Rambam’s Failed Vow

by R. Gil Student

I. The Non-Binding Vow

Great thinkers convince people and do not try to intimidate them. In the introduction to his Guide for the Perplexed, Rambam issues a command to the reader, invoking God’s name. This demand is puzzling on two levels. First, it fails as a command because it does not bind readers. Second, it has been repeatedly ignored by Torah sages throughout the generations. What did Rambam write and what did he mean? Different solutions have been offered to this strange puzzle.

In his introductory remarks to the Guide, Rambam writes:

”I demand (mashbi’a), in God’s name, of anyone who reads this book of mine, not to explain even a single word nor to explain to others except what is explicit and clear in the words of previous, famous Torah sages. He must not teach others anything that he understands from it that has not been said by our famous sages. Nor may he be quick to raise objections against me because it is possible that what he understands from my words is different from what I intended. He will cause me injury in response to my desire to cause him good; he will return evil for good.”

Rambam makes readers swear (mashbi’a) two things: 1) not to explain anything in the Guide that is original or even just not explicit in the writings of prior generations and 2) not to critique him for saying things that he did not mean. We can only speculate as to the reasons for this. Perhaps Rambam wanted people to read the Guide at their own level, finding meaning appropriate to their level of scholarship. Or maybe he did not want to risk commentators putting words into his mouth that he did not say.

Regardless, this vow is astounding on multiple levels. You cannot bind someone to a vow without his consent. Just because Rambam says he is binding people to the vow does not mean it actually binds us because we do not necessarily consent to it. Rambam himself, in his great halakhic work Mishneh Torah, writes that one person is not bound by another’s vow unless he responds “Amen” (Hilkhos Shevu’os 5:2). Additionally, people have been writing commentaries to the Guide ever since it was published. Not only does Rambam forbid commentaries, he also forbids teaching classes or even individuals about the Guide. Perhaps the first question answers the second. The vow is not binding and that is why people felt comfortable explaining the Guide. If so, why did Rambam bother issuing that warning when he certainly knew it was not binding? Rambam, in that very introduction, notes how carefully he worded and structured the Guide. Where is the care in writing this seemingly, but not really, binding vow?

II. Curses and Approbations

Rav Moshe Hagiz (18th cen., Amsterdam) was asked about this by someone who wanted to teach the deep meanings within the Guide. Is he allowed to do so, since he never consented to Rambam’s vow? Rav Hagiz explains that Rambam is not invoking a vow but rather a decree, a cherem. Effectively, Rambam curses with a cherem anyone who would explain the Guide. Rav Hagiz was careful himself to abide by this command and cautions others to do so, as well (Responsa Shtei Ha-Lechem, no. 35).

More recently, Rav Chaim David Halevi (20th cen., Israel) was asked the same question in 1986 and rejects Rav Hagiz’s explanation because only a community or its leader can issue a decree, not an individual (Aseh Lekha Rav, vol. 8, no. 54). Rather, Rav Halevi suggests that Rambam was harshly expressing his desire and request of readers. There is no actual prohibition in explaining the Guide but it violates the great author’s wishes.

It is unclear to me why Rav Halevi so quickly dismisses Rav Hagiz’s view. I compare this to the purpose of publishing rabbinic approbations for a book of Torah scholarship. Reportedly, the first work to be published with a rabbinic approbation was Sefer Ha-Agur, by Rav Ya’kov Landau. It was published in 1486 with an approbation at the end by Rav Nesanel Ben Levi of Jerusalem. This approbation informs potential readers that the work is worthy of their time and money. With the publication explosion due to the relatively recent innovations with the printing press, consumers needed a way to identify worthy works of Torah scholarship.

In 1517, Rav Eliyahu Levitas published his classic grammar work, Sefer Ha-Bachur. In the 1518 edition, he added an approbation from three prominent rabbis in Rome forbidding others from violating the author’s copyright. They declare that anyone who republishes the book without the author’s permission or who buys such a forbidden publication is subject to a curse of cherem. (Below is the 1518 approbation as published in the 2019 Zichron Aharon edition.)

Effectively, Rambam — who wrote the Guide at the end of his life when he was one of the most prominent rabbis in the world — published his own approbation in which he admonishes readers not to misuse the book. This was, indeed, a cherem of the sort later used to protect authors’ copyrights.

III. Making Many Books, There Is No End

We are left with the question of how great Torah sages have, in fact, published commentaries explaining the Guide, sometimes themselves with approbations (below is the approbation for the Givas Ha-Moreh commentary on the Guide, published in 1612).

More recently, Rav Shlomo Aviner (cont., Israel) has published three volumes of commentary on the first two sections of the Guide and Dr. Yochai Makbili heads a religious team of translators and commentators who published the excellent Mifal Mishneh Torah edition of the Guide which is full of commentary intended for a popular audience. Additionally, many great Torah sages throughout the generations include citations and explanations of idea from the Guide within their independent works. How can they do this, contrary to Rambam’s explicit instruction not to do so?

Rav Avraham Kook (20th cen., Israel) says that Rambam objected to people teaching obscure ideas from the Guide. If something is already well-known, it does not fall under Rambam’s vow. What is obscure and what is common knowledge varies by time and place. Over the centuries, what was groundbreaking and perhaps shocking in Rambam’s time became commonplace. Therefore, the vow no longer prevents us from discussing and exploring Rambam’s views (Iggeros Ha-Ra’ayah 2:414). On one level, this seems a bit unsavory. Because others violated Rambam’s instruction and publicized his views, we can now discuss them publicly? We are benefitting from their bad faith actions. On the other hand, what point is there in trying to keep a secret that is well-known? Additionally, even without Rambam, as these philosophical ideas gained traction through other thinkers, Rambam’s views became more publicly palatable.

Rav Ya’akov Ariel (cont., Israel) adds that there are commentaries of the Guide which attribute to Rambam a variety of non-traditional beliefs. They violated the second part of Rambam’s vow by suggesting that he denies creation, miracles and the uniqueness of the Jewish people. There seems to be no end to the outrageous “hidden beliefs” some claim to find in the Guide, which can mislead people who are searching for faith in this confusing age. Therefore, there is a need to properly explain the Guide in order to dispel these false claims about his beliefs. This is in addition to the need for Rambam’s thought to serve as a guide for us today. Rambam continues in his introduction that his justification for writing the Guide are the verse “It is time to act for the Lord for they have voided Your law” (Ps. 119:26) and the rabbinic saying “Let all your actions be done for the sake of Heaven.” Rav Ariel says that these apply today to those who explain the Guide in a traditional way (quoted in Rav Yonason Blass, Mi-Nofes Tzuf, vol. 1, p. 18).