[Avodah] Rambam's naturalism

[Michael Makovi]

For those familiar with Rambam's naturalism, especially in Shemonah
Perakim chapter 8 and Commentary to Avot 5:5, that miracles are
pre-implanted at creation, and that "hakol biydei shamayim hutz
miyirat shamayaim" means that G-d controls only natural law, and that
ALL else is in our hands, the following may be interesting:

Professor Charles H. Manekin
"Divine Will in Maimonides' Later Writings"
in Maimonidean Studies, ed. Arthur Hyman, pp. 189-221
http://books.google.com/books?id=6AYvt0zwTPQC&pg=PR7&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=0_1#PPA189,M1
(Google Books except, contains the entirety of the essay in question.)

I haven't yet read this article, but based on a book of Professor
Manekin's which I just read (On Maimonides, Wadsworth Philosopher
series), the basic thesis will be as follows:

In Rambam's earlier writings, he was much more of an Aristotelian
naturalist, and scarcely differed from Aristotle, at least relative
what one would expect from the rabbinic leader of Jewry.

But, in his later writings, we see Rambam emphasizing G-d's volitional
character more. For example, in the Moreh, Rambam says that upholding
Aristotelian eternity would deny G-d the ability to craft natural law
and create miracles; such require a volitional character, whereas
Aristotle had reality and natural law arising inexorably from G-d.

Manekin proposes that G-d's will is eternal and unchanging (given
Aristotelian metaphysics), but that this consistent and unchanging
will exerts a constant effect on the will, depending on the
recipient's status. For example, G-d's will will cause the righteous
to prosper, while it causes Sodom to be obliterated. Manekin likens
this to a flame: some objects will be burnt, others melted, others
tempered, even though the flame is constantly and unceasingly
unchanging.

Manekin tells me that his paper was quite controversial, given that it
makes Rambam much "frummer" than the academics are accustomed to.

Michael Makovi