Professional Documents
Culture Documents
EnlightenIllent of
SoloIllon MaiInon
Judaism) Heresy) and Philosophy
Abraham P. Sacher
STANFORD, CALIFORNIA
2006
Introduction Solomon Maimon
"He is one of the ra\vest of Polish Jews."
Marcus Herz in a letter
to Immanuel lunt
was witnessing the defection ofhis nl0st gifted students and expositors,
Reinhold among them. The passage smacks as nluch of academic
gamesmanship as it does of Enlightenlnent anti-Judaism. Nonetheless,
the terms with which I(ant dismisses Maimon are revealing. He is an in-
trusive Jew whose work is unoriginal (perhaps even parasitic) and close
to unintelligible. 13
Maimon's German philosophical writing did betray its Polish-Yiddish
origins, and his exegetical, self-reflexive nlanner of presentation was
strikingly different from the expository prose of the Aufklarung philos-
ophers vvhose ranks he aspired to jOil1. In fact, as I(ant lUlew, Reinhold
had already adnlinistered a scathing reproof to Main10n in an extraordi-
narily heated exchange of philosophical letters, in which he suggested
more than once that Mainl0n ought to improve his literary skills before
publishing anything furt11er. Mainl0n not only ignored the suggestion
bllt, in a characteristic breach of literary etiqllette, published the
exc11ange without Reinhold's perlnission in I793. 14
Herz's description of Maimon as "raw," together with IZant's sneer
and Reinhold's suggestion, is, of course, an example of now familiar
attempts to exclude an llnruly other, no nlatter how clever, from the
public sphere of enlightened European discourse. One way to n1ark the
beginnings of Ellropean Jewish modernity, however, is to note that
Main10n became an influential Gerlnan philosopher 110netheless. An-
other is that Maimon concurred, however ambivalently, with Herz in
his estimation of his own uncultivated "rawness" and the barbarity of
his origins in Lithuanian rabbinic culture. Maimon was both spectacll-
larly successful at entering the highest reaches of European discourse
and self-consciously unsuccessful at doing so as anything but an odd
and exotic Jew.
Maimon, his patrons, and his readers viewed his life and accomplish-
ments as both an inspiring and a cautionary tale of what a Polish Jew
nlight achieve in moving from the barbarism of Eastern European Jew-
ish culture to Western enlightenment. However, there was always a kind
of paradox or nlystification involved in this thought, which is epito-
mized in Maimon's remark to IZant that he had grown IIp "in the woods
of Lithuania." Although it is true that Maimon grew up in the house-
SOlOlTIOn MailTIOn 5
Ehe passage repays close scrutiny. Maimon would seem to admit the
crude animality of his language and manners, as well as the exotic nov-
lelty ofhis performance in his matter-of-fact acceptance ofHerz's recep-
tion of him as like "a dog or a starling ,vho has been taught to speak a
few words." Nonetheless, he slyly underlines his intellectual superiority
over Herz by contrasting his own rational thoughts with the merely
imaginative ones of his interlocutor. In doing so, Maimon employs the
technical terms of contemporary faculty psychology, imagination, and
understanding, which he makes clear elsew11ere in the autobiography he
understands in the light of both IZantian and MailTIonidean doctrine.
Indeed, in the narrative that precedes this incident, Maimon has al-
ready shown that his easy conceptual mastery of Enlightenment topics
was due not only to his native genius (something he never underesti-
mated) but also to his imlTIersion in the world of premodern Jewish
thought. Maimon may even have been undermining this picture ofhim-
self as "a talking anin1al" (redendes Tier) in the very phrase with which
he asserts it. If we literally translate this phrase back into Hebrew
(Maimon's la11guage of primary literary and philosophical literacy), it
becomes hai ha-medaber, which is the medieval Aristotelian designation
of man as the rational or speaking anima1. 22 Such bilingllal pllns and
allusions were very much a part of Maimon's distinctive literary style.
A crllder example of both Maimon's sly allusiveness and the aggres-
sion with which he confronted enlightened German Jews can be found
in his account of his break with the great exemplar of German-
Jewish Enlightenment, Moses Mendelssohn, in the early 1780s. When
Me11delssohn remonstrated with him for his dissolute and scattered life,
Maimon replied that since morality can prescribe only means to given
ends but not the ends then1selves, the conduct ofone's life is really a mat-
ter oftaste. "We are all," he reports himselfas saying, "Epicureans" (lfTir
sind aIle Epikuraer).23
Althollgh the term "Epicurean" was a term of learned abuse in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries-and the German reader migl1t
have registered it as such-it could also have been read as a casual clas-
sicism between philosophers. But Maimon, who italicized the phrase,
meant something mllch more aggressive, with a real idiomatic punch. In
both rabbinic Hebrew and Yiddish, the word Epicurean, or apiqores, is
8 Introduction
philosophy, and although Maimon was far closer to the concerns ofsuch
scholasticism than IZant (or even the "German Aquinas," Christian
Wolff), they were not as alien to either the technical philosophical
concerns or the radical anticlerical spirit of the Enlightenment as its
expo11ents often liked to think.
IZant's letter to Herz about Maimon contained more than the praise
quoted at the outset. It also incillded a fairly detailed response to Mai-
mon's proposed revision of the critical philosophy, which IZant called
"Spinozism." This descriptio!1 of Maimon's philosophy has, at least, a
triple significance.
In the first place, as a technical matter, Maimon's representation of
human understanding as a limited reflection ofa divine intellect in which
sensibility and understanding are ultin1ately unified is Spinozistic, al-
though, as we shall see, it also has philosophical roots extending well
before Spinoza in Inedieval Hebrew philosophy (roots that to some ex-
tent Spinoza's doctrines shared).27 1'Jonetheless, Maimon's doctrines
were also an attempt to resolve genuine philosophical tensions in IZant's
systen1, and they even had systen1atic and textual bases within IZant's
Critique ofPure Reason. Moreover, they would seem to anticipate some
of the ideas of the Critique ofJudgment, on which IZant was working
when he received Maimon's manuscript, as well as those oflater German
Idealism. 28
However, the attribution ofSpinozism was never, or even primarily,
a simple philosophical description in IZant's intellectual context. The so-
called "Pantheism Controversy" (Pantheismusstreit) over whether
Mendelssohn's great friend Gotthold Ephraim Lessing had been a secret
Spinozist was, along with the reception ofIZant's philosophy, at the very
center ofthe German Enlightenment struggle over the authority ofrea-
son in the 1780s. 29 In this context, Spi110zism was never a compliment.
It meant that one had taken reason beyond its acceptable lin1its with
dangerous and untenable resllits. To use IZant's own preferred termi-
nology, such a person had lost his proper bearings, or the correct "ori-
entation in thinking." 30 Finally, Maimon was, as both his and Herz's
cover letters to I(ant made clear, a disside11t Jew, who had abandoned the
traditional Judaism in which he was raised. In 1789, Spinoza was n0J:JT~~ __
10 Introduction
enment. "Our age," IZant wrote, "is, in especial degree, the age ofcriti-
cisn1 [I(ritik ] and to criticism everything must sllbmit." 42
The result ofthis criticism, to be preemptively brief(I attend to S01l1e
of the details later), is IZant's "Copernican Revolution," which was sup-
posed to demonstrate that the world l1ecessarily has the structure that it
does because finite Ininds such as ours could not conceive it otherwise.
The epistemological slLbject is thus not merely the passive recipient of
the object ofhis knowledge but rather "spontaneously" and freely takes
up that which is "given" to him in empirical experience and makes it
into an object of knowledge. Such a spontaneous subject necessarily
legislates for itself the conditions (space, tin1e, and the categories of
understanding) under which an object can be known.
The cogency and virtues ofIZant's transcendental idealism are not at
issue for the moment; rather, what should be 110ted is their resonance
with Enlightenment ideals, not only of criticism but also of radical au-
tonomy. Indeed, precisely these twin ideals are echoed at the cultural
level in IZant's famous defil1ition of Enlightenment as "mankind's exit
from its self-incurred immaturity." The consequent challenge to "dare
to know" should be understood precisely as a call to bring cultural and
historical "givens" before the bar of reason, in a way analogous to that
in which the contents of perception must submit to the concepts of
understanding:
Sapere aude! 'Have the courage to use your own understanding!' is
thus the motto of the enlightenn1ent.... If I have a book that has
understanding for me, a pastor who has a conscience for me, a doctor
who judges my diet ... I have no need to think. 43
The dicta given by books, pastors, doctors, and tradition generally are
only authoritative insofar as one makes then1 so. To accept them as an
external, heteronomous authority is not so much an abdication ofone's
self-legislative abilities (strictly speaking an impossibility) as a deluded,
unconscious use of them.
Part of the sociohistorical significance of IZant's philosophy, then, is
in its rigorolls working through of the consequences of radical human
autonomy at every level of discourse. Freedom was, as Ernst Cassirer
once remarked, "always really IZant's n1ain problem." 44 This is so down
14 Introduction
Mendelssohn and Heine, at the beginning of the Jewish entry into Ger-
man literature. Unlike Mendelssohn and like Heine, he thematized his
cilltural otherness, flaunted it, and made it a thing of comedy. Like
Mendelssohn (only n10re so) and unlike Hei11e, Maimon was in fact a
product ofthe distinctive literary, intellectual, and religious traditions of
Jewish culture. He is, in an in1portant sense, one of the last figures to
whon1 the traditional tern1 heretic, or apiqores, literally applies.
Berlin and elsewhere. Since the chronology of MailTIOn'S life is not ,vell
known, Chapter I also provides the reader with the biographical and
historicallu10wledge necessary for the detailed interpretive readings of
the following chapters.
In Chapter 2, I locate the center of Maimon's philosophical thought
in the philosophical and theological perfectionislTI first articulated in his
unpublished Hebrew manuscript, Hesheq Shelomo. Along the lines indi-
cated already, I discuss the significance of this perfectionism for an un-
derstanding of the thollght of the early Haskala and its dialogue, or
debate, with Hasidism and the Mitnaged party of rabbinic traditional-
ism. In Chapter 3, I show how Maimon employed the tools and terms of
this medieval philosophical perfectio11ism in his i11flllential revision of
I(antian Idealism in the face of his own skeptical challenge. These two
chapters can also be read as a kind of microhistory ofideas that trace, in
the work ofa single thinker, the transforn1ation ofthe medieval religious
and philosophical ideal of union (devequt) with the divine mind into
the German Romantic ideal of a World Soul. As I argue throughout,
however, these technical arguments have a wider cultllral and literary
resonance as well as an internal philosophical logic. The transition from
active intellect to World Soul is paralleled by the transition from the Mai-
monidean ideal of intellectllal perfection, or shelemut ha-nefesh, to. the
German Enlightenment ideal of Bildung. Neither of these transitions,
however, was free of irony or, indeed, ever really completed.
In Chapter 4, I present my i11terpretation of Maimon's autobio-
graphical self-invention as underwritten by Maimonidean perfection-
ism. In effect, Maimon wrote a Bildungsroman (or Bildungsgeschichte
to be precise) in which German Bildung is not really the reigning ideal.
In this chapter, I also show the extent to which Maimon's incon1plete
revolt against the rabbinic textual practices of commentary and super-
commentary was central to his literary style and persona. I close this
chapter with a thorough exegesis of the puzzling and hitherto untrans-
lated allegory with which MailTIOn ends his autobiography. This allegory
about the history of philosopl1Y, human perfection, and death is, in
many ways, the epitome of Maimon's writing. It is cryptic, comic (even
buffoonish), and extraordinarily learned. As I will show, in addition to
the overt references to the history ofphilosophy, it calls on passages from
18 Introduction
both the Guide ofthe Perplexed and the Zohar and illvites serious com-
parison to passages from the work of such younger contemporaries as
G. V\l. F. Hegel, on the one hand, and Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav on
the other.
In Chapter 5, I sketch the story of Maimon's literary afterlife as a
figure in and an influence on novels, philosophical works, historical
narratives, and the Jewish popular imagination. Finally, in a brief con-
cluding chapter, I discuss ways in which Maimon's career serves as an
instructive (if not, perhaps, decisive) coullterexample to several con-
verging arguments about the llature of the Haskala, the origins of
radical enlightenment, and the possibilities of Jewish thought.
In each of these chapters, I have often relied for both interpretive
and cOlltextual matters on the work of several generations of previous
scholars of what the first such writer, Maimon's friend and memoirist
Sabbattia Wolff, called "Maimoniana."49 What is especially new is the
picture I try to provide of how Maimon's works in two langllages and
several genres fit together as the products of all individual life, with a
set of central concerns and tensions. I further argue that these concerns
also reflect neglected, or incompletely understood, aspects of the
historical transformations through which Maimon lived.
I(enneth Schmitz has eloqllently argued for the importance of
historical studies of philosophers that respect the individuality, even
idiosyncrasy, of their arguments and ideas. He writes:
The history of philosophy starts from a more concrete base [than the
history of ideas], and its integers are neither facts nor ideas but per-
sons. Ideas do not live a free life of their own, but are taken up rather
into the personal thought of a philosopher and suffused with the en-
ergy of his own mind and personality.... More needs to be said
about how the hidden possibilities within ideas and new interrelation-
ships among them are disclosed in the mediunl of actual philosophical
discourse. 50
To this, I would only add that philosophers do not lead "free lives
of their own" either; they live in particular cultures with distinctive
patterns of life and vocabularies. They are, ethereal occupation
notwithstanding, "natives" of somewhere. In tracing the connections
Solomon Main10n 19
the house as quickly as possible, and the whole fan1ily would have
tilue to take refuge in the neighboring woods.... This sort of life
lasted for son1e generations. 6
Jews of the West-or rather i11 the regional territory of bourgeois en-
lightenment."6o It is an inge11ious suggestion, and there is little doubt
that here, as elsewhere, Maimon is doing more than merely reporting an
incident in his life, but it seelns to me that the symbolism and allusions
ofthis passage lie elsewhere. In writing his autobiography, Main10n was
influenced by his friend and editor I(arl Philipp Moritz's autobiograph-
ical novel about his liberatioI1 from German Pietism, Anton Reiser. At a
crucial moment in that account, the protagonist is described as being
brought to the point of suicide by a crisis of identity:
The fact that he always had to be himself and could never be anyone
else . . . gradually brought him to a degree of despair that led hilTI to
the banks of the river that flowed through part of the city, to a place
where there was no protective railing.
An acute critic has pointed out that this incident was a version of the
Pietist self-annihilation through union with God. 61 Maimon, who, as
I will show in Chapter 4, evokes related themes of human perfection
through divine union in his comical attempt at conversion, may well
have had this passage in mi11d. But Maimon's description of his failed
suicide should probably also be taken as another one of his sly in-group
jokes: Purim is precisely the one Jewish holiday whose carnivalesqlle cel-
ebration turns on sllrprising reversals. In early modern Ashkenazi com-
munities, the biblical phrase "the opposite happened" (Esther 9: I) was
taken as a kind ofritual imperative for drunkenness, cross-dressing, role
reversals, and other acts ofsymbolic transgression on Purim. 62 Mainlon's
story ofhis feet refusing to follow the directions ofhis head wOll1d seen1
to be in the same spirit. Moreover, his easy allusion to this set oftexts and
cultural practices underlines the extent to which his subsequent failed
conversion (in which, one might say, his l1ead refused to follow his feet)
was also an attempted suicide.
In Hamburg, Maimon's fortunes were saved by yet another patron,
who offered to pay his tuition as an irregular adult student (he was
abollt 31) at the liberal Gymnasium Christianeum in nearby Altona.
Maimon's description of his two years in the gymnasium is closest in
tone and language to that of his two years as a philosophical talmid
hakham in Posen. Here, too, he was far froin any family obligations,
36 Chapter One
Main10n was not, in fact, quite as far from the life he had left behind in
Lithuania as he had hoped when he changed his name in Altona. A
message from his wife, who had heard of his whereabouts, spurred
Raphael IZohen, now chief rabbi of the triple community of Hamburg,
Altona, and Wandsbeck, to request al1 interview with Maimon. Al-
though Maimon coyly omits the n1ention of IZohen's name here and
throughout the alltobiography, he expected his contemporary Jewish
readers to recognize the rabbi of the prestigious community, if not,
perhaps, the extent of his lifelong association with him. IZohen was a
well-known scourge of heretics who rlded his community with a heavy
hand. He was a famously frequent user of the rabbinic ban of herem, or
Main10n's Life and "Life History" 37
history, even though they are easier than the deep sciences they have
studied, since nothing is written about them in Hebrew. 72
It was precisely the lack of "depth" ofsuch subjects that dissuaded Mai-
luon from continuing with the commission as a translation ofBasnage.
He wrote to his patrons that such works would offend orthodox sensi-
bilities too much, on the one hand, ,vithout exciting sufficient intel-
lectual stimulation for sharp Polish Talmudists on the other. One such
Taln1udist in question might have been Mailuon hin1self. It is hard to
imagine Main10n laboring for very long over Basnage's n1any volumes.
In addition to the obligatory pious assumption that the Jevvs would
eventually convert, Basnage's history was credulous on various points
on which Maimon was already a skeptic, including the early rabbinic
composition of the Zohar and Maimonides' actual theological posi-
tions. Basnage also repeatedly condemned his conten1porary Spinoza
as a damnable heretic in terms that Maimon is not likely to have been
interested in reproducing for his Polish brethren. 73
Instead, Main10n proposed to write a Hebrew algebra textbook. The
book would begin with self-evident propositions and lead the reader
into higher mathematics, thus making it both more "suitable for the de-
velopment of the mind" and less offensive to religiolls sensibilities than
the other works. 74 Apparently, neither Maimon nor his patrons knew
that another contemporary Lithuania11 Jew had already published such
a work, a translation of an English textbook of algebra and trigonome-
try in 1783.75 In any event, Maimon's proposal was approved, and he
wrote the textbook "using the Latin work by Wolff as its basis." How-
ever, when the book was finished and Maimon requested payment,
his erstwhile patrons complained that it was too long, typograpl1ically
complicated, and impractical to pri11t. Eventually Mendelssohn resolved
the dispute by suggesting that Maimon take up a subscription for the
work, including but not liluited to his principal patrons. Maimon re-
ports that "Mendelssohn and the other enlightened Jews of Berlin sub-
scribed," but the work was never published, leaving both Maimon and
his patrons bitter. 76
The dispute may have had as much to do with Maimon and his pa-
trons' differing views of his intellectual role as it did with the specific
4-0 Chapter One
Shortly after the dispute, Maimon decided yet again that his positio11
in Berlin was untenable, and he moved to Breslau in 1786. In Breslau,
Maimon was able to enter into the life of enlightened intellectual ex-
change (as well as mild debauchery) more confidently than he ever had
before, although his German was still imperfect. He tutored the chil-
dren of the wealthy Maskil Aaron Zadig in Hebrew, n1athematics, and
physics, attended medical lectures, befriended some of the more en-
lightened teachers at the Jesuits College, and frequented the coffee-
hOllses and taverns with "a short, round man of enlightened mind and
cheerful disposition," named Hien1a11n Lisse. 81
In tutoring for Zadig, Maimon reports himselfas declining to replace
the traditional Polish-Jewish tutor whom they l1ad already engaged.
Maimon's Life and "Life History" 41
had returned to Berlin. This may well have been true, for Maimon writes
with the genuine enthusiasm of someone to whom a new intellectual
world has been revealed, and his interest and excitement reflect the re-
newed attention that IZant's difficult work began to receive at the end of
the decade. Nonetheless, Maimon may also have been exaggerating his
lack of familiarity with the Critique. In the first place, his sometime pa-
tron Marcus Herz had been I(ant's student, his philosophical corre-
spondent, a11d among his first readers. Second, although Mendelssohn
wrote that he no longer had the i11tellectual stamina to read the first Cri-
tique, his Morgenstunden (1785), which Maimon had already translated
into Hebrew, carried on a covert argument with IZa11t's transcendental
idealism, which an astllte philosophical reader such as Maimon cannot
have failed to miss.9 2 Finally, as noted, Maimon had sought out the com-
pany and patronage of the philosopher Christian Garve and his circle in
Breslau. Garve had been the at-first anonymous allthor of the first and
most controversial review of the Critique, in 1782, which provoked an
extended controversy and a massive response from IZant in the form of
his Prologomena to Any Future Metaphysics (1783).93 It is hard to inlag-
ine, then, that Maimon was quite as innocent of the details of the Criti-
cal Philosophy before arriving in Berli11, and his association with Garve,
whom IZant regarded as an empiricist enen1Y, n1ay have given him added
reason to profess such innocence.
anonymous reading public. In this it also differs from the only other
prominent example of eighteenth-century Ashkenazi self-narrative,
Rabbi Jacob Elnden's Megillat Sefer. 101 Elnden's work is far too self-
absorbed to truly count as either an ethical will or a set of memoirs, but
it was never n1eant for publication. 11oreover, it begins vvith a recitation
ofthe names ofEmden's forefathers, whose purpose seems to be to em-
bed Emden within a larger fan1ily narrative. "They were a holy seed," he
writes, "men ofdiscernn1ent and purity amidst times ofdecrees and de-
struction.... [They] were among the great leaders ofAshkenaz in ear-
lier times." 102 The book then turns to a long biographical account of
Emden's father, whose life, he claims, set the pattern for his own. The
contrast with Mendelssohn's determination to distance himselffrom his
father and grandfather's traditional irrationality could not be clearer.
Another point to make about each of these works is that they were
vvritten in a Jewish language: in Gluckel and Ber's case, Yiddish; in En1-
den's, Hebrew. Neither book was published, or even prepared for pub-
lication, during their authors' lifetimes. Indeed, each of these books is
addressed, at least ostensibly, to the author's heirs and was preserved
within the family until published by scholars at the turn of this cen-
tury.103 As such, they belong in many respects to the medieval Hebrew
genre of the ethical will, which was left for the writer's heirs as an act of
religious and moral instruction. 104 Despite the fact that these works and
others like thein are often discussed together with Maimon's autobiog-
raphy, it is not irrelevant to point out that Maimon himself could not
have read them, or even known of their existence. Although such docu-
n1ents afford the reader precious access to the lives ofearly modern Jews,
they were still written in a context in which the primary ful1ction ofsuch
writing was still cultural transmission within a family, rather than a
presentation of self.
For Maimon, 1793 and 1794 were years of prodigious activity. He
published a major essay, Uber die Progressen der Philosophie (1793); a
book proposing a new transcendental logic, versuch einer neuen Logik
oder Theorie des Denkens (1794); and three commentaries on the works
of other philosophers: Die JCathegorien des Aristoteles (1794), a critical
commentary on Aristotle's Categories that further elaborated Maimon's
Maimon's Life and "Life History" 4-7
that Maimon Inight have known from David Veit or Rahel Varnhagen. lo9
There seen1S to have been a briefflurry ofinterest on Goethe's part, but
nothii1g n10re, and Maimon never visited Weimar.
In 1795, Maimon found his final, and perhaps lnost generous patron, a
free-thinking young count named Adolf Kalkrellth, who invited him to
live with him in his Berlin residence and, later, to n10ve to his estate in
Niegersdorf, Silesia, where Maimon stayed for the rest ofhis life. In 1797,
Main10n published his final major work, J(ritische Unterschungen iiber
menschlichen Geist oder das hijhere Erkenntnis und Willensvermijgen,
which was an atten1pt to synthesize his earlier work and give systen1atic
forln to his idiosyncratic Idealism, which we could call a Maimonidean
revision ofIZant. l1o The five years spent in Count IZalkreuth's residence
in Silesia was probably the longest period in Maimon's adult life in which
he stayed in one place, and at least one writer depicts him as having lived
his last years in triumph over his petty detractors in Berlin. Other ac-
counts have hin11iving his final years in a drunken stupor, his intellectual
creativity spent. Neither would seem to be the case. In fact, he had ar-
ticles in press at the time ofhis death and was plotting a return to Berlin,
which he had always regarded as the polestar ofhis intellectual life. Only
a few months before his death, in a letter to his fellow Kantian and some-
time patron, Lazarus Bendavid, MailTIOn wrote:
Do SaInething that I might come back to Berlin; what this depends
on you can figure out by yourself. Maybe we can undertake sOITlething
together. Speak about it with Mr. Levi, or even better with Madame
Levi.!ll
This letter and another he wrote to Bendavid in the same year show
Maimon in full intellectual form, discussing the nature of philosophy,
defending Fichte against the attacks of Kant, and tweaking Bendavid
for a mistake in a published mathematical proof. In an irritated letter
to a publisher, written at about the same time, he complained about
the failure to publish his article and promised further work that would,
among other things, explain "das Absolut" once and for all.
Solomon Maimon died in Siegersdorf on Noven1ber 22, 1800. The
date of Main10n's death is known because a local Protestant clergyman,
Main10n's Life and "Life History" 49
J.C. Tscheggey, visited hin1 during the last weeks of his life to discuss
n1atters of philosophy and religion and published a memoir of their
c011versations shortly after Maimon died. It is impossible to say how ac-
curately Tscheggey depicted his interchanges with Maimon. Certainly,
they do not read as the fluid record of actual conversation. On the
other hand, the conversations do accurately reflect MaitTIon's philo-
sophical preoccupations. This, according to Tscheggey, is Maimon's
deathbed conversation:
T: I an1 sorry to find you so ill today.
M: There will perhaps be some improvement yet.
T: You look so ill that I am doubtful of your recovery.
M: What does it matter after all? When I aill dead, I aill gone.
T: How can you say that, dear friend? Your n1ind, which aillong the
most unfavorable of circumstances soared to ever higher attain-
ments' which bore such fair flowers and fruits-shall it be trodden
in the dust along with the poor covering in which it has been
clothed? Do you not at this moment feel that there is something in
you which is not body, not matter, not subject to the conditions of
space and time?
M: Ach, these are beautiful dreams and hopes [sehijne Traume und
HoffnungenJ .
T: Which will surely be fulfilled .... You maintained not long ago that
here we cannot reach above mere legality. Let this be admitted. Now,
perhaps, you are about to pass over soon into a condition in which
you will rise to the state of true morality, since you and all ofus have
a natural capacity for it. Wouldn't you wish to come into the society
of one WhOlll you honored as much as Mendelssohn?
M: Oy me! I have been a foolish man, the most foolish among the
foolish-and how earnestly I wished otherwise!
T: This is proof that you are not yet in complete accord with your
unbelief. No you will not all die. Your spirit will surely live on.
M: SO far as mere faith and hope are concerned, I can go a good way.
But what does that help us?
T: It helps us at least to peace.
M: I am at peace. [feh bin ruh~.J 112
Both the title of Maimon's first book and llis alltobiographical descrip-
tion evoke its central concern, the nature of human cognition and the
.human telos, with n10re precision than nl0st of his readers were likely to
notice. l-'he use of the Hebrew term hesheq in this sense derives from
the cognate Arabic terln for desire, ishk, which was used by Ibn Sina
(Avicenna), Maimonides, and others to describe philosophical eros, the
desire for IG10wledge. 23 Such a desire is consllmmated in intellectllal per-
fection, a complete IG10wledge, wllich can be had only through llnion,
or devequt, with the divine mind, or active intellect. In the technical ter-
minology ofmedieval Hebrew philosophy, to which the Hesheq Shelomo
was a belated addition, this perfection is terlned shelemut, for which the
German Vollkomenheit is Maimon's consistent translation. 24
Indeed, Mainl0n begins the Hesheq Shelomo on just tllisAristotelian
note. He writes:
When we investigate the true purpose of the species man, that pur-
pose being one of the four causes which account for all existents,
[we will find that] lmowledge of this purpose is very beneficial for the
conduct of nlan. For when the purpose is lUlown we can define and
represent the actions which will necessarily bring one to that purpose,
as is explained in The Book of Virtues [i.e., Aristotle's Ethics].25
Thus, in the late 1770S, we find Maimon framing the questions ofethics
and politics in pllrely medieval Aristotelian terms as the question of
what the final cause, or telos (for which Maimon's takhlit is, again, the
precise translation in scholastic Hebrew), of man is. Indeed, it is worth
noting that Aristotle's Ethics is the first authority that MaimOll cites. 26
Although Aristotle had long been supplanted as the leading philo-
sophical authority in the rest of Europe, he still stood at the head of
the only philosophical tradition available to an eighteenth-century
Hebrew reader.
