Did the Rambam believe his Mishneh Torah superseded the Talmud?

In his letter to rabbi Yosef ben Ha’Rav Yehudah, Maimonides explained his belief that in the future “all of Israel will subsist on it alone” in reference to his Mishneh Torah, over even the Talmud, as the Jewish people “will ABANDON ALL ELSE BESIDES IT without a doubt.” His words were clear.

Rambam was a genius, a great commentator and philosopher. However every one of his 13 principles has been contested by famous rabbis throughout the ages. See Marc B. Shapiro’s The Limits of Orthodox Theology: Maimonides’ Thirteen Principles Reappraised for a summary.  Even his own son – a famous rabbi in his own right, rabbeinu Avraham – dissented with many of his views, and there can be no question from his writings that Maimonides saw himself in a prophetic light at least (which though surprising, would not take him outside of the fold).

An exceptional work on the historical realities of popular Jewish dissenting opinions to Maimonides. Much respect to the great works of the Rambam, but his accomplishments do not give him carte blanche to standardize a singular Jewish Orthodoxy, nor do they excuse his own personal biases.

We know that there was no falling out between the Rambam and his son, but that his son was quite different in approach from his father. He, nevertheless, believed that his father would have evolved in some of his views, were he still alive. As for the Rambam, we know what he thought of his only son; he regarded him as the most pious individual in his day.

In the Rambam’s day the whole Bavli Talmud was not owned by normal Jewish communities… that is to say nothing of the Yerushlami. Most would have only one tractate of the Bavli, at best, and would write for rulings to famous rabbis. To that end, the Rambam saw a need and his Mishneh Torah filled it. The sitz im leben of the Rambam’s Mishneh Torah was thus a stand in for the Talmud, in communities where it was not readily available.

Maimonides’ had many senseless opponents, and we know that his son rabbeinu Avraham defended his father against many of them. We know, however, that Maimonides also had principled ones who questioned his failure to use citation, arguing that he was not interested in pointing people to the Talmud, but in arguing that his writings alone should be accepted uncritically.

Were the man Mashiach himself, this would be problematic – as nothing should be accepted without proof, through citation or reason – but Maimonides had many problematic views on the sexes and on “the blacks” of Al-Sudan, which he described as lower than humans, which highlight the necessity of approaching his views critically, and with an eye out for bias.

The reason why i describe him as racist is because of the following key Judeo-Arabic passage:

 לא נטריה ולא תקליגיה כאטראף אלתרך אלמתוגלין פי אלשמאל ואלסודאן אלמתוגלין פי אלגנוב ומן מאתלהם מטן מענא פי הדה אלאקאלים

 

“There are those like some among the Turks (literally, “like” certain “parties” among them: “kataraf al-Turk כאטראף אלתרך), itinerant (אלמתוגלין) in the North, and in the Sudan, the itinerants [there is NO qualifier of “kataraf al-Sudan”], in the south (ואלסודאן אלמתוגלין פי אלגנוב), AND from those who resemble them (ומן מאתלהם מטן) among us, FROM them that are in this region (מענא פי הדה אלאקאלים) [i.e. Sudanese who had been “exported”].”

The above quote sets up WHO Maimonides is talking about, when in the following paragraph he says:

“The status of all of these is like that of unthinking animals. To my mind they do not have the rank of men, but have among the beings a rank lower than the rank of man but higher than the rank of apes. For they have the external shape and lineaments of a man and a faculty of discernment that is superior to that of the apes.”

No one questions the above translation, or the phrasing, only who it is referring to. Based on his qualifying those “like certain parties” among the Turks, and NOT qualifying for the Sudanese, as well as EXPANDING his definition to also include Sudanese or “those who resemble them” abroad, it is clear-cut to me that Maimonides was absolutely, unquestionably racist against Sub-Saharan Africans.

This is a call not to disregard the Rambam and his Mishneh Torah, but to approach it critically and mine it for truth, while discarding the societies’ baggage which had attached itself to Maimonides.