Maimonides: The Man and His Works (review)

There are few scholars of medieval Jewish philosophy whom I have enjoyed reading over the years more than Herbert Davidson. While there are many who have published a good deal more than he in this area, his books and articles are models of how scholarship should be written. Davidson's work is always carefully researched, well-argued, and replete with insight. He also casts his ideas in a form that is as clear and lucid as any scholar I have read. There is an almost machine-like precision to his writing. Davidson is also obsessive about reviewing his arguments every few pages so that the reader is never lost.

In this latest book on Maimonides, we see Davidson at his best. This study is the most comprehensive treatment of Maimonides that has ever been written. In over five hundred pages of small print, Davidson provides a detailed and encyclopedic analysis of Maimonides' biography, all of his writings in halakhah, philosophy, and medicine, and the controversy surrounding Maimonides' writings in both the medieval and modern periods. This is a remarkable and unprecedented accomplishment. Maimonides' writings are so voluminous, wide-ranging, and complex that scholars have tended to specialize in one or another area of his thought. Just the sheer volume of secondary literature written on Maimonides makes such specialization a virtual necessity nowadays. Davidson has therefore provided a study few scholars would be capable of writing, let alone attempt. Interestingly, Davidson demonstrates expertise in areas of Maimonides' thought that is not in evidence in his previous scholarship. Davidson's specialty has been philosophy, but here we see him very much in command of Maimonides' halakhic writings and the historical material surrounding Maimonides' life and its aftermath. Davidson has also written a study that should be accessible to a wide range of readers, novice, and specialist alike. Every issue is covered with Davidson's usual lucidity. Moreover, Davidson generously punctuates his study with basic introductory discussions about concepts in Jewish law and philosophy that are pertinent to his analysis.

There are far too many insights in Davdison's study to discuss here at length. In his section on Maimonides' biography, Davidson provides a wonderful analysis of the hotly debated question of whether Maimonides temporarily converted to Islam in his teenage years to escape Islamic persecution. Davidson concludes that evidence for this hypothesis is lacking (17–28). One of the most interesting sections of Davidson's book is his discussion of the Treatise on Logic which shows—convincingly, I believe—that the work could not have been written by Maimonides, this despite the almost universal acceptance of its authenticity among decades of scholars (313–322). Toward the end of the book, Davidson also treats us to a sensitive character portrait of Maimonides that shows his virtues and critical flaws as the leader of his generation (545–555).

One issue in Davidson's book, however, requires more extensive discussion. If there is a theme that underlies Davidson's entire study, it is that Maimonides was an integrated personality and that the rabbinic worldview dominated his thinking, including his philosophical beliefs. With this viewpoint, Davidson has taken a definitive position on the most controversial question in Maimonidean scholarship. The question of how the rabbinic and philosophical dimensions of Maimonides' intellectual life relate to each other is a vexing issue that has intrigued scholars for centuries. There are those who argue, as Davidson does, that Maimonides remained throughout his whole life a traditional rabbinic Jew and that all his writings must be interpreted with that understanding in mind. There are others, however, who claim that there is evidence that Maimonides was actually a heretic in disguise who hid his true opinions beneath a cloak of esoteric writing and that his radicalism emerges from a careful reading of clues in his Guide of the Perplexed. There is disagreement about the nature of the heresy, with scholars arguing that Maimonides was either a thoroughgoing Aristotelian who believed in an impersonal God, an agnostic, or even an atheist...