A GREATER FAMILIARITY with the philosophical literature is to be expected in Maimonides’ philosophical opus, the Moreh nevukhim, which he began after finishing his rabbinic works and completed by 1191, when he was 53 or 54 years old. The present chapter examines the extent to which the evidence bears out the expectation. I have already shown that except for a few doubtful scraps there are no grounds for supposing knowledge of Neoplatonic literature on Maimonides’ part during either his rabbinic or philosophical period. Here I begin with the Kalam and then proceed to Aristotle, the Greek commentators on Aristotle, other Greek philosophers, the Arabic philosophers, and medieval Jewish philosophers.

Kalam

Maimonides states in the Moreh nevukhim that he had studied the ‘books of the Kalam thinkers as far as was feasible’ for him to do so. At one juncture he refers to ‘lengthy books and better-known compositions’ written by members of the school, and although he does not name any of the compositions, he leaves the unmistakable implication that he had read them. He adduces Kalam opinions on major and minor issues,3 and is cognizant of the divide between the Asharite and Mu'tazilite branches of the school.

He thus distinguishes between the stance of the Asharites and that of the Mu'tazilites on divine providence. The former, he writes, maintained that God acts with untempered arbitrariness, determines every action a human being will perform, whether good or bad, yet rewards and punishes human beings for those very actions. The latter reserved for men some control over their behaviour and viewed God as a paragon of justice. They therefore held that, in the world to come, God will reward and punish every living creature, man as well as beast, in accordance with its deserts and will compensate His creatures for undeserved suffering in this life. Maimonides has simplified a little regarding the Mu'tazilites but is reasonably faithful to the sources that have been preserved.