Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Jews had their first bump into philosophy when Alexander the Great conquered Israel (in the early Tanaic period). Since then, we lived under the Greeks and Romans for a few hundred years. Both of those nations had their philosophers (Romans not so much, but a lot of Greek philosophy continued on through them).

Yet, the first "philosophical" work was the Rasag, who lived a few hundred years after the Amoraim. There are a few debates that are recorded between Rabbis and "Elders of Athens" and Rabbis and Sadducees, but they are mostly Rabbis pushing them off and not a true attempt at learning (and teaching) philosophy.

Why do we not have any of the "philosophy" of the Tanayim/Amoraim? Did they not hold of this study? If not, why did the Rasag and Rambam study it?

share|improve this question
related judaism.stackexchange.com/q/13112/759 – Double AA May 31 '13 at 5:55
Perhaps they just presented it in a different way. – Double AA May 31 '13 at 5:56
In its presentation, or in the concepts it aims to convey? – Double AA May 31 '13 at 5:58
What about Philo? Does that not count? – Jason Aug 14 '13 at 18:14

How about jewish hellenistic philosophers like Philo? And a lot of Halacha is influenced by Greek thought, such as the place of women.

Among the Tannaim there were bitter debates whether Greek wisdom should be taught and learned. The Mishnah in Sotah 9:14 bans Greek wisdom. However, this was definitely done because of heavy Greek persecution

share|improve this answer
Philo isn't Jewish philosophy. He's a Jew writing about philosophy. Different thing. – Double AA May 31 '13 at 14:42
Why isn't Philo Jewish philosophy? books.google.com/… – wfb May 31 '13 at 16:43
Quotes from that link: "It is not established that he knew Hebrew" "His direct contribution to Jewish medieval thought is non-existent" "The Christians were convinced that Philo's philosophy proclaimed Jesus son of God....One can in fact...deduce this from the text". – Double AA Jun 2 '13 at 9:51
@DoubleAA - Philo is not a Jewish philosopher!?? Philo was absolutely a Jewish philosopher; the fact that his contribution to later Jewish philosophy was minimal in no way detracts from that. Nor, incidentally, does the fact that he wrote in Greek. Saadiah wrote in Arabic; Ahai wrote in Aramaic. Nobody wrote Hebrew philosophy, which is why Ibn Tibbon had to invent so many words. And Alexandria was, at the time, a major centre of Jewish life. – Shimon bM Jul 1 '13 at 3:21
@DoubleAA - He died c.50 CE. How many "traditional" texts could he have interacted with? If a precondition for writing Jewish philosophy is that you show an awareness of the rabbinic literature and that you're not part of the Talmud itself, then the OP's question is tautological. How could there be anybody before the latter geonim? – Shimon bM Jul 1 '13 at 5:55

In a recorded lecture, R' Yaakov Weinberg Zt"l claimed that philosophy in Judaism was always organic. There was never a need for formalized or systematized philosophy when that philosophy was the entirety of the life one grew up with and lived. It was only when it became necessary as a defense of the Rabbinic view, in response to outside influences and sectarian sects which were gaining sway, that R' Saadia presented a formal "response" and defense of the Pharisees, and following in his footsteps, the Rambam.

share|improve this answer
This does not explain why the Sadducees, Boetheans, early Christians and numerous other sects weren't addressed. The Karaism that faced Rasag was nothing new. What was new was his reaction, which prompted this question, and which remains unexplained. – mevaqesh Mar 28 at 15:10
@mevaqesh no, what was new was the degree to which it took hold and was gaining sway, as I said in my post. In the times of Rasag, they were nearly a majority. – Y ez Mar 29 at 0:28

From what I understand the aggadic material in the talmud may contain coded discussion of philosophic ideas. It would seem that much of this type of information was conveyed orally for generations previously and only put into writing out of necessity. There was a great fear that this material would either upset the ruling non-jewish government and/or would be misunderstood and abused by those not well enough versed so it was written cryptically.

share|improve this answer
I think some sources claiming this would improve this answer. – Double AA May 31 '13 at 15:04
@DoubleAA agreed. at the moment i don't have them in front of me. I believe the artscroll says this before the rabbah bar bar chama stories and I think Rabbi Feldman makes this same remark in his introduction to the juggler and the king. But I cannot yet say for sure. – user2110 May 31 '13 at 15:38
See הרב צבי אינפלד, חכמה פנימית וחכמה חיצונית: חכמת ישראל וחכמת יוון, part 2 about how Chazal related to Greek ideas, as seen in the aggadah of the questions asked by Alexander to the חכמי דרום (Tamid 32) – wfb May 31 '13 at 16:45

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.