60 Chapter Two
In the pages that follow, Maimon quotes his master's brief exposition
of man's unique purpose as just such knowledge, and the purpose of
both the natural and social world (includi11g its innumerable fools) as en-
abling the existence of such a "perfect man, who possesses all wisdom
and [good] deeds." 31 According to the interpretation of Main10nides
favored by Maimon, bodily health, political well-being, and even ethical
virtue are all merely instrun1ental goods that create the conditions for
the intellectual perfection of the philosopher. 32 Such extraordinary in-
tellectual elitism had, for Maimon, the great advantage of counterbal-
ancing the Mitnaged ideology of Talmudism while fulfilling an analo-
gOllS need. The i11tellectual virtuoso was still the most important person
62 Chapter Two
in society under this scheme, but that person was a philosopher, not a
Talmid Hakham.
Toward the end of this introductory essay, Maimon makes this con-
trast explicit. He argues that all the parties of Jewish intellectual life
agree that the telos ofman is some sort ofintellectual or spiritual perfec-
tion. However, they differ radically as to w11at that perfection consists in.
The disputants can be divided into three principal camps. The first and
largest party is that of the Talmudists, or lomdim, who hold that
the sole end of an Israelite man is to toil constantly in God's Written
and Oral Torah, to be careful about its words to the best of his ability
and carefully fulfill all of its comn1andments in order to acquire [life]
in this world and the world to come. 33
Maimon quickly adds that most Tahnudists actually disdain the Stlldy of
the Bible, or written Torah, as well as the Hebrew gran1111ar necessary to
understand it properly and reserve all of their intellectual energy for the
study of oral Torah. Even within the pages of the Talmlld, such lomdim
focus only on the exoteric legal discussions, ignoring the scattered
Midrashim, which contain hidden p11ilosophical truths. 34 Indeed, those
who especially pride themselves on their Talmudic sharpness (Mainl0n
uses the untranslatable Hebrew adjective harif, which literally means
hot or pungent) hold that such ability and biblical or Aggadic study are
mutually exclusive. Moreover, they accuse those who enlploy philolog-
ical or philosophical tools in their Stlldy with rank heresy (apiqorsut). 35
The second party consists of the IZabbalists, who recognize that the
Bible and rabbinic lore contain hidden metaphysical truths and that their
attainment is the ultimate object of human life. However, as Maimon
goes on to argue in detail in Livnat ha-Sapir, they lose themselves in a
dream world of strange symbols, whose meaning has become opaque
even to them. 36 In Livnat ha-Sapir, Maimol1 writes:
Their words are sealed and are like the words within sealed books, to
which a literate person must respond "I cannot since it is sealed" they
are like a dream without interpretation. 37
Insofar as one can assign any meaning at all to silch discussions of
Creation (.LMaJaseh Bereshit) and the Godhead (MaJaseh Merkavah),
Maimon's Medieval Desire: The Hesheq Shelomo 63
This ideal of intellectual perfection and the ternls, tropes, and argu-
ments associated with it persisted in Maimon's later work, just as, one
is tempted to say, he carried the physical manuscript of the Hesheq
Shelomo manuscript with him for the rest of his life. But this is not quite
right, because one of the features ofMaimon's later writillgs that makes
them so interesting is the way in which these tropes of medieval He-
brew thought are transfornled. They are fought with, ironized, trans-
lated, and secularized in his autobiography, his maskilic commentary to
the Guide, and his post-IZantian philosophical writings. However, be-
fore tllrning to these developments, we lnust understand the medieval
Aristotelian picture of perfection as Maimon received it. The Aris-
totelian mechanism of perfect knowledge was a kind of activation of
the potential of the passive human intellect (sekhel ha-koach) through
the divine active intellect (sekhel ha-poal), which is in a continual and
perfect state of thought. This dark doctrine was central to the medieval
Aristotelian tradition, and although I have alluded to it more than
once, it is important to llnderstand it-and Maimon's struggles with
its implications-in some detail.
In raising the question ofthe active intellect, Maimon was heir to a long
and complicated philosophical tradition by way of the writings of Mai-
monides and his philosophically informed medieval commentators and
Maimon's Medieval Desire: The Hesheq Shelomo 65
return to their source, like the Neoplatonic sOld that is reabsorbed in the
One from which it emanated.
Some version of this skepticism over i11dividual immortality was a
persistent worry of the medieval tradition of thought that Maimon in-
herited. Alfarabi seems to have suggested that the idea of individual
imn10rtality was "an old wives tale" in his lost commentary to the Nico-
machean Ethics. 58 Avicen11a, whom Maimon's friend and editor Euchel
studied, strllggled against any such conclusion. 59 In his Guide, Mai-
m011ides cited the position of Ibn Bajjah (Aven1pace) that individual
immortality is conceptllally impossible, because where there are no
bodies, "t11ere can be no thought of multiplicity." Maimonides does
not demur, suggesting that this was in fact his true esoteric position,
despite statements from his Commentary to the Mishna, quoted ear-
lier. 60 Averroes, who deeply influenced the Maimonidean commenta-
tors that Maimon prized most, infamously l1eld the almost Hegelian
position that, strictly speaking, individual human cognition was in1-
possible even in this life. 61 His reason was, apparently that the passive
intellect could be construed only as transpersonal and shared by all hu-
manity' thus making an individual noetic afterlife doubly impossible. 62
Maimon's second objection to the idea of a noetic afterlife is more
original and perhaps distinctively modern in its insistence on an idea of
open-ended progress in knowledge.
Moreover, the philosophers have not delimited or defined for us
whether immortality and the passing from passive to active [intellect]
is consequent upon the comprehension of all sciences or merely some
of all of them, or a single one completely ... but this is impossible,
for who inforn1ed thein [the natural philosophers] of all of the sci-
ences? It is possible that a new science will be invented that had not
been IU10wn up till now, of which they knew nothing at all. Similarly,
who has defined anyone of the sciences so that it is this much and
no more? An example of this would be alchemists who can transforn1
iron into silver or copper into gold. Who told them that no one will
be found in a future generation who can turn sulfur into gold? And,
indeed, we see that the sciences progress and multiply in each gen-
eration. In which case even the ancients, according to their own
doctrines, did not attain immortality and the eternity which they
desired. 63
Maimon's Medieval Desire: The Hesheq Shelomo 71
The sllggestion Main10n envisions here is one that turns on the doc-
trine that any cognition at all necessarily involves the active intellect
and hence, perhaps, that any lmowledge at all guarantees immortality.
But, as Maimon immediately points out, such a doctrine is unsatisfy-
ing for the opposite reason: It trivializes immortality as the telosof a
life of theoretical contemplation. 72 At this point Maimon seems to fall
back on a familiar kind of skeptical fideism.
The end of the matter is that their words are not at all adequate to
explain immortality, if they are not strengthened from the side of faith
in Torah which informs us of matters that are higher than the com-
prehension of the intellect. Nonetheless, we ought not cease from
approaching the subject of the intellect?3
whether he was satisfied at all, even at this point in his career. A weak
but pious rejoinder to a vigorollsly stated philosophical argument is, of
course, one of the telltale marks of an esoteric text alTIOng the radical
followers of Mainl0nides and Averroes. 74
The philosophical world picture to \vllich MailTIOn was heir was Aris-
totelian, bllt, as I have already noted, it was a Platonized Aristotle. In
particular, the doctrine of llnion with the active intellect can also be
described as one in which the human soul rellnites with its heavenly
SOllrce. Along these lines, it call be helpful, at least as a heuristic device,
to frame the scheme in the explicitly Neoplatonic terms ofthe "Upward
Way" and the "Downward Way." In these terills, the Upward Way of
the passive human intellect's Llnion with the active intellect, in cognition
(or prophecy), is precisely the reverse of the process of the Downward
Way, in which tIle active intellect gives form to the world through a
conjunction with its ITIatter.7 5
One ofthe underlying problems ofthis pictllre, which is behind some
of Maimon's worries over the possibility of conjunction, is the dualist
problem ofhow intellectual form and physical nlatter can be conjoined.
Thus, one ofthe most basic problems with individual immortality in this
picture is just that what is immortal cannot be physically individuated
and what is physically i11dividuated (this body) cannot be immortal.
These dualist difficulties also attend to the Downward Way, namely, how
matter is prepared to take on form, or even more starkly, how matter
can exist at all if it must emerge from a purely spiritual (or intellectual)
source. One answer to SllCh difficulties is to opt for some version of
metaphysical monism that denies, or internalizes, the dualism of form
and matter, God and world.
Main10n raises this monist possibility several times in the Hesheq
Shelomo in connection with such problems. For instance, in his com-
mentary to a sermon of Derashot ha-Ran, which discusses "the great
union (devequt ha-gadol) between man and his creator, the Shekhina," 76
Maimon writes:
I have seen fit to explain this phrase which is so COmiTIonly on the lips of
authors, and in particular among kabbalists who use it a great deal. It is
74 Chapter Two
Although the passage is not as clear as one wOllld like, several impor-
tant points do en1erge. First, Maimon makes explicit the conceptual
C011nection between the Upward Way of devequt with the active intel-
lect a11d the Downward Way of the active intellect's giving form to mat-
ter. Second, he seems to suggest that forn1 and matter are really two as-
pects of a single thing or process. Third, he associates these two aspects
with two different aspects, or sefirot, of the Godhead, the "Holy One
Blessed Be He" and the Shekhina, which are understood to be male
and female, respectively.78 God is always already, as it were, arranging
the marriage between form (or intellect) and matter. Fourth, one n1ay
wonder where these marriages are taking place. Could part of the "se-
cret" be that the marriage is always actually between the Holy One
Blessed Be He and the Shekhina, within God? If so, then there is an-
other level to Maimon's talk of two aspects, in which the material world
itself would only be an aspect of God. Finally, it should be noted that
MailTIon's Medieval Desire: The Hesheq Shelomo 75
t11is comment is i11 keeping with Main10n's claiIn, discussed earlier, that
the IZabbala is merely philosophy clothed in vivid symbols.
In his introduction to the Hesheq Shelomo, Maimon had hinted that
the "wonderful thing" that Maimonides found i11 the rabbinic saying
that God "has no part in the world, except for the four cubits of
halacha alone" was that God's only relationship to the world is through
the material, forinal, efficient, and final callses of Aristotelian science.
This interpretive suggestion does have a certain textual plausibility, but
its implicit pantheisn1 also radically controverts official Maimonidean
doctrine.7 9 As Maimonides makes explicitly clear in the Guide, he en-
dorses the "opinion of the philosophers," that God is only the efficient,
forinal, and final cause of the universe:
God is the efficient cause, that He is the forIn, and that he is the end.
Thus, it is for this reason that they say that He, Inay He be exalted, is
a cause and a ground, in order to comprise these three causes-that
is, the fact that God is the efficient cause of the world, its form and
its end. 80
God is not, however, the material cause of the world (as, say, the mar-
ble is of the statue), or so it would seem. Nonetheless, in the brief" Di-
gest of Topics in the Guide in the Order of its Chapters," which closes
the Hesheq Shelomo, Maimon reiterates his pantheistic suggestion in his
con1n1ent to precisely the sequence of chapters in which the above
statement is made:
IZnow that the universal intellect is the best and first reality. And it is
the cause of the least and last reality external to the intellect, just as
the intellectual forln in the artisan is the best and first reality, and the
cause of the least and the last reality external to the intellect. And
since He is an active intellect, therefore the intellect, the intellecting
subject and the intellected object will be one. And He will include the
four causes of [all] existents which are: the material, the formal, the
efficient, and the final [causes ].81
The clever wordplay expresses the central point: One must realize that
he is not the active musician but the passive instrument upon whonl
the spirit of God plays. Joseph Weiss has made a persuasive argument
.for this homily as an authentic teaching from the Maggid's circle. 87
Maimon explains the metaphysical sources for this doctrine of devequt
through "self-annihilation":
They maintain that Ilian, in accordance with his destiny, can reach the
highest perfection [hiichste Vollkomenheit] only vvhen he regards him-
self not as a being that exists and works for hilTIself but as an organ of
the godhead. 88
This is, of course, true, Maimon adds from the later vantage point of
Maimonidean and Spinozistic post-I(antian idealism, "but only to the
degree to which that person has achieved perfection." 89
Maimon's pantheisn1, or "acosmism" as he would later insist on call-
ing it (because the doctrine is that everything in the cosmos is God),
was probably influenced by his encounter with the thought ofthe Mag-
gid, as well as with an early inclination to read Maimo11ides against the
grain. Indeed, when Maimon mentions the kabbalistic works that es-
pecially influenced him in his autobiography, they are not only texts
that tend toward theological monism and elnphasize devequt as the ul-
timate end of religious experie11ce, such as Pardes Rimonim of Moses
Cordovero and the Sha)arei Qsdusha 90 of Hayyim Vital, but also pre-
cisely the texts that were most popular i11 the Maggid's court. 91
Jewish man) was to become just the kind of Talmid Hakham that Mai-
Illon had been groon1ed to be. In scattered exegetical remarks, Rabbi
Eliyahu ben Shelomo of ViIna, the patron saint of Lithuanian rabbinic
culture, gestured at a theory of Torah study as both the means and end
of devequt in a way that perhaps unconsciously echoed medieval ac-
counts of Aristotelian theoria as intellectual perfection (shelemut ha-
nefesh ).92 This line of thought was given full theoretical articulation by
the Gaon's leading student and Maimon's historical contemporary,
Rabbi Hayyim ofVolozhin (174-9-1820). Rabbi Hayyim's theory made
the study of Torah for its own sake (Torah Lishma), paradigIllatically
study of the Talmud, the crucial spiritual and intellectual act. In his
magnum opus, Nefesh ha-Hayyim, Rabbi Hayyim wrote:
When one is truly studying Torah, it is certain that one need not con-
centrate on union with the Divine at all, for this study alone is true
union with His Will and His Word. Moreover He and His Will and
His Word are one. 93
In a110ther work, Rabbi HayyiIll llnderlined the point in the explicit
terms of traditional Taln1l1dic study as human union, or devequt, with
the divine as a union of the knower and the known in the act of
knowledge.
Through studying the Talmud and commentaries and all the pilpulim,
everything is Inade to cling to the Holy One, Blessed Be He ... and
by cleaving to his Torah it is as if one is cleaving to Him. 94
At such moments, which profoundly express the ideals of the Lithuan-
ian Jewish intellectllal culture in which Maimon was raised in a theoret-
ical register, the talmid hakham and the Divine are virtually identified
with the text. IZnower and known merge in the reading of the text.
It might be imagined that this was simply an argument between
Hasidism and Mitnagdut and that when Maimon wrote, in the Hesheq
Shelomo, of a third party of "philosophers," he was merely retllrning to
the terms of the medieval topos, or wishing that he was more than a
party of one in Posen. But this is only partly true, for, as I have already
indicated, many of Maimon's peers in the Haskala were profoundly en-
gaged not only with the work of Maimonides but with the Aristotelian
philosophical tradition more generally. To take just two examples that
Maimon's Medieval Desire: The Hesheq Shelomo 79
To understand what is new about these moven1ents, one must set their
texts against this historical backdrop. Maimon was not an ordinary
member ofthe Haskala (or anything else ), but l1is i11tense preoccupation
with the question of man's telos, the ultin1ate object of human knowl-
edge, and the possibility ofunity with the divine Inind points to a larger
discourse ofperfection that had both a history and a social context. One
of the interesting features of Inaskilic discussio11s of perfection vvas the
extent to which it was ambiguous between the classical cognitive ideal,
which obsessed Maimon, and a less precise cultural ideal of urbane so-
ciability, aesthetic good taste, and social tolerance, which approximated
that of Bildung in the Gerlnan Enlightenn1ent. 10o I will retllrn to this
crucial ambiguity and its effect on Maimon's writings in Chapter 4.
Scarcely more than a decade after he had written the Hesheq Shelomo,
Maimon was an active literary participant in both the Aufklarung and
the Haskala. He published his llersuch uber die Transcendentalphiloso-
phie and contributed to ha-Meassef It was at this point in his career that
Maimon realized his Maimonidean an1bition of producing a new edi-
tion of the first part of The Guide of the Perplexed, together with his
o\vn n10dern commentary, Giva)at ha-Moreh, in which, among other
things, Maimon finally made his argument for metaphysical monism
explicit. I will discuss some of the systematic philosophical positions
that Maimon stakes out in the Giva)at ha-Moreh and other writings in
Chapter 3. In the present context it is important to note how much this
project is still fran1ed in terms of the "Jewish peripatetic philosophy,"
with which Maimon struggled in the Hesheq Shelomo, and how he con-
nected this to the concerns of the Haskala.
One of the most interesting things about this project is the genuine
enthusiasm that Euchel, who was arg-uably the n10st influential literary
Maskil of the period, showed for the republication and interpretive
renovation of the most canonical work of medieval Jewish philosophy.
Needless to say, no lapsed Catholic Aufkliirer, or even proponent of
Catholic Reform, ever performed such services for Aquinas's Summa.
Euchel and an anonymous Maimon published a prospectus for the work
in ha-Meassefthat promised to elucidate, correct, and supplement Mai-
monides' "peripatetic philosophy ... which follows Aristotle and those
Maimon's Medieval Desire: The Hesheq Shelomo 81
who followed hin1" in light of the author's deep and sustained study of
modern philosophy.101 They published his commelltary together with
the fourteenth-century Averroist conlmentary of Moses of Narbonlle
(Narboni). Narboni had completed his Beur to the Guide in 1362, and,
although it had been known by Maimollidean cognoscenti for cen-
tllries, the comlnentary had never been published. In exhorting the
readers of ha-Meassefto support the publication of Giva)at ha-Moreh,
. Euchel placed it squarely in the tradition of radical Maimonidean com-
mentary, emphasizing that it elucidated not only the Guide bllt Nar-
boni's comnlentary as well.
Maskilim! You see the great value of these commentaries, the depth
of the thought of the sage Narboni, and the lucid way in which he is
explicated by the author of Giva)at ha-Moreh, who establishes each
idea and enlightens with the lamp of his conlmentary ... both the
Guide and Narboni clearly. There is no need to speak further in their
praise for you will judge their excellence and utility for us in this
time.l2
In sllort, Maimon's comnlentary promised to help renl0tivate not
merely a canonical work of Jewish philosophy but also the world and
vocabulary of medieval Jewish philosophical discourse. It is worth not-
ing, in this connection, the particular place that Narboni occupied in
that world. In 1625, Joseph Solomon Delmedigo, a Jewish philosopher
from Crete, wrote to a student that the tOl-lr leading COlnmentators 011
the Guide of the Perplexed-he was fanliliar with eighteen-were like
the "four sons" of the Passover Haggadah. One was wise, one wicked,
one simple, and one did not know how to ask. 103 The three "good"
sons were, respectively, Shem Tov ben Joseph bell Shem Tov,104 Asher
ben Abraham Crescas, and Profiat Dllran, whose commentaries had
been included in the Renaissance edition of the Guide alld its 1741
reprint. The wicked son was, of COllrse, Narboni, whose comnlents of-
ten u11packed or radicalized (depending on one's perspective) the eso-
teric philosophical doctrine of Maimonides' text in an Averroist key. lOS
The remark was probably meant as a compliment by Delmedigo, who
was himself a radical Aristotelian and who is sometimes listed among
the last figures of medieval Jewish philosophy.l06
82 Chapter Two
you?" from some standpoint outside the culture, and in doing so, re-
lTIOVeS himself from the community of believers. Maimon opens the
Giva)at ha-Moreh with the following programmatic statement:
The telos [takhlit] of Inan's activities, in his aspect as a possessor of
freewill and choice, is human excellence [hatzlachat ha-enoshit] , and
this human excellence necessarily follows upon the attainment of per-
fection [shelemut]. Here, then, isa topic worthy of research: what is
the nature of this attainment of perfection, which we have n1entioned?
And what are the means through which it is possible to reach it? And
we shall say: the perfection of any being consists in the passing over
from the potential to the actual, as with the perfection of a tree, for
example, which produces fruit. And the perfection of man is intellec-
tion [Haskala] .110
that philosophy brings us to the final perfection in our times. And his
"vords are not surprising, for in all of the previous generations, philos-
ophers have spoken like this, in particular since Aristotle. 1 12
Hurwitz was familiar with the terms of Maimon's argument and even
agreed with him that the Haskala was silnply another version of me-
dieval Jewish philosophy. But he also held that the results of this phi-
10sophy could never be conclusively established and ultimately be-
trayed the particular terms of the Jewish covenant with GOd. 113
Main10n himself more or less en1braced this conclusion (n1uch of the
pain, charm, and interest of his work lie in this ambivalence) and was,
consequently, rather infamous. Because the work itself was intended as
part of a program to educate traditional Hebrew readers toward some
form of enlightenment, GivaJat ha-Moreh was published anonymously,
carrying only Euchel's name. However, Maimon hinted at both his
given Hebrew name and the painful distance from his origins, which his
inability to use it implied, with this rather poignant bit ofriddling verse:
My beloved Maskil Reader
You 'will know my name and the name of IllY father
In considering the word "exile" 114
The Hebrew word for exile (Shevi), above which asterisks had been
placed, is the abbreviation of Maimon's Hebrew name and that of his
father, Shelomo ben Yehoshua. 11s
III the next chapter, I will examine some of the philosophical uses to
which Main10n put his medieval Jewish Aristotelianism in his years of
exile as the wicked son of modern Maimonidean scholarship in his
GivaJat ha-Moreh.
Three German Idealism in a Maimonidean I(ey
"We are in this respect similar to God."
Solomon MailTIOn, Uber die
Progressen der Philosophie
critical philosophy and earlier theories, to play one set of ideas off the
other, and to see the unresolved tensions in both.
Maimon granted that Kant had demonstrated that empirical knowl-
edge must be the product ofthe matter ofsensible intuitions given form
by the conceptual categories, but this, as I(ant llnderstood, was not
enough. In the section ofthe Critique ofPure Reason called the Schema-
tism, I(ant attempted to show how universal cOl1cepts actually applied to
particular intuitions through the medium of time. Later, in the Second
Analogy, I(ant worked this out in detail for the key concept of causality.
In doing so, he made good, or tried to, on his transcendental defense of
a chastened empirical realism against Humean skepticism, although he
also admitted that
this schematism of our understanding, in its application to appear-
ances and their mere form, is an art concealed in the idepths of the
human soul, whose real modes of activity nature is hardly likely ever
to allow us to discover and to have open to our gaze. 8
This is precisely where Maimon attacked. He denied that Kant had,
or could possibly have, a coherent account of how the categories ap-
plied to the particulars of intuition; how the forn1 of thought made
contact with its matter. Kant had made such a gldf between concepts
and intuitions that there was no way for the concepts to do their un-
deniably necessary work of giving shape to sensible intuitions. In a
striking analogy that underlines the historical depth which Maimon
brought to Kant's philosophy, Maimon puts the point this way in the
Yersuch iiber die Transcendentalphilosophie, upon whose subtlety I(ant
had remarked.
The question quid juris of the legitimacy of applying the forms of
understanding to what is sensibly given, addressed in IZant's transcen-
dental deduction is one and the same as the important question that
has been treated by all previous philosophers, namely the explanation
of the community between soul and body, or as the explanation of
the origination of the world (with respect to its matter) from an
intelligenceY
It was clever to note that Kant's problem of intuition and understand-
ing is an epistemic version ofthe Cartesian problen1 ofgetting body and
German Idealism in a Maimonidean Key 89
For such a God, knowledge and creation are the same thing, and both
tllrn on a Spinozistic restriction ofthe infinite being in a particular way.
We intuit mathematical objects (say, a triangle) by constructing them in
somethi11g like the way this God both knows and constructs real objects.
In both cases, to construct such an object is to lG10W it and vice versa, or,
at any rate, this is almost true, since we do not achieve a complete deter-
mination, or llnified knowledge, ofeven mathematical objects. Maimon
illustrates this point colorfully in another text:
The understanding prescribes a rule to the productive imagination,
namely to produce a space enclosed by three lines. The imagination
obeys and constructs the trilateral figure; but look, three angles sud-
denly obtrude themselves, which the understanding had not asked
for. ... The understanding then puts on an imperious face and says
"a trilateral figure must have three angles," as if it were the legislator
in the affair, although in fact it must obey a legislator completely
unknown to it.l 6
Unlike us, the infinite intellect has no legislator other than itself and is
completely self-transparent. We approach the activity of such a God in
positing a geometric figure or a number, but we don't quite get there.
Empirical knowledge must be understood on this constructive model.
92 Chapter Three
it to just the right cases. 24 In short, our concepts will remain empty and
our intuitions blind so long as IZant maintains that they are entirely
heterogeneous.
Maimon's proposed answer is, ofcourse, that concepts and intuitions
actually are homogeneous, although they may not appear so to us. He
posits a continuum between sensible intuition and pure concepts that
mirrors the continuum between the finite and infinite minds. Space and
time are not the nonconceptual forms through which we intuit the
world, but rather the basic conceptual conditions for distinguishing
objects. Thus IZant's distinctions between the faculties of sense and
understanding are brought in house, as it were.
In his comments to the following chapter of the Guide, MailTIOn
explicitly develops the monist implications of this line of thought. In
response to Maimonides' assertion that "God is the efficient, final and
forn1al cause" of the world, Maimon adds:
One ought wonder why the philosophers did not say that God, may
He be exalted, is also the material cause. I mean to say, the ultimate
subject of everything which is not a predicate of anything else. And in
this He, may He be exalted, He will be the ultimate cause of all the
causes mentioned. For if we assume that God is the efficient, formal
and final cause but not the material cause as well, we would have to
assume the existence of prilTIordial matter which has no cause. How-
ever this would contradict the notion of God, may He be exalted,
that is, the universal cause of everything that is. But the truth is that
God is indeed the ultimate cause in every respect. 25
before being finally burned at the stake, Inade hin1 a figure whose philo-
sophical and social accolnplishlnents Mailnon cOll1d adlnire. 27
son1ething like the cognitive role that the active intellect played in the
attainment ofintellectual perfection in the medieval Aristotelian system
with which Mainlon began his philosophical career. But it is no more
clear whether he believed in the "infinite intellect," or "World Soul," in
the 1790S than it is that he believed in the active intellect in the 1770S.
What, in short, was MailTIOn doing in proposing this solution to the
antinomy he had uncovered in I(ant's systemr
This is a crux ofMaimon scholarship, and the son1etimes indistinct or
fraglTIentary and exegetical nature ofhis writings does not seem to allow
for a clear, defillitive answer. Beiser, for instance, suggests that Maimon
moved froIn an early constitutive view of the infinite intellect to a later
regulative one, but the chronology is, llnfortunately, not so clear. The
regulative remark quoted earlier ("at least as an idea") is from Mainl0n's
first German work, the Transcendentalphilosophie, and the more consti-
tlltive qllotes from the Giva)at ha-Moreh are, apparently, later. 28 On the
other hand, in another comment in Giva)at ha-Moreh, Maimon specific-
ally indicates that the idea of God is regulative and its reality problem-
atic (mesupaq).29 Friedrich I(untze tll0ught that Maimon's final posi-
tion was skeptical, whereas Samuel Atlas, as is clear from his title, argues
that Maimon progressed from skepticism to full-fledged "Speculative
Idealism," as does Bergman. 30 Ernst Cassirer seems to have thought that
Maimon had anticipated the insights of neo- I(antiallism in arriving at a
position that avoided the pitfalls of both, by internalizing the given and
eliminating the thing-in-itself as anything but all endless cognitive task.
Most recently, Jan Bransen has argued that Maimon uncovered the fun-
damental antinomy ofhuman knowledge, which is always both a passive
finding alld an active making. 31 My own position is closest to Bransen's,
but before turnillg to my reasons for this (still tentative) interpretation,
it will be useful to examine Maimon's descriptions of the finite and
active intellects and their relations more closely.
