92 CHAPTER FOUR
In order to reach such a phenomenological view, Maimonides un-
doubtedly perused sources different from those used by contemporary
scholars in their search for the Sabians. All the modern theories rely on a
number of works that describe the Sabian rites, temples, and customs. In
all likelihood, Maimonides was familiar with these or similar works. His
description of Sabian rites and beliefs, however, includes also many ele-
ments that do not appear in these works, and indeed he quotes other
sources in this context.
In order to better understand Maimonides’ writings on the Sabians we
must briefl y survey Maimonides’ view of the development of religions.
According to Maimonides, the religious development of humanity must
be seen in the context of what might be termed “the realistic Divine
economy.” In His efforts to educate human beings God acts (as He does
in any other realm) according to the laws of nature, using these laws to
guide humans and to press them forward, rather than imposing His om-
nipotence and forcing them to change.^40 Humankind naturally tends to
adhere to acquired habits, and abandons them only with great diffi culty.^41
God takes this natural tendency into account, and rather than forcing
a sudden change onto humankind, He encourages them to advance by
stages (bi-tadrij), to abandon earlier, “primitive” habits and replace them
with incrementally higher levels of worship that refl ect an increasingly
pure metaphysical understanding. Such a tactic of accommodation, which
Maimonides calls talattuf, (“shrewdness in the ser vice of lovingkind-
ness”) is refl ected, for example, in the fact that God prepares mother’s
milk for infants to nourish them until they gradually become accustomed
to the heavy food of adults.^42 In this way Maimonides interprets God’s
decision to lead the Israelite exodus from Egypt along the more diffi cult
(^40) Guide 3.32 (Dalala, 386:25– 387:4; Pines, 529).
(^41) SeeGuide 1.31 (Dalala, 45:3– 16; Pines, 670; Bos, Maimonides, On Asthma, 110. Habit
as a cause of human behavior also appears, in a similar context, in the writings of Ibn
Rushd; see Fasl al- maqal, 45– 46; Averroes, The Book of the Decisive Treatise, 19. This
may indicate, as I have suggested elsewhere, that the two thinkers have used a common
source, perhaps a commentary on Aristotle or on Alexander of Aphrodisias; see note 56,
below. If so, the emphasis on the power of habit is not Maimonides’ original addition to
the discussion, as Pines had assumed (“The Limitations of Human,” appendix, 100– 104,
esp. 104); see S. Stroumsa, “Habitudes religieuses et liberté intellectuelle dans la pensée
arabe médiévale,” in M. Abitbol et R. Assaraf, eds., Monothéisme et tolérance: Actes du
Colloque du Centre international de recherche sur les Juifs du Maroc, 1– 4 Octobre, 1996
(Paris 1997), 57– 66. It is, however, more likely that the similarity is yet another indication
of Maimonides’ direct familiarity with Fasl al- maqal, and that Averroes himself was Mai-
monides’ source for this idea.
(^42) Guide 3.32 (Dalala, 384:6– 10, 20– 25; Pines, 525– 26); see also Guide 1.33 (Dalala,
384:7–10; Pines, 525).