This dissertation concentrates on those factors which form the doctrine of G-dly reward and punishment. In other words, the philosophical approach amongst Jewish thinkers from the Middle Ages to the above subject, which taken together give expression to the doctrine of reward and ptmishment, or at least to the possibility of determining such a doctrine. The definition of correct behaviour is not of interest for pwposes of this dissertation, nor is human judgement of behaviour, even according to a G-dly doctrine; only the A-lmighty's judgement and implementation thereof The following points are of note. Research into the specific approach of one individual philosopher is not the aim of this dissertation, but rather a collective crystallised viewpoint according to various different Jewish philosophers, in order to reach a harmonious formation of the desir~ goal. Hence the details are also important since they assist towards the goal. The views of the philsophers are of interest and not their source, viz. from whom these views were received or by whom the philosophers were influenced, as is usually the case in research. Nevertheless, this aspect is elaborated upon in the introduction to this dissertation, in the style of the customary academic research approach. An analytical comparison is made between the opinions of various authors, taking into account the finer points of their words, as well as between the differing opinions expressed by a single author in his various writings, and conclusions are drawn, the results of which are highly significant. Besides the fact that it is not within our power to adjudicate between the views of the great Jewish thinkers, this is even more true here, due to the metaphysical nature of the subject, which makes logical, rational-realistic judgement very difficult. Nevertheless, some criteria have been established for making such a decision. In summary, this dissertation is an attempt to research many diverse opinions in the treasury of Jewish thought from the Middle Ages, and to extract those opinions from which a complete system of the doctrine of reward and punishment can be built. / Religious Studies and Arabic / D.Litt et Phil. (Judaica)

Thesis (DPhil)--University of Stellenbosch, 2004. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Philo is a writer who lived in Alexandria in 30 BC – 50 AD. Traditionally scholars classified Philo as philosopher, exegete and apologist. With these classifications in mind, Philo’s works is read and interpreted. In this study a methodology of postmodernism (which is inherently a cultural historical understanding of reality) will be used, and it will become clear that this classification of the scholars is not satisfactory. The question that arises, is: How must Philo be read and understood in the context of a postmodern methodology? By means of a study of the logos-concept it is suggested that Philo must be understood as a threshold person, who stands on the cutting edges of the cultures in Alexandria; he therefore creates a new universe of symbols. In this new universe of symbols it is possible for the different cultures to communicate effectively, because they now have a joint vocabulary. Philo is not a postmodernist, but he makes use of techniques which occurs in post modern philosophy to create this new universe of symbols. Through the use of these techniques it becomes possible for the reader to take into account the different philosophical dimensions that are part of Philo’s thoughts. This helps the reader to understand the contradiction in Philo’s thought in connection with the logos-concept. It also helps the reader to place the logos-concept of Philo in its proper cultural historical background. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Filo is ’n skrywer wat in Aleksandrië gewoon het in die tydperk 30 vC – 50 nC. Tradisioneel het geleerdes Filo getipeer as filosoof, eksegeet en apologeet. Aan die hand van hierdie tiperings is Filo se werke dan gelees en geïnterpreteer. In hierdie studie word daar met ’n postmoderne metodologiese vertrekpunt gewerk (wat ten diepste gebaseer word op ’n kultuur historiese verstaan van die werklikheid) en word dit duidelik dat hierdie tiperings nie bevredigend is nie. Die vraag wat nou ontstaan, is: Hoe moet Filo dan gelees en verstaan word binne die raamwerk van ’n postmoderne metodologie? Aan die hand van ’n studie van die logos-begrip word daar voorgestel dat Filo gelees en verstaan moet word as ’n deurdrumpel-persoon, wat op die snypunt van al die verskillende kulture in Aleksandrië staan en daarom ’n nuwe simbole universum skep. Binne hierdie nuwe simbole universum kan verskillende kulture effektief met mekaar kommunikeer, aangesien hulle nou oor ’n gedeelde woordeskat beskik. Filo self was nie ’n postmodernis nie, maar hy maak wel van tegnieke gebruik wat ook voorkom in die postmoderne filosofie om hierdie nuwe simbole universum te skep. Deur middel van hierdie tegnieke is dit vir die leser moontlik om die verskillende filosofiese nuanses wat op Filo se denke ten opsigte van die logos ingewerk het, te verreken en om hierdie oënskynlike teenstrydighede in sy denke rakende die logos-begrip te verstaan teen die kultuur-historiese agtergrond waarbinne hy hom in Aleksandrië bevind.

