firmament. The Rambam interprets the “Brickwork of sapphire” as referring to this area. This area is symbolized in the Temple as the Holy, the place of the Menorah and the Table, and is the place where the angels sing in the vision of Ezekiel.

In this domain are the forces of nature that change but are eternal. This parallels the “chayot” or animal angels, which control the spheres, which are referred to as “ofanim” and control the planets and constellations which are referred to as “animals” in the Zohar. This is the world of “Yetzira, and in the Sefer Yetzira, it is called “shana” meaning “change.”

The Material:

These are forces and things in our world that come into and out of existence. These are the “ofanim” , in Kabbalah, this domain is called “Asiya” and in the Sefer Yetzira it is called “Nefesh” as this world is anthropocentric. This area is symbolized in the Temple as the courtyard, and the ancients viewed it as paralleling the body.

In the Rambam’s worldview, the angelic order lends the world structure, law, and consistency. It is specifically through this world and order that we relate to God. The world is good and the laws of the world are good, and we experience God through every element of the world. This is in opposition to the theological perspective that holds that we must transcend the natural order in order to develop spiritually or that miracles or other worlds are necessary for divine judgement.

In Kabbalistic thought, there is a fourth world, called Atzilut. The Rambam does not talk about this as a world, because it is actually different ways of thinking about God. The Rambam fully appreciates the different ways that we relate to God in a way that parallels the Kabbalistic Sefirot of Atzilut. Notably, 3:53, 1:69, and 2:12. Note also 1:46, that attributes of God really describe “forces.”

An overview of the different types of angels or forces on each part is implied in the Guide’s description of three types of objects: things that come in and out of existence, things that change, and things that cause other things to change.

God cannot do the logically impossible.

This double negative is similar to what the Rambams says about God’s existence. In 1:58 “when we say of this being [God], that it exists, we mean that its non-existence is impossible.” That is, while God cannot have an attribute of existence, it is impossible for God not to exist in some way, given that we experience creation. Similarly, regarding the famous “rock that God cannot move” question, this approach would have us positing that while God cannot have an attribute that grants the ability to create things that cannot be moved, we also believe that God cannot be restricted by anything. God cannot have an attribute that bounds God to logic, but it is impossible for God to do the impossible, by identity. Identities are not provable but are axiomatic. Another way of putting this is: If God can do it, it’s possible.

“We do not ascribe to God the ability to do the impossible” means that we will relate to God, as everything else, and expect things to be consistent with logic and mathematics.

The rules of a system cannot be used to prove the integrity of that system. For example, the laws of mathematics can’t be used to prove the veracity of mathematics. Similarly, logic cannot be used to prove the universality of logic itself. Thus, the Rambam does not attempt to prove this idea. This idea, like the laws of mathematics, is inherently true. Logical proof is considered equal to direct prophecy.

To have any rational, understandable, reliable, or predictable relationship with God, we must presume some sort of system that would help define that relationship. So this concept is not just a theoretical curiosity. Rather, the basis of Science, mathematics and logic as understanding the real truth of the universe hinges on this question.

The Rambam describes this as not limiting the “hand of God” in 3:16. One way to imagine this is that things that are impossible, such as a square with five sides, don’t really exist, so it does not limit God by stating that God cannot do them.

In 1:75, we have: “we do not say that God is imperfect because He cannot transform Himself into a body, or cannot create another being like Himself, or make a square whose diagonal should be equal to one of its sides.”

We can understand God through behavior.

The negative attributes’ main purpose is to redirect our focus in understanding God to thinking about God’s actions which are our observations of the behavior of the world.

Understanding of God has three steps. First a person learns about God via metaphors. Later a person learns gradually that God cannot have any positive attributes. Third, a person interprets all the descriptions of God as descriptions of behavior rather than describing God directly.

Without the third step, the negative attributes fail to yield a satisfying way to relate or think about God or yield any positive practical results. Without the second step, we would not know to redirect our focus from positive attributes to attributes of action. Thus, both steps are necessary.

The focus on God’s just guidance and wisdom as expressed in the constant and omnipresent laws of nature is how the immediate connection with God is imagined in the Rambam’s system. This is the basis of the Comment in 3:28 “And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might" (ibid. 6:5), what stress is laid on this commandment to love God. We have already shown in the Mishneh-torah (Yes. ha-torah 2:2) that this love is only possible when we comprehend the real nature of things, and understand the divine wisdom displayed therein.”

There is a unity between the knowledge of God, and the laws whereby God runs the world. This is how providence is linked to the perfection of the intellect.

Knowledge of God

When the Guide talks about the knowledge of God (that is, things that God knows), the Guide is talking about an attribute of action. As an attribute of action, the knowledge of God is a property of God’s action. See 3:19-3:21. Thus, 68, which talks about the equivalence between knowledge and the knower, is really talking about the unknown faculty that results in the order of the universe.

In 3:19: “His eternal knowledge, which has established their actual properties, and made part of them purely spiritual, another part material and constant as regards its individual members, a third part material and changeable as regards the individual beings according to eternal and constant laws.”

