Meister Eckhart und Moses Maimonides

1972 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Liebeschütz
Religions ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 632
Author(s):  
Yossef Schwartz

The paper examines how the figure of the biblical Moses was philosophically interpreted in medieval Jewish and Christian writings. It highlights a turning point in a new concept of prophecy and scriptural authority and suggests that this transformation was made complicated for both Jewish and Christian intellectuals by the appearance of Moses Maimonides, who was most influential in promoting the Muslim model of philosophic interpretation of prophecy, and at the same time confusingly emerged as a living manifestation of semi-biblical authority. Against Jewish exclusivist interpretation of Mosaic law as the leading polemical argument to encounter competing revelations, the first part of my paper points out a mechanism of “Jewish successionism”, i.e., the re-interpretation of the biblical Moses as an instrument for rationalizing normative paradigmatic shift. The second, main part of the paper turns to the Latin translation of Maimonides’s Guide of the Perplexed, placing it in the midst of a crucial western Latin turn into a new phase of engagement with Old Testament concept of prophecy. A short comparison between some prominent twelfth century figures and later Scholastic thought demonstrates the central role of the new Arab Aristotelianism in general, and that of Maimonides in particular. Maimonides reception among the schoolman will culminate in the writings of Meister Eckhart, exposing the full potentiality of the double appearance of the Egyptian (Rabbi) Moses.


Author(s):  
Burkhard Mojsisch
Keyword(s):  

Keyword(s):  

An austere form of legalism lies at the heart of Judaism. Apart from a limited set of exceptions, every adult Jew is required to observe the full gamut of relevant biblical and rabbinic laws. Success in this endeavor is handsomely rewarded and failure severely punished. Despite the apparent bleakness of this legalism, the system licenses a divine pardon in cases where the offending individual repents. This chapter opens with a discussion of this clemency, as understood by Moses Maimonides, before moving on to a reading of a Talmudic debate that introduces an epistemic puzzle regarding repentance. With the epistemic contours of repentance thus exposed, the remainder of the chapter deals with the manner in which Timothy Williamson’s work on knowledge can undermine the cathartic value of repentance. The chapter concludes with a short note marking the implications for Christianity and Islam.


Open Theology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-255
Author(s):  
Calvin D. Ullrich

AbstractThis article seeks to distill key moments in the early work of the philosopher John D. Caputo. In considering his early investigations of Martin Heidegger, it argues that an adequate account of the trajectory of his later theological project requires a refraction through a crucial double gesture in these earlier writings. To this end, the article follows Caputo’s relationship with Heidegger where the optics of ‘overcoming metaphysics’ are laid bare (the first gesture). In these deliberations, alongside Neo-Scholastic Thomism, it is clear that what constitutes (theological) metaphysics for Caputo is any thinking which fails to think that which ‘gives’ the distinction between Being and beings. The second gesture, then, reveals ‘a certain way’ (d’une certaine maniére) of reading that allows him not only the unique possibility to re-read Scholastic Thomism by way of Meister Eckhart, but also the delimitation of the mythological construal of Being in the later Heidegger himself. The article’s methodological argument is that this transgressionary impulse gleaned from Heidegger, constitutes the ‘origins’ of Caputo’s move into the ethical-religious paradigm of deconstruction and, therefore, is also axiomatic for his later radical theology of ‘religion without religion.’


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 664-680
Author(s):  
Omer Michaelis

AbstractIn his works from the past decade, Menachem Fisch offered an analysis of a crucial distinction between two modes of rationalized transformation: an intra-framework transformation and an inter-framework one, the latter entailing a revolutionary shift of the framework itself. In this article, I analyze the attempt to produce such a framework transition in the tradition of Jewish Halakha (i.e., Jewish Law) by one of the key figures in its history, Moses Maimonides (1135–1204), and to explore how this transition was rationalized and promoted by the utilization of crisis discourse. Using discourse analysis, I analyze the introduction to Maimonides’ great legal code, Mishneh Torah, and explore the modes by which he sought to establish, install and stabilize a homogenous and centralistic legal order at the center of which will lie one – that is, his own – Halakhic book.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document