his thought. For example, Maimonides distinguishes between “the fi rst
(Divine) intention,” which is the elimination of idolatry, and “the second
intention,” which is the ethical improvement of individuals and the just
governance of society.^57 This distinction, a cornerstone in his under-
standing of the role of religion, appears in the writings of the Aristotelian
philosophers (including Alexander of Aphrodisias’s above- mentionedOn
the Principles of the All), where it has a somewhat different meaning.^58 It
does, however, occupy a central place in the “The Epistles of the Pure
Brethren,” where it is used in similar po litical contexts.^59 Maimonides
was familiar with these epistles, to which he refers in a derogatory man-
ner in his letter to Samuel Ibn Tibbon.^60 His criticism of their approach
in itself does not, however, preclude their infl uence on him. His unac-
knowledged usage of their understanding of a two- tiered Divine inten-
tion may well refl ect this ambivalent attitude.^61
In the historiographic and heresiographic literature of Maimonides’
time the Sabians have a considerable presence, and it is likely that Mai-
monides read this literature and that it had a signifi cant impact on his
views. It was commonplace to associate the Sabians with the biblical
Abraham, an association that emphasizes the role of Harran and that
presents the Harranian Sabian religion as paradigmatic idolatry.^62 Works
that may have reached Maimonides also indicate an association of the
Sabians with the Nabateans.^63 Already Masudi identifi es the Sabians/
(^57) SeeGuide 3.27 (Dalala, 371– 73; Pines, 510– 12), 3.29 (Dalala, 377:11; Pines, 517), 3.32
(Dalala, 385:17, 27; 386:11, 17, 21; Pines, 527– 28).
(^58) The formula is common in the phi losophers’ discussion of divine providence; see, for ex-
ample,Discourse of Alexander of Aphrodisias on the Governance (tadbirat) of the Sphere,
53.1–59.3; See Genequand, Alexander of Aphrodisias on the Cosmos, 45, 66. The terms
al-qasd al- awwal /al-qasd al- thani, which appear in Abu Bishr Matta’s Arabic translation in
the sense of “primarily/secondarily,” have no equivalent in the Greek original of that text.
I am indebted to Fritz Zimmerman for bringing this text to my attention and for discussing
it with me.
(^59) Rasail ikhwan al-safa wa- khillan al- wafa (Beirut, n.d.), 3:476– 78 (al-Risala al-ula min
al-ulum al- namusiya).
(^60) See Stroumsa, “A Note on Maimonides’ Attitude to Joseph ibn Sadiq,” 33– 38.
(^61) On the Neoplatonic Ismaili infl uence on Maimonides, see A.L. Ivry, “Ismaili Theology
and Maimonides’ Philosophy,” in D. Frank, ed., The Jews of Medieval Islam: Community,
Society and Identity (Leiden, 1995), 271– 99; idem, “Neoplatonic Currents in Maimonides’
Thought,” 115– 40; and see chap. 1, note 35, above. An unacknowledged use of Ismaili
sources was a common practice in Judeo- Arabic literature. See Stroumsa, “Citation Tradi-
tions,” 170– 72.
(^62) See Gen. 11:31, 12:4; and see, for example, Ibn al- Nadim, Fihrist, 373.
(^63) For example, Ghayat al-Hakim, attributed to the phi losopher Majriti; see, M. Fierro,
“Batinism in al- Andalus: Maslama b. Qasim al Qurtubi (d.353/964), Author of the Rutbat
al-Hakim and the Ghayat al-Hakim (Picatrix),” Studia Islamica 84 (1996): 7– 112. As
noted by D. Chwolsohn (“Über die Überreste der altbabylonischen Literatur in arabischen