This is how the Guide explains the “soul” of the spheres, in 2:4, which is limited to function.

Some elements of the revelation at Sinai are metaphor.

The Rambam takes many of the descriptions of physical phenomena at Sinai as metaphor for the intellect and learning.

In 1:3 “The words "And the similitude of the Lord shall he behold" (Num. 12:8) therefore mean "he shall comprehend the true essence of the Lord."” Compare the similar use in 1:5, regarding Moses at the bush.

In 1:5, “But "the nobles of the Children of Israel" were impetuous, and allowed their thoughts to go unrestrained: what they perceived was but imperfect. Therefore it is said of them, "And they saw the God of Israel, and there was under his feet," etc. (Exod. 24:10); and not merely, "and they saw the God of Israel"; the purpose of the whole passage is to criticize their act of seeing and not to describe it. They are blamed for the nature of their perception, which was to a certain extent corporeal--a result which necessarily followed, from the fact that they ventured too far before being perfectly prepared. They deserved to perish, but at the intercession of Moses this fate was averted by God for the time. They were afterwards burnt at Taberah, except Nadab and Abihu, who were burnt in the Tabernacle of the congregation, according to what is stated by authentic tradition. (Midr. Rabba ad locum.)”

In 1:8: “you must understand that the word makom has the same signification in the passage "Behold, a place (makom) is with me" (Exod. 33:26), viz., a certain degree of contemplation and intellectual intuition (not of ocular inspection), in addition to its literal meaning "a place," viz., the mountain which was pointed out to Moses for seclusion and for the attainment of perfection.” Here, Makom must imply the intellect, which connects man to God.

In 1:10: “When, on the other hand, it says, "And Moses went up unto God" (Exod. 19:3), it must be taken in the third signification of these verbs, in addition to its literal meaning that Moses also ascended to the top of the mount, upon which a certain material light (the manifestation of God's glory) was visible; but we must not imagine that the Supreme Being occupies a place to which we can ascend, or from which we can descend. He is far from what the ignorant imagine.” Here the Rambam does not tell us what this means, because it is part of Sitrei Torah. Given everything else the Rambam says, this would be a metaphor for the ascent of the mind of Moses to perceive the complete nature of Hashem, as the Rambam implies in 1:3.

In 1:13 The Rabmam interprets Moshe’s physical position as meaning that Moshe will be a teacher to b’nei Israel, not physically in between HaShem and Israel. Similarly, note that chazal interpret Moshe’s standing with HaShem as meaning a constant state of prophecy.

In 1:15, 1:16,1:18 The Rambam explains “Makom” “tzur” and “nigash” all referring to intellectual accomplishments.

In 1:21: “avor” is an expression of revelation.

In 1:28 “What they (the nobles of the children of Israel) perceived was therefore the materia prima, whose relation to God is distinctly mentioned, because it is the source of those of his creatures which are subject to genesis and destruction, and has been created by him. This subject also will be treated later on more fully.” Friedlander’s translation here is deficient, so check it out in the Kapach. In either case, this is a description of their understanding and perception.

In 1:54 “God promised to make him comprehend the nature of all things, their relation to each other, and the way they are governed by God both in reference to the universe as a whole and to each creature in particular. This knowledge is referred to when we are told of Moses," he is firmly established in all mine house" (Num. 12:7); that is, "his knowledge of all the creatures in My universe is correct and firmly established"; for false opinions are not firmly established.”

In 1:66 “Similarly we explain, "And the writing was the writing of God" (Exod. 32:16); the relation in which the writing stood to God has already been defined in the words "written with the finger of God" (ib. 31:18), and the meaning of this phrase is the same as that of "the work of thy fingers" (Ps. 8:4). this being said of the heavens; of the latter it has been stated distinctly that they were made by a word; comp. "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made" (ib. 33:6). “

In 2:33: “they learnt the truth of the principles contained in these two commandments in the same manner as Moses, and not through Moses. “

“Note it, and remember it, for it is impossible for any person to expound the revelation on Mount Sinai more fully than our Sages have done, since it is one of the secrets of the Law. It is very difficult to have a true conception of the events, for there has never been before, nor will there ever be again, anything like it. Note it.”

In 3:9 “His revelation in a thick cloud did not take place without any purpose, it was intended to indicate that we cannot comprehend Him on account of the dark body that surrounds us. It does not surround God, because He is incorporeal. A tradition is current among our people that the day of the revelation on Mount Sinai was misty, cloudy, and a little rainy.”

All miracles can be interpreted as metaphor, as long as it does not eliminate the hopes and fears of the people.

This follows from Ibn Tibbon and Schwartz’s translation of 2:25. Additionally, see the Shem Tov there, which takes this approach.

Aristotle held that the world doesn’t change permanently. There is no technological progress, no permanent redemption or slavery, no perminant improvement of the human condition, no punishment for evil behavior or reward for good behavior. See 3:15-3:18 for more detail on Aristotle’s view of providence. Those beliefs are what the Rambam refers to in 2:25 as uprooting the entirety of the Torah, because they would affect people’s behavior.

