Introduction

In the writings of Joseph Albo, a fifteenth-century Spanish exegete, we find the most explicit theory of law attempted by a Jewish thinker up to that time. In his Sefer ha-Ikkarim (Book of Roots) Albo carefully defines the various kinds of law and their interrelations. Noahide law, of course, is introduced into his overall theory of law. In order to understand Noahide law in Albo's thought, we must first consider his general approach to law, then the relationship of Noahide law to that approach and finally how Noahide law is related to other types of law.

Albo defines law in general as follows: “The name law (dat) applies to any direction (ha-yesharah) or rule of conduct (hanhagah) which includes a large group ofmen.” Then he divides law into three distinct classes: natural (tiv'it), conventional (nimusit) and divine (elohit). This theoretical division is based on a real division between the respective purposes these types of law intend. The source of natural law is human nature, intending a just society. Conventional law's source is a sovereign ruler who creates a desirable society. The source of divine law is God, aiming at the eternal happiness for human beings. Noahide law is included as a group within the third class of law. However, it is not so much Albo's classification of law that stimulates philosophical reflection as it is his analysis of the content of each class, its relation to its source and its purpose, and the interrelations among the classes themselves. Here we find some of Albo's most significant contributions to the development of Jewish thought.

Natural Law

Albo starts his analysis of law with a discussion of natural law: “Grouping and association (ve-ha-hitavrut) being necessary for the existence and maintenance of the species, the wise have stated that man is political by nature (medina be-teva).” The phrase “political by nature” has its origins, of course, in Aristotle's designation of human beings as politikon zoo–n, “a political animal.” 3 Nevertheless, Albo means here something more limited. Whereas Aristotle designated the human capacity for rational speech (logos) as the essence of this political nature, Albo limits it to the human need for material sustenance, whose satisfaction usually requires sustained association between human beings. Such a need leads to the requirement of some systemof order which will maintain society.