One of the keys to Maimon's thought seems to be his repeated in-
sistence that the finite human intellect is, somehow, a restriction or lim-
ited expression of the infinite intellect. As I suggested earlier, one way
to ITIotivate this extraordinary thought might have been through a
close reading of Book V of The Ethics, in particular Spinoza's doctrine
of the "third kind" of knowledge. Unfortunately, Maimon never did
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
98 Chapter Three
One way to see the extent to which Maimon remained in the debt of
nl_edieval Aristotelianism for this theory, even as he anticipated the
Absolute Idealism ofFichte, Schelling, and Hegel, is to focus on the im-
plications of his epistemological and metaphysical views for his ethical
Gennan IdealislTI in a Mailnonidean I(ey 103
philosophy for Maimon have often failed to take the full n1easure of this
influence. More important, they have not taken account of the way in
which, like Spinoza only more so, MailTIOn was not simply a n10dern
European philosopher whose cllrriculluTI was enhanced by certain clas-
sical Hebrew works of medieval philosophy. He has to be understood,
instead, as a philosopher who worked in two intellectual contexts: that
of medieval Jewish philosophy and that of modern German philosophy.
This allowed for a unique set of argun1ents and insights, as well as a
rather foreign style and genre of philosophical expression.
This double aspect of Maimon's thought also allows one to trace
the history of a philosophical idea within a single consciousness. In
Maimon's writings we can see how the medieval active intellect became
the World Soul of German Idealisnl, although the fit, as always with
Maimon, was not quite perfect. In th.e next chapter I explore the cultural
and psychological effects of the parallel process by which the ideal ofin-
tellectllal perfection, or shelemut ha-nefesh, became (albeit imperfectly)
the ideal of Bildung, in Maimon's autobiography. In fact, the tension be-
tween these ideals llnderlies much of the humor, pain, and blasphemy
that make Maimon's Lebensgeschichte such a fascinating book.
F0 u r From Shelomo ben Yehoshua
to Solomon Maimon
"I have left my nation, the land of Iny birth and Iny family in search
of the truth."
Solon10n MailnOI1, Salo1non Maimons Lebensgeschichte
this was a central concept for Maimon, with a long and complicated
philosophical genealogy, as well as a socially resonant personal an1bition.
The Jewish desire for secular knowledge, and the growing possibility
ofits satisfaction, was peculiarly relevant at this mon1ent in the German
Enlightenment when the question of the "education and enlighten-
ment of the Jewish nation" as a whole was indeed "an object of reflec-
tion." The word that I have translated as "education" is Bildung, which
also has the sense of cultivation or self-formation. In late eighteenth-
century Gerlnan discussions, the term Bildung came to express a con-
stellation of cultural ideals that underlay the forn1ation of both modern
German and German-Jewish identity. Although the exact contours of
the concept varied, depending on the writer, a certain set of attributes
to which the educated Burgher ought to aspire did emerge. These in-
cluded a clear command ofnascent modern German and its literature, a
modicum ofclassical learning, and adherence to a certain set ofaesthetic
and moral judgments, together with a kind of enlightened sociability
and a respectable profession. 2 A "raw" Polish Jew such as Maimon, to
use Herz's description, was, in language, manners, and dress, among
those who were often counted as paradigms of Unbildung-a prejudice
that Maimon's autobiography tended to confirm as well as belie. 3
As I argued in Chapter I, Maimon's autobiography takes on two tasks
that were not previously attempted in Jewish literary history and that
were rare in European literary history before the eighteenth century.4
The first task is the attempt, to use George Gusdorf's formulation, to
"reconstruct the unity of a life across time." 5 Maimon approaches his
life with the autobiographical conviction that there is a thematic and not
merely chronological unity to be found in his experiences. This is, to cite
another influential theorist of the genre, "the secret project of all auto,..
biography, the discovery of the order of a life." 6 This idea that a life can
be grasped (despite the author's being in the midst of it) in something
approximating its essential wholeness turns on the idea of the subject
possessing a unique and private individuality. In discovering this indi-
viduality' the alltobiographer justifies his, or her, life? The second task
Maimon undertakes in his Lebensgeschichte is to present that individllal-
ity to an anonymous reading public. The two tasks are not unrelated.
One justifies one's self to someone, and notions of privacy and publicity
From Shelomo ben Yehoshua to SOlOlTIOn MailTIOn III
necessarily come into being together. 111 the case of the modern Euro-
pean sense ofprivacy, Jiirgen Habermas has persuasively argued that the
Enlightenn1ent cultivation ofa private and unique individuality was "al-
ways already oriented towards a public." 8 The presentation of a private
selfwould seem to have reqllired a public reception.
Maimon was, of course, inspired by Rousseau's Confessions, which
had been published more than a decade earlier. The Lebensgeschichte
includes several allusions to Rousseau and the Confessions. A youthful
crime is referred to as "a theft a la Rousseau," Main10n is deliberately un-
apologetic in his depiction of his abandonment of his young wife and
family, and an aCCOllnt ofMain10nides' allegorical reading of the expul-
sion from Eden is described as "al1tirousseauische" in its failure to de-
pict Adam as a noble savage. Nonetheless, such allusions are very much
at the surface of the work, and Maimon, who was above all cerebral, is,
in many ways, a poor match for the author who wrote that the cause of
all his misfortunes was his "sensitive heart." He was more directly influ-
enced by 1(arl Philipp Moritz's autobiographical novel Anton Reiser,
which described Moritz's rise from ascetic pietism to enlightenment.
Neither the Confessions nor Anton Reiser, however, exhibits the key
feature of Maimon's autobiography, which is that it is a presentation of
both himself and the culture from which he had become alienated.
Indeed, it is precisely in this alienation from "my nation, the land of
my birth and my fan1ily in search of the truth" that Maimon finds his
identity.
The first chapters ofMaimon's autobiography were published in 1792
in Moritz's journal, the Gnothi Sauton oder Magazin zur Erfahrungssee-
lenkunde. The "Fragmente aus Ben Josuas Lebensgeschichte," which
began with a sociological sketch of the place ofJews in Poland al1d con-
tinued with episodes from Maimon's childhood, provided an account of
the life and struggle for enlightenment of a Polish Jew, at a moment of
intense public debate over the question of Jewish emancipation and at
a time, moreover, when Poland (and hence its Jewish population) was
undergoing partition by the German states and Russia.
In the late 1780s and early 1790S, the terms in which Jewish emanci-
pation was discussed in the German states had chal1ged. The enlight-
ened brief for Jewish rights, which had begun with Christian Wilhelm
112 Chapter Four
von Dohm's famous argument that the sin1ple removal ofthe disabilities
under which the Jews suffered wOll1d ilnprove their adlnittedly degraded
n10ral and social character, had evolved into an argllment in wl1ich the
terms of the excha11ge had been reversed. 9 Jewish advocates of enlight-
en111ent and emancipation, such as David Friedlander and Lazarus Ben..
david, argued that Jews ought first relinquish the "Jewish characteris-
tics" and invidious dogma that divided what Friedlander called (in a
term borrowed from Mendelssohn) the "Jewish colonies" from the rest
of society, before civil elnancipation could take place. lo In such argu-
111ents, the unenlightened Polish Jew began to figure as the epitome of
that which German Jewry had to overcome in order to enter modern so-
ciety.11 In short, they had to be worthy ofentrance into tl1e enlightened
ranks of the Bildungsbiirgertum.
Maimon's "fragn1ents" of "Ben Josua's life history" entered into this
debate by placing an engaging hun1an narrative of such a Jew and his
strivings for enlightenment next to the polemics and abstract analyses
of what would later be called the "Jewish question." This portrait was,
however, crucially ambivalent. Maimon both observed himself through
the eyes of Germans and sophisticated Berlin Jews, such as Friedlander
and Bendavid (both of whom had been patrons), and subverted this
perception through the repeated demonstration of his i11tellectual su-
periority and even the depths of the tradition that he rejected (and of
which they were comparatively ignorant).
This ambivalence can even be seen in the formal characteristics of
the narrative in the initial fragments, which were published anony-
mously and written in the third person. Although it was hinted that the
author and subject were identical, the "life history of Ben Josua" was
not yet framed as the remarkable childhood of a prominent Aufkliirer,
but rather of an obscure Jew who, in the somewhat comical darkness of
Poland, had struggled for enlightenment. 12
The form in which these first chapters were first published is worth
dwelling on for a moment. Although I have characterized them as
anonymous, this is not quite true. "Ben Josua" was, after all, Maimon's
patronymic, the name with which he was born and the name that he used
throughout his life in Hebrew contexts. Nonetheless, "Maimon" was
more than the German pseudonym of a Polish Jew; it was an achieved
Froin Sheloino ben Yehoshua to Solomon Main10n 113
(or ahnost achieved) identity within the pllblic sphere of the German
Enlightenn1ent. The distance, by turns ironic, ethnographic, and defen-
sive' between the narrator and the subject in these "FragInents," persists
even after Main10n has become the first-person voice of his Lebens-
geschichte. Maimon's narrative stance continues to oscillate between
confession and that ofa kind of beInused participant-observer.
There is, perhaps inevitably, a narrative distance that lies between the
first-person narrative voice ofthe autobiographer and the subject whose
life is described. 13 However, in Maimon's case, this distance also seen1S
to be an expression ofwhat W. E. B. DuBois fan10usly diagnosed as the
divided psyche of the minority thinker:
this double consciousness, this sense of always looking at oneself
through the eyes of others, of Ineasuring one's soul by the tape of
a world that looks on in an amused contempt and pity.14
In Maimon's case, and perhaps that of other Jews of his time and place,
we might also speak of a double alienation, both from the cultllre in
which he was raised and the one to which he aspired. It is Maimon's ac-
count of these alienations, the ways in which he did and did not achieve
Moritz's Aufklarung and Bildung, to which I now turn.
Maimon begins his account of his education in the third chapter of his
autobiography with a dialogue between himself and his father, over the
opening lines of Genesis.
In my sixth year my father began to read the Bible with me.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Here I interrupted my father, and asked, "But Papa, who created
God?"
F: God was not created by anyone, He existed from all eternity.
I: Did he also exist ten years ago?
F: Oh yes, He even existed one hundred years ago.
I: Then maybe God is already a thousand years old?
F: Silence! God is eternal.
I: But he must have been born some time?
F: No little fool! He was forever and ever and ever.
I was not satisfied with this answer, but I thought, "Papa must know
better than I, so I must leave it at that." 25
Main10n's lament that "the pen falls from his hand" should be n1arked.
It would seem to be precisely the memory of the spirit-deadening
business of Talmudic study that threatens Maimo11's ability to write. In
another description of his early life Maimon wrote:
My life in Poland, from the tiIlle of my marriage and emigration, a
period in which I possessed my fullest strength, was a series of
diverse miseries, lack of all that could support my development, and
a waste of energy that necessarily followed from it. The quill falls
from my hand at its description and I seek to squelch my painful
recollection. 42
Jean Starobinski, one of the great critics of the genre, has called atten-
tion to phrases such as "the hand that holds the pen" as tokens of the
problematic but crucial identification between author and protagonist
in autobiography.43 In Maimon's case the men10ry of his cultllral and
geographic origins would appear to threaten precisely this identifica-
ti011. That is to say, the memory of Poland, his studies, and his young
family-the "nation, birthplace and fan1ily" that Maimon had aban-
124 Chapter Four
doned "in search ofthe truth"-ahnost literally deprive hin1 ofhis iden-
tity as an author of Germa11 prose, a participa11t in the public sphere of
Enlightenment reason.
What, then, was Main10n doing in repeatedly removi11g hilTIselffron1
the text, as it were, in his tales of Enlightenment? And how is this to be
connected with the dissociative way in which Maimon describes his
earlier self and his hOlTIe culture?
What is crucial to understand is that, in a certain, very real sense, the
homeland from which Main10n exiled himself was as mllch, or more, a
set of texts together with an interpretive commllnity, as it was a geo-
graphic location.
In this textual culture, a rabbinic scholar was inevitably kl10wn not by
his given name but by the title of his first or most influential book. One
can hear the effects ofthis practice in the passage cited earlier, when Mai-
lTIOn is unable to name the author of the astronomical treatise, Nehmad
ve-Naim, which he had read as a child without mentioning the title of
Gans's other, more influential book, Zemah David, for which, and by
which, he was known. 44 But this identification ofthe man with the book
was not just a matter of rabbinic authorial conceit. As Maimon himself
relTIarks, "I11deed, every rabbi ifhe possesses sufficient acuteness, is to be
used as a living COlTImentary."45
There is an old Yiddish idiolTI in which a good Jewish boy, in partic-
ular, a Talmlldic prodigy sllch as MailTIOn, is called a Sefer Torah, that is,
a scroll ofthe law, a Bible. Ifsuch a child fulfills his promise in adulthood,
then he "wears the crown of Torah" and one is obligated to rise before
him wl1en he walks into a room just as one would for a Sefer Torah. 46
Main10n was such a child and, briefly before his heretical turn, such a
man. There was, in fact, a dense web ofrabbinic, and in particular Ashke-
nazi, cultural practices, idioms, a11d expectations that all tend to identify
the Jewish man with the Torah at key ritual moments. 47 In the insight-
ful forn1ulation of Harvey Goldberg, such ritllals identify the propaga-
tors of Jewish biological and cultural reproduction. 48 Claude Levi-
Strauss famously spoke of "things which are good to think with" in a
given cultllre. 49 I would suggest that in the Ashkenazi culture from
which Maimon came, among those things were books, even in nonelite
culture and even in their material aspects.
From ShelolTIO ben Yehoshua to SOlOlTIOn Mainl0n 125
In an iI1teresting essay, the critic Michael Warner has argued that par-
ticipation in the eI1lightened discourse of the public sphere required of
its participants a peculiarly Inodern kind of self-abstraction. He writes:
The Public Sphere calls for a rhetoric of disincorporation in two senses:
renl0ving one's selffrOln a particular corporation and renl0ving one's
selffroln one's own corporeal body.50
For a Jew like Maimon, the assall1t on textlIality constituted the requi-
site disincorporation in both senses: both froln his Jewish body, which
he identified with the body of the text (the Torah), and from the cor-
porate entity of the Jewish people wllo were constituted precisely by
their relationship to this text. And yet one of the interesting features of
Mainl0n's writing is the extent to which he is incapable of effecting this
disincorporation, of shedding his origins and the exegetical consciollS-
ness that accompanies them.
One can also see Maimon's anxiety over his origins operating in the
Lebensgeschichte, even when he is not studying mlltilated texts and the
peI1 is not falling from his hand. Thus, Mainlon often makes reflexive
and spurious allllsions to classical literature at lTIOments when he is de-
scribing his previolls life, especially the texts and learning that were at
the center of that life. Thus when he describes the brutality of his Heder
teacher, Maimon underlines his own cll1tlIral distance froln the scene.
The master, sits at the table in a dirty blouse and holds between
his knees a bowl in which he grinds tobacco into snuff with a huge
pestle like the club ofHercules, while at the saIne tinle he ,;yields his
authority. 51
If, in leaving "the land of his birth," Main1011 was leaving a textual cul-
ture as much as the geographic area of Lithuania, what was his destina-
tion? Here his answer was the same as it was in the cover letter he had
sent to I(ant along with his Transcendentalphilosophie, and just as un-
equivocal: "the truth." Maimon's idea of the trut11 was, as I have shown
in the previous two chapters, some version of the Aristotelian notion of
the eternal propositions held in the n1ind of God, or at least the active
intellect. This, needless to say, is not quite the same as the Bildung and
Aufklarung that Moritz described as Maimon's ultimate goal. This
leads to an interesting set of tensions, for Moritz was at one with both
Maimon's patrons and readers in presuming that Bildung, convention-
ally understood, was, or ought to be, his ultimate goal. Few, ifany, com-
mentators have noted the extent to which the narrative of Maimon's
autobiography is oriel1ted toward a more excillsively intellectual and
philosophically austere goal. Maimon's Solomonic desire for intellectual
perfection is as important to the emplotment of his Lebensgeschichte as
Augustine's Neoplatonic desire for God is for the Confessions.
The common failure to note the intellectual perfectionism that is at
the heart of Maimon's text is not becallse it is hidden. On the contrary,
Maimon places ten chapters that limn Maimonides' entire system in
the form of a classic medieval epiton1e at the very cel1ter of his autobi-
ography. He tells the reader that he does so because Maimonides' phi-
losophy exercised "the most decisive influence" on his life. 54 This as-
sertion has been effectively ignored by Maimon's modern editors, who
have relegated the chapters to appendixes or excised them altogether,
together with most other theoretical excurses. Maimon's English trans-
lator, J. Clark Murray, notes that these chapters are not "biographical"
and "excite just the faintest suspicion of 'padding,'" so he does not
include them at all. 55
This attitude is somewhat reminiscent of that displayed by the
English editor of Gliickel of Hameln's Memoirs, who writes that his
edition is "complete save for an abridgement ofGluckel's theologizing,
the omission ofa few ofher borrowed tales.... Nothing has been omit-
ted of her own experience." 56 The presumption here, that Gluckel's
Judisch- Deutsch rendition of Ellropean tales and her "theologizing"
were not aspects of her experience, presupposes, first, that experience is
From Shelomo ben Yehoshua to SOlOlTIOn Maimon 127
what the reader is after and, second, that we would know what experi-
ence consisted in before engaging with the full autobiographical text.
Maimon's modern editors, it seems to me, have made a similar mistake.
A proper understanding of MailTIOn and l1is autobiography must come
to grips with the fact that he placed a ten-chapter epitome of Mai-
n10nidean philosophy at its very center.
However, in arguing my case for intellectual perfection as the gov-
erning ideal of the Lebensgeschichte, I focus on the vvay in which this
ideal is crucial to understanding three important narrative episodes.
The first is Maimon's description of his interaction with Mendelssohn
and his other enlightened Jewish patrons. The second is an odd en-
counter with a Lutheran minister in which he makes a rather preSllll1p-
tuous proposal to convert. The third is ostensibly not about Maimon
at all but rather the odd and comic allegory of the history of philoso-
phy as a masked ball with which Maimon ends his autobiography.
These three episodes should be placed with Main10n's description of
early Hasidism as a genuine VOllkomenheitssystem as well as his repeated
descriptions of both his work and his life as striving toward intellectllal
perfection. What they show is that Main10nides' philosophy lies at the
center of Maimon's autobiography because it is its interpretive key.57
Since I have discussed aspects of the first two episodes earlier, in Chap-
ters I and 2, I will discuss them more briefly here.
When Maimon describes his first expulsion from Berlin at the
Rosenthaler Gate, he remarks that the attitude of the German rabbinic
establishment toward Jews such as himself who were seeking rational
enlightenment was, in a certain sense, justified.
They believe this to be especially true of the Polish Rabbis, who, having
by some lucky accident been delivered from the bondage of supersti-
tion, suddenly catch a gleam of the light ofreason and set themselves
free from their chains. And this beliefis to some extent well-founded.
Persons in such a position may be con1pared to a man who after being
famished for a long time suddenly comes upon a well-spread table, and
attacks the food with violent greed, and overfills himself. 58
Maimon's choice of a sumptuary simile is, perhaps, revealing. Such
"raw" Polish Jews (to return to Herz's de~~il?~i~El!e_~s_gl~~t9!191.1~ _
128 Chapter Four
and uncouth in their desire for knowledge as they were at the table, or
at least Maimon was.
MailTIon records several conversations with Mendelssohn that raised
precisely these issues of moderation and the desire for knowledge
during his second, and somewhat n10re successful, visit to Berlin. In
some of these conversations he C011trasts his own allegiance to the Mai-
monidean ideal of intellectual perfection to Mendelssohn's position:
The inlnl0rtality of the soul for lne (following MailTIonides) consisted
in union with the universal World Soul [dem allgemeinen WeltgeisteJ
of that part of the faculty of knowledge which has been brought into
actuality, in proportion to its degree of actuality; in accordance with
this doctrine I held that only those who occupy themselves with
eternal truths participate in this ilTIlTIOrtality, and only to the degree
which they do so. The soul with its attainment of this high immortal-
ity lnust lose its individuality. That Mendelssohn, following lnodern
[WolffianJ philosophy thought otherwise, everyone will readily
believe. 59
Maimon n1ay be suggesting that, although "everyone will readily be-
lieve" that Mendelssohn subscribed to the doctrille of the immortality
of the individual soul-he had, after all, written his most successful
book in its defense-Mendelssohn privately concurred with Maimon's
radical Mainlonideanism. In any case, MaimOl1's exclusive interest in
the theoretical truths that afforded the only immortality he thought
available gave Maimon little appetite for the belles lettres and artistic
interests pursued by Mendelssohn and his circle. In another conversa-
tion he records Mendelssohn's gentle attempts to civilize him through
aesthetic edllcation:
Once when I was going on a stroll with Mendelssohn, the topic arose
of when I would read the poets he recoffilnended. I replied: "No, I
will read no poets; what is a poet but a liar?" Mendelssohn smiled at
this and said: "You agree with Plato who banished the poets from his
Republic. But I hope that with time you will think entirely otherwise
on the subject. And so it happened soon." 60
Mailnonidean ideal of shelemut ha-nefesh and the more practical and so-
cial ideal of Bildung, which emphasized finding one's place in the social
whole. Maimon's ultilnate goal was not, and never would be, to become
a Iniddle-class pharlnacist with an interest in philosophy, as, say Marcus
Herz was a philosophical physician and Mendelssohn himselfwas a busi-
nessman-philosopher. It was also a result ofMain10n's inability to accept
the consequences ofhis self-imposed exile from Lithuanian rabbinic cul-
ture. He seen1S to have acted as if he cOll1d discard the socioreligious
structure that Inade possible the institution ofthe talmid hakham with-
out relinquishing the status of the "holy idler" to which he had once
been entitled.
Maimon's spectacular failure to achieve the Bildung that his patrons
prescribed for him was too much. Mendelssohn himself felt con1pelled
to ask Maimon to leave Berlin, as recounted in Chapter I, and yet, what-
ever his regrets, Maimon's autobiography betrays no regrets about this
failllre, which, in addition to personal idiosy11crasy, was the result of his
adherence to the ideal of shelemut ha-nefesh and his disdain for the stric-
tures ofeither Halakha or enlightened society, which ll1ight have curbed
his gluttonous tendencies. He was, in short, immoderate in both realms,
like a starving man who "suddenly comes llpon a well-spread table, and
attacks the food with violent greed, a11d overfills himself."
Maimon's banishment from Berlin initiated another series of travels
in which Maimon managed to impress, insll1t, and alienate a series of
patrons in Holland and Hamburg. After his comical suicide attelnpt on
Purim, he c011sidered his predicament and options and decided that
the best course n1ight be conversion to Christianity. His account of this
predicament and his subsequent proposal is revealing and worth quot-
ing at something close to its full length:
I had grown too enlightened [aufgeklart] to return to Poland ... on
the other hand I could not count on success in Gerillany owing to my
ignorance of the n1anners and customs of the people, to which I had
never been able to adapt myself to properly. . . . I was not even master
of any particular language. It occurred to me therefore that there was
no alternative but to embrace the Christian religion Accordingly I
resolved to go to the first clergyn1an I came upon and inform him
of IllY resolution. But as I could not express Illyself well orally, I put
From ShelolTIO ben Yehoshua to Solomon Maimon 131
This chapter has often been excised by editors and has been almost al-
together ig110red by critics,?l The inattention is, perhaps, abetted by the
apparent heavy-handed didacticism ofMaimon's allegory, together with
its crude good humor. In fact, however, the chapter draws subtly on me-
dieval Hebrew traditions of allegory, and, when read with care, can be
understood as having indeed been written "toward a conclusion" ofthe
Lebensgeschichte, his life history. The allegory brings together Maimon's
deep engagement with Maimonidean philosophy, IZabbala, IZant's
"Copernican revolution," and his own ambivalent relationship with the
134 Chapter Four
The allegory is, at the most obvious level, about the pursuit of meta-
physical reality behind mere appearances, the in1penetrable thing-in-
itself, personified as the noble but elusive Madame Metaphysik, who
is invisible or virtually so except for the traces she leaves in natural
phe110mena, which is only "the chattering of her chambermaid." The
dancers and their dances, as will shortly become clear, each represent a
figure or school of philosophy and its characteristic doctrines.
As I have shown, the idea that knowledge is driven by a kind of eros
was of central importance to Maimon, whose first work was, after all,
titled Hesheq Shelomo, or "The Desire of Solomon." Similarly, the per-
sonification of metaphysics, or philosophy more generally, as a desir-
able woman for whom gentlemen (I(avaliere) mllst engage in chivalric
competition is a topos of European literature. Mendelssohn, for in-
stance, was invoking just such traditions in a fairly stereotypical man-
ner when, in a moment of philosophical fatigue at the olltset of the
"Pantheism Controversy," he wrote that having seen his opponent "re-
move his visor" and demonstrate his worthiness, he would "retrieve the
gauntlet," which he had mistakenly thrown down, and retire from the
contest for the fair lady.7 5 Hegel employed a more striking and original
metaphor, which is closer in spirit to Maimon's allegory. In a famous
passage from the preface to his Phenomenology ofMind, written fifteen
years after Maimon's Lebensgeschichte, Hegel enigmatically described
the history of philosophy as made up of frenzied dancers.
136 Chapter Four
possibility ofintercourse with the divine, which is both "the end ofman"
and a foretaste of the eternal life that awaits him. 80
The most perfect specimen of this type was, as mentioned, Moses,
whose life ended at precisely the n10ment in which he had fulfilled the
ends of life. This is, according to Main10nides, the deep exegetical
meaning of the scriptural staten1eIlt that Moses died "by the mouth of
the Lord" (Numbers 33: 38), or, in the words of the Talnlud, by the
"kiss of God." 81 It is this sort of death into eternal life that Maimonides
identified as the sllblin1e object of the Song ofSongs, thereby initiating
a whole genre of Hebrew interpretations. 82 In explicating both the rab-
binic traditions regarding Moses's death and his own final parable in
the Guide, Maimonides vvrote that
the apprehension that is achieved in a state of intense and passionate
love for Him is called a leiss, in accordance with the verse "Let hilTI
leiss n1e with the leisses of his mouth" (Song of Songs I : 2).83
Maimon's deliberate juxtaposition of the final allegorical chapter of his
autobiography with Maimonides' final allegorical discussion of perfec-
tion as the proper "end oflife" in both senses ofthe term begins to Sllg-
gest, theIl, that there may be more to this chapter than even his own glee-
ful footnotes on the history ofphilosophy sllggest. However, this kleine
allegorie differs importantly from MaiITIonides' mashal of the palace.
Both allegories describe a search for a personified yet unapproachable,
or virtually unapproachable, trllth. However, the image of an enticing
woman for whom the lover nlust strive is very different from that of a
hidden king. Indeed, although Maimonides explicitly thematizes the
erotic nature of the desired union, there is a significant and obvious dif-
ference. Not only are the genders switched, but it is the king who is the
active lover, just as in the Aristotelian nimshal it is the active intellectfhat
draws up the passive hun1an intellect into its timeless thOllght. In Mai-
mon's mashal the enticing Madame Metaphysik would appear to playa
more passive role.
However, Maimon was heir not only to the tradition ofMaimonidean
philosophy but, as we have seen, to that ofmedieval IZabbala as well. The
Shekhina of Zoharic IZabbala, the tenth and lowest of the Sefirot, cor-
responds to the active intellect, which according to MaiITIonides and
138 Chapter Four
others was the tenth and lowest ofthe Separate Intelligences. 84 This was
a relationship that, as we have seen in detail in Chapter 3, Maimon knew
and struggled with while coming to the position that the IZabbala was a
symbolic expression of natural truths.
The erotic nature of devequt is, needless to say, stronger and less sub-
limated in the kabbalistic tradition in which the Shekhina is understood
to be a feminine aspect ofGod, whose relationship to the mystic is often
that of an elusive beloved. 85 It is precisely such a passage in the Zohar
that Maimon drew upon in the construction of his allegory. In a deep
and puzzling parable of the Zohar, the Shekhina is personified as "the
beautiful maidel1 upon whom"-like Maimon's Madame Metaphysik-
"no one has set eyes." 86 In this passage, a mysterious figure sets out a
parable that would seem to be about both the Shekhina a11d the Torah
to two of the Tannaim of the Zohar, Rabbi Hiyya and Rabbi Yose.
Who is the beautiful maiden on whom no one has set eyes? A body
concealed, yet revealed? She COlnes out in the lnorning and is hidden
all day. She adorns herselfwith Jewels which are not.
