"Reason Above All" With that added title, Israel Drazin fairly well established that, According to the Maimonides, “God has no need for and is not interested in devotion, prayer and sacrifices. Instead, he wants humans to focus on three things: (1) acquiring true ideas, and living a proper life, which in turn, helps both (2) them and (3) society to become as perfect as possible. This mental, personal and social improvement requires that people study, acquire knowledge and use their intelligence properly for themselves and others. Thus, according to Maimonides, Torah laws are obligations focusing on humans and are not in any way to helping God.” Thus does Aristotle's influence over Maimonides make itslf readily apparent.
Regardles of one's individual Religion/philosophic inclinations, one cannot help being entrapped by Maimonides use of logic and reason before one would accept, on faith, most of what any other "philosopher" had to promulgate. ( )

I selected this book from Early Reviewers because I had heard of Maimonides but had never read any of his works. I am certainly not qualified to discuss this book from a religious viewpoint (due to my background – evangelical Lutheran) but will discuss this as an introduction to the thought of Maimonides.

The author states that the purpose of the book is to contrast the teachings of Maimonides with those who came before him and after him. As such a certain amount of exposition should be mandatory to explain what those teachings were. Instead the first quarter of the book is given over to explaining what Maimonides’ son believed and how this differed from Maimonides’ own beliefs. By the end of this section, you feel as though you understand what is going on, but I don’t think this is the best approach.

This pattern repeats. Later in the book Dr. Drazin states that Maimonides was not superstitious. This is fine, but why list several superstitions, how they arose, and who held them. Since none of this had anything to do with Maimonides?

There are several sections such as this. At one point, Dr. Drazin lists several generations of Maimonides’ descendants with small blurbs summarizing their political histories. This seems out-of place. Since previously the author had mentioned that none of Maimonides’ descendants shared his philosophy, you might expect some discussion of why they didn’t. Instead you are left with the feeling that maybe they simply were not smart enough to understand.

By the end of the book, I was looking for something with more depth. ( )

To be honest, I was a bit intimidated when this one came in the mail. For one thing, I knew very little about Maimonides when I started and for another, I have a family member who does. The way this book it set up, though, is perfect for a newbie. The chapters are laid out almost in textbook fashion and there is a summery at the end of each. Drazin doesn't assume his reader has a vast store of knowledge on the subject, which (obviously) was nice for me. He gives you a brief biographical introduction and the launches into Maimonides philosophy.

As I said, I knew very little going in, so I'm not really in a position to evaluate the books content. Hoever, Drazin has more than whet my appitite for Maimonides. I'm on the lookout for more books about him. ( )

This volume claims to contrast the Maimonidean perspective on life with those held by his father and descendants. Maimonides' understanding of epistemology was much more closely aligned to Aristotelian thought than previous Jewish religious thinkers. The author introduces Maimonides but quickly turns to his son's views and then spends multiple chapters applying Maimonides' method/principles to various biblical and aggadah riddles.
Maimonides is known chiefly (in the Roman Catholic world) for his role as a foil to Aquinas as he formulated his own views on God. Aquinas was born twenty years after the death of Maimonides. Aquinas' views on natural theology in the Summa Theologica were tempered by Maimonides' own struggles with Aristotle in The Guide for the Perplexed. Aquinas was also an Aristotelian but also easily incorporated Platonic elements from Christian writings to form his own synthesis. Although Aquinas rejects the overall argument of Maimonides, he did accept the value of his negative theology when speaking about God's attributes while using human language which must always fall short of it's goal. This author strays from focusing on Maimonides' thought and largely pursues an apologetical tone for Judaism in general (contra Sufism & Catholicism) while presenting Maimonides as a cryptic Aristotelian. The book suffers in readability due to the format which used to be known as 'manualism'. The manuals of old had several points to cover and argued for those points while providing a few straw men objections for simple contrast. This book takes that general format with its questions, responses, and summaries. This is why I personally would classify it under apologetics. In some some circles, this term may have negative connotations, but none are implied here.
Overall, this book engages the better than average reader with ample Talmudic material to better understand the context of Maimonides' elevated place among the world most eminent thinkers.

I have no idea who the intended audience is for this book. Maimonides is a challenging philsopher, whose writings are worthy of slow and repeated readings, and concentrated discussion. In other words, his work merits serious scholarly discussion. Alternatively, a good "teaching" explanation would also be useful, as Maimonides's work is important to religious people of a range of educational backgrounds.

Drazin's book, however, is neither a serious scholarly discussion nor an attempt to seriously teach people to work their way through Maimonides's texts. It seems, instead, almost like a (not terribly accurate) set of notes for a book club discussion of Maimonides. Drazin, for example, argues that you cannot understand Maimonides without understanding Aristotle. While this is probably correct, to follow such a claim with a ludicrously thin 2.5 page discussion of "the meaning of Aristotle" is simply insulting to Maimonides, Aristotle, and the reader.

I requested this book from Early Reviewers because I've read several of Maimonides's books--(Eight Chapters and The Guide of the Perplexed, in particular)--and wanted further information and argument. This book does not deliver that, and I found it so useless that I chose not to finish it. ( )