32 CHAPTER TWO
(which they then passed on to the Jews). In Maimonides’ view, philoso-
phy, twice harnessed in this manner to religion, was much the worse.
From the search for truth it was transformed into a system for arbitrary
distortion of the truth.
Maimonides’ main concern, however, was neither the Christians nor
the Muslims but his own co- religionist theologians, whose opinions he
tried to discredit. He therefore continues his historical sketch so as to
include also the Jews:
As for that scanty bit of kalam regarding the notion of the unity of
God and regarding what depends on this notion, which you will fi nd
in the writings of some Gaonim and in those of the Karaites, it
should be noted that the subject matter of this kalam was taken over
by them from the Mutakallimun of Islam.Muslim scholastic theology was thus, according to Maimonides, copied
by Jewish scholars in the East, both Rabbanites— the Gaonim— and
Karaites. He does not credit them with fashioning their thought to fi t the
size of Judaism, as Muslims and Christians before them had adopted
philosophy for their needs. He does not credit them with any kind of
discernment or choice. According to him, since the fi rst Muslim theologi-
cal school happened to be the Mutazila, it was this version of theology
that was cloned by the Jewish thinkers: “This was not because they pre-
ferred the fi rst opinion [i.e., that of the Mutazila] to the second [i.e., the
Ashariyya], but because they had taken over and adopted the fi rst opin-
ion and considered it a matter proven by demonstration.”^30 Maimonides
then proceeds to offer a lengthy criticism of kalam, a system that he pres-
ents as a degradation and abuse of philosophy. In his writings, he rarely
misses an opportunity for an aside to the mutakallimun, whom he does
not regard as engaged in the same endeavor as he is.
Despite its obvious fl aws, Maimonides’ outline is, on the whole, strik-
ingly perceptive. The role of oriental Christians in translating and trans-
mitting Hellenic culture to the Arabs has been long recognized, although
the current “wisdom in the fi eld” favors a revised evaluation of this role.^31
Maimonides’ writings offer an interesting angle to this question: he grudg-
(^30) Guide 1.71 (Dalala, 122; Pines, 177). On the different schools of kalam, see, for instance,
L. Gardet and M.- M. Anawati, Introduction à la théologie musulmane: essai de théologie
comparée (Paris, 1981), 46– 67; J. van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahr-
hundert Hidschra: Eine Geschichte des religiösen Denkens im frühen Islam, fi ve vols. (Ber-
lin and New York, 1991– 97).
(^31) See D. Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco- Arabic Translation Move-
ment in Baghdad and Early Abbasid Society (2nd– 4th/8th–10th centuries) (London and
New York, 1998); Stroumsa, “Philosophy as Wisdom: on the Christians’ Role in the Trans-
lation of Philosophical Material to Arabic.”