In five chapters, this thesis traces the question of humanity in the thought of the French philosopher Emmanuel Lévinas, mainly in his works De l'évasion (1935), De l'existence à l'existant (1947), Totalité et infini (1961) and Éthique comme philosophie première (1982), which represent various stages of his philosophical development. It offers an exposition of Lévinas's most original concepts, follows their development and sketches their parallel and/or polemic concepts in the European thought, placing them within the context of Lévinas's life-work. For Lévinas, the question of humanity appears as a transpostition of the question of God, who can not become an object of rational inquiry. In conclusion, the question of humanity becomes the theological issue par excellence. This study tries to show how theology can draw inspiration from Lévinas's concepts in various manners: (1) methodology: Lévinas shows what happens to our thought when we follow the principle Sein-lassen in questionning God and when we take this principle as a basis of our theological research; (2) re-thinking: Lévinas offers a critical revision of traditional theological concepts and endows them with existential meaning, (3) marginalized phenomena: Lévinas thoroughly analyzes phenomena, which has been neglected or marginalized by the...

Maïmonide (m. 601/1204) est resté sans doute une figure majeure du judaïsme rabbinique. Mais, sa connaissance de la philosophie fit de lui une référence indispensable dans la pensée philosophico-religieuse juive, chrétienne et musulmane. Son œuvre, riche et variée, témoigne de la jonction harmonieuse, dans un même esprit, d'une religiosité profonde, telle qu'elle s'exprime dans ses traités juridiques et théologiques, et d'une curiosité philosophique et métaphysique qui se révèle dans son œuvre Le Guide des égarés. La présente étude consiste à analyser les origines de la doctrine de la prophétie chez Maïmonide en puisant dans un premier temps, dans ses propres sources, pour les comparer dans un second temps aux références textuelles des philosophes musulmans tels que Fārābī, Ibn Sīnā et Ibn Bāğğa. Le chapitre I a pour objet la définition de la prophétie chez Maïmonide. Le chapitre II porte sur le rôle de l'imagination dans la prophétie. Le chapitre III est consacrée aux significations politiques de la prophétie. / Maimonides (d. 601/1204) is universally recognized as a leading rabbinic authority in Judaism. His eminence as a philosopher made him an indispensable source in Jewish, Christian and Islamic philosophical and religious thought. The present study aims to analyze the origins of the doctrine of prophecy in Maimonides' philosophy by studying, first, the original sources and then to compare them with the works completed by Muslim philosophers, most notably, Fārābī, Ibn Sīnā and Ibn Bāğğa. Chapter I addresses Maimonides' definition of prophecy. Chapter II examines the role of imagination in the prophecy. Chapter III is devoted to the political implications of prophecy.

