THE PREMIER DEBATE in medieval Jewish philosophy was about the God of Maimonides and the nature of the Torah. Jewish philosophy until Maimonides led up to that debate, and Jewish philosophy from Maimonides on largely was that debate. The debate never really ended, and most of the prominent rabbinic figures from modern times who are discussed in this book echo what was for them a maḥloket rishonim (an argument among earlier post-talmudic authorities). Some of them, however, relate to Maimonides in a way that differs from the way in which other rishonim related to him.

It should be emphasized that the medieval debate about the philosophy of Maimonides was not just any maḥloket rishonim. Rather than an argument about a particular law or principle within the Torah, it was a fundamental dispute about what the Torah is. As such, it cannot be resolved by applying the tools of halakhic decision-making. Any later thinker who grapples with Maimonides and the debate that surrounded him will be forced to come to grips with his own fundamental views about the nature of the Torah.

How well did the rabbis studied in this book understand Maimonides, and how do they fit into the classic debate about him? The seven chapters of this work exhibit a range of possibilities. Some thinkers try to liberate themselves from the influence of Maimonides’ ideas, others try to build on those ideas or expand them in ways that Maimonides himself did not (and with which he would probably have disagreed), while still others advance patently non- Maimonidean positions by attributing them to none other than Maimonides. Members of the last group rewrite Maimonides in their own image, and it can be hard to tell whether they realize this or not.

The first rabbi (Netsiv) and one of the last (Aviner) studied here—who frame the book both chronologically and conceptually—work to liberate themselves from Maimonides’ philosophical approach, or at least move beyond it.