Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upenn.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Jewish Quarterly Review.
http://www.jstor.org
DURAN'S VIEW OF THE NATURE OF PROVIDENCE
14
THE JEWISH QUARTERLYREVIEW
2 B. Pes. 8a.
3 Kabbalistic literature is, of course, replete with references to
evil spirits, demons, etc. Although within the philosophical tradition
the existence of shedim was denied by Maimonides (Guide of the
Perplexed, III, 37, and Mishneh Torah, "Laws Concerning Idolatry,"
XI, I6), and according to Menasseh ben Israel, by Ibn Ezra as well,
the existence of demonic spirits was accepted by Judah ha-Levi
(Kizari, V, I4), but in a context which makes no mention of the
question of diverse sources of good and evil. Among later medieval
writers the reality of such spirits was accepted by Shem Tob ibn Shem
Tob (Sefer ha-Eminiot, Ferrara, I556, V, I), Crescas (Or ha-Shem,
IV, 6), Moses Tachau (Ket~b Tdmim, published in Osar Nehmad, ed.
Ignatz Blumenfeld, Vienna, I86o, III, 97); Isaac Abravanel (in his
commentary on Deut. I8: 9), and by so late an authority as Elijah Gaon
of Vilna (cf. his oft cited stricture on Maimonides in which he claims
that Maimonides was misled by "philosophy" and hence interpreted
Talmudic references to spirits and demons in an overly rational spirit,
Shul6han cArki, Yoreh De'dh, I79, Bz'ti ha-GRA, note I3). For a
discussion of the sources and justification of the conflicting views
see Menasseh ben Israel, Mishnat IHayyim (Warsaw, I876), III, 12-14.
Averroes also alludes to a belief in the existence of such beings as
intermediaries between the Intelligences of the spheres and sublunary
creatures (Die Hauptlehren des Averroes, trans. M. M. Horton [Bonn,
I913], p. 277). Gersonides (Wars of the Lord, IV, 3), in attributing such
a belief to the "multitude of our coreligionists" in contrast to his
earlier reference to the "philosophers," probably had no specific
figure in mind, but was referring to Kabbalistic views which the
masses tended to accept in an unsophisticated manner.
4 See Zohar, Introduction, p. II.
DURAN S VIEW OF PROVIDENCE-BLEICH 2II
first in the temporal order but rather as being supreme or first in the
ontological order. Since he is referring not to a series stretching back
into the past but to a hierarchy of causes in which a subordinate
member is dependent upon the causal activity of a higher member,
Duran may have felt that this concept is identical with that of an
Unmoved Mover. F. C. Copleston offers a similar interpretation of
Aquinas' first proof for the existence of God; see F. C. Copleston,
Aquinas (Baltimore, 1955), pp. II7-I9.
25 III, 2, p. 33a.
26 Maimonides, Guide, III, I8, also declares that "species have no
existence except in our own minds" and uses this assertion to demon-
strate the reality of individual Providence, but in a manner com-
patible only with his own view of the nature of Providence. According
to Maimonides, Providence is exercised through the medium of the
intellect. Since species have no objective existences, Providence must
operate through the medium of the individual intellect. Hence, con-
cludes Maimonides, not only is individual Providence a reality, but
Providence is also proportional to the endowment of the intellect.
DURAN'S VIEW OF PROVIDENCE-BLEICH 219
37b and Sot. 8b) declares that although the Sanhedrin no longer exists
and consequently the four modes of execution cannot be imposed, the
guilty nevertheless receive a similar punishment at the hands of
Heaven. Thus "a person incurring [the punishment] of burning either
falls into a fire or is bitten by a snake."
DURAN'S VIEW OF PROVIDENCE-BLEICH 22I
I5