Le Sefer Ha-ʻIqqarim de Joseph Albo qui a pour objet la définition des principes fondamentaux du Judaïsme s’inscrit dans une réflexion qui a commencé avec Sadia Gaon, qui s’est poursuivie avec Maimonide, Gersonides, Crescas, Duran. Dans le but de permettre au lecteur de se faire sa propre opinion, nous avons souhaité présenter et traduire l’oeuvre de Joseph Albo. Traduire l’ensemble du Sefer Ha-ʻIqqarim dépassant le cadre de notre projet, nous nous sommes contentés de traduire le premier traité qui présente la conception de Joseph Albo sur les principes fondamentaux et sa réduction à trois principes fondamentaux qui sont la croyance à l’existence de Dieu, la croyance à une révélation divine, et la croyance à la rétribution. Les trois traités suivant ne constituant qu’un approfondissement du premier, nous avons traduit un chapitre supplémentaire pour voir et comprendre comment Joseph Albo développe et approfondit le thème déjà ouvert dans le premier traité. C’est le troisième traité qui développe le second principe fondamental de la croyance à la révélation divine. / The Sefer Ha-ʻIqqarim of Joseph Albo which try to determine the basic principles of Judaism is part of a reflection that began with Sadia Gaon, which continued with Maimonides, Gersonides and Crescas Duran. To allow the reader to form his own opinion, we wanted to introduce and translate the work of Joseph Albo. Translating the whole of the Sefer Ha-ʻIqqarim exceeding the framework of our project, we simply translate the first treaty which presents the conception of Joseph Albo on fundamentals and its reduction to three fundamental principles which are the belief in the existence of God, the belief in a divine revelation, and the belief in retribution. The three following treaties being only a deepening of the first, we have translated an additional chapter to see and understand how Joseph Albo develops the theme already opened in the first treaty. This is the third treaty that develops the second fundamental principle of belief in the divine revelation.

Au vu des monographies récentes portant sur les sciences juives médiévales, Musique est la petite sœur oubliée. Elles sont héritées des sciences, de la méthode philosophique et de la partition du savoir arabes, qui constituent un enseignement où la musique est pourtant inscrite. Elle apparaît notamment dans des classifications arabes des sciences, et des traités lui ont été consacrés, dont certains sont fameux. À en juger par les textes hébreux médiévaux qui nous sont parvenus, les textes arabes ont influencé le discours juif sur la musique. Nous qualifions de « discours sur la musique » l’ensemble des parties textuelles relatives à la musique, dont nous fournissons une traduction française inédite. Il s'agit de textes hébreux produits dans le rayonnement de la culture juive andalouse entre le XIIe et le XVe siècle, traduits ou adaptés de l'arabe et, dans une moindre mesure, d'autres langues, et de textes originaux. Ces textes sont de nature pédagogique et de genres différents : classifications des sciences ou encyclopédies, dialogues, commentaires ou super-commentaires, traités, sermons et notes éparses. Dans cette étude, nous retraçons l'histoire des idées et notions musicales introduites dans les textes juifs, d'une part ; nous déterminons les raisons pour lesquelles leurs auteurs convoquent ces idées et notions, d'autre part. Cette thèse vise à montrer que la musique, considérée par les savants juifs des points de vue rationnel, psychologique ou éthique, est à la fois une des sciences et un des principes unificateurs des différents corps de la connaissance juive médiévale. / Music appears to be an overlooked subject in recent monographs focusing on medieval Jewish sciences. Medieval Jewish scholars are indebted to Arab-Muslim scholars : the former received the philosophical method and the branches of knowledge that the latter conceived. However, music was part of the Arab philosophical education. For instance, it appears in classifications of sciences ; scholars compiled treatises on that matter. Judging by medieval Hebrew texts that have been handed down to us, Arabic texts that circulated have influenced the way Jewish scholars speak about music. The corpus of texts upon which this study is based is constituted of texts or excerpts that can be related to music. They all constitute what will be called « discourse on music ». These Hebrew texts all account for the influence of Judaeo-Spanish culture on Provençal Judaism between the 12th and the 15th centuries. Some of them are original texts ; others are translations or adaptations from texts originally written in Arabic or, to a lesser extent, in other romance languages. These texts are essentially pedagogical and belong to various textual types. The first aim of this study is to trace musical ideas and concepts that are found in Jewish texts ; the second aim is to determine the reasons why Jewish scholars rely upon musical ideas and concepts in texts that are not devoted to the subject. This thesis shall prove that music, a subject that Jewish scholars considered alternatively in a rational, psychological, or ethical way, turns out to be one of the medieval Jewish sciences, and one of the unifying principles of the various bodies of Jewish medieval knowledge.