This approach makes sense of the Guide’s suggestion in 3:50 that the genealogy in the Bible is to support the theory of creation. That the world has a chronology and development rejects the notion of eternity of the universe.

The expectation of future miracles cannot form the basis of Israel’s fear and hope, because the Rambam holds that providence is based on natural law.

Belief in miracles themselves independent of the lessons learned from them could not be insisted upon by the Rambam. By construction, there would be no purpose for those mitzvot, and the Rambam holds that all mitzvot have a purpose. In the Rabmam’s framework, belief in a miraculous origin of the mitzvot is not necessary for observance because all mitzvot have an understandable function.

When the Rambam talks of miracles being necessary, it is in the sense of “pele” meaning proof, and “nes” meaning sign, as in 3:25. From this perspective, miracles are things that inform people and help the world develop. This concept of the world continually learning from new information is essential to the concept of a continual evolution of society that forms the crux of the Torah’s mission.

Throughout the first part, the Rambam is careful to frame non-literal interpretations as “homonyms” not as “metaphor”, so in the Rambam’s framework, metaphor is essentially a literal interpretation. The Rambam states in 2:47 that “Employ your reason, and you will be able to discern what is said allegorically, figuratively, or hyperbolically, and what is meant literally.”

Helpful Details

Similarities between the Zohar and Guide for the Perplexed

1. Employs metaphor for reading the Bible, and denigration of literal interpretation

2. Employs metaphor for interpretation of Rabbinic statements,

3. Emphasis on transcendence of God

4. Emphasis on a cosmic system of agents that God uses to direct the world

   1. Nature never changes,

   2. Interpretation of the planets and constellations as having a major role in Jewish thought and life

5. Emphasis on understandable nature of the Mitzvot

6. Emphasis on the rewards of observance in this world,

7. Emphasis on the intellect, and a denigration of the heart

   1. Adam’s intellect was perfect and complete before the sin

Tzura / Form

The Rabmam’s use of “tzura” or “form” as referring to the “tzelem” or image of God in 1:1 is not referring to a physical form. The Guide sheds light on what it means by “tzura” in 1:73 when it presents the rejected view of the Mutakallimin: “There does not exist a form which, as you believe, modifies the substance, and thus causes substances to be different from each other: this difference is exclusively effected by the accidents.”

This implies that the “tzura” form is the cause observable behavior of a substance. So while the underlying matter of gold and iron might be the same, there is some “tzura” that causes each to change under various circumstances differently. So, with an animal, the “tzura” refers not to its physical form on the macro scale, but the elements of the animal that drive its growth and behavior. When the intellect drives a person’s behavior, their “tzura” is the intellect.

In 2:12, this interpretation makes the chapter eminently sensible. “There are, however, changes which are not connected with the combination of the elements, but concern only the forms of the things; they require likewise an efficient cause: there must exist a force that produces the various forms. This cause is incorporeal, for that which produces form must itself be abstract form, as has been shown in its proper place.”

What the chapter is saying is that drivers of behavior in matter are, essentially, natural law embedded in nature. Natural law being the Separate Intellect, and the Form being the drivers of behavior specific to that object.

See Ibn Tibbon’s definition.

Sechel / Intellect

Sometimes causes are referred to as “Sechel” or intellect. This is clearest the introduction to pard 2, where we find “The existence of an infinite number of causes and effects is impossible, even if these were not magnitudes: if, e.g., one Intelligence were the cause of a second, the second the cause of a third, the third the cause of a fourth, and so on, the series could not be continued ad infinitum.” That is, that the ancients viewed the intellect as the unobservable cause of human behavior. And natural forces function in a similar way, so there are called “Intelligences” but really, a modern reader would call them “forces.” Indeed, angels in the Guide are referred to as natural forces and intelligences.

See Ibn Tibbon’s definition.

The Rambam rejects the notion that the Spheres or intelligences have intellects or a “soul” similar to that of ours or animals in 2:4, referring the reader to the observed behavior of the spheres.

Occam’s Razor

The Guide notes that a simple explanation is preferable to a complicated one. This implicitly endorses Occam’s Razor, and may explain why the Rambam’s books on law are generally simpler and more sensible than alternative approaches to interpreting the Talmud.

2:11 “He will, besides, endeavour to find such an hypothesis which would require the least complicated motion and the least number of spheres”

Order of the Guide

Understanding the order of the Guide is subordinate to understanding the text of the Guide. It was not written so that everything needed to understand a chapter is contained in the preceding chapters. Rather, the proper understanding comes from integrating ideas dispersed through the work.

Commentaries on the Guide

Read the old commentaries on the Guide: Narboni, Abarbanel, Shem Tov, Efodi, and Kreskas. Often neglected, these commentaries present an authentic interpretation of the cosmology of the time, and are bolder in their willingness to interpret the Guide as distinct from less intellectual and scientific philosophies of religion.