. . . What a multitude of humans there are who dwell in confusion,
failing to perceive the ,;yay of truth that abides in the Torah, and the
Torah, in love, summons them day after day to her, but woe, they do
not as much as turn their heads. It is just as I have stated, the Torah
releases one word and comes forth fron1 her sheath ever so little and
then retreats to conceahnent again....
A parable. To what may she be compared? To a beautiful and
stately maiden, who is secluded in an isolated chamber of the palace,
and has a lover of whose existence she alone knows. For love of her
he passes by her gate unceasingly, and turns his eyes in all directions
to discover her.... She thrusts open a small door in her secret cham-
ber, for a moment reveals her face to her lover, then quicldy withdraws
it....
And when he arrives, she begins to speak with him, at first from
behind a veil which she has hung before her words, so that they il1ay
suit his manner of understanding.... Then behind a thinner veil of
finer mesh, she speaks to him in riddles and allegories, Aggada. When
finally he is on close terms with her, she stands disclosed face to face
with him and has intercourse with him on all her secret mysteries....
From ShelolTIO ben Yehoshua to Solomon MailTIOn 139
just lavished ten chapters of his autobiography), and proceeds with the
n10derns.
Then can1e the line of young gentlen1en. Even though they danced
with more skill and grace than those who preceded them, their success
was no greater. The old disputes returned and were renewed among
then1, and everything ren1ained as it was, only slightly revised. [The
new philosophers) it rnust be admitted., madegreat progress in methods of
thought) but when it came to metaphysics not a single neJV step Jvas forth-
coming. ] Finally one of the clever alnong then1 was no longer able to
tolerate this "Don Quixotism." He recognized that the famous lady
was nothing but a creature of the ilnagination whose appearance in-
spired wandering knights to great deeds, but ... also led to all sorts of
paradoxes. And not only this, but he also showed how these illusions
were created and how to guard against them. [Presumably ](ant is
meant here. ] 92
Maimon's skeptical reading of IZant implies that the veil may not be
lifted because there is nothing behind it, or to use his metaphor, there
142 Chapter Four
When Maimon wrote the sentences quoted in the epigraph, he was im-
plicitly comparing his accon1plishn1ents as a philosopher and as a writer
to those of Mendelssohn al1d IZant. He had ul1derstood and come to
grips with IZant's Copernican Revolution in a way that Mendelssol1n
(and perhaps even IZant) had not, and yet he knew that his quirky cOln-
mentaries possessed neither the grace of Mel1delssohn's n1elliflllous
Gerlnan prose nor the architectonic grandeur of IZant's Critiques. He
was also, perhaps, positing yet another al1d even more attenuated ver-
sion of philosophical imn1ortality, ill which the mind merges not with
the eternal active intellect but with the future community of scholars.
His works wOll1d not be read, but the trllths that he had made his own
would survive and be llsed in the work of others.
And yet, a century after Maimon had written these words, his work
was, in fact, read and discussed, although not (and with good reason) in
the same reverential tones as that of Mendelssohn and IZant. In 1878, a
British philosopher named Shadworth Hodgson glossed Maimon's
oblique prediction with this bathetic note: "Thy name, too [would be
immortal], Maimon, ifany words ofmine cOll1d celebrate it. But he who
now writes has a pen as little potent as thine own." 1 Hodgson thought,
as Ernst Cassirer would a few years later, that Maimon had somehow
solved the problem ofthe given. As it turns out, Hodgson's pen was con-
siderably less potent than Maimon's, but Maimon's works as well as his
ideas have survived, il1 particular, his sparkling autobiography. 143
I briefly discussed Maimon's afterlife in European philosophy at the
end of Chapter 3. This was what Maimon, quite clearly, cared most
about, but his literary afterlife is largely the story of his Lebensgeschichte.
144 Chapter Five
Midway throllgh George Eliot's last novel, Daniel Deronda (1876), the
title character, a Jewish orphan raised as an English aristocrat, wanders
into a secondhand bookshop in East London and finds
something that he wanted-nalnely that wonderful piece of auto-
biography, the life of the Polish Jew Solomon Mailnon; which as he
could easily slip it into his pocket, he took from its place, and entered
the shop.2
The remarkable story about Maimon and the Vilna Gaon that is con-
tained in this letter appears to be intended, at least in its extant version,
to demonstrate that the Gaon, and l1ence the culture that he repre-
sented, had nothing to fear fiom either the "Socrates of Berlin" or the
falTIous Lithuanian apiqores who had correspol1ded with IZant. It also
illustrates the way in which MailTIon's life was situated at the intersec-
tion of the worlds of traditional Lithuanian rabbinic scholarship and
the Haskala (among others).
In the letter, Maimon tells Mendelssohn how he ilTIpersonated an
Italian rabbi, thus explaining his shorn beard and short coat-Italians,
then, as now, were known for their fashion-a biblical grammarian
from Padua, in order to visit the Gaon. 15 He further claimed to be the
author of a book on Hebrew syl10nyn1s. 16 Maimon describes forging
letters of introduction, which describe hilTI as an emissary sent to learn
the Gaon's response to questions posed by contemporary heretics. The
Gaon responds masterfully, although, perhaps u11fortunately, the letter
details 11either the exact questions posed nor their al1swers. Afterward,
the Gaon graciously asks his visitor about the subject of his book.
[He said] explain the difference for me between: sason) simcha) gila)
rina) ditza) hedva [six biblical words for happiness]. And I answered
him according to lTIy opinion. He responded haven't you forgotten to
explain ditza? I said ditza isn't [a synonYlTI of] happiness in the holy
language. He responded ... doesn't our great Rabbi, Rashi, explain
ditza as meaning happiness? ... I answered hilTI that Rashi did not
know how to explain the peshuto shel Miqra . . . he responded in a
loud voice didn't our holy Rabbis, the lTIasters of midrash, explain it as
happiness, when they said "there are ten words for happiness," includ-
ing ditza? I responded that the masters of midrash also did not know,
because they were not alTIOng the n1asters of correct peshat. 17
infinity."43 But he had little interest in why Mailllon had taken it from
Narboni, let alone Narboni's original philological or metaphysical
point (or indeed who Narboni was). In Benjamin's fertile mythologi-
cal imagination, the shards of the stones upon which the original reve-
lation had been engraved became something like signatures of the di-
vine in1pressed on the physical world. 44
Leo Strallss, on the other hand, read Maimon in the radically natu-
ralist spirit in which he wrote. Strauss would appear to have first en-
coulltered the (for him) crucial esotericist idea ofapplying the Spinozist
description "theological-political" to Maimonides from Maimon's au-
tobiography, which he cited in an early essay.45 Nonetheless, Maimon
apparently played, even in the case of Strauss, a relatively minor role.
Strauss would doubtless have found his way to esoteric rationalism with
or without Maimon, just as Scholen1 and Rosenzweig would have re-
jected any such rationalism whether they had read Maimon or not.
Solomon Maimon is famous (to the extent that he is famous) for two
extraordinary accomplishments within the German and Jewish Enlight-
enments of the late eighteenth century. He was among the very first
philosophical critics to truly engage the central problems of Immanuel
IZant's great epistemological project in the Critique ofPure Reason and
to sketch the contours of a post-IZantian German Idealism in response.
He was certainly the first writer to vividly depict the wrenching move
of an Eastern European Jew from traditional rabbinic culture to the
Western European Enlightenment, in his autobiography.
We might call the first of these accomplishments philosophical and
the second literary. On the face of it, they have little to do with one
another, except for the contingent fact that Main1on's achievements as
a philosopher legitimated his worthi11ess as an autobiographical sub-
ject (as Maimon himself well llnderstood). This, in fact, has been the
approach of writers on Maimon over the past two centuries. Philoso-
phers have treated his autobiography as a colorful footnote and have pro-
ceeded quicldy to the technical argumentation; historians have taken
Maimon's philosophical accomplishment as merely one of the earliest
and most dramatic illustrations of the Jewish e11try into European high
culture, and literary critics have generally ig110red the role ofphilosoph-
ical ideas, tropes, and argume11ts in Maimon's autobiography, let alone
their historical origins. Such approaches are justifiable within their dis-
158 ciplinary borders, but sometimes it is necessary to cross borders in order
to nlap important territory. As I have shown, Maimon's philosophical
and autobiographical works are n10re than merely contingently related,
and understanding the way in which they inforn1 each other helps to
Conclusion 159
Introduction
1. Arnulf Zweig, trans. and ed., Immanuel I(ant: Correspondence (Catnbridge,
England, 1999), pp. 3II - 2.
2. Zweig, I(ant: Correspondence, pp. 132-8.
3. For a biographical study, see Martin L. Davies, Identity or History: Marcus
Herz and the End ofthe Enlightenment (Detroit, 1995).
4. Zweig, I(ant: Correspondence, p. 293.
5. Zweig, I(ant: Correspondence, p. 292.
6. Zweig, I(ant: Correspondence, p. 312.
7. For a historical portrait of the salon, see Deborah Hertz, jeJvish High Society
in Old Regime Berlin (New Haven, 1988). The classic study of the significance of
such institutions as spaces for early Inodern public discourse is Jiirgen Habern1as,
The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Thon1as Biirger, trans. (Caln-
bridge, Mass., 1989). For an application of a generally Habermasian Inodel to this
period in Jewish history, see the influential study of David Sorkin, The Transfor-
mation ofGerman jewry) 1780-1840 (Oxford, 1987).
8. Sololnon Maimon, Versuch iiber die TranJcendentalphilosophie) mit einem
Anhang iiber die symbolische Erkenntnis und Amerkungen (Berlin, 1790).
9. Solomon Maimon, GivaJat ha-Moreh (Berlin, 1791).
10. Solomon Maimon, Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte) Von ihm selbst
erziihlt und herausgegeben von I(arl Philipp Moritz (Berlin, 1792-3).
II. Alan Mintz, Banished from Their FatherJs Table: Loss of Faith and Hebrew
Autobiography (Bloomington, Ind., 1989), p. 10. This judgn1ent has been recently
confirmed in extensive detail in the con1prehensive study by Marcus Moseley, Be-
ing for M.,vselfAlone: Origins ofjewish Autobiography (Stanford, 2005).
12. Zweig, I(ant: Correspondence, p. 476.
13. Cf. Yinniyahu Yovel, Dark Riddle: I(ant) Nietzsche) and the jelvs (University
Park, Penn., 1999), pp. 18-9. Yovel suggests that this passage was actually in some
sense directed at Mendelssohn. This is simply n1istaken. Mendelssohn had been
dead for eight years, did not know Reinhold, and had a fairly cordial relationship
Notes to Pages 4- - 6
with IZant. Main10n, on the other hand, vvas both Reinhold's bitter rival and alTIOng
the lTIOst formidable of those who both understood "the critical philosophy" and
thought it could be improved.
14. SOlOlTIOn Main10n, Streifereien im Gebiete der Philosophie (Berlin, 1793).
15. For an anecdotal account of IZant's childhood that discusses his Lutheran
upbringing, see J. H. W. Stuckenberg, The Life ofImmanuel I(ant (London, 1882),
ch. 1. See also Ernst Cassirer, I(a'nt: Life and H10rk (New Haven, 1980), pp. 12-39;
and Manfred IZuehn, I(ant: A Life (Calnbridge, Mass., 2001), pp. 24-60.
16. The name ofthe town in which Dov Baer held court is transcribed variously.
'The spelling I adopt here is ll1eant to reflect Yiddish pronunciation rather than the
Polish orthography, in conformity with the usage of~ for exalTIple, Allan Nadler, The
Faith ofthe Mithnagdim: Rabbinic Responses to Hasidic Rapture (Baltimore, 1997).
17. These ambivalently related characterizations n1ay, in part, be traceable to
the lnedieval Christian question of vvhether to regard Jews as atavistic Old Testa-
ment biblicists or as adherents of a new Taln1udic heresy (nova lex). See Frank
Manuel, The Broken Staff: Judaism Through Christian Eyes (Calnbridge, Mass.,
1992), and Amos Funkenstein, Perception of Jewish History (Berkeley, 1993),
pp. 172-200. For Enlightenment attitudes toward Eastern Europe, see Larry Wolff,
The Invention of Eastern Europe: The Map of Civilization in the Mind of the En-
lightenment (Stanford, 1994), especially ch. 7, on Poland.
18. Heinrich Graetz, History ofthe Jews (Philadelphia, 195 6 ), v. 5, p. 407.
19. For a recent, and ultimately unsuccessful, attempt to relate Maimon's early
kabbalistic interests to his later philosophy, see the otherwise excellent study of
Meir Buzaglo, Solomon Maimon: Monism) Skepticism) and Mathematics (Pitts-
burgh, 2002), pp. 130-5.
20. I think, for instance, that David Sorkin, who is the leading American histo-
rian of the Haskala, sometimes falls into this trap. For an early instance, see his
"Jews, the Enlightenlnent, and Religious Toleration: Some Reflections," Leo Baeck
International Year Book (1992), p. 10. Sorkin's most important recent studies-
Moses Mendelssohn and the Religious Enlightenment (Berkeley, 1997) and The Berlin
Haskalah and German Religious Thought: Orphans of [(nowledge (London,
2000 )-display similar tendencies on occasion. I discuss these issues a little further
in Chapter 2.
21. I quote from the most accessible recent edition, Salomon Maimons Lebens-
geschichte, Zwi Batscha, ed. (Frankfurt, 1984), p. 154. Here and throughout, I have
dravvn on the incomplete nineteenth-century English translation of J. Clark Mur-
ray, which has been recently reprinted, The Autobiography of Solomon Maimon
(Urbana-Chalnpaign, 2001). (A modern German scholarly edition that respects
the integrity of the original remains a desideratum, as does a complete and accu-
rate English translation.) The patron is actually identified, in the literary fashion of
the day, only as "H--." Davies, in Identity or History? identifies this figure as
Herz (p. 10 and fn. 28), as have others. Maimon's slighting of "H's" philosophical
Notes to Pages 7-10 r67
32. Alisdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory (Notre Dan1e,
1984), p. 52, and esp. ch. 5,passim.
33. In particular, MacIntyre works vvith a rather unnuanced and rOlnantic idea
of the theoretical stability of the n1edieval religious Aristotelianisln of Aquinas and
others (e.g., Main10nides). Part ofvvhat I will sho\v about Main10n is that he self-
consciously releases the radical and even anti-ethical potential of this philosophical
tradition. MacIntyre's ongoing refonnulations and the cOlnlnentary and criticisn1
that these works have elicited is beyond the scope of this study.
34. Vivasvan Soni, "Affecting Happiness: The Emergence of the Modern
Political Subject in the Eighteenth Century," Ph.D. dissertation (Duke University,
2000 ).
35. For a con1prehensive discussion of the centrality of Bildung for modern Ger-
n1an Jewry, see Sorkin, Transformation ofGermanIervry. On the Aristotelian sources
for the developlnent of early ideas of Bildung, see Robert E. Norton, The Beautiful
Soul: Aesthetic Morality in the Eighteenth Century (Cornell, 1995), esp. ch. 3.
36. Wolfson, The Philosophy ofSpinoza, v. I, pp. vii-viii. Wolfson discusses Mai-
n10n's cOlnparison of Spinoza's account of the relationship between finite n10des
and an infinite God to the Lurianic doctrine of Tzimtzum, or divine contraction,
on pp. 394-5.
37. On the vexed question of Spinoza's Jewish education, see, now, Steven
Nadler, Spinoza: A Life (Can1bridge, England, 1999), ch. 4. For a critique ofWolf-
son's general approach, see Edwin Curley, Behind the Geometrical Method: A Read-
ing ofSpinozaJs Ethics (Princeton, 1988), pp. x-xii.
38. Zweig, I(ant: Correspondence, p. 175.
39. Moses Mendelssohn, "Morgenstunden," In Gesammelte Schriften Iu-
biliiumsausgabe, Alexander Altn1ann, ed. (Stuttgart, 1971), v. 3, pt. 2, p. 3.
40. I(arl Reinhold, "Briefe tiber die kantische Philosophie," Der Teutsche
Merkur, January 1787, third letter, p. 12.
41. Robert Pippin has produced an interesting and important body ofwork de-
voted to arguing for this characterization and working through its consequences.
For his most succinct statements, and references to his other work, see his Mod-
ernism as a Philosophical Problem: On the Dissatisfactions ofEuropean High Culture
(Oxford, 1991), esp. ch. 3, and his Idealism as Modernism: Hegelian Variations
(Cambridge, England, 1997), esp. ch. I.
42. In1n1anuel I(ant, Critique of Pure Reason, Nonnan I(elnp Smith, trans.
(New York, 1963), Axi-xii.
43. In1manuel I(ant, "An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenlnent?" in
What Is Enlightenment? Eighteenth-Century AnS1vers and TIventieth-Century Ques-
tions, Jalnes Schn1idt, ed. (Berkeley, 1996), p. 58.
44. This is from the famous Davos disputation with Heidegger over the nature
of I(ant's philosophy, reproduced in Martin Heidegger, I(ant and the Problem of
Metaphysics, Richard Taft, trans. (Bloomington, 1990), app. 2, p. 172.
Notes to Pages 14-21 r69
Chapter One
1. A cOlTIplete list of such works would be tedious. However, in addition to the
treatment ofHeinrich Graetz, A History ofthe ]e'ws (Philadelphia, 1956), p. 6, and the
work of Hillel Levine, The Economic Origins ofAntisemitism: Poland and Its Jews in
the Early Modern Period (New Haven, 1991), p. 4and fn. 7, see, for example, Bernard
Dov Weinryb, The Jews ofPoland: A Social and Economic History ofthe Jewish Com-
munity of Poland) 1100 -1800 (Philadelphia, 1973). For a partial exception, see the
brief but nuanced discussion of MailTIOn'S proposed conversion in Jacob I(atz, Out
ofthe Ghetto: The Social Background ofJe1vish Emancipation) 1770 -1870 (Can1bridge,
Mass., 1973), pp. 114-15, and compare with n1Y discussion in Chapter 4.
2. Or thereabouts. The question of the exact date of Maimon's birth has been
the subject of son1e dispute. The date is generally put at 1754; see, for instance, En-
cyclopedia Judaica S.v. "Maimon, Solomon." This date follows Sabbattia Wolff's
early men10ir, Maimoniana oder Rhapsodien zur Charakteristik Salomon Maimons
(Berlin, 1813), p. 10, which was echoed by the first in1portant scholarly work
on MailTIon, Abrahan1 Geiger's "Salomon MailTIOnS Entwicklung," Jiidische
Zeitschrift 4 (1866), pp. 198-99. However, the date does not quite tally with vari-
ous ren1arks of Maimon, as was recognized by Friedrich I(untze, Die Philosophie
Salomon Maimons (Heidelberg, 1912), p. 502, who noted that in September 1794
Maimon wrote to Goethe, "Ich trete zwar erst in n1einem 42 Jahr." In his in1por-
tant introduction to the Hebrew translation of Main10n's autobiography, Pinchas
Lahover strengthened the case for n10ving the date backward to 1753, based on a
relTIark in Maimon's unpublished Hebrew manuscript Hesheq Shelomo, folio 19. As
Lahover also insists, Main10n's birthplace was certainly Sukoviborg rather than the
170 Notes to Pages 22-23
nearby Nieswicz (to which he later moved). See Solomon Main10n, Hayyei Shlomo
Maimon, Pinchas Lahover, cd., and Y. L. Baruch, trans. (Tel Aviv, 1941), p. 9.
3. For an overview of this economic arrangement, see M. J. Roslnan, The LordJs
Jews: Jelvish-Magnate Relations in Eighteenth-Century Poland (Cambridge, Mass.,
1989), esp. pp. 1-22. For an illulninating socioeconomic case study, see Gershon
Hundert, The Jews in a Polish Private T01vn: The Place of Opat01v in the Eighteenth
Century (BaltilTIore, 1992). The work of Hundert, Roslnan, and others has sub-
stantially revised the Inonochromatic portrait of Polish-Jewish relations painted by
previous historians. For a discussion of the Halakhic details of Jewish leaseholding
in Poland, see Edward Fram, Ideals Face Reality: Jelvish LalV and Life in Poland)
I550 -I655 (Cincinnati, 1997), ch. 6.
4. The bulk of Ashkenazi Jewry lived in the Polish Lithuanian COInmonwealth
throughout Inost of the eighteenth century. The population figure of 750,000 was
arrived at by Raphael Mahler, The Jelvs ofOld Poland in Light ofNumbers (Warsaw,
1958) (in Yiddish), on the basis of a 1764 census. For more recent discussions that
accept Mahler's reasoning, see Rosman, The LordJsJelvs, and Shaul Stalnpfer, "The
1764 Census of Polish Jewry," Bar IUan 24-25 (1989), pp. 41-147.
5. Solomon Main10n, Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte, Zwi Batscha, ed.
(Frankfurt, 1984), p. 15.
6. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 16.
7. Levine, Economic Origins ofAntisemitism, pp. 1-19,232-40. Levine refers to
Main10n's grandfather and his broken bridge at several key points throughout the
book and draws on Maimon's autobiography rather uncritically for his account of
eighteenth-century Polish blood libels as well. For trenchant criticism on this and
other scores, see the brief review of Gershon D. Hundert, American Historical Re-
vielv, 98 (October 1992), p. 1246, and cf. Hundert's similar criticisms of the work
of Majer Balaban and Wladyslaw Smolenski in the introduction to his Jelvs in a Pri-
vate Polish Town, p. xv. See also Levine's discussion in "'Should Napoleon Be Vic-
torious . . . ': Politics and Spirituality in Early Modern Jewish Messianism,"
Jerusalem Studies in Jelvish Thought 16-17 (1997), pp. 65-84.
8. Adam Teller argues for the specific historical plausibility of Mailnon's ac-
count, even if it should not be taken as typical, in "The Reliability of SoloInon
Maimon's Autobiography as an Historical Source," Gal-Ed: On the History of the
Jews in Poland 14 (1995), pp. 13-23 (in Hebrew).
9. For a brief statement of this position, see M. J. Rosman, "Jewish Perceptions
of Insecurity and Powerlessness in 16th-18th Century Poland," Polin I (1986),
pp.19- 27
10. Such two-generation households were exceedingly common, as Jacob I(atz
showed in his classic study "Family, I(inship, and Marriage in the 16th to 18th
Centuries," Jewish Journal ofSociology I (1959), pp. 4 -22.
II. Main10n n1entions his older brother Joseph in Lebensgeschichte, p. 32.
Notes to Pages 24 -25 171
18. See, for exan1ple, the characterization ofAchim Engstler in his Untersuchun-
gen zum Idealismus Salomon Maimons (Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt, 1990), p. 26.
19. For the eighteenth-century Ashkenazic, especially Polish, practice of n1ar-
rying boys off at this age, see the responsa of Mailllon's older rabbinic contempo-
raries: R. Jacob Emden, She)elat Yavetz (Altona, 1759), no. 14-, p. 18; and Rabbi
Ezekiel Landau, Noda be-Yehuda (Prague, 1811), no. 54-, p. 63. For a provocative his-
torical discussion of the phenoillenon, see David Biale, Eros and the Jelvs: From Bib-
lical Israel to Contemporary America (New York, 1992), pp. 127-30. For a demo-
graphic discussion, see Andrejs Plakans and Joel M. Halpern, "An Historical
Perspective on Eighteenth Century Jewish Fan1ily Households in Eastern Europe:
A Prelin1inary Case Study," in Modern Jewish Fertility, Paul Ritterband, ed. (Lei-
den, 1981), pp. 1-29. Plakans and Halpern note four instances of such n1arriages in
their Latvian data and reillark that "they would appear to require cultural rather
than den10graphic explanation" (p. 27). This is precisely right. Note that the hus-
bands of these n1arriages are listed without official occupation. They lllay very well
have been young scholars like Maimon.
20. See the discussion of Mai1110n and later Inaskilic memoirs in Biale, Eros and
the Jelvs, pp. 14-8 -52.
21. Mai1110n, Lebensgeschichte, p. 62. The coincidence of the chapter nUlllber
\vith Main10n's marriage age is likely a deliberate bit of Maimonian literary play.
22. Thus, for instance, Soloillon Dubno (1738 - 1813) tutored Moses Men-
delssohn's son Joseph (see Alexander Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn: A Biographical
Study [Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1973], p. 355); Isaac Satanow (1732-1804-) tutored for
several Berlin families (see Joseph I<Iausner, Historiya shel haSifrut haIvrit ha-
Hadasha [Jerusalen1, 1952], v. I, p. 165); and Manasseh ofIlya (1767-1831), a n10re
conservative Maskil, also worked as a family tutor (see Yitzhak Barzilay, Manasseh
ofIlya: Precursor ofModernity Among the Jelvs ofEastern Europe [Jerusalen1, 1999],
p.24-).
23. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 71. This incident plays a part in Sander
Gilman's speculative psychoanalytic reading of Maimon's Lebensgeschichte, in Jew-
ish Self-Hatred: Anti-Semitism and the Hidden Language of the Jews (Baltin10re,
1986 ), pp. 125-32.
24-. Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 24-, and see Zwi Batscha's editorial note 8.
25. For another example of Maimon's n1isogyny, see Lebensgeschichte, pp. 179-
81. I alll indebted here to a perceptive essay by Bluma Goldstein, which I hope she
will publish.
26. Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 97.
27. See Plakans and Halpern, "Historical Perspective on Eighteenth Century
Jewish Faillily Households."
28. For the Tahlludic origins of this tension, see Daniel Boyarin, Carnal Israel:
Reading Sex in Talmudic Culture (Berkeley, 1993), esp. pp. 134--66. Boyarin has
also explored later, nineteenth-century culturallnanifestations of the Inale ideal of
Notes to Pages 28-29 173
37. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, p. 110. Maimon actually uses initials, saying that
he traveled to "M--, where the leader B--lived," but the identity of the place
and leader have never been in doubt.
38. Although Main10n does not indicate exactly where he was living at the tin1e,
we can aSSUlne that he was still in Polish Lithuania, in the general vicinity of
Nieswicz, Slonin1, and Mohilna, so a trip to Mezeritch in Volhynia was a major un-
dertaking.
39. Interestingly, Maimon does not appear to be aware of Rabbi Israel Baal
Shen1 Tov (1700-1760) as a unique founder of the lTIOVement. He does, however,
i11ention another "BeShT," Joel Baal Shem, a well-known folk healer (it is not clear
whether MailTIOn is referring to the late seventeenth-century author of Mifalot Elo-
him, published posthumously in 1727, or his grandson and editor of the saIne
nan1e); see Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 108. On the lneaning of the honorific title,
see Gershom ScholelTI's discussion in Encyclopedia Judaica, s.v. "Ba'al Shem." In-
cidentally, Main10n's indistinct knowledge about the origins of the lTIOVen1ent may
support Moshe Rosman's argument, in Founder ofHasidism, that Israel Baal Shen1
Tov was only recognized retrospectively as the founder of a distinct moven1ent.
40. Main10n represents both "the founder of the Christian religion" and "the
notorious Shabatai Zevi" as similar critics of rabbinic hegemony. Of the former he
writes with dry irony that he succeeded in reforming "at least part of the Nation."
See Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 106.
41. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 102-3.
42. See Rivka Schatz-Uffenheimer, Hasidism as Mysticism: Quietistic Elements
in Eighteenth Century Hasidic Thought, Jonathan Chipman, trans. (Princeton,
1993) .
43. The nineteenth-century historian Joseph Flinn identified the proto-
maskilic Rabbi of Slonim in question as Rabbi Shin10n ben Moredechai, who
later provided an introductory approbation for Rabbi Baruch Schick's well-
known translation of Euclid's Elements into Hebrew. See Joseph Flinn, Safah le-
Ne)emanim (Vilna, 1881), p. 94. One of the n1edical textbooks appears to have been
Johann Adam I(ulmus, Anatomische Tabellen (Leipzig, 1741); I have been unable to
conclusively identify the others. See Shmuel Feiner, The Je'wish Enlightenment,
Chaya Naor, trans. (Philadelphia, 2002), esp. ch. 2.
44. Moses Shulvass, From East to West: The liVestward Migration ofJervs from
Eastern Europe During theI7th andI8th Centuries (Detroit, 1971), esp. pp. 79-125;
and William Hagen, Germans) Poles) andJelvs: The Nationality Conflict in the Pruss-
ian East) I772 -I9I4 (Chicago, 1980).
45. MailTIOn, Lebensgeschichte, p. 122.
46. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 123.
