Rambam's Three Groups

Originally Posted in August, 2008

I've been meaning to post the Rambam's discussion of the "three groups" (from his introduction to Chelek) for quite some time. I guess I've refrained, because I didn't want to post the text without offering some insight into it. I recently realized, however, that this is irrational, and that I should definitely post the text even if I have nothing to say about it at the moment.

Rambam: Introduction to Perek Chelek
People can be divided into three groups, based on the way they relate to the words of Chazal (i.e. the Wise Men of the Talmud).
The First Group
The first group includes the majority of people I have met and whose books I have seen and about whom I have heard. These people understand the words of Chazal according to their literal meanings without explaining them at all. To them, all impossible things are believed to be necessary. This is due to their stupidity in matters of science and their inexperience with other branches of knowledge. They lack sufficient perfection to be awakened to such wisdom on their own and they have found no one to awaken them. Consequently, they think that the only meaning in the wise words of Chazal is what they, themselves, understand – namely, the literal meaning. They think this, even though the literal meanings contain statements so bizarre that if you were to tell them to an average person, and certainly to an intelligent individual, he would be astounded and exclaim, “How is it possible that there should be anyone in the world who would imagine such things and think that they are true, much less find value in them?”
The unfortunate people in this group (may God have mercy on their stupidity) exalt Chazal in their own minds, but in reality, they degrade them to the utmost extent without realizing it. As God Lives, this group destroys the beauty of Torah and darkens its brilliance. These people render the Torah of Hashem the opposite of its intended purpose, for Hashem said about the wisdom of His Torah, “[for it is your wisdom and discernment in the eyes of the nations, who shall hear all these decrees and who shall say,] ‘Surely a wise and discerning people is this great nation!’” (Devarim 4:6). But this group expound from the literal meanings of the words of Chazal notions which, if heard by the gentiles, would cause them to say, “Surely a stupid and disgraceful people is this pathetic nation!”
Many of the men who do this are public speakers who attempt to convey ideas to the people which they, themselves, do not understand. If only they would shut up, since they do not understand – “If only you would be utterly silent, that would be your wisdom” (Iyov 13:5). Or if only they had it in them to say, “We do not know what Chazal intended with these words, nor do we know how to interpret them.” Instead, they think they understand, and they set themselves up as authorities to convey to the people their own understanding - not what Chazal actually said; and they expound to the masses the midrashim in Berachos and Perek Chelek and the like, word for word according to their literal meanings.
The Second Group
The second group is also numerous. It consists of individuals who, having read or heard the words of Chazal, understand them according to their simple literal sense and believe that Chazal intended nothing more than what may be learned from their literal interpretation. Consequently, they will degrade them, disparage them, and consider things to be ridiculous which are not actually ridiculous, and they will inevitably mock the words of Chazal. They imagine that their own intelligence is of a higher order than that of Chazal, and that Chazal were simpletons who suffered from inferior intelligence were incapable of attaining genuine wisdom. Most of those who have stumbled into this error are involved with medicine or astrology. They regard themselves as cultivated men, scientists, critics, and philosophers. They are more foolish than the first group and more naïve.
This is an accursed group which attempts to tarnish men of established greatness whose wisdom has been demonstrated to those who are competent in wisdom. If these fools had worked at wisdom hard enough to know how to write accurately about theology and similar subjects both for the masses and for the educated, and if they understood the practical aspects of philosophy, then they would be in a position to understand whether the Sages were in fact wise or not, and the real meaning of their teachings would be clear to them.
The Third Group
There is a third group. Its members are so few in number that it is hardly appropriate to call them a group, except in the sense in which one speaks of the Sun as a group, of which it is the only member. This group consists of men to whom the greatness of Chazal is clear. They recognize the superiority of Chazal's intelligence from their words, which point to exceedingly profound truths. Even though this third group is few and scattered, their books teach the perfection which was achieved by their authors and the high level of truth which they had attained. The members of this group understand that Chazal clearly knew impossibility of that which is impossible and the necessity of that which is necessarily true. They know that Chazal did not speak nonsense, and it is clear to them that the words of Chazal contain both a surface-meaning and a hidden meaning. Thus, whenever Chazal spoke of things that seem impossible, they were employing the style of riddle and parable which is the method of truly great thinkers. For example, the greatest of our wise men (Solomon) began his book by saying: “To understand an analogy and a metaphor, the words of the wise and their riddles” (Mishlei 1:6).
All students of rhetoric know the real purpose of a riddle is its hidden meaning and not its surface-meaning, as in: “Let me now put forth a riddle to you” (Shoftim 14:12). Since the words of the Sages all deal with metaphysical matters which are the ultimate objective, they must be expressed in riddles and analogies. How can we complain if they formulate their wisdom in analogies and employ such figures of speech as used by the masses, especially when we note that the wisest of all men did precisely that, under the guidance of the Prophetic Spirit? I am referring to Solomon in Proverbs, the Song of Songs, and parts of Ecclesiastes.
It is often difficult for us to interpret words and to educe their true meaning from the form in which they are contained so that their real inner meaning conforms to reason and is in line with truth. This is the case even with the Holy Scriptures. Chazal, themselves, interpreted Scriptural passages in such a way as to educe their inner meaning from literal sense, correctly considering these passages to be figures of speech, just as we do. Examples are their explanations of the following passages: “he smote the two alter-hearths of Moab; he went down also and slew a lion in the midst of a pit” (Shmuel II 23:20); “Oh, that one would give me water to drink of the well of Bethlehem” (ibid. 23:15). The entire narrative of which these passages are a part was interpreted metaphorically. Similarly, the whole Book of Job was considered by many of Chazal to be properly understood only in metaphorical terms. The dead bones of Ezekiel (Chapter 37) were also considered by one of the rabbis to make sense only in metaphoric terms. Similar treatment was given to other passages of this sort.
Advice to the Reader
Now if you, reader, belong to either of the first two groups, pay no attention to my words nor to anything else in this section. You will not like it. On the contrary, it will irritate you, and you will hate it. How could a person who is accustomed to eating large amounts of harmful food find simple food in small quantities appealing, even though the latter is good for him? On the contrary, he will actually find them irritating, and he will hate them. Do you not recall the reaction of the people who were accustomed to eating onions garlic, fish, and the like? They said: “Now our soul is dried away; there is nothing at all; we have naught save this manna to look to” (Bamidbar 11:6).
But if you belong to the third group, when you encounter a statement of Chazal which seems to conflict with reason, you will pause, consider it, and realize that this utterance must be a riddle or a parable. You will sleep on it, trying anxiously to grasp its logic and its expression, so that you may find its genuine intellectual intention and lay hold of a genuine concept, as Scripture says: “To find out words of delight, and that which was written uprightly, even words of truth” (Koheles 12:10).
If you consider my book in this spirit, with the help of God, it may be useful to you.