In contemporary philosophy about justice, a contrast between empirical and transcendental approaches can be identified. Hillel Steiner represents an empirical approach: he argues for building an account of justice-as-rights out of the minimal inductive material of psychological linguistic and moral intuitions. From this opening, he ultimately concludes that persons have original rights to self-ownership and to an initially equal share of natural resources. Emmanuel Levinas represents a transcendental approach: he argues that justice arises from a transcendent ethical relation of responsibility-for-the-Other. This relation underpins all subjective cognition, and makes rationality, reasoning, and rights possible. Analysis of each of these positions reveals certain problems. On the one hand, Steiner’s argument contains a number of latent methodological, conceptual, and structural presuppositions. These include the pretheoretical concepts of “person”, “equality”, and “consistency”. These presuppositions prefigure and condition the conclusions which Steiner reaches. On the other hand, Levinas fails to provide a convincing account of how the self comes to be an object of my own deliberations about morality and justice. This amounts to an annihilation of the subject which undermines his argument for the subject as a site of responsible action. As Steiner identifies, justice encompasses equal moral agents. Levinas’s hyperbolic description of the ethical relation’s asymmetry must therefore be revised. Nevertheless, what remains is the strength of Levinas’s argument for the priority of the ethical relation over thematization, rationality, and consciousness. The hidden presuppositions supporting Steiner’s work are evidence of Levinas’s plausibility in this respect. Steiner’s account of justice-as-rights requires a prior ethical relation in which we recognise one another as separate persons, each possessing an ethical status of their own; an attitude of justice motivates Steiner’s description of justice. This attitude is evident in language, which is communication before it is thought. In that individual rights can be conceived only on the basis of a relation of responsibility, rights are primordially the rights of the Other.

This dissertation examines the scope and limitations of the re-appropriation of the term barbarism by modern Jewish intellectuals in conversation with Third World social movements. Emmanuel Lévinas is my paradigmatic example of this re-appropriation, as his Talmudic interpretations illuminate this process, and his work is located on the axis of the encounter between Jewish and decolonial thinking. I contend that Lévinas follows a classic line of modern European interpreters who expressed their discomfort with the description of the Jewish people as barbaric. While this discomfort can be traced within this orthodox interpretation of Lévinas, I argue that his particular solution for the problem can only be explained by a more heterodox exploration. Lévinas’ positive re-appropriation of the term is part of contextual conversations that he sustained with other peoples characterized as barbarians (i.e. Third World decolonial theorists). While this re-appropriation was originally conceived in order to establish an East-East revolutionary conversation between Eastern European rabbinical interpreters and other radical Eastern projects (i.e. Maghrebi Marxism) it became an East-South decolonial conversation between Jewish and Afro-Caribbean/Latino-American intellectuals. This conversation, however, ultimately challenges the apologetic Jewish re-appropriation of exteriority in the concert of multiple barbarians. I explore the limitations of Jewish thought to engage with this community and cross from an apologetic to a critical barbarism. This dissertation, in conclusion, seeks to make an original contribution in the interrelation between Jewish and post-colonial studies. I aim to do so by first, demonstrating that the Jewish return to classical sources is historically and conceptually a decolonial counter-narrative that was influenced by (and in turn influenced) Third World discourses; second, explaining the reasons and consequences of the persistence of Jewish imagery and influences in Third World decolonial theory; third, exploring the limits of Jewish thinking and the benefits of the expansion of Jewish apologetical dialogues into barbaric critical conversations. And finally, challenging most contemporary scholarship in modern Jewish philosophy, which holds that Jewish thought and the modern re-reading of its sources can only be understood in the context of Western consciousness.