Sacred Texts And Their Interpretation: A Study On Maimonides'Allegorical Interpretation

In medieval Rabbinic Judaism, sacred texts referred to Tanakh, Talmud and Midrashim; and believers were grouped as laities and elites. Laities were those illiterate and obedient to authorities such as rabbis. Elites were scholars who studied rabbinical literatures and were, or would be, rabbis. Many elites also studied secular knowledge and formed some opinions on metaphysics (theology), astronomy or physics under the overwhelming influence of medieval secular knowledge introduced from ancient Greek by the Arabic translation movement. But opinions might not be always in agreement with each other. What's worse, the obvious contradictions between Judaic truths and philosophical truths had thus put many philosophized Judaic believers in perplexity.Maimonides, the greatest medieval Judaic authority in Arab land, showed his deep concern about those in perplexity and wrote one of his master pieces, Guide for the Perplexed, to solve their problems.He first specified the contradiction between faith and reason as the contradiction between the outcome of literal understanding of sacred texts and that of the rational understanding. He then further specified the sacred texts as some words and metaphors in Prophetic Books of Tanach. And then he announced that those words and metaphors had hidden meanings-the knowledge of natural science and theology. Then he interpreted those chosen words and metaphors. His interpretation was called allegorical interpretation, or philosophical allegory to be exact, or reading out the meaning of Arabic-Aristotelian philosophy from the Jewish Sacred Texts, to be more exact.His allegorical interpretation had two preconditions. One was "torah speaks in the language of Adam"; another was "sacred texts have literal meanings and hidden meanings-the knowledge of natural science and theology". The reason why torah spoke in the language of man was because torah was to be heard by everyone, not only the philosophized elites but also laities. So homonyms, equivocal terms or hybrids were seen in the sacred texts. As for the second precondition, Maimonides inherited the concept of double-layer meaning from traditional Midrashim, and adopted the strategy of philosophical allegory from Islamic and Jewish forerunners.Maimonides'allegorical interpretation was against the background of medieval Jewish scriptural interpretation. Traditional Midrashic interpretation was equipped two general methods; one was peshat (to give its literal meaning); another was derash (to give its inferred, often homiletic meaning). Under the influence of Islamic rationalism, philology, poetry, etc., the Karaites opposed all Talmudic inferred meanings and highlighted the literal meaning of a word; they eventually set up Hebrew grammar as the criterion to judge the scriptural interpretation. Pesharim exegetes emphasized the literal meaning of a word in its context, and rejected the inferred meanings explained by Mishnah sages.With their emphasis on the language itself, scriptural interpretation was loosing its concern about human. However, that tended to set Talmudic belief in danger; because Halahah norm was shaped by Mishnah sages'inferences and many rabbinical inferences were created just for the need of rabbis preaching to laities. Maimonides'allegorical interpretation, on the one hand, adopted some form of peshat, such as lexical analysis, and had human concern as the purpose of interpretation-to help those perplexed disciples. By his allegorical interpretation, he announced that the sacred texts were never wrong unless interpreted in a right way-allegorical interpretation; if it appeared wrong, the only reason was that it was interpreted in a wrong way-literal interpretation.So, as for Maimonides, allegorical interpretation was not only a method of scriptural interpretation, but a right way of belief for those philosophized Judaic believers as well. It meant that the perplexed would approach the truth of YHVH if they possessed the correct secular knowledge and took the verses allegorically. In another words, if they interpret the sacred texts in a wrong way or/and possessed wrong secular knowledge, they would make grave blunders. What would those blunders be like?Those philosophized Judaic believers already held some philosophical truths as "YHVH exists", or "YHVH is One"; but they might not know their standpoints before two improvable opinions-the eternity of the universe and YHVH's creation. Those philosophized believer already had some knowledge of physics, but they might be confused by creation ex-nihilo or creation with primal matter. Those philosophized believers already had some knowledge of astronomy, but they might be allured by the enchantment of astrology.As for Maimonides, the negation of Creation equaled to the negation of YHVH's existence or providence, which simply meant the abandon of Judaism. The acceptance of creation with primal matter would lead to the conclusion that there existed some being before creation; since that being was not the created, it must be as divine as the Creator YHVH; then it was worthy of being worshipped. And if they were absorbed in astrology, they would worship stars or calculate the day of Messiah's coming, which, in Maimonides' eyes, were wrong and dangerous doings. Here we see Maimonides's ultimate concern of allegorical interpretation-to build the correct way of belief and the correct content of religious knowledge.In order to achieve the above understanding of Maimonides' allegorical interpretation, this dissertation would present the following parts as:the target readers, the words and metaphors interpreted, the preconditions of interpretation, the methods and process of interpretation and the context of interpretation, and criticize them respectively.