De Gruyter Isaac PolqarA Jewish Philosopher or a Philosopher and a Jew?: Philosophy and Religion in Isaac Polqar’s ʿEzer ha-Dat and Tešuvat Epiqoros: 3 (Jewish Thought, Philosophy and Religion, 3)

To date, scholars have skilfully discussed aspects of Polqars thought, and yet none of the existing studies offers a comprehensive examination that covers Polqars thought in its entirety. This book aims to fill this lacuna by tracing and contextualizing both Polqars Islamic sources (al-Frb, Avicenna, and Averroes) and his Jewish sources (Maimonides and Isaac Albalag). The study brings to light three of Polqars main purposes (1) seeking to defend Judaism as a true religion against Christianity (2) similarly to his fellow Jewish Averroists, Polqar wishes to defend the discipline of philosophy. By philosophy, Polqar means Averroes' interpretation of Aristotle. As a consequence, he offers an Averroistic interpretation of Judaism and becomes one of the main representatives of Jewish Averroism (3) defending his philosophical interpretation of Judaism. From a social and political point of view, Polqar's unreserved embrace of philosophy raised problems within the Jewish community he had to refute the Jewish traditionalists charge that he was a heretic, led astray by philosophy.The main objective guiding this study is that Polqar advances a systematic naturalistic interpretation of Judaism, which in many cases does not agree with traditional Jewish views. ""Halivas lucid, learned, and incisive monograph on the thought of Isaac Polqar is the first comprehensive study devoted to this important, but neglected fourteenth century Jewish Averroist. It makes a significant contribution to our knowledge of post-Maimonidean medieval Jewish philosophy. Haliva convincingly shows that while Polqar claims to follow Maimonides, he consistently pushes his thought in a more radical direction, offering a severely naturalistic interpretation of Jewish religious principles and refusing to make any concessions to more traditional theological modes of thought. Her study leads us to ask whether it is possible to uphold such an uncompromisi