Joshua Blau
The ControversialSentenceof Guide
2.24:A Philologist'sPerspective
to the presentAleph Forumwill be limitedto brief
My contribution
remarkson the sentenceat the core of the discussion,made fromthe
vantagepoint of a linguistspecializingin Judeo-Arabic.It is not my
purpose to commenton the philosophicalimportof the different
readingsof thetext.
The textof thesentencein question,as it seemsto appearin all the
ofDalãlat al-Ha'iñn, is:1
manuscripts
‫לאן אסבאב אלאסתדלאל עלי אלסמא ממתנעה ענדנא קד בעד ענא ועלא‬
‫באלמוצע ואלמרתבה ואלאסתדלאל אלעאם מנה אנה דלנא עלי מחרכה לאמר‬
.‫לא תצל עקול אלאנסאן אלי מערפתה‬
This sentencewas translated
by Pines as follows:
from
For it is impossibleforus to accedeto thepointsstarting
which conclusionsmay be drawnabout the heavens;for the
latterare too faraway fromus and too highin place and in
rank.And eventhegeneralconclusionthatmaybe drawnfrom
them,namelythattheyprovetheexistenceof theirMover,is a
1
Dalãlat al-Hâ'irtn,ed. I. Joel(Jerusalem,
1930/31),
p. 228:23-26.
©
Aleph 8 (2008) pp. 159-161
159
matterthe knowledgeof whichcannotbe reachedby human
intellects.2
ofaccepting
Whilemostofthediscussionrevolvedaboutthelegitimacy
the gloss added by Samuel Ibn Tibbon (see Editor's Introduction),
Prof.H. A. Davidson offereda new understanding
of theArabictext,
to
it
the
Mover
can
be
knownfromthe
statementthatthe
ascribing
motionof thespheres.He put forwardthefollowingtranslation:
The causes fromwhichproofscan be drawnup regarding
the
of
are
our
heavens
[nature the]
beyond
grasp.They [i.e., the
heavens]are at a distancefromus and exaltedin place and in
rank- thegeneral[enterprise
of]drawingup a prooffromthem
in
that
consisting[solely] this,
theyshow us [or prove to us]
theirmover- indeedthey[i.e., the heavens]are somethingto
theknowledgeofwhichmindscannotattain.3
From a philologicalpoint of view,the proposedtranslation
seemsto
me unacceptable.
1 One of Davidson's arguments
is that" 'drawingup a proof is
thatone may attempt,thatone
somethingthatone may contemplate,
fail
or
that
one
at,
may
mayaccomplish.But thepersonwho framesa
can
be
described
as eitherpossessingor lackingknowledge
proof hardly
of his drawingup of theproof."And similarly:"the drawingup of a
proofis not thesortof thingthatthehumanmindis said to be able to
know or not to know.The words wal-instidlälal-cãmm,the general
notthepropersubjectofa sentence
drawingup ofa proof,aretherefore
to theknowledgeof whichhuman
havingas itspredicate'is a matter,
mindscannotattain/"4 For mypart,I do notconsiderthereference
of
hdivöto ‫ אסתדלאל‬to be unlikely:sucha semantic widening ‫ הפרעמ‬is
‫ הפרעמ‬refers to ‫אמר‬
by no meansexceptional.Moreover,syntactically
rather than to ‫ אסתדלאל‬a fact that may have facilitated Maimonides'
160
JoshuaBlau
in this context. Lastly, this use of ‫ מערפה‬is opposed to
the immediately preceding occurrence of ‫מערפה‬, which refers to the
knowledge of the sublunar world.
2 By Davidson’s own admission, his reading of the sentence
ascribes to it a “choppy,” “anacoluthic,” or “loose” syntax.5 It
indeed contravenes Arabic style,in a way we need not attributeto
Maimonides.
3 Moreover, Davidson's suggestion posits that Maimonides
thesentenceagainsttherules
assumedthathis readerswould interpret
of Arabicsyntax.But would he have assumedthathis readerswould
realizethatthesentenceis notto be understoodaccordingto theusual
This seemsratherunlikely.
sentencestructure?
to Davidson's suggestion,I wish to express
but
unrelated
Lastly,
mentionthat
Ibn Tibbondoes notexplicitly
Samuel
view
that
since
my
as expressedin his gloss, it
Maimonidesendorsedhis interpretation
seemsquiteunlikelythatthelatteris based on such an approval.6His
whichin myopinionis not based on
emendationis a mereconjecture,
a betterArabictext.SamuelIbn Tibbonexplicitly
says:"It seemsto me
he
does
not
is
thatsomething missinghere";
say "somethingis missing
here,"as he would have done had his emendationbeen based on an
Arabictextat his disposal.
use of ‫מערפה‬
4
5
6
trans.S. Pines(Chicago:University
The GuideofthePerplexed,
MosesMaimonides,
ofChicagoPress,1963),p. 327.
H. A. Davidson, appendix to "Maimonides on MetaphysicalKnowledge,"
Studies3 (1992/93):49-103,on p. 103.
Maimonidean
on a Problematic
H. A. Davidson,"Further
2.24,"
Passagein GuideforthePerplexed
Studies4 (2000):1-13,on p. 12.
Maimonidean
Davidson,"Maimonideson Metaphysical
Knowledge,"pp. 100,103.
L.
"How (Not) to Read theGuideof
was suggested
Thispossibility
byJoel Kraemer,
StudiesinArabicand Islam32 (2006):350^09.
thePerplexed"Jerusalem
161