The Importance of History and Perspective in Understanding Mediæval Philosophy: The Case of Maimonides’ Response to the Question of Eternity

Abstract

The study aims to show how taking history and perspective into consideration could help in understanding mediæval philosophy. To that end, in spite of a philosophical assumption which usually considers that there is no connection between eternity and creation, the paper assumes that Maimonides planned to establish a distinct response which was neither creation nor eternity. Investigating Maimonides’ perspective will be approached in two ways. Firstly, through the distinction between Maimonides, on one hand and theologians and philosophers on the other will be discussed from an intellectual point of view. Al-Ghazālī will be compared to Maimonides to show that, despite initial impressions, they differ substantially from each other on this issue. It will also be shown how Maimonides differentiated his discourse from that of the Greek philosophers. It will firstly be shown here that Maimonides’ response to the question of eternity adopts a different position from that of the classical theologians and the ancient philosophers. Secondly, the historicity of Maimonides’ discourse, or whether anyone else shared Maimonides’ conciliatory approach, will be examined. It will be shown that Averroes has the highest affinity with Maimonides in this regard. This will result in recognition of the fact that Maimonides’ “conciliatory approach” was shared with some other mediæval philosophers such as Averroes. Ultimately, it will be explained how Maimonides’ complicated concept of eternity can be better understood and justified if one takes perspective and historical discourse into consideration, showing that he was someone who tried to incorporate “conciliatory discourse” into mediæval philosophy.