Did Maimonides really “forget an explicit Torah Law”?: the monetary value of human life in the Laws of Arachin
Maimonides declares that his Guide for the Perplexed was written with great attention and care for details. He explains that, unlike other texts, internal contradictions found in his work are not the result of mistakes or oversights, but were made intentionally and with an esoteric aim. Therefore, i...
| Autres titres: | האומנם ״שכח הרמב״ם מקרא מפורש״? גובה ערכי אדם בהלכות ערכים |
|---|---|
| Auteur principal: | |
| Type de support: | Imprimé Article |
| Langue: | Hébreu |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
College
[2015]
|
| Dans: |
Hebrew Union College annual / Jewish Institute of Religion
Année: 2013, Volume: 84/85, Pages: 115-136 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Maimonides, Moses 1135-1204
/ Torah
/ Loi
/ Divergence
/ Explication
|
| Classifications IxTheo: | BH Judaïsme |
| Résumé: | Maimonides declares that his Guide for the Perplexed was written with great attention and care for details. He explains that, unlike other texts, internal contradictions found in his work are not the result of mistakes or oversights, but were made intentionally and with an esoteric aim. Therefore, it is surprising to find that in one of the chapters concerning reasons for the commandments in The Guide (Part 3, Chapter 40), Maimonides refers to a biblical law, but specifies the law that arises from it in a way that differs from the explicitly stated law in the Torah and in the talmudic literature. In dealing with the reasoning behind the Torah's penal laws, Maimonides asserts that there is a relation between the amount of the fine one should pay in the event that his beast killed a slave, and the amount vowed to the Temple for the value of a free man. He notes that the maximum amount, according to the laws of Arachin , is fifty shekels, while the Bible expressly notes an amount of sixty. This article reviews the various attempts to explain this problem, notes the difficulties in each, and offers a new way to solve the problem. In addition, the author aims in this textual and halakhic study to reach conclusions concerning The Guide's method of interpretation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0360-9049 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Hebrew Union College annual / Jewish Institute of Religion
|