47. Marcus Herz had actually been among the enlightened Jewish students of
I(onigsberg, where he studied with I(ant, but by this time (1777 or 1778) he had
already moved to Berlin.
Notes to Pages 31 -33 175
48. By the tin1e MailTIon arrived in IZonigsberg, it had gone through nine edi-
tions. See Altn1ann, Moses Mendelssohn, p. 148.
49. See Alexander Altn1ann, "Moses Mendelssohn: The Archetypal Gern1an-
Jew," in The Jewish Response to German Culture: From the Enlightenment to the Sec-
ond World War, Jehuda Reinharz and Walter Schatzberg, eds. (Hanover, 1985), p. 3.
50. Mendelssohn hilTIself apparently considered rendering his Phiidon in He-
brew but decided it was too hard. Naftali Herz Wessely also considered translating
the work but gave it up. In 1765, Mendelssohn did compose a long epistolary essay
in Hebrew on the ilTIITIOrtality of the soul that drew on Hebrew classical sources to
ITIake si.n1ilar arglUTIents; see Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn, pp. 179-93. This work was
published posthun10usly as Sefer ha-Nefesh (Berlin, 1787) by David Friedlander. It is
to be distinguished fron1 the Hebrew translation ofthe Phiidon that was finally pub-
lished in the saIne year by Isaiah Beer-Bing, Fadon: Hu Sefer ha-Nefesh (Berlin, 1787).
The contemporary den1and for Hebrew translations of Mendelssohn is attested to
by Isaac Satanov in an appendix to his Sefer ha-Middot (Berlin, 1784), p. 138.
51. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, p. 125.
52. lVlain10n, Lebensgeschichte, p. 129. On the term Betteljude and the large
nun1ber of Eastern European Jewish wanderers who fit the category at this tin1e,
see Shulvass, From East to West, esp. pp. 13-17 and pp. 70-74 and notes.
53. MaiITIon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 133.
54. The manuscript is now held by the Institute tor Microfilmed Hebrew Man-
uscripts at the Jewish National and Hebrew University Library, JerusaleITI, cata-
logued as MS 806426. Abrahan1 Geiger's conspectus, "Salomon MaiITIons En-
twicldung," is the first scholarly discussion, although it is briefand marred by aniITIUS
against the genre. The ITIanuscript was held by the ]udische Hochschule frOITI some-
time in the mid-nineteenth century until World War II, when it was apparently taken
to the United States by .l\lexander Guttn1an. With the exception ofthe pages copied
by Scholem, the manuscript was lost to view. It was rediscovered by Moshe Idel at a
Sotheby's auction of Guttn1an's collection in New York in 1981. On the subsequent
controversy over its rightful ownership and the eventual disposition of the Hesheq
Shelomo and other manuscripts, see H. C. Zafren, "From Hochschule to Judaica
Conservancy Foundation: The GuttITIan Affair," Je1vish Book Annual 47 (1989),
pp. 6 -26. I discuss parts of this manuscript in some detail in Chapter 2. One other
Hebrew manuscript from Maimon is known to be extant, Ta)alumot Holchma, an
account of Newtonian mathematical physics, written in the late 1780s while Mai-
ITIOn was in Breslau. It is briefly quoted and discussed in Samuel Hugo Bergman,
haFilosofia shel Shelomo Maimon, 2nd ed. (Jerusalem, 1968), app. B, pp. 201-4.
55. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, p. 134. The anecdote is actually n10re plausible
than it might sound. Fish are COn1lTIOnly associated with the souls of the righteous
in Jewish folklore. For an entertaining account of a twenty-first-century reprise of
this incident in a traditional Ashkenazi community, see Corey IZilgannon, "Mira-
cle? Dream? Prank? Fish Talks, Town Buzzes," Ne1v YOrk Times, p. AI.
176 Notes to Pages 33-36
aus Littauen gebiirtig." See San1uel Hugo Berglllan, The Philosophy of Salomon
Maimon, Noah J. Jacobs, trans. (Jerusalem, 1967), p. 2, fn. 2. (The footnote does
not appear in the Hebrevv edition). For the Gymnasiun1 Christianeun1's place in
the Auftlarung, see Franklin IZopitzsch, Grundziige einer Sozialgeschichte der
Auftlarung in Hamburg und Altona (Han1burg, 1982), pp. 713-38.
64-. Every proposed liberalization of Jewish rights in Prussia fron1 1780 until
1812 included a provision requiring Jevvs to take a fixed surnallle in place of their
patronymic. Other provisions included conducting business in Gern1an rather than
Yiddish and shaving off one's beard. See Dietz Bering, The Stigma of Names: Anti-
semitism in German Daily Life) I8I2 -I933, N. Plaice, trans. (Ann Arbor, Mich.,
1992 ), pp. 27-4-3
6S. Mailllon could conceivably have known of the fourteenth -century philoso-
pher Shelon10 ben Menahelll Prat Maimon, who was the last influential teacher of
philosophy in Provence. His work and that of his students did circulate in lllanu-
script fonll in eighteenth-century Eastern and Central Europe. On this Main10n,
see Colette Sirat, A History ofJe1vish Philosophy in the Middle Ages (Can1bridge, En-
gland, I98S), pp. 397-98; and Ernst Renan, Les ecrivans juifs du XIV siecle (Paris,
184-3), pp. 4-07-13
66. For a discussion of IZohen's perhaps apocryphaln1ission in which he deter-
mined that the Maggid was not a Talmid Hakham at the behest of the Vilna Gaon,
see Simon Dubnow, Toldot haHasidut (Tel Aviv, 1932), pp. 4-63 -6S; and Wolf Zeev
Rabinowitsch, Lithuanian Hasidism from Its Beginnings to the Present Day, M. B.
Dagut, trans. (London, 1970), p. 13. On his opposition to Mendelssohn, see Alt-
lllann, Moses Mendelssohn, pp. 383-88.
67. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 188-89.
68. The refusal to grant one's wife a divorce is not aillong the original rabbinic
list of the twenty-four actionable causes for excollllllunication (see T B. Berakhot,
19a), but it is mooted in the later Ashkenazi responsa literature. See the sources
cited by IZatz, Tradition and Crisis, p. lIS and notes.
69. Heinrich Heine, Religion and Philosophy in Germany, John Snodgrass,
trans. (Albany, 1986), p. 70. Heine's reillarks on Mendelssohn, whom he falllously
compares to Luther, are also perceptive.
70. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 191. Perhaps because of the ensuing contro-
versy, Maimon mentions then1 only by their initials. I follow the plausible identifi-
cations of Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn, p. 363 and note.
7!. Jacques Chretien de Beauval Basnage, Histoire des Juifs: depuis Jesus-Christ
a
jusquJa present) pour servir de continuation Phistoire de Joseph (Rotterdan1, 1706-
II). It was widely read, reprinted, and translated throughout the eighteenth cen-
tury. Indeed, Maimon may have had help frOlTI the Yiddish paraphrase by Mena-
hen1 Amilander, Sheyris Yisroel (Amsterdan1, 174-3), or the English translation, The
History of the Je1vs from Jesus Christ to the Present Time (London, 1708), which is
178 Notes to Pages 39-41
84. For IZiih's biography, see Meyer I(ayserling, Der Dichter Ephrainz I(iih: Ein
Beitrag zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (Berlin, 1864), and the critical dis-
cussion of Gilman,jelvish Self-Hatred, pp. 115-21.
85. Ephrailll Moses IZiih, Hinterlassene Gedichte (Zurich, 1792), e.g., v. I, p. 157.
86. For a fictional portrait of their friendship, see Berthold Auerbach, Dichter
und I(aufman: ein Lebensgemiilde aus der Zeit Moses Mendelssohn (Stuttgart, 1860).
87. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 198-99.
88. See, for exan1ple, the use of the term in Alexander Baun1garten, Aesthetica
(Berlin, 1750), and in Mendelssohn's faillous prize essay Of1763, reprinted in Moses
Mendelssohn, Gesarnmelte Schriften jubiliiumsausgabe, Alexander Altn1ann et aI.,
eds. (Berlin, 1929), V. 2.
89. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 199.
90. For an insightful study that focuses on just this episode \vith an eye toward
the literary representation of the Aguna, see Blun1a Goldstein, "Deserted Wives:
Agunas on German Soil in Glild's Memoirs and Soloillon Mailllon's Autobiography"
(forthcoilling).
91. Wolff, Maimonia, p. 177.
92. See the discussion of Frederick Beiser, Fate of Reason: German Philosophy
from I(ant to Fichte (Cambridge, 1987), esp. pp. 105-7. Part of Main10n's transla-
tion is preserved in Giva)at ha-Moreh; the rest is lost.
93. Beiser, Fate of Reason, pp. 172-77. The two versions of the infamous
"Feder-Garve Review" have been translated and annotated in Brigitte Sassen,
trans. and ed., I(ant)s Early Critics: The Empiricist Critique of the Critical Philoso-
phy (Cambridge, England, 2000).
94. Gnothi Sauton oder Magazin zur Erfahrungsseelenkunde appeared from 1783
to 1793. On Maimon's involvement with the journal, see Liliane Weissberg, "Er-
fahrungsseelenkunde als ald(ulturation: Philosophie, und Lebensgeschichte bei
Salomon Maimon," in Der Ganze Mensch: Anthropologie und Literatur: lvissenschaft
in achtzehnten jahrhundert, H. J, Schings, ed. (Stuttgart, 1994), pp. 298-328. On
Moritz, see Mark Boulby, I(arl Philipp Moritz: At the Fringe of Genius (Toronto,
1979); and Martin L. Davies, "I(arl Philipp Moritz's Erfahrungsseelenkunde: Its
Social and Intellectual Origins," Oxford German Studies 16 (1985), pp. 13-35.
95. Solomon Maimon, Philosophisches Wiirterbuch oder Beleuchtung der lvichtig-
sten Gegenstiinde der Philosophie in alphabetischer Ordnung (Berlin, 1791).
96. Soloillon Mailllon, Giva)at ha-Moreh, Isaac Euchel, ed. (Berlin, 1791).
97. Soloillon Maimon, Salomon Mai1nons Lebensgeschichte, IZarl Philipp Moritz,
ed. (Berlin, 1792-93).
98. As noted in the introduction, note II, Alan Mintz and Marcus Moseley have
both concurred in this judgment. See also my discussion in Chapter 4. Perhaps it
should be noted that a case could also be made for the seventeenth-century work
of Leon de Modena, Hayyei Yehuda (Warsaw, 1911). Modena's work is informed by
the rhetorical traditions of the Renaissance and is often interior in focus, but it also
180 Notes to Pages 45-47
includes tvvo ethical ,vilIs. See Mark R. Cohen, trans. and ed., The Autobiography of
a Seventeenth-Century Venetian Rabbi: Leon Modena)s Life ofJudah (Princeton,
1988 ).
99. M. Vishnitzer, ed. and trans., The Memoirs of Ber of Belechow (London,
1922), which provides several interesting sketches of mid-eighteenth-century Jew-
ish life. The genre distinction between autobiography and n1emoir is put crisply by
Roy Pascal: "In the autobiography proper, attention is focused on the self, in the
n1en10ir or ren1iniscence on others" (Design and Truth in Autobiography [CaIn-
bridge, Mass., 1960 ], p. 5).
100. The Memoirs were not published until 1896, under the editorship of David
IZaufmann, as Die Memoiren der Gliickel von Hameln (Frankfurt, 1896). The only
complete translation was rendered by her descendant (and among other things
Freud's "Anna 0."), Bertha PappenheiIn, in Gern1an in a private edition (Vienna,
1910). The English edition, edited by Marvin Lowenthal, The Memoirs ofGluckel of
Hameln (New York, 1932), omits a good deal.
101. D. IZahana, ed., Megillat Sefer (Warsaw, 1896).
102. IZahana, Megillat Sefer, p. 3.
103. Cf. George Misch on the high medieval autobiography: "The son writes
for the benefit of his fainily what he heard fron1 his father. ... He adds his own life
history and that of his children and grandchildren and binds it all together with
worldly advice and ethical exhortation," in Geschichte der Autobiographie (Frank-
furt, 1969), p. 585. And with regard to Ghickel's familial autobiography, compare
Dipesh Chakrabarty's remarks on women's autobiographies in India between 1850
and 1910, which tend to be about extended fainily rather than individuals ("Post-
Coloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for the Indian Past," Repre-
sentations 37 [winter 1992 ], pp. 8-9).
104. This genre is, along with letters, prefaces to books, and other authorial
asides, one of the key sources tor premodern Jewish self-narrative. See the invalu-
able collection of Israel Abrahams, HebreTv Ethical Wills (Philadelphia, 1938). Leo
Schwarz, Memoirs ofMy People (Philadelphia, 1960), also includes English transla-
tions of several different forn1s of early Jewish self-narrative.
105. Solon10n Maimon, Uber die Progressen der Philosophie (Berlin, 1793); Solo-
n10n Main10n, Versuch einer neuen Logik oder Theorie des Denkens (Berlin, 1794-;
reprinted Berlin, 1912); Solomon Main10n, Die I(athegorien des Aristoteles (Berlin,
1794-); Solon10n Maimon, Bacons von Verulam neues Organon (Berlin, 1793); and
Solomon Mailnon, Anfangsgriinde der Ne1vtonischen Philosophie von Dr. Pember-
ton, F. Bartholdy, trans. (Berlin, 1793), a translation of Henry Pen1berton's popu-
lar exposition of the Principia, titled A Vie1v of Sir Isaac NeJvton)s Philosophy
(London, 1728).
106. Solomon Maimon, Salomon Maimons Streifereien im Gebiete der Philoso-
phie (Berlin, 1793).
Notes to Pages 47-50 181
lI8. Lazarus Bendavid, "Uber SalOITIOn Main10n," National Zeitschrift fur Wis-
senschaft (Berlin, 1801).
119. Sin10n Bernfeld, Michael Sacks (Berlin, 1900), p. 3 (in Hebrew); cf Simon
Bernfeld, [(ampfende Geister imJudentum (Berlin, 1907), esp. pp. 105-19. A cen-
tury later, the editor of a new edition of Maimon's autobiography sent a letter to
the rabbi of Glogau for information on 1\1aiinon's burial and "vas told that ''\ve
know nothing ofMaimon's grave," in Jakob Froiner, ed., Salomon Mainl/ons Lebens-
geschichte (Berlin, 1911), p. 486.
120. Fro111er, Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte, pp. 35-40.
121. Yitzhak Melamed and Florian Ehrensperger visited Siegersdorf and tell n1e
that the stone is still referred to as the Denkmal of "IZalkreuth's Jew."
122. Wolff, Maimonia.
Chapter Two
1. Solomon Maimon, Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte, Z\vi Batscha, ed.
(Frankfurt, 1984), p. 128.
2. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 150. Mendelssohn's edition of Maiinonides'
ltvfillot ha-Higgayon was first published in Hamburg in 176r.
3. The press was established in 1784 as the publishing arm of the Free School of
Berlin. See the classic study of Moritz Steinschneider, "Hebraische Drucke in
Deutschland," Zeitschrift fur die Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland 5 (1892),
pp. 154-86. On Euchel, see Shmuel Feiner, "Isaac Euchel, Entrepreneur of the
Haskala in Gernlany," Zion 52 (1987), pp. 427-69 (in Hebrew).
4. Amos Funkenstein, Perceptions ofJelvish History (Berkeley and Los Angeles,
1993), pp. 234-35 ff. In the following paragraphs, I use different examples of the
scholastic pursuits of these Maskilim than Funkenstein chose, for the sake of the
present exposition.
5. For a recent argument that the generational distinction is crucial to an
understanding of the radicalization of the Haskala, see David Sorkin, The Ber-
lin Haskalah and German Religious Thought: Orphans of I(nolvledge (London,
2000). For distinctions between writers ofHebrewjYiddish and Gennan, see Isaac
Eisenstein-Barzilay's classic articles "The Treatment of the Jewish Religion in the
Literature of the Berlin Haskalah," Proceedings of the American Acade1ny ofJelvish
Research 24 (1955), pp. 39-68, and "The Ideology of the Berlin Haskalah," PAAJR
25 (1956), pp. 1-38. Moshe Pelli concurs in mapping the linguistic distinction more
or less directly onto that between moderates and radicals in The Age ofthe Haskalah
(Leiden, 1979). For an early insistence on the difference between Maskiliin of
Eastern and Western Europe, see Jacob Raisin, The Haskalah Movement in Russia
(Philadelphia, 1913).
6. See James H. Lehman, "Maimonides, Mendelssohn, and the Me'asfim: Phi-
losophy and the Biographical Imagination in the Early Haskalah," Leo Baeck Insti-
Notes to Pages 54 -56 183
tute Year Book 20 (1975), pp. 87-108, esp. pp. 101-3. The Inotto vvas long-lived and
widespread enough to have been picked up and quoted by Jalnes Joyce in Ulysses
(l'Jew York, 1961), p. 687.
7. I know of no definitive history of this phrase. It was perhaps suggested by
Maimonides' daring Deuteronon1ical choice of titles for his great code, Mishneh
Torah (literally, "second Torah"), which he underlined with the introductory claim
that "one could read the Written Torah and this book and learn all Torah without
having read any book between them." For an explicit use of the equation in later
rabbinic literature, see, for exalnple, Rabbi Hayyim Bachrach, Teshuvot Havot Yair,
p.19 2 .
8. Aaron Wolfson-Halle, "Siha be-Eretz ha-Hayyiln," ha-Meassef 7 (1794-7),
briefly discussed by Lehman, "Main10nides, Mendelssohn, and the Me'asfim," and
in some depth by Moshe Pelli, "On the Genre of 'A Dialogue in the Hereafter' in
Hebrew Haskala Literature," Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish
Studies (1982), pp. 209 - 15.
9. Isaac Euchel, ed., Moreh ha-Nevuchim im Shnei Perushim (Berlin, 1796). Sa-
tanov is a fascinating figure who has yet to receive extended, perceptive treatlnent.
Incidentally, Altmann conjectures that Satanov n1ay have been the fellow "Polish
Jew residing in Berlin for the sake of study" who saved Maimon from being ex-
pelled from Berlin a second time for his possession of Millot ha-Higgayon (Alexan-
der Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn: A Biographical Study [London, 1973J, p. 354).
10. Mendel Lefin, trans., Moreh haNevuchim (Zolkiew, 1828), published post-
hun10usly and in direct competition with the third edition of the Main10n-Satanov
Giva)at ha-Moreh. However, it may actually have been published five years later, in
1833, despite the date on the title page; see Moreh naNevuchim le-Rabbenu Moshe
ben Maimon, Michael Schwarz, trans. and ed. (Tel Aviv, 2002), v. 2, app. 3, p. 748,
fi1. 18.
II. The previous publication had been the Renaissance edition of Sabbioneta
(Venice, 1553). See Jacob I. Dienstag, "Maimonides' Guide ofthe Perplexed: A Bib-
liography of Editions and Translations," in Occident and Orient: A Tribute to the
Memory of Alexander Scheiber, Robert Dan, ed. (Leiden, 1988), pp. 98-100. On
this and other publications of the Wulffian Press in Jessnitz, see Alexander Alt-
n1ann, "Moses Mendelssohn's lCindheit in Dessau," Bulletin des Leo Baecks 1nsti-
tuts 10 (1967), pp. 237-75, and Azriel Shohat, 1m Hilufei Tekufot (Jerusalem, 1960),
p. 207-8. For Mendelssohn's Maimonidean scoliosis, see the maskilic hagiography
of Isaac Euchel, Toldot Rabbenu haHakham Moshe Ben Menahem (Lemberg, 1860),
P23
12. Cf. the opening characterization of eighteenth-century Maskilim in Harry
Austryn Wolfson, "Solomon Pappenheim on Time and Space and His Relation to
Locke and Iunt," in Studies in the History ofPhilosophy and Religion, Isadore Twer-
sky and George Williams, eds. (Calnbridge, Mass., 1977), pp. 606-7. An analogous
desire to find connections between Hebrew literary traditions and contemporary
184 Notes to Pages 56 -57
not have had access), see Shlolno Pines, "A Tenth Century Philosophical Corre-
spondence," Proceedings of the American Academy of je1vish Research 24 (1955),
pp. 103-36.
19. Mailnon, Hesheq Shelomo, folios 19-20 (MS 806426, Institute for Micro-
fihned Hebrew Manuscripts at the Jewish National and Hebrevv University Li-
brary, Jerusalem). It remains an open question as to whether the algebra textbook
is an original production or (as is perhaps lnore likely) a translation or paraphrase
of a contemporary Gennan textbook. See Chapter I, note 77, for speculation on its
. relation to the textbook comlnissioned in the 1780s and lnentioned in Lebensge-
schichte, p. I91.
20. I am indebted to Yitzhak Melalned for insisting on this point in several
discussions.
21. On the self-referential titles of rabbinic books, see the classic essay of Solo-
lnon Schecter, Studies in judaism (First Series) (Philadelphia, 1911), pp. 270-82. Of
course, not all such titles were both eponyn10us and then1atically appropriate.
Yohanan Allelnano (1435 -after 1504), one of the Renaissance scholars who taught
Pico della Mirandola Jewish lore, also titled a book Hesheq Shelomo with silnilar
noetic connotations, but I have no evidence that Main10n was aware ofAllemano's
book. On Allemano's perfectionisn1, see Hava Tirosh-Salnuelson, Happiness in
Premodern judaism (Cincinnati, 2003), pp. 412-23. On the other hand, Solon10n
Cohen (d. 1902), a leading Lithuanian Tahnudic scholar of the nineteenth century,
gave his classic work of legal novellae the title without an apparent allusion to any-
thing but his nalne.
22. Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 85.
23. See Steven Harvey, "The Meaning of the Term Designating Love in Judeo-
Arabic Thought and Some Relnarks on the Judeo-Arabic Interpretation of
Maimonides," in judeo-Arabic Studies, Norn1an Golb, ed. (Atnsterdam, 1998),
pp. 175-96.
24. See Jacob IZlatzkin's great lexicon of lnedieval philosophical Hebrew, Otzar
Munahim ha-Filosojiya (Berlin, 1927-33), which lists Perfectio and Vollkommenheit
as the Latin and Gern1an equivalents of shelemut. All three have the connotation of
a thing or act that has been con1pleted. IZlatzkin actually dre\v on Mailnon's Gi-
va)at ha-Moreh on occasion for the identification of n1edieval Hebrew and lnodern
German philosophical terms. See, for example, IZlatzkin, Otzar, s.v. "Behina."
25. Mailnon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 3.
26. Albeit not precisely. The Nicomachean Ethics begins with the n10re conlplex
argument that goods correspond to ends and that Eudaernonia is the highest hu-
man good, although Main10n's statement that "knowledge of this purpose is very
useful for the conduct of lnan" closely paraphrases Nicomachean Ethics, 1094a23-
4. Mailnonides' Guide, and thus the entire medieval Jewish philosophical tradition,
was deeply influenced by the Ethics. However, the earliest Hebrew source for lnore
or less direct knowledge of Aristotle's text vvas through the fourteenth-century
186 Notes to Pages 60 -62
translation of one of Aven~oes' commentaries to the Ethics, which has now been
published in a critical edition by L. V Bern1an, ed., Averroes Middle Commentary
on AristotleJs Nicomachean Ethics in the HebreJv version of Samuel Ben Judah
(Jerusalen1, 1999). MaitTIon, however, would appear to be using a n1anuscript ofthe
Sefer haMiddot of Meir ben Solomon Alguadez (fl. 1390 -1+10), which was trans-
lated from the Latin translation of Boethius. A selection from this version of the
Ethics was later published with a cotTImentary by Maimon's friend Isaac Satanov.
27. MaitTIon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 3, quoting MaitTIonides, "Introduction," to
Perush haMishnayot) Zeraim.
28. Mishna Peah I: I and B. T. Shabbat 127a. I quote this rabbinic staten1ent, from
literally hundreds of others, because it is part of the daily morning liturgy and
hence of the shared religious culture. The originally intended scope of "everything
else" was all the other commandments, but it was commonly quoted more broadly
as a curricular mandate as well. On the Lithuanian ideology ofTalmud Torah in the
late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, see Norman Lamm, Torah for
TorahJs Sake in the Works of Rabbi Hayyim of Volozhin and His Contemporaries
(New York, 1989).
29. For a perspicacious account of the early Main10nidean controversies over
the place of philosophy in the curriculum, see Bernard Septimus, Hispano Jewish
Culture in Transition (Cambridge, Mass., 1982).
30. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folios 3-4. The passage continues with a quota-
tion of scripture that metaphorically describes the extent of Solomonic scientific
wisdom: "He spoke on the purpose of the creation of the trees the grasses and an-
in1al species: 'And he spoke about the trees-from the cedar that is in Lebanon to
the moss that goes out in the wall-and he spoke about the beast, about the bird,
about the reptile and about the fishes' (I<ings 1,5: 13), which demonstrated that he
possessed the divine spirit." (The resonance between Solomon's name Shelomo and
the word for perfection, shelemut, was a fortuitous coincidence for the tTIedieval
adoption of him as the philosopher-Icing.)
31. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 6.
32. Cf. Maimonides, Guide, 111:27 and 111:51.
33. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 16.
34. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 17. The doctrine that Aggadic lore contains
hidden philosophical truth is MaitTIonidean, see Guide of the Perplexed 1:63. The
complaint that Talmudists think the road to heresy is paved with biblical grammar
is also a medieval topos, going back, at least, to the great eleventh-century philol-
ogist Jonah ibn Janah, Sefer haRiqma, Yehuda ibn Tibbon, trans. (Frankfurt, 1856),
and repeated often in maskilic texts.
35. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 17.
36. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 17.
37. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 129. This passage and the one quoted next
have been discussed by Moshe Idel, Hasidism: BetJveen Magic and Mysticism (Al-
Notes to Pages 63-66 187
bany, 1995), pp. 39-+0, although it seen1S to lTIe that they are more skeptical of
kabbalistic doctrine than Idel allows. The book is sealed and the drealTI uninter-
pretable because there is nothing in them unless one simply stipulates (for theo-
logicopolitical reasons) that they are metaphorical renditions of Maimonides. I am
indebted to Prof. Idel, here and elsewhere, for several discussions regarding Mai-
lTIOn and the Hesheq Shelomo in particular.
38. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 1+2.
39. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folios 17-18.
+0. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 18.
+1. See the early fifteenth-century discussion of Profiat Duran, MaJaseh Efod
(Vienna, 1865), pp. 1-5, and the discussion of Isadore Tvversky, "Religion and La\v,"
in Religion in a Religious Age, S. D. Goiten, ed. (Ne\v York, 197+), pp. 69-82. Cf.
Dov Rappel, "The Introduction to the Ma'aseh Efod of Profiat Duran," Sinai 100
(1987), pp. 7+9-95 (in Hebrew).
+2. For instance, Abraham Abulafia's distinction between the theosophical
IZabbala ofSefirot and his own prophetic IZabbala, collected in Adolph Jellinek, ed.,
Philosophie und ICabbalah (Leipzig, 185+), pp. 33-38. Maimon actually distin-
guishes between two sorts of TalITIudists (see the Hebrew text of Hesheq Shelomo,
folio 16), but they quickly coalesce into one antitheoretical party.
+3. Isadore Twersky, "Talmudists, Philosophers, IZabbalists: The Quest for
Spirituality in the Sixteenth Century," in Jewish Thought in the Sixteenth Century,
Bernard Dov ~oopenTIan, ed. (Cambridge, Mass., 1983), p. ++0. And see Twer-
sky's other studies on the theme: "Religion and Law"; "Joseph Ibn IZaspi, Portrait
of a Medieval Jewish Intellectual," in Studies in Medieval Jewish History and Liter-
ature, Isadore Twersky, ed. (Cambridge, Mass., 1979), pp. 231-57; and "Law and
Spirituality in the Seventeenth Century: A Case Study of Rabbi Yair Hayyim
Bacharach," in Jelvish Thought in the Seventeenth Century, Isadore Tvversky and
Bernard Septimus, eds. (Cambridge, Mass., 1987). For a substantive philosophical
narrative that covers lTIuch of the same ground, see Hava Tirosh-Samuelson, Hap-
piness in Premodern Judaism, especially chs. 5, 6, 7, and 9.
