Family Ties in a New World Order

By: Jonathan Seidel

Nahmanides: bridging rationalism and mysticism: a forced foil for Maimonides 

Nahmanides is seen as the anti-maimonidean champion. He is always positioned against Maimonides. He is the mystic to Maimonides’ rationalism. Despite his mystical affiliation, it is evident that he was not as radical nor as adversarial as many paint him. He was a byproduct of his Spanish heritage yet also encouraging the spiritual prowess.

Septimus’ article openly portrays a more nuanced character of Nahmanides. Yet, he did present a newfound character that diverged from Andalusia to a mystical future. Nahmanides was heavily affected by the christianisation of Andalusia but held to his Spanish heritage. The demise of the Andalusian Jewry in the middle of the twelfth century (Maimonides moved to Egypt) ended a rich history of Jewish scholarship. This isolated the rest of Spanish Jewry especially those in Castile. They instead turned to their northern brethren in France for inspiration. Both under christian rule they relied on one another. French talmudism and Provencal kabbalah affected him but he could not erase Andalusian rationalism.   

Nahmanides participation in the Maimonidean controversy was solely diplomatic. He did not wish to see the Jewish world explode. He defended the Montpellier anti-rationalists and the Provencal rationalists. Though his move could be seen as simply tactical to ensure peace between the two sides, it also could mean much more. Another example is in the Disputation of Barcelona. The christians had given aggadah genuine accuracy and Nahmanides dismissed its literalism. Again this could go both ways: was he explaining his true belief in light of Andalusian heritage or falsifying/esoterically for polemical purposes. 

Nahmanides paid fealty to the Spanish halakhic tradition in his halakhic works. His Milchemet Hashem is a play on defending Rif from Baal HaMoer. Firstborn and challah laws mirror Alfasi’s. Many of his huddushim follow this pattern as well, non mystical and traditional. He even argues against Rabad's dream-related halakhic decision. His need to quote earlier geonic leaders was a mode of preservation. He was stooped in a christian world that seemed to upend the Andalusian tradition. The French notoriously rebuked the geonim. He felt a need not only to protect Alfasi but also the geonic legacy. Baal HaMoer was intentionally Nahmanides’ target as a French serf than an Andalusian martyr. The pillars of Spanish Jewry were not to be extinguished even with the sands of time. Nahmanides went to preserve the past despite his philosophical alterations. 

Nahmanides was not anti-philosophy he was simply anti-rational like his cousin Rabbenu Yonah who though played a key role in the controversy to the end of his life reconciled with his Andalusian heritage. Nahmanides was not the only scholar trying to balance both worlds, he just did it earlier in his life and at times more confidently. Nahmanides drew his peshat from Ibn Janah finding it in accordance with halakha a move by Ibn Ezra and not by Rashbam. His knowledge of hebrew and utility as Ramah showed was part of the earlier Spanish thinking. Despite their united philosophical divergence they still remained faithful to the legal corpus while both finding a mystical ally. 

Yet, it this to this extent that Nahmanides held to Andalusian and mirrored Maimonides. The remainder of his thought that of his biblical commentary and theological discourse was christian influence and affected his political ideology as well. His biblical commentary reminiscent of Ibn Ezra demonstrates not an Andalusian interaction but an ashkenazic inspiration. Nahmanides went further in his derashic interpretation in an exoteric divulgence of deep ideas, in a sense unveiling Ibn Ezra’s ideas was his own, not a Spanish model. Reading the text like Rashi and then adding a kabbalistic flare was not of his predecessors. Though he quelled many of the supernal ideas, it was insufficient in many of his mythical associations. He did not reject philosophy nor accepted the supernal structure but he did accept the celestial creations.

His affiliation went further than the early Tosafists. His mystical affinity translated much of the allegorical literalism into realistic fashion. Witchcraft and sorcery were real to him and he railed against Maimonides for observing them. Magic and necromancy are intertwined with spirituality. Though the Tosafists themselves did not ascribe to any mysticism, the Rhenish pieties also known as hasidei ashkenaz were incredibly influential. Nahmanides even quotes Yehuda HaChasid’s opinion over Rabbenu Tam. He even recounts a story of learned wisdom from the pietists. It was the rhenish pietists who exploited the readiness of religious articulation, Nahmanides’ talmudism was capprent in applying his allegorical knowledge to his mystical philosophy. 

His mystical association has political measures as well. He followed in the ashkenazi model of proto-daas torah and placed the sage above all. With infinite power to mould the law. The sage’s authority allows textual manipulation through the divine lens. The sage has a some god-given gift to preach to the people. A hierarchical aristocracy of sorts that landed them mosaic function. Charismatic leadership was the foremost quality which Nahmanides lent to each sage. Mistakes were more less or implausible. The public punishment of the rebellious elder presents the court’s hegemony. The sage is the ultimate authority. 

Nahmanides, like Rabbenu Yonah could not fully accept their crusades. Nahmanides though chastised Ibn Ezra’s esoteric secrets wrote at the end of the intro to his biblical commentary that the secrets can only be learned orally. Nahmanides’ mysticism died with him. His school was incredibly influential but not his mysticism. Ritva nor Rashba engaged in such theological discourse. They were massive talmudists like their teacher and halakhic giants. His grand students Ran and Hasdai criticised the Kabbalistic motive and promoted anti-rational philosophies unconnected to the mystical layer. 

His political philosophy was passed down to his students even his mysticism was not. This was more a mystical expansion of the French doctrines. Ran and Sefer HaChinuch stenches court authority to contemporary sages. They also extend the rebellion elder to rejecting rabbinic decisions. The notion of “lo tasur” followed through the Nahmanidean school. He drew from the French and the mystic association remained strong in his halakhic legacy to his students. The empowerment of post-maimonidean Spanish Jewry sparked a newfound. The court is the supreme model and infused incredible authority within the rabbinate, a sentiment still found today. 

Nahmanides disagreed with Miamonides’ rationalism but was pro philosophy and pro science. Nahmanides’ view is reminiscent of Kuzari’s exoteric flavour. He did quote him on occasion but also disagreed. His theory of miracles is suspect to naturalisation. His literary style is intriguing bridging his Kabbala and his Andalusian heritage. He even defers to greek science in his commentary. As much as he diverted from Andalusian scientific readings, he converted some his theosophical ideology into scientific congruency. He saw the opposite as the Torah teaching science. Nahmanides was an empiricist more than Halevi. His empiricism enabled a wider variety including paranormal creatures. He connected science and spirituality. 

Nahmanides anti-rationalism did not lend to much optimism in the Kabbalistic world. His mystical reservations and limitations endured criticism from later scholars. Meir ibn Gabbai attacked Nahmanides lack of celestial manifestation. Nahmanides references mystical ideas usually afterwards  as an additional derashic manner, succeeding his natural model. The natural order expanded to the spiritual. For him the rational proofs are too restrictive. There is more out there than what is rationally evidenced. His expanded universe is the Torah’s logic. He is not Maimonides’ foil as much as Crescas is but his disagreements do paint a more sceptical intellectual picture than Maimonides’ certainty. His Andalusian   heritage ddi attribute to less hostile behaviour and more understanding position.