140 CHAPTER FIVE
it was also used contemptuously, to designate senseless mythologies.^73
IbnTufayl reports that Farabi, in his lost Commentary on the Nico-
machean Ethics, called belief in the afterlife “ravings and old- wives’
tales” (hadhayan wa- khurafatajaiz).^74 Farabi may have intended to
speak of myths in the Platonic sense, but readers like Ibn Tufayl could
not help noticing a scornful tone. In the Arabic philosophic tradition in-
herited by Maimonides, the two terms khurafa and hadhayan are closely
linked. It is thus not surprising to fi nd them appearing together in Mai-
monides’ discussion of the Sabians. When the Sabian myth involves cul-
tic and magical practices that are intended to infl uence the spirits and
control the natural elements of the sublunar world, Maimonides brands
the whole discourse as khurafat wa- hadhayanat^75 or “hadhayanat and
stupidities which tarnish the intellect.”^76 In his parlance, “ravings” or
“myths and ravings” indicate both the mythology itself and its cultic, ap-
plied aspect, theurgy based on the interpretation of esoteric texts and on
the supposedly scientifi c view of the world. He states categorically that
these “fables of the Sabians and... ravings of the Chasdeans and
Chaldeans... are devoid of all science that is truly science.”^77
Maimonides’ lengthy discussion of the Sabians and their literature
prepares the ground for his explanation of those commandments that do
not have an obvious rational explanation. In his Epistle on Astrology he
reiterates his interest in these kinds of commandments, as well as the im-
portance of pagan literature for understanding them. In this work Mai-
monides also sets clear criteria for accepting something as true. One
should believe only in what is sanctioned by rational evidence, by the evi-
dence of the senses, or by that of prophetic traditions. A person who be-
lieves anything else fi ts the dictum that “the fool would believe anything.”^78
Maimonides mentions that thousands of books have been composed deal-
ing with futile ideas and stupidities that people have imagined to be sci-
ence, and that the books on astrology are prominent among them. He
also says that the ancient Persians and Greeks, who were trained in the
sciences, had nothing to do with astrology. Only the Chaldeans, Egyptians,
(^73) See, for instance, Abu Bishr Matta’s commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, as quoted in
Pseudo-Majriti’s Ghayat al-hakim, 283.
(^74) RisalatHayy ibn Yaqzan, ed. Faruq Sad (Beirut, 1980), 112.
(^75) Guide 3:26 (Dalala, 380:7; Pines, 520); Guide 3:37 (Dalala, 396:27; Pines, 542).
(^76) Commentary on the Mishnah, Qodashim,Hullin, 173 (“al-hadhayanat wal-sukhuf al-
muwassikha al-aql”).
(^77) “Ariyinan kull ilm huwa ilm bil-haqiqa”;Guide 3:26 (Dalala, 380:7; Pines, 520). It is
noteworthy that both khurafat and hadhayanat are used in a derogatory sense by Maimo-
nides’ main source for the Sabian theurgy; see al-Filaha al- nabatiyya (L’agriculture naba-
téene), ed. T. Fahd (Damascus, 1993), 1: 155:2– 4.
(^78) Epistles, 479.