++. Aristotle, De Anima, 3:5. I quote from D. W. HalTIlyn, trans. and com-
mentary, AristotleJs De Anima) Books II and III (Oxford, 1968), with slight revi-
sions in light of the translation contained in J. Barnes, ed., Complete Works ofAris-
totle: The Revised Oxford Translation (Princeton, 198+), for present expository
purposes.
+5. MaiITIOn'S lU10wledge of Alexander, whom he refers to in the Hesheq She-
lomo, folio 297, was mediated by Maimonides, who quotes hilTI several times. For
Maimonides' use and lmowledge ofAlexander, see the "Translator's Introduction"
to The Guide ofthe Perplexed, Shlomo Pines, trans. (Chicago, 1963), pp. lxiv-lxxv.
+6. Cf. Aristotle, Metaphysics, VII:7, 1032a32-b2.
+7. Needless to say, I am simplifying an extraordinarily complex story for pres-
ent exegetical purposes. The clearest account of the development of the doctrine
188 Notes to Pages 66-68
Franz Brentano, The Psychology ofAristotle) in Particular His Doctrine ofthe Active
Intellect, Rolfe George, trans. (Berkeley, 1977).
63. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 8.
64. The case with regard to Maimonides' position on the state of the sciences
is vexed, for he (along with others) regarded Aristotelian astronomy as flawed. In
an important and controversial article, Shlomo Pines has argued that this in1plied
a deep skepticism about the possibility of real conjunction with the active intellect,
in "The Lilnitations of Human I(nowledge." For argun1ents to the contrary, see
Alexander Altn1ann, "Maimonides on the Scope of the Intellect," in Alexander
Altmann, VOn del" mittelalterlichen zur modernen Aufkliirung: Studien zur Judis-
chen Geistegeschichte (Tubingen, 1983), pp. 60-129, and Herbert Davidson, "Mai-
monides on Metaphysical I(nowledge," in Maimonidean Studies, Arthur Hyman,
ed. (New York, 1995), v. 3, pp. 49-105
65. See Main10nides' introduction to The Guide of the Perplexed, in which the
rhetoric strives to convey precisely this image.
66. Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 145.
67. Cf. the remark of Mendelssohn's early teacher, Israel Zan10sc, Netzach Yis-
rael (Frankfurt, 1741): "The ancients knew nothing of this science, so why should
I mention every point at which they erred, as there are so many?" (p. 20a), al-
though it is not made in this metaphysical context.
68. A similar set of puzzles about whether the referential function of names and
natural kinds can be explicated in terms of definite descriptions led to the so-called
Direct Theory of Reference, in the Anglo-American philosophy of the 1960s and
1970S. For an influential argument that the contents of one's mind cannot deter-
mine one's reference to a natural kind (like gold), see Hillary Putnam, "The Mean-
ing of 'Meaning,'" in his Mind) Language) and Reality: Philosophical Papers (Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1975), v. 2.
69. See the discussions of Gad Freudenthal, "Human Felicity and Astronon1Y:
Gersonides' War against Ptolemy," Da)at 22 (1989), pp. 55-72 (in Hebrew); and
Menahem I(ellner, "Maimonides and Gersonides on Astronomy and Meta-
physics," in Moses Maimonides: Physician) Scientist) and Philosopher, Fred Rosner
and Samuel I(ottek, eds. (Northvale, N.J., 1993), pp. 91-96. Gersonides gives the
position a Whiggish turn in his commentary to the Song of Songs: "While each of
us will apprehend either nothing or very little, when all that is apprehended is gath-
ered together, a worthy amount will have been gathered," in Levi ben Gershon1,
Commentary on Song ofSongs, M. I(ellner, trans. (New Haven, 1998), p. 23.
70. See Levi ben Gershom, The Wars of the Lord, Seymour Feldman, trans.
(Philadelphia, 1984), v. I, especially chs. II and 13.
71. Main10n, Hesheq Shelomo, folios 8- 9.
72. Maimon's objection that such a doctrine gives every ignoramus at least a
measure of immortality is the opposite of Maimonides' great fifteenth-century op-
ponent, Hasdai Crescas, who objected that any doctrine of immortality as acquired
Notes to Pages 72-76 I9I
intellect did nothing for the pious nonphilosophers, in his fifteenth-century an-
tiphilosophical classic, Or ha-Shem. For discussion of Crescas's critique of Aris-
totelianislll on this point, see the unpublished dissertation of Warren Z. Harvey,
"Hasdai Crescas' Critique of the Theory of the Acquired Intellect" (Columbia
University, 1973).
73. Main10n, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 9.
74. See the classic discussion in the title essay of Leo Strauss, Persecution and
the Art of Writing (Chicago, 1952 ).
75. For a systematic application of this schelna to the first Inedieval Jewish phi-
losopher, see the lllonograph of Alexander Altillann and S. M. Stern, Isaac Israeli)
a Neoplatonic Philosopher of the Early Tenth Century: His Works Translated with
Comments and an Outline ofHis Philosophy (Oxford, 1958), esp. p. 149 and pp. 185-
91, who follow the discussion of H. R. Schwyzer, "Die zvveifache Sicht in der
Philosophie Flotins," Museum Helveticum (1944), esp. pp. 89-90. For Mai-
Inonides' brief discussion of the active intellect as the giver of forms, see Guide,
11:4 and II:n, passim, and the discussion of Davidson, Alfarabi) Avicenna) and
Averroes, pp. 78-79.
76. Derashot ha-Ran was published several tilnes in the late seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries, and I have not located the precise edition that Maimon used.
For a modern critical edition, see Leon Feldn1an, ed., Derashot haRan (Jerusalem,
1973). The passage that Maimon con1n1ents on here is found in the first version of
Sermon 5, p. 68.
77. Mailnon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 40. 'The rabbinic saying is quoted fron1 Gen-
esis Rabba, 68; cf. Leviticus Rabba 8.
78. The attentive reader may note that the Shekhina, which had appeared to
play the role of the active intellect in the Maimonidean text Maimon quoted, has
now becolne passive and explicitly feminine when Maimon renders the schen1e in
the sefirotic terms of the Zohar. The "Holy One Blessed Be He" is the ninth Sefira,
Yesod, which is generally gendered male. For a discussion of related issues of gen-
der symbolism in sefirotic IZabbala, see Moshe Idel, "Sexual Metaphors and Praxis
in the IZabbala," in The Jewish Family: Metaphor and Memory, David IZraemer, ed.
(Oxford, 1989).
79. Cf. Shlomo Pines's suggestion that if God cognizes the system of forn1s of
the universe, then he would be "identical with ... the scientific systeln of the uni-
verse . . . this would n1ake him something coming perilously close to Spinoza's
attribute of thought" ("Translator's Introduction," Guide, p. xcviii). Maimon's
interpretation, I suggest, takes him perilously close to the attribute of extension
as well.
80. Pines, trans., Guide 1:69, p. 167.
81. Maimon, Hesheq Shelomo, folio 285.
82. Isaac Melan1ed, in "SaIOITIOn Maimon and the Spectres of Spinozisln," pa-
per presented at the Maimon Conference, Van Leer Institute (JerusaleIE~~~~~l,-
192 Notes to Pages 76 -78
has also noted this passage and suggests that Main10n's luonist elaboration is luiss-
ing or even conceivably censored. It is true that this passage appears on folio 285
and that the extant manuscript reSUlues on folio 297. However, it is not clear
\vhether Main10n hiluself numbered the n1anuscript and whether whoever did
n1ight not have siluply slipped a digit (only the odd pages are nUlubered, so the
next nun1ber should be 287). In any event the passage does not take up the whole
page and does not break off fl~agn1entarily.
83. See the discussion of Gershom Scholem, "Devekut, or COll1n1union with
God," in his Messianic Idea in judaism and Other Essays on jervish Spirituality (New
York, 1971), esp. 208-10.
84. Dov Baer of Mezeritch, Maggid le-Devarav le-YaJaqov (I(oretz, 1781),
p.26b.
85. On the Maggid's pantheislu, see Rivka Schatz Uffenhein1er, Hasidism as
Mysticism: Quietistic Elements in Eighteenth Century Hasidic Thought, Jonathan
Chipn1an, trans. (Princeton, 1993), esp. ch. 8. This aspect of his thought was espe-
cially developed by his student and Mailuon's conten1porary Schneur Zalman of
Liadi, on whom see Rachel Elior, The Paradoxical Ascent to God: The I(abbalistic
Theosophy ofHabad Hasidism, Jeffrey Green, trans. (Albany, 1993).
86. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 114.
87. Joseph Weiss, "Via Passiva in Early Hasidislu," collected in Joseph Weiss,
Studies in Eastern European jewish Mysticism and Hasidism (London, 1985),
pp. 69-94, esp. n. 10, where he locates the salue hon1ily in the work of a student
of the Maggid, Rabbi Uzziel Meisels, Tiferet Uzziel (Warsaw, 1862), p. 39b. For a
related use to which the Maggid put this verse, see Rivka Schatz- Uffenheiluer, ed.,
Maggid Devarav le-YaJaqov le-Maggid Dov Ber mi-Mezeritsh (Jerusalen1, 1990),
sec. 196, p. 315. Cf. Idel, Hasidism, pp. 195-98.
88. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 102-3.
89. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 102-3.
90. With regard to Vital's work, Mailuon wrote that "leaving out what was en-
thusiastic [Schwiirmerische] and exaggerated, it contained the principle doctrines
of psychology" (Lebensgeschichte, p. 78). Cf. the Maggid's remark with regard to
Vital's most in1portant work: "I teach everyone that all of the [sefirotic] teachings
described in the book Etz Hayyim also apply to this world and the human being"
(Rabbi Dov Baer of Mezeritch, Or ha-Emet, Levi Isaac of Berdichev, ed. [Bnei
Braq, 1967], p. 36d).
91. Mailuon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 77-80, and compare the testimony of
Schneur Zahuan of Liadi in a recently discovered contemporary docun1ent, pub-
lished in the Lubavitch journal I(erem Habad (1990), app. 2, in which he describes
his curriculluu of studies under the Maggid.
92. See, for exaluple, Rabbi Eliyahu ben Sheloluo of Vilna, Biur ha-Gra le-
Mishlei, on Provo 8: 19, and his con1n1entary to Song ofSongs) passim.
Notes to Pages 78-81 193
93. Rabbi Hayyif\! of Volozhin, Nefesh ha-Hayyim, Y. Rubin, ed. (Bnei Brak,
1989), p. 221. The work was published posthumously in 1814 but reflects currents
in the late eighteenth-century mitnagdic response to Hasidism.
94. Rabbi Hayyim ofVolozhin, Ruah Hayyim (Jerusalem, 1976), p. IO.
95. For a sample of Euchel's translation of Avicenna, see "Sefer ha-Refuot," ha-
Meassef(I794), pp. 93-95 The rest of the translation remained unpublished.
96. Isaac Satanov, Sefer ha-Middot (Berlin, 1790).
97. See, for instance, Moshe Pelli, Be-Maavqei Temurah: Iyyunim be-Haskala
ha-Ivrit be-Germaniah (Tel Aviv, 1988), pp. 13-14 and notes. Pelli relies, especially,
on Paul Hazard's account, European Thought in the Eighteenth Century (Glouces-
ter, Mass., 1973).
98. See Klatzkin, Otzar, s.v. "Osher." Maimon uses the term in this sense in the
Hesheq Shelomo several times, for example, folio 16.
99. The article appeared in ha-Meassef 4 (1788), p. 237.
IOO. In Naftali Herz Wessely, Divrei Shalom ve-Emet (Berlin, 1782), we find per-
haps the earliest instance of this ambivalence. Wessely's call for enlightenment in
terms of "the Torah of man" (i.e., Bildung), which is the necessary supplement to
the "Torah of God," is also couched in the traditional discourse of perfection and
exhibits this ambivalence between an intellectual telos and something more cultural.
IOI. Solomon Maimon (Anon.) and Isaac Euchel, "Panim haMoreh," ha-
Meassefs (1789), pp. 243-63.
I02. Maimon and Euchel, "Panim haMoreh," pp. 261-63. A list of more than
two dozen prominent subscribers in 19 cities followed.
I03. In Abraham Geiger, ed., Melo Hofnayim (Berlin, 1840), p. 18 (Hebrew sec-
tion). Earlier versions ofDelmedigo's letter were published in Yehuda Leib Meises,
Qjnat haEmet (Vienna, 1828), pp. 228-32, and, originally, in Delmedigo, Sefer
Elim, where Maimon and Euchelmight have encountered it. On the complicated
and uncertain provenance of these differing versions, see the discussion of David
Ruderman, jewish Thought and Scientific Discovery in Early Modern Europe (New
Haven, 1995), pp. 146 -52.
I04. Shem Tov ben Joseph ben Shem Tov was the last great figure of the Shem
Tov family whose representatives were found among both the great defenders and
opponents of philosophical rationalism in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
Many of Shem Tov's key comments can be read as responding to and moderating
Narboni's Aristotelian radicalism. For discussion of one such instance, see Bernard
Septimus, "Shem Tov and Narboni on Martyrdom," in Studies in Medieval jewish
Thought, Isadore Twersky and B. Septimus, eds. (Cambridge, Mass., 1987),
pp. 447-55 (on Guide III:34).
105. Narboni, known in the Latin tradition as Maestro Vidal, has been the sub-
ject of several important studies over the last few decades. For recent overviews, see
Colette Sirat, A History ofMedieval jewish Philosophy (Cambridge, England, 1985),
pp. 332-41, and the introductory essays in Alfred Ivry, ed., MaJamar al Shelemut
194 Notes to Pages 81-84
ha-Nefesh (Jerusalen1, 1977), and IZaln1an Bland, trans. and ed., Epistle on Conjunc-
tion with the Active Intellect (New York, 1987), which is a Hebrevv translation of and
supercolnn1entary to Averroes's n1iddle cOlnlnentary on Aristotle's De Anima.
106. For a conspectus of Delmedigo's works, see Isaac Eisenstein-Barzilay,
YiJseph Shlomo Delmedigo (Yashar of Candia) (Leiden, 1974), but the n1aterial
ought to be revisited in light of criticism such as that of Ruderman, Jewish Thought
and Scientific Discovery. Sirat places Dehnedigo at the very end of her survey of
n1edieval Jewish philosophy (Medieval Jewish Philosophy, p. 411), although one
might also place hin1 alnong the first of the figures of early Jewish modernity (he
was familiar with Galileo). He is not to be confused with his n10re famous ances-
tor, Elijah Delmedigo (1460-1493), author of Behinat haDat, and translator of
Averroes and others for Pico della Mirandola.
107. It should be noted that, unlike SOlne of the so-called Latin Averroists at
the University of Paris in the thirteenth century, the Averroism of these Jewish
writers was lnuch lnore straightforward: They translated, commented on, and ap-
plied the works of Ibn Rushd, SOlne of which only survive now in the He brew
translation. This is not to say that they possessed all of Averroes' con1lnentaries or
that they did not depart froln his interpretations in in1portant ways. For the classic
nineteenth-century studies of these figures, see Moritz Steinschneider, Die he-
braischen Ubersetzungen des Mittelalters und die Juden als Dolmetscher (Berlin,
1893), and Ernst Renan, Les Ecrivains Juifs Franfais du XIvc siecle (Paris, 1893).
108. I adopt here the language of Jiirgen Habennas, The Structural Transfor-
mation ofthe Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category ofBourgeois Society, Thon1as
Burger, trans. (Can1bridge, Mass., 1989). See also Jacob IZatz's classic discussion of
the "semi-neutral society," in Out of the Ghetto: The Social Background ofJelvish
Emancipation) 1770 -1870 (Canlbridge, Mass., 1973).
109. Indeed, late medieval Jewish critics of philosophy repeatedly blamed the
apostasy of n1uch of Spanish Jewry on the religious disloyalty bred by such a phi-
losophy. An early instance of this is Joseph ben Shem Tov's unfavorable cOlnpari-
son of Spanish conversos with the Ashkenazi martyrs at the time of the Crusades,
in I(evod Elohim (Ferrara, 1556), p. 27a-b. The accusation and accompanying unfa-
vorable comparison with unphilosophical Ashkenazi Jewry becan1e a topos. It was
revived as a partial historical explanation by Yitzhak Baer, who was also ilnplicitly
cOluparing Spanish Jewry of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries to the modern
enlightened German Jewry of which he was a product, in his History of the Jelvs in
Christian Spain (Philadelphia, 1966).
110. Maimon, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 1.
III. I have translated hatzlachat ha-enoshit literally here as "hulnan excellence."
It is another Hebrew Aristotelian term of art and plays the same role as the sum-
mum bonum does in parallel Latin discussions.
112. Pinhas Eliyahu Hurwitz, Sefer Ha-Brit (Jerusalem, 1990), p. 189, and cf.
pp. 362-63. The book was originally published anonymously in Briinn in 1797 and
Notes to Pages 84-89 195
relnains popular in the Haredi world. Remarkably, it cOlnbines a defense of the re-
ligion in post-Lurianic terms with a pre-Copernican account of natural science. For
an account of Hurwitz's career, see Zinberg, A History of]eJvish Literature, v. 6,
pp.260-72.
113. In this passage, Hurwitz actually goes on to invoke IZant, in rather naive
counter-Enlightenlnent fashion, as having shown the ilnpossibility of establishing
n1etaphysical proofs on the basis of reason, thus Inaking room for kabbalistic faith.
114. Mailnon, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 5.
lIS. The Inore con1n10n Ineaning of shevi is imprisonlnent, but I don't think it
is the intended n1eaning here. For the theIne of exile in Mailnon's self-presentation,
see also Chapter 4.
Chapter Three
I. Solomon Mailnon, Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte, Zwi Batscha, ed.
(Frankfurt, 1984), pp. 201-2.
2. For characteristic quotations, see, for example, Salnuel H. Berglnan, The
Philosophy of Solomon Maimon, Noah J. Jacobs, trans. (Jerusalem, 1967), p. 217;
San1uel Atlas, From Critical to Speculative Idealism: The Philosophy ofSolomon Mai-
mon (The Hague, 1964), p. IO.
3. See, for exalnple, Natan Rotenstreich, "On the Position of Main10n's Phi-
losophy," Review ofMetaphysics 21 (I968), pp. 534-45, who explicates the sources
of Mailnon's philosophy in tern1S of this coalition. For the latter list of philosoph-
ical systems, see Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 2IO.
4. In1n1anuel IZant, I(ant: Philosophical Correspondence) 1759 -99, Arnulf Zweig,
trans. and ed. (Chicago, 1967), pp. 70 -76. The letter; dated February 2I, 1772, con-
tains IZant's earliest critical musings. One wonders whether Herz showed it to
Main10n while he was drafting his Transcendentalphilosophie in 1789.
5. See the useful account of IZant's understanding of Leibniz in Henry Allison,
I(ant)s Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense (New Haven,
1983), esp. pp. 19-21 on the "theocentric model."
6. Immanuel IZant, Critique ofPure Reason, Norman IZelnp Slnith, trans. (New
York, 1929), A50/B74-A5I/B75.
7. IZant, Critique, BI39.
8. IZant, Critique, AI4I/BI80-I.
9. Maimon, Versuch uber die Transcendentalphilosophie (Berlin, 1790), p. 62, and
see his cOlnmentary on p. 362. Cf. also Maimon, Giva)at ha-Moreh (Berlin, 179I),
p. IOI.
IO. Sololnon Maimon, Streifereien im Gebiete der Philosophie (Berlin, 1793), p. 38.
II. I say "prescient" because it seems to me that in ilnportant respects this form
of rule skepticism anticipates that with which Wittgenstein grappled. See the clas-
sic and controversial account of Saul A. IZripke, Wittgenstein on Rules and Private
196 Notes to Pages 89-97
Language (Oxford, 1982). This sin1ilarity has also recently been noted by Paul
Franks, All or Nothing: Systematicity) Transcendental Arguments) and Skepticism in
German Idealism (Can1bridge, Mass., 2005), p. 153. I hope to return to this point
on another occasion.
12. Maimon, Gesammelte Werke, V VelTa, ed. (Hildesheiln, 1965), v. 4, p. 465.
13. Frederick Beiser, The Fate ofReason: German Philosophy from I(ant to Fichte
(CaInbridge, Mass., 1987), p. 292.
14. Maimon, Transcendentalphilosophie, p. 64.
IS. Maimon, Uber die Progressen der Philosophie, in Main10n, Gesammelte Werlze,
v. IV, p. 20.
16. MailTIOn, Gesammelte Werke, v. III, pp. 174-75, quoted in Lachtern1an,
"Mathen1atical Construction, SYlnbolic Cognition, and the Infinite Intellect,"
pp5 10 - 11.
17. Maimonides, Guide ofthe Perplexed, 1:1, p. 23.
18. Main10n, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 33.
19. Maimon, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 29.
20. My interpretation of these passages is closest to David Lachterman, "Math-
ematical Construction, Symbolic Cognition, and the Infinite Intellect: Reflections
on Maimon and Maimonides," Journal of the History of Philosophy 30 (1992),
pp49S-S 1 9.
21. Maimon, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 103.
22. Mailnon, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 107 (this may be the only "vork of IZantian
philosophy in which son1e version of the intellectus archetypus is continually, if per-
haps ironically, "blessed").
23. I an1 being deliberately imprecise in Iny staten1ent of the principle, because
there has been no end to nuances and redefinitions on this matter. For an in1portant
collection of philosophical and exegetical essays, see Willian1 L. Harper and Ralf
Meerbore, eds., I(ant on Causalit)) Freedom) and Objectivity (Minneapolis, 1984).
24. Maimon, Transcendentalphilosophie, pp. 187-88 and 370-73, and cf. Mai-
mon, VCrsuch einer neuen Logik oder Theorie des Denkens (Berlin, 1794), GW V,
pp.489-9 0 .
25. Maimon, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 109.
26. MailTIOn, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 110.
27. See Maimon's essay, "Auszug aus Jordan Bruno von Nola, von der Ur-
sache," in Magazin zur Erfahrungsseelenkunde 10 (1793). The description "knight
errant of philosophy" is from Pierre Bayle, Historical and Critical Dictionary:
Selections, Richard Popkin, ed. and trans. (New York, 1965), s.v. "Bruno."
28. Beiser, Fate ofReason, ch. 10, passim.
29. MailTIOn, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 81, and cf. p. 53.
30. Bergman, The Philosophy ofSolomon Maimon, p. 217; Atlas, From Critical to
Speculative Idealism, p. 10. Friedrich IZuntze, Die Philosophie Salomon Maimons
Notes to Pages 97- ror 197
(Heidelberg, 1912) is probably still the Illost thorough study of Maimon's n1ature
philosophy.
31. Ernst Cassirer, Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft
der neuren Zeit (Darmstadt, 1917), v. 3, pp. 97-104. Jan Bransen, The Antinomy of
Thought: Maimonian Skepticism and the Relation Between Thought and Objects
(Dordrecht, 1991), and cf. Achim Engstler, Unterschungen zunil Idealismus Salomon
Maimons (Stuttgart-Rad Cannstatt, 1990).
32. MaiInon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 154-55.
33. IZalman Bland, trans. and ed., The Epistle on the Possibility of Conjunction
1vith the Active Intellect by Ibn Rushd 1vith the Comnilentary ofMoses Narboni (New
York, 1982), p. 22 (Hebrew section, p. 2), and see p. 113, note 5, on the possible
source of this "quote."
34. Spinoza's use of Averroes and, of course, MaiInonides is well known. For
his use of Narboni, see Harry A. Wolfson, The Philosophy of Spinoza (Cambridge,
Mass., 1934), v. I, pp. 134-35 (on privative judgInents).
35. Michael FriedInan, I(ant and the Exact Sciences (Can1bridge, Mass., 1992).
36. Apparently it is now possible and considered logically preferable to conceive
of calculus on the "Cauchy-Bolzano-Weierstrauss" conception of convergence,
which does not involve the idea of continuous (ten1poral) Inotion toward a lin1it
but rather a fonnal, static counterpart based on "quantifier dependence and order
relations" (roughly speaking, lists), but this was not the case for MaiIllon. For the
state of calculus in the second half of the eighteenth century, see Carl Boyer, The
History of the Calculus and Its Conceptual Development (New York, 1949). On
IZant's understanding and use of the calculus, see FriedInan, I(ant and the Exact
Sciences, esp. pp. 72-80.
37. IZant, Critique, A166/B207-11. Extensive Inagnitudes are the result of the
projection of the given, a posteriori intensive n1agnitudes (resulting from a caress
or han1Iner blow) into time and space, which are a priori.
38. See Maimon, Transcendentalphilosophie, esp. pp. 32-35, and Beiser, Fate of
Reason, p. 297, whose explanation I follow here.
39. The most thorough discussion is in IZuntze, Die Philosophie Salomon Mai-
mons, esp. pp. 331 ff. See also the positive appraisal of Cassirer, Das Erkenntnis-
problem, v. 3, pp. 97-104
40. Main10n, Giva)at ha-Moreh, p. 82, and cf. his Transcendentalphilosophie,
P377
41. Benedictus de Spinoza, Ethics, G. H. R. Parkinson, trans. (Oxford, 2000),
I, prop. 8, scho1. 2.
42. Cf. Main10n's Die I(athegorien des Aristoteles (Berlin, 1794), in which he
presents Aristotle in decidedly Main10nidean and Spinozistic fashion.
43. The best discussion of this doctrine is now Oded Schechter, "The Logic of
Speculative Philosophy and Skepticism in MaiInon's Philosophy: Satz der Bes-
198 Notes to Pages 101-105
"Avoiding Gern1an Idealism: Kant, Hegel, and the Reflective Judgenlent ProblelTI,"
in Pippin, Idealism as Modernis'fn: Hegelian Variations (Cambridge, England, 1997),
pp. 129-55. With regard to MailTIOn, see the remark ofTheodor Adorno: "I Blust add
that you should not run away with the idea that IZant's critical achievement was sim-
ply forgotten by the post- Kantian philosophers, starting \vith SOIOlTIOn MailTIOn,"
in Adorno, I(ant)s Critique ofPure Reason (Stanford, 2000), p. 49.
58. Daniel Brezeale, trans. and ed., Fichte: Early Philosophical Writings (Ithaca,
1988), pp. 383-84. For discussions ofl\1aimon's influence on Fichte and further ref-
erences to MailTIOn in Fichte's work, see Atlas, From Critical to Speculative Ideal-
ism, pp. 316 -24, and BerglTIan, Philosophy ofSolomon Maimon, pp. 169-81.
59. For Hegel's explicit rejection of mathematics as the kind of paradign1 that
Maimon held it to be, see his Preface to the Phenomenology ofMind, Walter I(auff-
lTIan, trans. and notes (Garden City, N.r, 1965), pp. 62-69.
60. I am indebted in this brief comparison to conversations with Frederick
Beiser as well as his article, "Maimon and Fichte," in Salomon Maimon: Rational
Dogmatist) Empirical Skeptic, Gideon Freudenthal, ed. (Dordrecht, 2003),
pp. 133-48.
61. G. W. F. Hegel, The Logic ofHegelfrom the Encyclopedia ofthe Philosophical
Sciences with Prolegomena, William Wallace, trans. (Oxford, 1874), pp. 89-90, and
see Berglnan, Philosophy ofSolomon Maimon, pp. 182-86.
62. See the introduction to Giva)at ha-Moreh; Uber die Progressen der Philoso-
phie, and the "kleine Allegorie" of the final chapter of the Lebensgeschichte, dis-
cussed later.
63. Nathan Rotenstreich, "Position of Maimon's Philosophy," p. 544-.
64-. Maimon, Sefer Moreh Nevuchim im Shenei Perushim: Moshe Narboni
u-Perush Giva)at ha-Moreh (Berlin, 1795; Sulzberg, 1828; Warsaw, 1871).
65. Johann Erdmann, Versuch einer 1vissenschaftlichen Darstellung der Geschichte.
der neuren Philosophie (Leipzig, 1848).
66. Wilhelm Dilthey, "Die Rostocker I(anthandschriften," Archiv fii11' Ge-
schichte der Philosophie 2 (1889), p. 613, quoted in Bergman, The Philosophy of Solo-
mon Maimon, pp. 238-39.
