The Jewish Reliance of the Traveler

Averroes is widely lauded in the West for his philosophical work. Ibn Rushd wrote The Reliance of the Traveler. These authors were the same man. So now, Erich Bischoff and Thomas Dalton have brought Joseph Karo's שֻׁלְחָן עָרוּך from the Sephardic world to the Germans and the English (respectively).

The article I've linked comes from Bernard M. Smith, a Catholic. As a Catholic I expect Smith disapproves Dalton the NSDAP apologist. Smith still approves this book, inasmuch as Dalton appears to have transmitted Bischoff faithfully and Bischoff the original text, from mediaeval Hebrew.

I bring up Ibn Rushd because what he'd done was to summarise Sunnite fiqh in a more-or-less readable fashion, by which the average Muslim could abide. In Islam, fiqh is had through a bewildering array of ahadith (traditions) and practical "sunna" (how righteous Muslims are actually navigating life). Nobody can memorise all of it; a lot of it argues with itself; the majority of it is outright fraud. Ibn Rushd meant his book as a manual for the Muslim-on-the-go, so the Grenadan didn't make a total ass of himself at some port on his way to hajj. Karo likewise (if later): Shulhan `Arûk, for the North African Jew.

The "counterjihad" makes much of Ibn Rushd - because he was Averroes, a first-class intellect, presenting Islam as honestly he could, to fellow intelligent Muslims. Islam is still revealed, in this work, to be violently antisocial. Karo experienced Maghrebi Islam as it interfaced with dhimmi classes, Jews there being the last caste even allowed the dhimma. Karo reasoned that inasmuch as the sultan oppresses us; we must cheat the sultan, for our very survival.

[INTERJECT 7/17: Joseph Hertz pointed out that Shulhan `Arûk bans wifebeating. Christianity doesn't condone this; the Christian concept of marriage is that man and woman are one flesh in matrimony, so abuse would be selfharm. There is however wifebeating in Quran and in Maliki Sunna . . .]

Given that situation, I hold more sympathy to Karo than TOO holds. Imagine if the ruling caste is an evangelist for this egregious nonsense. What does a hapless Christian do - fight? Nah; best he do what the Shi'a do under Mamluk dominion. Consider The Benedict Option: hide under the radar, and subvert the authorities where possible.

If I am reading these translators and reviewer correctly: Karo went too far in Shulchan Aruch inasmuch as it subsumes the average citizen of a goyische (possibly tyrannical) nation, with the oppressors themselves; even if his oppressors were Barbary Pirates and Ottomans. Smith for his part is careful to warn that opposing a Merrick Garland is very, VERY different from being a jerk to dear Dr Rosenthal your family paediatrician. Perhaps Karo would have benefited from an Algerian Catholic editor; sadly he had little access to such, in his time.

It seems to me that rather than attacking this text, we who share Torah would do better to revise Shulchan Aruch, and then adopt it.