122 CHAPTER FOUR
evidence that the preachers’ activity is not restricted to the Jewish com-
munity was thus readily available to Maimonides.^163 We thus fi nd him
denigrating the book called Shiur Qoma, saying that it is “nothing but
a composition of one of the Christian preachers (ahad ha- darshanin al-
rum).”^164 The implication of this hybrid term is that the Byzantine Chris-
tians (called hererum) must also have a category of people who fulfi ll
the function of the Jewish darshanim. What ever name the rum might
give them, everyone knows what kind of discourse one can expect them
to deliver.
One of the main functions of the darshan is, for Maimonides, to com-
fort and encourage simple people in distress. His typical audience would
be bereaved women who gather at the mourners’ house.^165 In his obser-
vation of this phenomenon, Maimonides’ disdain for women colors also
the attitude to the darshan. In spite of his scorn, however, Maimonides
seems to accept this form of discourse as a fact of life, and does not at-
tempt to eradicate such homilies. The point where he does react sharply
is when the darshanim overstep their turf and presume to be something
else.
In his introduction to Pereq Heleq Maimonides describes the approach
of simple people to the midrashim regarding the afterlife. These simple
folks accept the most fantastic midrashim at face value, and, although
Maimonides regrets their poor understanding, he refrains from trying to
change them. He specifi cally warns the reader who belongs to this credu-
lous crowd from continuing to read Maimonides’ analysis, since the
things Maimonides is about to expound are bound to be too much for
him, just as fi ne food would be indigestible for a person used to heavier
fare.^166 Maimonides does try, however, to curtail the additional support
that this poor thinking receives through homilies, and he says:
Resorting to the technique of midrash, this category of people inter-
pret what the Sages say literally, and extract from them things that,
if the [gentile] nations would have heard, they would have said:
“Surely, this small nation is a stupid and vile people.”^167 This is fre-
quently done by preachers, who explain to people what they them-
selves do not understand. If they do not understand, would that they(^163) See, for example, Pedrsen, “The Criticism of The Islamic Preacher,” Die Welt des Islams
2 (1953): 215– 31; M. L. Schwartz, Ibn al- Jawzí’s Kitab al- Qussas wa’l-Mudhakkirin (Bei-
rut, 1969), 46– 60, esp. 55– 60.
(^164) Responsa, 200– 201;Epistles, 578; and see chap. 3, above, apud note 80.
(^165) See, for instance, Essay on Resurrection,Epistles, 322, 325 [Hebrew 345, 351].
(^166) Introduction to Pereq Heleq, Commentary on the Mishna,Neziqin, 200– 201, 203; and
see above, apud note 42.
(^167) The Hebrew words, inserted in the Judaeo- Arabic text, are obviously a parody on Deut.
4:6; cf. above, apud note 131.