67. Hans Vaihinger, Commentar zu I(ants ](ritik (Stuttgart, 1881), 2 vols.,
draws on MailTIOn on several occasions. Vaihinger's own philosophical work, Phi-
losophy (CAs-If/) C. 1(. Ogden, trans. (London, 1902), was deeply indebted to Mai-
mon's theory of the imagination, although Samuel Atlas, From Critical to Specula-
tive Idealism, argues convincingly that Vaihinger's interpretation of Maimon on
these n1atters is mistaken.
68. For an overvievv of the philosophical affinities between the two thinkers, see
Bergman, Philosophy ofSolomon Maimon, ch. 14.
69. In Vaihinger's Commentar zu I(ants ](ritik, v. I, p. 21, Cohen's prose style
is, perhaps maliciously, compared to Main10n's.
200 Notes to Pages 107-112
70. Friedrich I(untze Inade a more substantive case in "Salon10n Main10ns the-
oretische Philosophie," Logos 3 (1912), to \vhich Cohen took exception in the third
edition of I(ants Theorie der Erfahrung (Berlin, 1915), p. 540, fi1. 1.
Chapter Four
1. Salon1on MailTIon, Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte, Zwi Batscha, ed.
(Frankfurt, 19 84), p. 7.
2. This is the real cultural significance of Mendelssohn's famous criticisn1 of
Frederick II's choice to COlTIpOSe poetry in French rather than Gern1an. See Alt-
n1ann, Moses Mendelssohn (Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1973), pp. 71-72.
3. For an excellent concise discussion of the ideal of Bildung, see George
Mosse, "Betvveen Bildung and l~espectability," in The Jelvish Response to German
Culture: From the Enlightenment to the Second World War, Jehuda Reinharz and
Walter Schatzberg, eds. (Hanover, 1985), pp. 1-16. Steven AscheilTI has developed
the connection between the Bildung ideal and the caricature of the Eastern Euro-
pean Jew in Brothers and Strangers: Eastern European Jelvs in Germany and Ger-
man Jewish Consciousness (Madison, Wise., 1983). These thelTIeS will be pursued at
greater length below.
4. I(arl J. Weintraub, The Value ofthe Individual: Selfand Circumstance in Au-
tobiography (Chicago, 1978), esp. ch. I, who takes into account the medieval exan1-
pIes of self-narrative unearthed by George Misch, Geschichte der Autobiographie
(Frankfurt, 1969), 5 vols.
5. George Gusdorf, "Conditions and Lin1its ofAutobiography," in Autobiogra-
phy: Essays Theoretical and Critical, Jan1es Olney, ed. (Princeton, 1980 ), p. 37.
6. Philippe Lejeune, Lire Leiris: Autobiographie et langage (Paris, 1975), p. 16.
7. Erik Erikson n1akes an analogous point to Gusdorf and Lejeune in a psycho-
logical register when he writes that autobiographies are inevitably attelTIpts "at
recreating oneself in the in1age of one's own n1ethod in order to n1ake that image
convincing" (Erik Erikson, Life History and the Historical Moment [New York,
1975J, p. 125).
8. Thus, Madan1e de Stael's salon guests would retire each to his or her own writ-
ing desk to write expressive private letters to one another. See Jiirgen Habern1as, The
Structural TIl'ansformation ofthe Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category ofBour-
geois Society, Thomas Burger, trans. (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), pp. 67-69.
9. Christian Wilhelm von DohlTI, Uber die verbesseren die Juden (Berlin,
1782 -3).
10. Lazarus Bendavid, Etwas zur Charackterisitick der Juden (Leipzig, 1793);
David Friedlander, Akten Stucke) die Reform der jiidischen I(olonieen den Preusischen
Staaten betrefend (Berlin, 1793). Cf. the lTIOre moderate Saul Ascher, Leviathan
(Berlin, 1792). On this phase of the public debate, see also Steven Lowenstein, The
Berlin Jewish Community (Oxford, 1994), pp. 77-83.
Notes to Pages 112-II4- 201
II. For Friedlander's representation of Polish Jewry in this context, see As-
cheim, Brothel's and Strangers, pp. 17-19, and the analysis of Friedlander's Allten
Stiiclu in David Sorkin, The Transfol'mation of German Jewry, 1780-1840 (Oxford,
1987), pp. 75-78. This trend ofthought was exacerbated by the fact that Poland was
then undergoing partition by Russia and the German states.
12. The term Lebensgeschichte, literally "life history," can denote either biogra-
phy or autobiography. It is not insignificant that, at the time, there existed no dis-
tinctive German word for the latter genre. The English autobiography did not enter
the English lexicon until I8ro and only later migrated to the German as autobiogra-
phie. See Oxford English Dictionary, S.v. "Autobiography," and Jakob and Wilhelm
Grimm, Das Deutsches Worterbuch (Leipzig, 1877), s.v. "Autobiographie."
13. Philippe Lejeune argues that this is always the case in "Autobiography and
the Third Person," New Literary History 9 (1977), pp. 27-50.
14-. W. E. B. DuBois, The Souls ofBlack FOUl ( ew York, 1989), p. 5. Paul Gilroy
has reintroduced this consciousness to current critical discussion in his Black At-
lantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (Cambridge, Mass., 1993). Gilroy's
point is that such a double consciousness, however painful the tension, allows for
unique insight. I do not claim this much for Maimon.
IS. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 14-6.
16. "Homo sum, nihil humanum a me alienum puto," Maimon, Lebens-
geschichte, p. 14-4-, quoting Terence (Publius Terantius Mer), Hauton Timoru-
menos, J. H. Gray, trans. (Cambridge, Mass., 1895), 1.77. Most of Maimon's classi-
cal allusions are to well-known sources, such as this one. It was, as Peter Gay notes
(in The Enlightenment: An Interpretation-The Rise of Modern Paganism [New
York, 1966], p. 128), a favorite of Enlightenment authors.
17. Both the air pump (the creation of a vacuum) and the harnessing of elec-
tricity were emblematic scientific achievements ofthe age, and their public demon-
stration was a staple of the Enlightenment public sphere. For evidence of the use
of air pumps in the Berlin Haskala, see the work of Mendelssohn's elder con-
temporary, Aaron Gumpertz, Megaleh Sod (Lemberg, 19ro), p. 35. On the cultural
place of experimentalism in the Enlightenment, see the influential discussion of
S. Shapin and S. Shaffer, Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Ex-
perimental Life (Princeton, 1985), esp. ch. 2, and in the Jewish context, see David
Ruderman, Jewish Thought and Scientific Discovery in Early Modern Europe (New
Haven, 1995), pp. 332-38. In a famous 1768 oil painting, Joseph Derby depicted
a rather distraught family witnessing the suffocation of a pigeon in Experiment on
a Bird in an Air Pump (National Gallery, London). On the spectacular electrical
experiments of scientists such as Franklin, who occasionally electrified a turkey
tor dinner guests, see 1. Bernard Cohen, Franklin and Newton: An Inquiry into
Speculative Newtonian Experimental Science, and Franklin)s Work as an Example
Thereof (Philadelphia, 1956).
202 Notes to Pages 114 - 118
18. The allusion is noted (although not in the philosophical context discussed
later) in HaiITI Shoham's suggestive study of the influence of the Aujklarung on
the Haskala, Inspired by German Enlightenment (Tel Aviv, 1996), p. 114- (in He-
brew). The translation is, as is generally the case with Maimon, his own. Cf. the
translation of Mendelssohn's Biur: "von deinem Lande, von deinen1 Geburtsorte,
und von deinem Vaters Hause," loco cit.
19. See, for exaITIple, Moses Main10nides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolaters, I: 2
(standard editions), and Moses Maimonides, Guide ofthe Perplexed, ShlOITlO Pines j
trans. (Chicago, 1963), 111:29. Although MaiITIonides vvas Maimon's almost in-
evitable fraITIe of reference, the identification of Abraham as a philosopher has its
origins earlier, in late antiquity. For other sources with which Maimon would have
been fan1iliar, see, for example, Bereshit Rabba 38: 6, and the sources collected by
L. Feldman, "AbrahaITI the Greek Philosopher in Josephus," Transactions of the
American Philological Association 71 (1968), pp. 14-3-58. He is less likely to have
known of, for exaITIple, Philo's Migrations ofAbraham, later employed in Hegel's
account of Abrahamic alienation in the Early Theological Writings.
20. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. II.
21. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 12.
22. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 13.
23. The phrase Luftmensch, which in its early, more innocuous connotations
had a sin1ilar sense, came into circulation only later. Maimon may have had in mind
the Hebrew tenTI batlan, which initially applied only to those who 1vasted their op-
portunity for pure study (including those who did so by being "economically use-
ful") but was later used in something like the sense that Maimon uses the phrase
"holy idlers" (heilegen mufligangers).
24-. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 33.
25. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 25.
26. P. Lahover, "Introduction," in Solomon Maimon, Hayyei Shlomo Maimon,
P. Lahover, ed., and Y. L. Baruch, trans. (Tel Aviv, 194-1), p. 28 and n. 2, suggests
that Maimon may have been alluding to the childhood skepticisITI of the original
apiqores, Epicurus himself, who is reported to have doubted Hesiod's Creation
myth in Diogenes Laertius, Book 10: 2. I find the particular suggestion charming
but unlikely.
27. Although secondary explanations for this choice offirst texts abound, be-
ginning with Vayikra Rabba 7: 3, its cultural motivation remains obscure. A partial
reason Inay lie in a punning interpretation of the first verse of Leviticus, not "And
the Lord called to Moses ... " but rather "And the Lord read to Moses." Thus the
teacher reads to the child as God read to Moses. Nonetheless, the fact that this in-
struction is with regard to ITIOOt rules of the sacrificial cult calls for further expla-
nation. For sources and synthetic accounts of this educational practice in the
medieval and early modern periods, see SiInha Assaf, Meqorot le-Toldot ha-Hinukh
Notes to Pages 118-122 203
be-Yisrael (Tel Aviv, 1925), v. I, p. 122; Israel Abrahan1s, ]e1vish Life in the Middle
Ages (Ne\v York, 1981), pp. 350-51; and Hern1an Polack,]e1vish Folk1vays in Ger-
manic Lands (I648-I806): Aspects ofDaily Life (Can1bridge, Mass., 1971), p. 55.
28. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, p. 28.
29. See the discussion ofThomas Houbka, Resplendent Synagogue: Architecture
and Worship in an Eighteenth Century Polish Community (Hanover, 2003), pp. 85-
86. A younger Lithuanian contelTIpOrary of Main10n's, Solomon Bennett, did in1-
migrate to England in 1789 and eventually becaille a painter. On him, see A. Bar-
nett, "Solomon Bennett, 1761-1828: Artist, Hebraist, and Controversialist," Jewish
Historical Society ofEngland Transactions 17 (1953), 91-111, and Todd Endelmann,
The je'ws ofGeorgian England: Tradition and Change (Philadelphia, 1979), pp. 142-
44 and 155-57
30. As codified authoritatively in Shulchan Aruch) YOreh Deah) Hilchot Avoda
Zara (laws concerning idolatry), ch. 141: 1-8 and COmlTIentators there. There were,
incidentally, eighteenth-century Jewish collectors of art, and occasionally a Jewish
notable would sit for a portrait in prelTIaskilic Western Europe, but the artists were
not Jewish. For a discussion of Jewish art collectors as a case of early embour-
geoisen1ent, see Azriel Shohat, 1m Hilufei Tekufot (Jerusalem, 1960). On the de-
VelOplTIent of the practice of rabbinical portraits, see Richard Cohen, jewish Icons:
Art and Society in Modern Europe (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1998).
31. Pirqei Avot, 3: 7
32. For a theoretical discussion ofsuch textual appendages, see Gerard Genette,
Paratexts (Minneapolis, 1995). It is perhaps worth noting that the illustrations of
many Hebrew title pages were often not specifically designed for these books but
were sin1ply borrowed frolll the files of the printer.
33. For one edition Main10n lTIight have read, see Mashal ha-J(admoni
(Zolkiew, 1727).
34. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 30.
35. The edition Maimon read was David Gans, Nehmad ve-Naim (Jessnitz,
1742). On Gans and his intellectual context, see the rather exuberant book of
Andre Neher, David Gans: ]e1vish Thought and the Scientific Revolution of the I6th
Century (Oxford, 1986).
36. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 31. The diagralTI, which is sin1ply a set of con-
centric circles, appears in Gans, Nehmad ve-Naim, p. 8.
37. MailTIOn, Lebensgeschichte, p. 31.
38. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 47.
39 . Christian Wolff, Metaphysik oder die Lehre von Gott) der Welt und der Seele
des Menschen (Frankfurt, 1739) is the most likely edition for Mailllon to have come
by, but it does not seem well suited for wrapping butter.
40. Moses Hadas, ed., Solomon Maimon: An Autobiography, J. Clark Murray,
trans. (New York, 1947), pp. x-xi.
204 Notes to Pages 123-125
of Literary Allusion," PTL: A Journal for the Descriptive Poetics and Theory of Lit-
erature I (1976), pp. 105-28.
54. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 241.
55. J. Clark Murray, "Translator's Preface" to Solon10n Main10n, Autobiogra-
phy, J. Clark Murray, trans. (London, 1888), p. xxxvi.
56. Marvin Lowenthal, ed., The Memoirs of Gluckel of Hameln (Ne\v York,
1932), p. xxxvi.
57. Lilliane Weissberg, "Salon10n Main10n Writes His Lebensgeschichte, a
Reflection on His Life in the (Polish) East and Gern1an West," in The Yale Compan-
ion to Jelvish Writing and Thought in German Culture) I096 - I996, S. Gilman and Jack
Zipes, eds. (Nevv Haven, 1997), p. II3, con1es close to suggesting sOlnething like this,
although she does not work it out in detail or note that the crucial issue is that of
Maimonidean perfection. Cf. also her interesting (but in the end, I think, un\vork-
able) further suggestion that the textual gaps and leaps in Main10n's text can also be
understood as reflecting the con1plicated structure of the Guide ofthe Perplexed.
58. Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 128.
59. Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, p. 163.
60. Mailnon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 167-68.
61. These were the Fragments of Ancient Poetry) Collected in the Highlands of
Scotland) and Translated from the Gaelic or Erse Language (Edinburgh, 1760),
which were actually largely or con1pletely the work ofJalnes Macpherson. See Paul
J. deGategno, James Macpherson (Boston, 1989), and for recent revisionist scholar-
ship, see Howard Gaskill, ed., Ossian Revisited (Edinburgh, 1991).
62. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 168-69.
63. Main10n, Lebensgeschichte, p. 169.
64. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 171-72.
65. Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, pp. 182-83 (italics in the original).
66. I hope to return on another occasion to the ilnplicit interpretation, cri-
tique, and parody of Mendelssohn's Jerusalem that are scattered throughout the
Lebensgeschichte.
67. Maimon, Giva)at ha-Moreh (Berlin, 1791), p. 35.
68. Main10nides' argun1ent in Guide 111:27 is actually sOlnewhat subtler. Here
perfection of the body refers to moral and civic virtue, but perfection of the soul
actually refers to the holding of "correct opinions" by the populace incapable of
philosophical thought that imparts the true and final perfection. See the lucid in-
terpretation of Lawrence 1Zaplan, "[ Sleep But My Heart Waketh: Maimonides'
Conception of Human Perfection," in The Thought of Moses Maimonides: Philo-
sophical and Legal Studies (Lewiston, 1990), pp. 130 -66.
69. Here, and throughout this chapter I sumlnarize philosophical and kabbal-
istic doctrines with an eye only to present expository purposes. For a wide-ranging
and suggestive essay on rapturous death in Jewish literature, see Michael Fishbane,
The [(iss of God: Spiritual and Mystical Death in Judaism (Seattle, 1994), ch. 1.
206 Notes to Pages 133 -138
Chapter Five
I. Shadworth Hodgson, Philosophy ofReflection (London, 1878), p. 17.
2. George Eliot, Daniel Deronda (Hertfordshire, 1996), p. 320, written in 1876.
3. For the plausible suggestion that Eliot was drawing on experience for this
scene and a brief discussion of her use of the Lebensgeschichte, see Israel Abrahan1s,
"George Eliot and Solon10n Main10n," in Israel Abrahan1s, The Book of Delights
and Other Papers (Philadelphia, 1911), pp. 242-46. For a recent biography that
shows the relatively direct ways in which Eliot drew fron1 her life for her fiction, see
IZathryn Hughes, George Eliot: The Last Victorian (New York, 1991), especially
pp. 303-24, on the cOlnposition of Daniel Deronda.
4. On Main10n as an autobiographical exen1plar, see Marcus Moseley, Beingfor
Myself Alone: Origins ofjeTvish Autobiography (Stanford, 2006), as well as the ear-
lier studies ofShlTIuel Werses, "Darkhei Autobiografiya be'tkufat ha'Haskala," col-
lected in Shn1uel Werses, Trends and Forms in Haskala Literature (JerusalelTI,
1990), pp. 249-60 (in Hebrew), and Alan Mintz, Banished from Their Father)s
Table: Loss ofFaith and Hebre1v Autobiography (Bloon1ington, 1989).
5. Nachn1an IZrochmal, perhaps the greatest of the Eastern European Maskilim,
also read Maimon closely, as can be evidenced by a letter to his son Abrahan1, which
paraphrases a passage from Main10n's Giva)at ha-Moreh on n1ethods of learning
and the attainn1ent of perfection. The letter is published in S. Rawidowicz, ed.,
ICitvei R. Nachman ICrochmal (London, 1961 ), p. 427.
6. For the influence of MailTIOn'S frank account of his adolescent n1arriage, see
David Biale, Eros and the je1vs: From Biblical Israel to Contemporary America (New
York, 1992), pp. 152-56.
7. For a suggestive partial list, see Menuha Gilboa's recent essay on Maimon's
autobiography "ShelolTIo Maimon: Sefer Hayei Shelon10 Maimon," in Bein His-
toriya leSifrut: Sefer YovelleYitzhak Barzilai, Stanley Nash, ed. (Tel Aviv, 1997),
pp. 80 -81 and notes.
8. M. Guenzberg, Devir (I), letter 67, cited by Gilboa, "Shelomo Maimon,"
p.82.
9. David Frischlnan, Gr;shtaltn (Mexico City, 1948), p. 147, translated in Lucy
Davidowicz, The Golden Tradition: jewish Life and Thought in Eastern Europe
(New York, 1967), p. 131.
10. Micha Joseph Berdichevsky, ICitvei Micha Yosef Bin Gurion (Berdichevsky):
Maamrim (Tel Aviv, 1960), pp. 201-5.
II. B. T. Hagiga, 15a-b.
12. A. Holtzlnan, Hakarat Panim (Tel Aviv, 1984), p. 194, n. 20.
13. Another instance is Peter Beer, Lebensgeschichte des Peter Beer, Moritz Her-
mann, ed. (Prague, 1839), p. 9, in vvhich Beer discovers Maimonides in a way sus-
piciously silnilar to that in which Maimon discovered the work of David Gans. The
discovery of forbidden literature also becomes a topos in the literature. A similar
Notes to Pages 14-6 - 14-8 209
story is repeated about Mendel Lefin and Joseph Solon10n Dehnedigo's Sefer ha-
Elim, in S. J. Fuenn, Qjryah NeJemnah (Vilna, 186o), pp. 271-73. For the theory
behind the fan10us phrase "strong poet," see Harold Bloon1, The Anxiety of
Influence: A Theory ofPoetry (New York, 1973).
14-. The letter was first published in Yehoshua Heschel Levin's hagiography of
the Gaon, Aliyot Eliyahu (Warsaw, 1859), pp. 31b-32b, fn. 34. I believe that the "70
powers in Inan" is likely to be a reference to doctrine that the hun1an being is a n1i-
crocosmos, an idea further elaborated by the Gaon's student Rabbi Hayyiln of
Volozhin, in Nefesh Ha-Hayyim.
15. On Italian Jews as a contemporary model ofcosn10politan and sophisticated
Jewry for the German Haskala, see Lois Dubin, "The Rise and Fall of the Italian
Jewish Model in Gennany: From Haskalah to Reforn1, 1780-1820," in Je1vish His-
tory and Je1vish Memory: Essays in Honor ofYOsefHayim Yerushalmi, Elisheva Carle-
bach, John M. Efron, and David N. Myers, eds. (Hanover, 1998). Dubin quotes
Euchel: "The Jews in Leghorn ... shave their beards and style their hair, there is
no difference between their dress and that of the [other] inhabitants. They speak
the language of the people correctly and eloquently like one of their orators"
(p. 273). See also Dubin, "Trieste and Berlin: The Italian Role in the Cultural Pol-
itics of the Haskalah," in Tmvard Modernity: The European Model, Jacob IZatz, ed.
(New Brunswick, 1987), pp. 189-224. There was traffic between Lithuania and
Padua. Raphael Levi of Hannover (1685-1779) was born in Vilna and studied med-
icine in Padua. He also studied with Leibniz, served as his secretary, and corre-
sponded with Mendelssohn in his old age. See Israel Zinberg, A History ofJnvish
Literature, Bernard Martin, trans. and ed. (Cleveland, 1972-78); and Alexander
Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn: A Biographical Study (London, 1973), pp. 159-61 and
the sources cited there. Finally, see Nahum Gelber, "Le-toldot ha-rofiln ha-
Yehudiln be-Polin ba-Meah ha-18," in Shay le-Yeshayahu: Yovelle-Yeshayahu Volfs-
berg, 1. Tirosh, ed. (Tel Aviv, 1956), pp. 34-7-71, who lists six Jewish doctors fron1
Poland who studied in Padua in the eighteenth century.
16. For the importance of questions of the rabbinic interpretation of biblical
language for the early Haskala, see Jay Harris, Hmv Do We I(nmv This? Midrash and
the Fragmentation of Alodern Judaism (Albany, 1995) on Naftali Herz Wessely's
Gan Naul (1778).
17. Levin, Aliyot Eliyahu, p. 32b.
18. A note added to the fourth edition, in response to the criticisln published
in the Russian maskilic journal ha-Carmel, v. I, no. 5 (1872), pp. 234-35, and by the
historian Heinrich Graetz suggests that the letter writer Inay have been the con-
troversial preacher Abba Glosk rather than Mailnon. This is hardly more likely be-
cause Glosk may not have existed outside the ilnagination of the Romantic poet
Adelbert Chan1isso, who wrote a poem about him in 1811. For a recent, if SOlne-
what credulous, discussion of the figure of Glosk, see Hayyim Shohan1, Inspired by
German Enlightenment (Tel Aviv, 1996), pp. 100-103 (in Hebrew).
210 Notes to Pages 14-8-151
19. There are features of the letter and its presentation that suggest that it n1ay
have son1e authentic basis. Levin provides a long and credible chain of tradition as
\vell as a detailed discussion of how the letter \vas intercepted and the Halakhic de-
liberations over whether it would be opened, given the falnous lnedieval edict of
Rabbenu Gershon1 against opening the n1ail of others. Finally, it is written in a fine
Inaskilic Hebrevv, possessed by few inhabitants of Levin's cultural world. Ifthe letter
is authentic and n1erely n1isattributed, the language, the grammatical interests, the
genuine an1bivalence over rabbinic authority, and the talk offorgery allinight point
to Main10n's friend and colleague Isaac Satanov, but this is n1erely a hypothesis.
20. Sabbattia Wolff, Maimonia) oder Rhapsodien zur Charakteristik Salomon
Maimons) aus seinem Privatlebengesammelt (Berlin, 1813), p. 89, and COlnpare the
infonnal biographical sketch of Lazarus Bendavid, "Uber Salon10n Mailnon,"
National-Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaft) I(unst und Gewerbe in den Pruessischen Staa-
ten) nebst einem I(orrespondenz Blatte I (1801), pp. 91-93.
21. Heinrich Heine, The Poetry and Prose ofHeinrich Heine, Frederic Ewen, ed.
(New York, 1955), pp. 690-91, written in 1823.
22. See Steven Aschhein1, Brothers and Stranger's: Eastern European Jelvs in
Germany and German Jelvish Consciousness (Madison, Wise., 1983), p. 14.
23. For a succinct staten1ent of Mendelssohn's cultural significance, see Alexan-
der Altmann, "Moses Mendelssohn: The Archetypal German Jew," in Jewish Re-
sponse to German Culture: From the Enlightenment to the Second World War, Jehuda
Reinharz and Walter Schatzberg, eds. (Hanover, 1985), pp. 17-31.
24. Heinrich Graetz, History ofthe Jelvs (Philadelphia, 1956), v. 5, p. 407.
25. Silnon Bernfeld, Dor Tahapuchot (Warsaw, 1897).
26. Ruth Gay, The Jelvs of Germany (New Haven, 1992 ), p. 37.
27. Israel Zangwill, Dreamers of the Ghetto (London, 1898), pp. 261-302, as
"Main10n the Fool and Nathan the Wise."
28. Harry Austryn Wolfson, "Solomon Pappenheim on Time and Space and
His Relationship to Locke and IZant," in his Studies in the History ofPhilosophy and
Religion (Calnbridge, Mass., 1977), p. 608.
29. Sololnon Maimon, Lebensgeschichte, Jakob Frolner, ed. (Munich, 1911),
Pp7- 8 .
30. Fromer, who modeled himself on Maimon, wrote his own autobiography,
TTrJm Ghetto zur modernen I(ultur: Eine Lebensgeschichte (Heidelberg, 1906). On
him, see Aschheim, Brothers and Strangers, p. 237.
31. Quoted in Zinberg, A History ofJelvish Literature, v. 8, p. 131.
32. Con1pare the remark of the American philosopher Morris Raphael Cohen,
who was born in Maimon's hometown of Nieswicz. Ironically, in his autobiogra-
phy, Cohen seems intent on showing the cultural richness of his birthplace through
reference to Mailnon: "Nor did Neshwies forget that it had been the home of
Solomon Mailnon, the greatest Jewish philosopher since Spinoza or Rabbi Isaak
Elhanon, one of the great rabbis of the nineteenth century, and of Sholner (M. M.
Notes to Pages 152-155 211
45. Leo Strauss, "Del' Ort del' Vorstellunglehre nach del' ansicht Maimunis,"
Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums (1937), p. 104, n. 34;
also, see Iny discussion in Chapter 4-.
46. For an interesting vantage point on Atlas, see the recent biography of his
friend Rabbi Yehiel Weinberg; see Marc Shapiro, Betlveen the Yeshiva World and
Modern Orthodoxy: The Life and Works of Rabbi Jehiel Jacob Weinberg (London,
1999), which suggests the extent to which Atlas also ren1ained torn between tvvo
vvorlds.
4-7. Isaac Bashevis Singer, Shad01vs on the Hudson, Joseph Shern1an, trans. (New
York, 2000), p. 23; and see the Yiddish journal Davke (1954-).
48. Hennan Potock, "The Philosophical Rationalisln of Solon10n Maimon,"
Ph.D. dissertation (University of Pennsylvania, 1963). (N.b. Potock later sin1plified
the spelling of his name to Potok.)
49. Chain1 Potok, The Chosen (New York, 1967), p. 113. Cf. the image of apiqor-
sut in the Yiddish novel by Saul Saphire, Shloyme Maymon: Historisher roman (New
York, 1954).
50. Yoseph Udelson, "Solon10n Maimon, A Second Look at the Enlighten-
n1ent," BJOr HaJTorah:Journal ofScience) Art) and Modern Life in the Light ofthe
Torah II (1992 ), pp. 123-33.
51. Zev Ya'vetz, Sefer Toldot Yisrael (Tel Aviv, 1955), v. 13, pp. 168-69.
52. Manfred Frank, "Der Scharfsinn des Herrn Mailnon," Die Zeit, June 3,
2004. Study of Maimon's philosophy will be greatly advanced by the recent ap-
pearance of a new scholarly edition of Main10n's Versuch uber die Transcendental-
philosophie (Halnburg, 2004-) with an enlightening introduction and notes by
Florian Ehrensperger.
Conclusion
1. Alfred Ivry, "Jewish Averroism," in The Columbia History of Western Philoso-
phy, Richard Popkin, ed. (New York, 1999), p. 208.
