In this chapter, Maimonides makes some interesting remarks about the divine Law (al-shari’ah الشريعة) and its relationship to Nature. He says:

the Law, though not a product of Nature, is nevertheless not entirely foreign to Nature (أن الشريعة ، و أن لم تكن طبيعية فلها مدخل في الأمر الطبيعي)

There is a difference between “human legislation” and “divine Law”. For Maimonides, the Law of Moses is nothing like the usual legislation put forward by a ruler, which are ideas of the person’s own. He tells the reader how to determine which laws are simply human and which are divine:

Firstly, there are laws which are purely man-made and whose objectives are solely about establishing orderly relations between people; these are made by statesmen, lawgivers, etc. who have received the divine influence, but only as far as their imaginative faculty.

You will find that the sole object of certain laws, in accordance with the intention of their author, who well considered their effect, is to establish the good order of the state and its affairs, to free it from all mischief and wrong: these laws do not deal with philosophic problems, contain no teaching for the perfecting of our logical faculties, and are not concerned about the existence of sound or unsound opinions. Their sole object is to arrange, under all circumstances, the relations of men to each other, and to secure their well-being, in accordance with the view of the author of these laws. These laws are political, and their author belongs, as has been stated above, to the third class [mentioned in GP.II.37], viz., to those who only distinguish themselves by the perfection of their imaginative faculties.

Secondly, there are laws which, in addition to the foregoing, also aim to impart correct philosophical opinions:

You will also find laws which, in all their rules, aim, as the law just mentioned, at the improvement of the material interests of the people: but, besides, tend to improve the state of the faith of man, to create first correct notions of God, and of angels, and to lead then the people, by instruction and education, to an accurate knowledge of the Universe: this education comes from God; these laws are divine.

He cautions, however, that not all those who proclaim laws of the second kind are true prophets: to determine true prophecy, one would have to abstain from worldly concerns.

We must examine the merits of the person, obtain an accurate account of his actions, and consider his character. The best test is the rejection, abstention, and contempt of bodily pleasures: for this is the first condition of men, and a fortiori of prophets: they must especially disregard pleasures of the sense of touch, which, according to Aristotle, is a disgrace to us: and, above all, restrain from the pollution of sensual intercourse

Commentary

It is not difficult to ascertain what Maimonides meant by the last part of this chapter; he ends it with “Note what is meant by these words”. It is interesting that the authority which he quotes for the idea that the sense of touch is the ‘worst’ of the senses possessed by humans is Aristotle, and that the main criterion which he dwells on in determining what kind of prophecy is ‘true’ versus ‘plagiraized’ is sexual chastity.