Legal Hegemony

By: Jonathan Seidel

Much of the return to Maimonides has also seen a shift in his ideology from legal to to theological to political. Beginning with Pines and Wolfson this trend has encompassed the past century of Maimonidean thought. 

Strauss’ political philosophy began this trend in the mid last century. His tenure as an A rated political philosopher ushered in his version of reading Maimonides. Maimonides wrote esoterically hiding his true theological-political opinions. Most recently Hartman engaged in this style using Maimonides to represent a new political zionism in Israel. Maimonides is seen as a paragon for modern religiosity and religious life in the land. 

Maimonides’ political philosophy is an interesting subject. He despised the rabbinic surge of power. While, the tosafists diminished the power of the secular leader, he wished to empower them. The rabbi was not supposed to be in charge. The geonic innovation of gradually absorbing power denigrated any outside authority. This culminated in the daas torah ideology. The rabbis was of the greatest wisdom. The Torah hierarchy persisted and preyed on the laymen as peasants. Instead of a secular authority ordering with his knowledge of the world, the enclosed rabbis devised solutions through spiritual prowess. The rabbinic mind combined the division Maimonides intended to be separated. The anti-maimonideans became their own prophetic sages. They were the end all be all of the law and order. Unlike the biblical order which divided in the priesthood, kingship, prophet and judge. Maimonides totalitarian fears came true. 

Maimonides true to his lexicography, shapes his political compass similar to the bible. Though there is no royalty, he associates the prophet with political leadership. The prophet in his mind, is a perfected character knowledgeable of the world living amongst the masses. He is the intellectual critic. His tangible knowledge is critical for the community’s issues and goals. The religious leader is concerned with ritualistic expression not social needs. The prophet’s judgement rests on ethics and commerce. He surveys the day to day life of the individual beyond the religiosity. 

The essence of political authority is the law. For Maimonides, law superseded any individual. All were indebted to following the law. His aversion to geonic innovation devalued their legislative ability. Their court was subservient to the talmudic law. The sage is the mere interpreter of the law, the prophet is the intellectually connected to both God and the masses. He is not playing theoretical games but practical consequences. The law is the centre of Judaism and abrogating it or manipulating it defies the validity of religious life. The law stands above the community as the primal mode of integration and expression. The law equalises everyone as a member of the tribe. The political stability rides on habituate order. 

Maimonides prophet supremacy flows into the kingship. The king for Maimonides is a very limited halakhic norm. He is appointed by the prophet and possesses an exclusive executive function to enforce laws and protect the people. The king like everyone else is subordinate to the law. He must even carry around a Torah scroll to remind him of his place. Unlike Islamic platonism which highlighted the philosopher king as the lawgiving prophet (aka Moses in the Jewish tradition), Maimonides agreed with the lofty prophetic function but still upheld a monarchical system. Yet he opposed the islamic scheme due to his ‘separation of powers’. The prophet is both the teacher and the preacher. The prophet is a central piece to the political order but he is not the ruler. The prophet is endowed with divine emanation to judge the people. He follows the law as given. Even Moses is simply not a king, he a prophet and leader but not a king.

The maimonidean political basis draws from the submission to the law. The law is the ultimate fidelity to society. The king acts as political stability and the prophet as ethical stability. The necessity of the prophet was to further educate and ensure the communal loyalty to tradition. The renewed interest in Maimonides political philosophy provided a new perspective of his thinking but in many ways interlinked much of his legal philosophy into politics. Maimonides’ politics were unique in his combination of both platonic and aristotelean themes. Yet, for Maimonides, traditional systems were operable, the mechanics just needed to be greased ever so often.