Pearson Edexcel Level 3 Advanced GCE in Religious Studies – Anthology
262t ext s permit. Ot herwise we must read figurat ively, forest alling c apric ious readings
by citing textual parallels to warrant each departure from familiar Hebrew usage.
The Hebrew poet Ibn Gabirol, as discovered only in 1845, was the philosopher
Avic ebrol, author of the Fons Vit ae (“The Fountain of Life”), whic h survives intac t
only in Latin, although passages quoted in Hebrew point us toward the lost Arabic
original. Written as a dialogue between teacher and disciple, it addresses the
ontology of the One and the many, relying on “int ellec t ual mat t er,” and a primal
Will t o mediat e divine simplic it y... Among its most endearing exc hanges: “Disc iple:
‘T he resolut ion of all t hings t o t hese t wo (universal mat t er and form), is t his fac t or
opinion?’ Master: ‘It is not a fac t but an opinion.’’’
Ibn Gabirol’s On the Improvement of the Moral Qualities e xa min e s mo ra l
psyc hology in a physiologic al vein. While upholding t he soul’s immo rt alit y... and the
mind’s affinit y wit h t he divine Int ellec t , Ibn Gabirol links human emot ions wit h t he
bodily senses – hauteur, humility, shame, and shamelessness with seeing; love,
hate, pity, and hardheartedness with hearing; ire, c omplaisanc e, jealousy, and
spunk with smelling; joy, anxiety, serenity, and regret with tasting; free-spending,
tightfistedness, boldness, and timidity with touc hing. The virtues, of c ourse, are
means between extremes. But, since each disposition represents a spec ific
“temperament,” or blending of the bodily humors, Ibn Gabirol c an disc uss and
“t reat” the dispositions by reference not only to social norms but also to our
embodime nt, laying the groundwork for Maimonides’ treatment of virtues and vic es
as habits whic h our c hoic es overlay upon our inborn propensities.
Judah Halevi (before 1075–1141), perhaps the greatest post-Biblic al Hebrew
poet , was anot her medic ally-minded thinker who grounded a theology in nature
and looked to nature as the realm in whic h underst anding would bear fruit. His
philosophic al dialogue t he Kuzar i imagines the enc ounter with Judaism of the King
of the Khazars, a people of the far off Volga, who had adopted Judaism in the
eighth c entury. As Halevi sets the sc ene, the king has dreamed that his intentions
please God, but not his ac tions. He summons a spokesman of the “despised
religion” only after hearing from a Neoplatonist, a Christian, and a Muslim. The
philosopher’s ideas are at t rac t ive. But , as t he king explains, it is his way of life, not
his mind that needs improveme nt. He worries that sec tarians who share the
philosopher’s ideas all seem sincerely bent on one another’s murder. The problem is
no mere abstraction. Halevi’s poems reflect the mayhem he had seen in Spain, the
Bosnia or Guernica of his time, where Jews were caught between the hammer and
anvil of Rec onquista and jihad. The philosopher’s attempt to set the life of the mind
above suc h c onflic t s vividly reveals t he povert y of t he prevailing int ellec t ualism t hat
passed for philosophy. Halevi’s own response is to pursue a way of life and thought
firmly rooted in prac tic e and c ommunity with his people, in the past and future as
well as the present.
Bec ause Halevi plac es c ult ure (inc luding mat erial c ult ure), imaginat ion, and
hist ory where more c onventional philosophers had plac ed logic , reason, and
c osmology, moderns of romantic bent see in him an adversary of philosophy. But
c loser st udy shows him as a skilled philosopher c ommit t ed t o a profound c rit ique of
est ablished philosophic al not ions. His ont ology is deeply root ed in Ibn Gabirol, as
Marx is in Hegel. But Halevi banishes t he st ream of emanat ing c elest ial int ellec t s
t hat had ent ranc ed earlier t hinkers. Seizing on Ibn Gabirol’s idea of a union of will
and wisdom and brilliant ly transforming his spirit ual mat t er, Halevi ret urns t o t he