2. 5hloll10 Pines, "Jewish Philosophy," in Studies in the History of Jewish
This bibliography is varied, but not very Inuch n10re so, I hope, than a serious con-
sideration of Main10n's life and work necessitates. I have listed Mailnon's collected
works as well as the various editions that I have consulted. There are two further
sections. In the first section, I list other prin1ary works cited; in the second, sec-
ondary works. I have olnitted a few texts, which are cited in the notes and whose
inclusion here seemed superfluous. Conversely, I have listed some works that vvere
not explicitly cited. The distinction between primary and secondary works is always
son1ewhat arbitrary, or interest relative. I include memoirs and novels in which
Maimon (or one of his books) appears as prin1ary texts.
Works by Maimon
Main10n, Solon10n. Bacons von Vi:rulam neues Organon (Berlin, I793).
- - - . Gesam71zelte Werke, V Verra, ed. (Hildesheiln, I965), 7 vols.
- - - . Hayyei Shlomo Maimon, Pinhas Lahover, ed., and Y. L. Baruch, trans.
(Tel Aviv, I94I).
- - - . Hesheq Shelomo. MS 806426, Institute for Microfiln1ed Hebrew Manu-
scripts, Jewish National and Hebrew University Library, Jerusaleln (I778).
- - - . Die I(athegorien des Aristoteles (Berlin, I794).
- - - . Lebensgeschichte, Jakob Fromer, ed. (Munich, I9II).
- - - . Philosophisches Wijrterbuch oder Beleuchtung der 1vichtigsten Gegenstiinde
der Philosophie in alphabetischer Ordnung (Berlin, I79I).
- - - . Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte, Zwi Batscha, ed. (Frankfurt, 1984).
- - - . Solomon Maimon: An Autobiography, Moses Hadas, ed., and J. Clark
Murray, trans. (New York, 1947).
- - - . Streifereien im Gebiete der Philosophie (Berlin, 1793).
- - - . Uber die Progressen der Philosophie (Berlin, 1793).
- - - . Vi:rsuch einer neuen Logik oder Theorie des Denkens (Berlin, I794).
- - - . Vi:rsuch iiber die Transcendentalphilosophie, Florian Ehrensperger, ed.
(Hamburg, 2004).
214 Bibliography
Primary Texts
Abrahan1s, Israel, ed. Hebre1v Ethical Wills (Philadelphia, 1938).
Atnilander, Menaheln. Sheyris Yisroel (At11sterdam, 1743).
At1onyn10us. Remarks on Some Books Lately Published) viz BasnageJs History of
the Jews) WhistonJs Eight Sermons) LockJs Paraphrase and Notes on St. Pau[Js
Epistles and LeClerc)s Bibliotheque Choise (London, 1709).
Aquinas, Thomas. On the Unicity of the Intellect Against the Averroists, Beatrice
Zedler, trans. (Milwaukee, 1968).
Aristotle. AristotleJs De Anima) Books II and III, D. W. Halnlyn, trans. (Oxford,
196 8).
- - - . Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, Jonathan
Barnes, ed. (Princeton, 1984).
Ascher, Saul. Leviathan (Berlin, 1792).
Assaf, Simha, ed. Meqorot le-Toledot ha-Hinukh be-Yisrael (Tel Aviv, 1925).
Auerbach, Berthold. Dichter und ICaufmann: ein Lebensgemalde.aus der Zeit Moses
Mendelssohn (Stuttgart, 186o).
Basnage, Jacques Chretien de Beauval. Histoire des Juifs: depuis Jesus-Christ jusqu)a
present) pour servir de continuation alJhistoire deJoseph (Rotterdam, 1706 -II).
- - - . The History of the Jews from Jesus Christ to the Present Time, Thomas
Taylor, trans. (London, 1708).
Beer, Peter. Lebensgeschichte des Peter Beer, Moritz Hermann, ed. (Prague,
1839 ).
Bendavid, Lazarus. Etwas zur Charackteristick der Juden (Leipzig, 1793).
--~. "Uber Salomon Maimon." National Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaft (Berlin,
1801).
Ber of Belechow, The Memoirs of Ber of Belechow, M. Vishnitzer, ed. and trans.
(London, 1922).
Bibliography 215
Secondary Texts
AbrahalTIs, Israel. "George Eliot and Solon10n MailTIOn." In The Book of Delights
and Other Papers, Israel Abrahan1s (Philadelphia, 19II), pp. 242-6.
- - - . Jewish Life in the Middle Ages (Nevv York, 1981).
Allison, Henry. I(ant)s Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense
(New Haven, 1983).
AltlTIann, Alexander. "MailTIonides on the Scope of the Intellect." In VOn der mit-
telalterlichen zur modernen Au.fkliirung: Studien zur judischen Geistege-
schichte, Alexander Altmann (Tiibingen, 1987), pp. 60-129.
- - - . Moses Mendelssohn: A Biographical Study (London, 1973).
- - - . "Moses Mendelssohn: The Archetypal Gern1an-Jew." In The Jewish Re-
sponse to German Culture: From the Enlightenment to the Second World War,
Jehuda Reinharz and Walter Schatzberg, eds. (Hanover, 1985), pp. 17-31.
- - - . "Moses Mendelssohn's IZindheit in Dessau." Bulletin des Leo Baecks Insti-
tuts 10 (1967), pp. 237-75.
Altn1ann, Alexander, and S. M. Stern. Isaac Israeli) a Neoplatonic Philosopher ofthe
Early Tenth Century: His Works Translated Jvith Comments and an Outline of
His Philosophy (Oxford, 1958).
Arendt, Hannah. "The Jew as Pariah: A Hidden Tradition." JeJvish Social Studies 6
(1944), pp. 98-II7
218 Bibliography
- - - . Rahel Varnhagen: The Life of a jerpess, Richard and Clara Winston, trans.,
and Lilliane Weissberg, ed. (Baltimore, 1997).
Arkush, Allan. Moses Mendelssohn and the Enlightenment (Albany, 1994).
- - - . "Solomon Main10n and His Jewish Philosophical Predecessors: The Evi-
dence of His Autobiography," in Renelving the Past) Reconfiguring jewish
Culture: From al-Andalus to the Haskalah, Ross Brann and Adam Sutcliffe,
eds. (Philadelphia, 2004-), pp. 149-66.
AscheilTI, Steven. Brothers and Strangers: Eastern European je'ws in Germany and
German Jewish Consciousness (Madison, Wise., 1983).
Atlas, SalTIUei. From Critical to Speculative Idealism: The Philosophy of Solomon
Maimon (The Hague, 1964).
Baer, Yitzhak. History ofthe jews in Christian Spain (Philadelphia, 1966).
Baumgardt, David. "The Ethics of Salomon Maimon." journal of the History of
Philosophy I (1963), pp. 199-210.
Beck, Lewis White. Essays on !(ant and Hume (New Haven, 1978).
Beiser, Frederick. The Fate of Reason: German Philosophy from !(ant to Fichte
(CaITIbridge, Mass., 1987).
Bell, David. Spinoza in Germany fromI67o to the Age of Goethe (London, 1984).
Bennett, Jonathan. !(ant)s Analytic (Cambridge, England, 1966).
Bergman, San1uel Hugo. Ha-Filosofiya shel Shelomo Maimon (JerusalelTI, 1968).
- - - . The Philosophy of Salomon Maimon, Noah J. Jacobs, trans. (Jerusalen1,
1967).
Bering, Dietz. The Stigma ofNames: Antisemitism in German Daily Life) I8I2 -I933 ,
N. Plaice, trans. (Ann Arbor, 1992).
Berlin, Isaiah. The Magus of the North: J G. Hamann and the Origins of Modern
Irrationalism, Henry Hardy, ed. (London, 1993).
Bernfeld, Simon. Dor Tahapuchot (Warsaw, 1897).
- - - . Michael Sacks (Berlin, 1900) (in Hebrew).
Bhabha, Romi. The Location of Culture (London, 1994).
Biale, David. Eros and the jews: From Biblical Israel to Contemporary America (New
York, 1992).
Blackwell, Constance, and Sachiko I(usukavva, eds. Philosophy in the Sixteenth and
Seventeenth Centuries: Conversations rvith Aristotle (Sydney, 1999).
Blumberg, Harry. "The Problem of Immortality in Avicenna, Maimonides and St.
Thomas Aquinas." In Harry Austryn Wolfson jubilee VOlume, Saul Lieberman,
ed. (New York, 1965), pp. 165-85.
Blumenberg, Hans. The Legitimacy of the Modern Age, Robert Wallace, trans.
(Can1bridge, Mass., 1984).
Blumenthal, H. J. Aristotle and Neoplatonism in Late Antiquity (Ithaca, 1996).
Boulby, Marie !(arl Philipp Moritz: At the Fringe of Genius (Toronto, 1979).
Boyarin, Daniel. Carnal Israel: Reading Sex in Talmudic Culture (Berkeley,
1993).
Bibliography 219
Fishnlan, David. RussiaJs First Modern Jelvs: The Je1vs of Shklov (Nevv York, 1995).
Franl, Edvvard. Ideals Face Reality: Jewish LalV and Life in Poland) 1550 -1655
(Cincinnati, 1997).
Franks, Paul. All or Nothing: Systematicity) Transcendental Arguments) and Skepti-
cism in German Idealism (Canlbridge, Mass., 2005).
Freudenthal, Gideon. Salonton Maimon: Rational Doglnatist) Empirical Skeptic
(Dordrecht, 2003).
FriedlTIan, Michael. [(ant and the Exact Sciences (Cambridge, Mass., 1992).
Funkenstein, Anlos. "Das Verhaltrisder ji.idischen Aufldarung zur nlittelalterlichcn
jiidischen Philosophie." Auflelarung und Hasleala Wolfenbiittler Studien zur
Aufklarung 14 (1990), pp. 13 -21.
- - - . Perception ofJe1vish History (Berkeley, 1993).
- - - . Theology and the Scientific Imagination from the Middle Ages to the Seven-
teenth Century (Princeton, 1986).
Flinn, Joseph. Safah le- NeJentanim (\lilna, 1881).
Gay, Peter. The Enltqhtenment: An Interpretation - The Rise ofModern Paganism
(New York, 1966).
Gay, Ruth. The Jews of Germany (New Haven, 1992).
Geiger, AbrahalTI. "Salonl0n MailTIons Entwicklung." Jiidische Zeitschrift 4 (1866),
PP19 8 -9.
Genette, Gerard. Paratexts (Minneapolis, 1995).
Gilboa, Menuha. "Shelomo MailTIOn: Sefer Hayei Shelonlo MailTIOn." In Bein His-
toriya le-Sifrut: Sefer YOvelle-Yitzhak Barzilai, Stanley Nash, ed. (Tel Aviv,
1997), pp. 113-27.
Gilnlan, Sander. Je1vish Self-Hatred: Anti-Semitism and the Hidden Language ofthe
JeJvs (Baltinlore, 1986).
Gilnlan, Sander, and Jack Zipes, eds. Yale Companion to Jelvish Writing and
Thought in German Culture) 1096 -1996 (New Haven, 1997).
Gilroy, Paul. The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (CalTIbridge,
Mass., 1993).
Goldberg, Harvey. "Torah and Children: Sonle Symbolic Aspects of the Repro-
duction of the Jew and JudaislTI." In Judaism from Within and Without,
Harvey Goldberg, ed. (New York, 1983), pp. 107-30.
Goldstein, BlulTIa. "Deserted Wives: Agunas on Gernlan Soil in Glikl's Memoirs
and SOlOlTIOn MailTIon's Autobiography." Unpublished.
Graetz, Heinrich. History of the Jews, Phillip Bloch and Bella Lowy, trans. (Phila-
delphia, 1956).
Grafton, Anthony. Defenders ofthe Text (Cambridge, Mass., 1991).
Graupe, Heinz Moshe. The Rise of Modern Judaism: An Intellectual History of
Judaism) 1650 -1942 (New York, 1978).
Guha, Ranajit, and Giyatri Spivak, eds. Selected Subaltern Studies (Oxford,
1988 ).
222 Bibliography
Neher, Andre. David Gans: Jewish Thought and the Scientific Revolution of the 16th
Century (Oxford, 1986).
Norton, Robert. The Beautiful Soul: Aesthetic Morality in the Eighteenth Century
(Ithaca, 1995).
Pachter, Mordechai. "The Concept of Devekut in the HOlniletical Ethical Writings
of Sixteenth Century Safed." In Studies in Sixteenth Century JenJish Thought
and Literature, Bernard Dov Coopennan, ed. (Calnbridge, Mass., 1984-),
pp. 171- 230 .
Pascal, Roy. Design and Truth in Autobiography (Can1bridge, Mass., 196o).
Pelli, Moshe. The Age oj'the Haskalah (Leiden, 1979).
- - - . Be-MaJavqei Temurah: I)~)lunim be-Haskala ha-Ivrit be-Gerntaniah (Tel
Aviv, 1988).
- - - . The Gate to the Haskalah: An Annotated Index to HameJasej; the First
Hebrew Journal (Jerusalem, 2000) (in Hebrew).
- - - . "On the Genre of 'A Dialogue in the Hereafter' in Hebrew Haskala
Literature." Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish Studies
(Jerusalem, 1982), pp. 209-15.
Pines, Shlon10. "Jewish Philosophy." In Studies in the History ofJe1vish Thought: The
Collected Works of Shlomo Pines, Warren Z. Harvey and Moshe Idel, eds;
(Jerusaleln, 1997), v. 5, pp. 1-51.
- - - . "The Limitations of HUlnan IZ-nowledge According to Al-Farabi, Ibn
Bajja and Mailnonides." In Studies in Medieval Je1vish History and Literature,
Isadore Twersky, ed. (Cambridge, Mass., 1979), pp. 82-104-.
- - - . "A Tenth Century Philosophical Correspondence." Proceedings of the
American Academy ofJenJish Research 24- (1955), pp. 103 -36 .
Pippin, Robert. Idealism as Modernism: Hegelian Variations (Calnbridge, England,
1997).
- - - . Modernism as a Philosophical Problem on the Dissatisfactions of European
High Culture (Oxford, 1991).
Plakans, Andrejs, and Joel M. Halpern. "An Historical Perspective on Eighteenth
Century Jewish Falnily Households in Eastern Europe: A Preliminary
Case Study." In Modern Je1vish Fertility, Paul Ritterband, ed. (Leiden, 1981),
pp.I-29
Polack, Herman. Jewish Folk'ways in Germanic Lands (1648-1806): Aspects of Daily
Life (CalYlbridge, Mass., 1971).
Potock, Herman. "The Philosophical Rationalism of Solomon Maimon." Ph.D.
dissertation (University of Pennsylvania, 1963).
Putnanl, Hillary. "The Meaning of'Meaning.'" In Mind) Language and Reality:
Philosophical Papers, Hillary Putnam (Calnbridge, Mass., 1975), v. 2.
Raisin, Jacob. The Haskalah Movement in Russia (Philadelphia, 1913).
Randall, John H., Jr. Aristotle (New York, 196o).
226 Bibliography
Rappel, Dov. "The Introduction to the Ma'aseh Efod of Profiat Duran." Sinai 100
(1987), pp. 749-95 (in Hebrew).
Ravitsky, Aviezer. "Rav Soloveitchik on I(nowledge: Betvveen Main10nides and the
Neo-IZantians." Modern judaisnlJ, 6 (1986), pp. 119-47.
Reiner, Elhanan. "The Yeshivot of Poland and Ashkenaz During the 16th and
17th Centuries: Historical Developments Studies." In jewish Culture in
Honor of Chone Schmeruk, 1. Bartal, ed. (Jerusalem, 1993), pp. 9-80 (in
Hebrew).
Renan, Ernst. Les ecrivans y'uifs du XIV siecle (Paris, 1843).
Robertson, Ritchie. "From the Ghetto to Modern Culture: The Autobiographies
of SalOlTIOn MailTIon and Jakob Fro111er." Polin: A journal of Polish-jeJvish
Studies 7 (1992) pp. 12-30.
Rorty, Amelie, ed. Essays on AristotleJs Ethics (Berkeley, 198o).
Rosenthal, Erwin. "The Concept of 'Eudaemonia' in Medieval Islamic and Je\vish
Philosophy." In Studio Semitica, Erwin Rosenthal (Can1bridge, England,
1971), v. 2, pp. 127-34.
Rosman, M. J. Founder of Hasidism: A Quest for the Historical BaJal Shem Tov
(Berkeley, 1996).
- - - . Jewish Perceptions of Insecurity and Powerlessness in 16th-18th Century
Poland." Polin I (1986), pp. 19-27.
- - - . The LordJs jeJvs: jeJvish-Magnate Relations in Eighteenth-Century Poland
(Can1bridge, Mass., 1989).
Rubinstein, Jeffrey L. "Purim, LilTIinality and ComlTIunitas." AjS Revierv 17 (1992),
pp.247-77
Ruderman, David. jeJvish Thought and Scientific Discovery in Early Modern Europe
(New Haven, 1995).
Saisselin, Remy G. The Enlightenment Against the Baroque: Economics and Aesthet-
ics in the Eighteenth Century (Berkeley, 1992).
Schachter, Jacob. "Rabbi Jacob Emden: Life and Works." Ph.D. dissertation (Har-
vard University, 1987).
Schatz-U ffenheimer, Rivka. Hasidism as Mysticism: Quietistic Elements in Eighteenth
Century Hasidic Thought, Jonathan Chipman, trans. (Princeton, 1993).
Schechter, Solomon. Studies in judaism (First Series) (Philadelphia, 1911).
Schmidt, James, ed. What Is Enlightenment? Eighteenth Century Answers and
Twentieth Century Questions (Berkeley, 1996).
Schmitt, C. B. Aristotle and the Renaissance (Cambridge, Mass., 1983).
Schmitz, IZenneth L. "The History of Philosophy as Actual Philosophy." journal
ofPhilosophy 85 (1988 ), pp. 671-74.
Schneewind, J. B. "Moral Crisis and the History of Ethics." Midwest Studies in Phi-
losophy 8 (1983), pp. 525-39.
Scholem, Gershom. The Messianic Idea in judaism and Other Essays on jeJvish Spir-
ituality (New York, 1971).
Bibliography 227
Wolft~ Larry. The Invention ofEastern Europe: The Map of Civilization in the Mind
ofthe Enlightenment (Stanford, 1994).
Wolfson, Harry A. The Philosophy ofSpinoza (Carnbridge, Mass., 1934),2 vols.
- - - . "Solon10n Pappenhein1 on Til11e and Space and His Relation to Locke and
IZant." Collected in Studies in the History ofPhilosophy and Religion, Isadore
Twersky and George Willialns, cds. (Calnbridge, 1977).
Yovel, Yinniyahu. Da,rkRiddle: I(ant) Nietzsche) and the Jel1JS (University Park,
Penn., 1999).
Zac, Sylvain. Salomon Maimon: Critique de I(ant (Paris, 1988).
Zan1n1ito, John H. The Genesis ofI(ant)s Critique ofJudgement (Chicago, 1992).
Zinberg, Israel. A History of Jewish Literature, Bernard Martin, trans. and cd.
(Cleveland, 1972-78), 12 vols.
Index
art, representative, II8, II9 ben Schelon10, Eliyahu, Rabbi (the Vilna
Ashkenazi culture Gaon)
in Polish Lithuanian Conlnlonvvealth, and devequt, 78
I70n4- in exile, self-in1posed, 31
preillodern, 5 and t~1nlily duties, 28, I73n30
and rabbinic authority, 28, 29 and Mainl0n, Solol11on, confrontation
astrononlY, 72, II9, 120 vvith, 14-6, 14-7
Atlas, Sailluel, 97, 155 study, lite ot~ 28
Auerbach, Berthold, 144- on Torah study, 78
Auj7ddrunB. See Enlightennlent; Gernlan ben Shen1 Tov, Joseph, I93nI04, 194nI09
Enlightennlent ben Solon10n, Elijah, I73n3I
Attj7diirunB philosophers, 4 ben Yehoshua, Shelonlo. See Main10n, Solo-
autobiography n10n
closure to, 132 ben Yehoshua, Shelon10 (f:1ther of Solon10n
developlnent of tenn/genre, 20InI2 Mainl0n),84
Erikson, Erik, on, 200n7 Bendavid, Lazarus, 48, 50, II2, 131-32, 157
as genre, IIO Benjan1in, Walter, 154-55
111edieval, 180nl03 Bennett, Solon10n, 203n29
as nlodern project, 14- Bel' of Belechov, 45
and order of life, IIO Berdichevsky, Micha Joseph, 146, 148
won1en's, in India, 180nl03 Bergl11an, Sailluel Hugo, 105, ISS, 156
autononlY, radical, 13 - 14- Bergson, Henri, 161
Averroes, 55, 98, 99, 160, 194, 197n 34 Berlin, Saul, 37
Averroisn1, 81-82, 159-60, 194nl07 Berlin Jewish Enlightennlent (Haskala). See
Aviezer (Guenzberg), 145 Haskala
Berlinische Monatschrift (journal), 44
BaJal Shem (tenn), 174 Bernfeld, Sin10n, 50, 150
Baer, Dov, Rabbi (Maggid of Mezeritch) Betteljude (ternl), 175n52
Hasidic Court of~ described,s Bildung
and IZohen, Raphael, Rabbi, 37 Aristotelian sources tor, 168n35
Mailllon's account of~ 5, 29, 76 defined, II, IIO
as n1anipulator, 76 and Eastern European Jews, 200n3
and perfection, systenl of~ 92 in Gernlan Enlightennlent, 80
Baer, Yitzhak, 194nI09 for Genllan Jewry, 1110dern, 168n35
Bahya, Rabbenu,59 Hegel's use ot~ 106
"barbarisnl," of Jewish culture, 151, 152 and history of philosophy, 136
Basnage, Jacques, 38, 39 and intellectual perfection, 108
batlan (tenn), 202n23 as Mailnon's goal, 126
Beer, Peter, I7InI5, 208nI3 in Salomon Maimons Lebens.geschichte,
Beiser, Frederick, 89, 97, I99n60 108
ben Abrahanl Crescas, Asher, 81 vs. shelemut ha-nefesh (perfection), 83,
ben Main10n, Moses (Moses Mainl0nides). 130, 162
See Mail11onides, Moses vs. talmid hakham, 162
ben Moredechai, Shimon, Rabbi, I74-n4-3 BildunBsroman, 17
Index 233
Pheno'J!J!tenololJY ofMind (Hegel), 135, 136 radical Aristotelianisn1, 160. See also
philosophers. See also individual Aristotelianisn1
philosophers radical Main10nidean tradition, 83
Aristotelian, 63, 64 Radzivvill, l(arol Stanisla\v, Prince, 22, 27
as heretics, 63 rationalism, and Maskilin1, 55
in Hesheq ShelO1no (MailTIOn), 63 reason, and Enlightenn1ent, 9, 12-13
historical studies of~ 18 Reinhold, l(arl Leonhard, 3, 4, 12, 89
individuality of argun1ents, 18 - 19 religion, 82, 90
intellectual perfection of~ 61 Reli,tlion and Philosophy in Gennany
on Main10n, Solon10n, 158 (Heine),37
vs. talmid halzham, 62 representative art, II8, II9
philosophical radicalisn1, 53 R.osen, MadalTIe, 129
philosophical \vriting, n1ldtiple levels of Rosenthaler Gate, 32, 52, 127
n1eaning in, 101 Rosenzweig, Franz, 152
philosophy, history ot~ 106, 133, 134-37, Rotenstreich, Nathan, 106, 155, 156
139-42 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 109, III, 126
physics, 71, 135. See also science
Pietisn1, Gern1an, 35 Salomon Maimons Lebens,geschichte (Mai-
pilpulim (tern1), 171n16 n10n). See also MailTIon, Solon10n
Pines, Shlon10, 160-61, 189n58, 19In79 Abrahan1 alluded to, II4
Pippin, Robert, 168n4l, 198n57 alienation, III, II3, II8
Pirqei Avot, II8 allegory ending, 17
Plato, 31, 140 allusions, II4, 125
PlatonislTI, 98 an1biguity in, II3
Plotinus, and active intellect, 188n52 alTIbivalence in, 45, 120, 122
Poland, land magnates in, 22, 23, III, II5 anecdotes in, 53
Polish Jews, II5, II6, 127-28, 170n3 anonyn1ous publication of~ 45
"popular philosophers" (popular- Auerbach, Berthold, read by, 144
philosophen ), 41 and autobiography as genre, IIO
Potok, Chain1, 156 as Bildungsroman, 17, 162
Principle of Detern1inability (Grundsatz del" books, discussed in, 26, II8, II9, 120,
Bestimmbarkeit), 99, 100, 101, 106 121
Principle of Sufficient Reason, 33, 41, 121 bridges in, 22-23
PrololJomena to Any Future Metaphysics candidness, 109
(Kant),44 chapters excluded 6,'0111, 126
public sphere, enlightened discourse of~ 125, class analysis in, II6
142 Confessions (Rousseau), con1pared to,
PurilTI, 35 109, III
Pythagoras, 139 didacticisn1 ot~ 133
Eliot, George, read by, 144
rabbinic authority, 173n34 exegetical nature of~ 4
rabbinic books, II9, 185n21 final chapter ot~ 133, 134-37
rabbinic hon10sociality, 173n28 first chapters, published, III
rabbinic textual practices, 17 first person in, use of~ 45, II3
rabbinical portraits, 203n30 and GenTIan language, 120 -21, 122
Index
Goethe, Johann vVol(gang von, read by, study ot~ need tor, 183n9
+7-4-8 as tutor, 1721122
Haskala critique of traditional Jewish so- Schelling, Wilhelm Joseph, 102, 104-, 104-
ciety in, 5 Schick, Baruch, Rabbi, 4-0, 174-n4-3
as historical source, 21 Schiller, Friedrich, 3, 4-7
and individuality, lIO Schmitz, Kenneth, 18
and infinity, problem ot~ II7 Scholem, Gershom, 16, 154-, 2IIn4-0
introduction by Karl Philipp Moritz, 109, SCience
II3 Aristotelian, 60
Jewish emancipation in, 109, 1II-12, II5 and Hesheq She/olno (Maimon), 6/, 63,
and Jewish identity, 14-4- 71-72
Jewish social order in, II5-16 and Maimon, Solomon, II4-, 122
literary afterlife ot~ 14-3-4-4- and Maimonides, 61
literary style ot~ 4-, 4-5, II4-, II7, 157 and Maskilim, 55
and Maimonides' philosophy, 126, 152 "Searching for Light and Right in a Letter
Maskilim, read by, 14-4--4-5 to Mr. Moses Mendelssohn" (essay),
memories in, 123-24- 34-
and metaphysical truth, lI4- Sefer Em~mot l'e-Deot (Gaon), 57
misogynist theme in, 27 Sefel' haMiddot (Alguadez), I86n26
narrative stance in, II3 Sefer haRiqma (Janah), I86n34-
and noetic pertection, desire tor, 132, 133 sefirotic gender dynamics, 297n85
and order, finding in life, II4- sensation, 100, 107
Polish Jews in, 6, III, II5, II6 sense impressions, 14-
preface to second part, II3 sensibility, and finite minds, 100, 101
Radziwill, Prince, in, 22 sensible intuition, 94-, 14-1
and reading public, IIO, III sensible representations, 86
reliability ot~ 31, 53, 170n8 ShaJaget Aryeh (Gunzberg), 25
scholarly attention toward, 157 Shadows on the Hudson (Singer), 155
subtleties of, II3, 157 Shekhina
success of, 4-5 and active intellect, 137, I9Il178
translated, 14-4- as temale, 74-, 207n85, 138
and Unbildung, IIO as "full of eyes," 207n86
and the Zohal', 18 and Maimon, Solomon, 74-, 138-39
salons, 165n7, 200n8 and Maimonides, 206n84-
Satanov, Isaac and perfection, impossibility o( 14-2
as eclectic, 56 personified, 138, 207n88
and Ethics (Aristotle), publication of, 79, in the Zohar, 138-39
160 she/emut ha-nefesh (intellectual perfection/
letter, disputed, as author of, 21OnI9 perfection of the soul), II, 17, 93,
and Maimon, Solomon, 183n9 162, I85n24-. See also perfection
and Maimonides, Moses, 55 Shestov, L. 1.,161
and medieval Jewish philosophical tradi- shevi (exile), I9511I15
tion,54- shofar, 37
and Mendelssohn, Hebrew translations Singer, Isaac Bashevis, 155
of,175n50 skepticism, 4-5, 97
Index 247