I am not at all skeptical about Prophecy. Not at all. This is based largely on Kant who divides reality into two realms, (1) the dinge an sich (things in themselves), things not as they are perceived but as they are) and (2) phenomenal reality. But I also believe like Hegel that there is a ground of unity between these two realms. [That is also hinted to in Maimonides in the Guide Volume 2 ch 19.] Where you see this in Hegel in a few places but I think the clearest statement in that way is in his treatment of Kant in his lectures.
Where you see this ground of unity between these two realms in the Rambam is this statement: "If the matter of the spheres is one and the same, in virtue of what thing has any sphere been so particularized as to receive a nature other than the nature of any other sphere? . . . There must of necessity be something that particularizes."
[Volume II is where the Rambam defends Creation Ex Nihilo/ Something from Nothing at great length and it is very worthwhile to make a thorough study of those chapters.]
I believe that chapter in the Guide has confused commentators for a long time because of lack of knowledge of Hegel. This means they were not aware of what the Rambam was getting at. ]
That Yemenite fellow that translated the Guide from the original wrote great comments and he was aware of the Rambam's usage of concepts from Aristotle. But that particular chapter II:19 I think has confused people because the Rambam is certainly thinking beyond Aristotle.
[Besides that the Guide is hard because it is hard to translate into understandable form. It needs someone like Reb Chaim Soloveitchik to begin the work of getting it to be understandable. This is the same as the Mishne Torah.] The way to do this is to see not just the background of the Rambam [from where he comes] in Neo Platonic thought but also to have some idea of where he is trying to go. I see in fact the Guide of the Rambam as being a very essential part of Torah. Without it, people get lost.
In case it is not clear what I am saying: with Kant you need a ground of validity for knowledge, both a priori and also a posteriori. With Hegel there is a ground of unity between them. But further there is a ground of unity between existing things and knowledge. So what I am saying is that I think the Rambam already hinted to this idea from Hegel.
[Reb Nachman was very unhappy with the Guide of the Rambam and with all due respect to Reb Nachman, I feel he can not override the Rambam. And to me it seems rather silly to imagine he can cancel something the Rambam obviously thought long and hard about. I have great faith in Reb Nachman's ideas and visions, but not when he disagrees with the Rambam.]
Where you see this ground of unity between these two realms in the Rambam is this statement: "If the matter of the spheres is one and the same, in virtue of what thing has any sphere been so particularized as to receive a nature other than the nature of any other sphere? . . . There must of necessity be something that particularizes."
[Volume II is where the Rambam defends Creation Ex Nihilo/ Something from Nothing at great length and it is very worthwhile to make a thorough study of those chapters.]
I believe that chapter in the Guide has confused commentators for a long time because of lack of knowledge of Hegel. This means they were not aware of what the Rambam was getting at. ]
That Yemenite fellow that translated the Guide from the original wrote great comments and he was aware of the Rambam's usage of concepts from Aristotle. But that particular chapter II:19 I think has confused people because the Rambam is certainly thinking beyond Aristotle.
[Besides that the Guide is hard because it is hard to translate into understandable form. It needs someone like Reb Chaim Soloveitchik to begin the work of getting it to be understandable. This is the same as the Mishne Torah.] The way to do this is to see not just the background of the Rambam [from where he comes] in Neo Platonic thought but also to have some idea of where he is trying to go. I see in fact the Guide of the Rambam as being a very essential part of Torah. Without it, people get lost.
In case it is not clear what I am saying: with Kant you need a ground of validity for knowledge, both a priori and also a posteriori. With Hegel there is a ground of unity between them. But further there is a ground of unity between existing things and knowledge. So what I am saying is that I think the Rambam already hinted to this idea from Hegel.
[Reb Nachman was very unhappy with the Guide of the Rambam and with all due respect to Reb Nachman, I feel he can not override the Rambam. And to me it seems rather silly to imagine he can cancel something the Rambam obviously thought long and hard about. I have great faith in Reb Nachman's ideas and visions, but not when he disagrees with the Rambam.]
