74 CHAPTER THREE
than not, the exoteric teaching, which refl ects the lowest level of under-
standing. Averroes frequently uses the expression “the intention of the
Lawgiver.”^90 Therefore, when Maimonides says in Guide 2.25 that the
interpretation of anthropomorphic verses in the Bible does not contra-
dict the text, but is in fact “the intention of the text” (qasd al- nass) he
may well be responding to Averroes’ line of argument in the Kashf, ac-
cording to which the literal, anthropomorphic level of understanding of
Quranic verses is “the intention of the Law.”^91
In other cases, the dialogue nearly slips into an argument. One exam-
ple may suffi ce: in summing up his position regarding the need to inter-
pret the sacred text, Averroes identifi es several categories of texts that are
in fact parables. The fourth and last category includes texts that are dif-
fi cult to perceive as being parables. Once this fact is disclosed, however,
the intention of the parables is almost evident.^92 Such a disclosure is ex-
actly what Maimonides promises to do in the Guide: In some matters,
Maimonides says, “it will suffi ce you to gather from my remarks that a
given story is a parable (mathal)... for once you know it is a parable, it
will become clear to you what it is a parable of.”^93 Such a decision would
clearly have been frowned upon by Averroes. Averroes expresses the fear
that the disclosure of the parabolic nature of the text may engender
“strange beliefs, far from the exoteric teaching of the law; these teachings
may become widespread, and the multitudes may disclaim them.”^94 It is
thus as a response to Averroes’s concerns that one can read Maimonides’
defi ant conclusion of his “Instruction” (wasiyya) to the reader of the
Guide:
To sum up: I am the man who, when the concern pressed him and
his way was straitened and he could fi nd no other device by which
to teach a demonstrated truth other than by giving satisfaction to a
single virtuous man while displeasing ten thousand ignoramuses— I(^90) Maqsad al- shari or ma qasada al- shar. See, for instance, Kashf, 99– 100.
(^91) Zev Harvey has noted that the expression “qasd al- nass,” which appears in Guide 2.25
(Dalala, 328), does not appear in the Fasl; See W. Z. Harvey, “On Maimonides’ Allegorical
Readings of Scripture,” in J. Whitman, ed., Interpretation and Allegory: Antiquity to the
Modern Period (Leiden- Boston-Köln, 2000), 182. In the Kashf, however, as noted above
(note 90), a similar expression does appear. This strengthens Harvey’s suggestion that Mai-
monides was infl uenced by Averroes in his formulation of Guide 2.25. The infl uence, how-
ever, refl ects Maimonides’ acquaintance with the whole of Averroes’s theological complex,
and not only with the Fasl.
(^92) SeeKashf, 207– 8. The mithal, translated here as “parable,” need not necessarily have all
the literary features of the genre of parables. Its main characteristic in this context is that it
cannot be understood literally, and that its true understanding calls for tawil.
(^93) “Introduction,” in Guide (Dalala, 9:22- 25; Pines, 14).
(^94) Kashf, 208.