intellectum tibi dabo ... : the function of free will in the

INTELLECTUM TIBI DABO ... : THE FUNCTION OF FREE WILL IN THE LIBRO DE BUEN AMOR

RICHARD

P.

KINKADE

University of Arizona

Reprinted from the

Bulletin of Hispanic Studies Vol. XLVII, No. 4, October 1970

INTELLECTUM TIBI DABO .. . : THE FUNCTION OF FREE WILL IN THE LIBRO DE BUEN AMOR P. KINKADE University of Arizona

RICHARD

There can be no doubt that at present a state of confusion exists with respect to Juan Ruiz' position on the doctrine of free will versus determinism in the Libra de buen amar. Much of the confusion may be attributed to a conscientious effort on the part of some critics to employ parallels between the Libra and similar extracts from mediaeval Latin and classical theological sources whose format and content may support or substantiate inferences drawn previously by these scholars. In some cases the confusion results from a simple misunderstanding of well-known mediaeval attitudes from which Juan Ruiz is often capriciously exempted. In the first instance, the implications are, of course, that Juan Ruiz was familar with the intricacies of Christian philosophy and that he knowingly applied these mental gymnastics to his work under the impression that his audience would recognize and appreciate them. This approach, not unlike the recent typological studies we have seen on mediaeval drama, has some obvious drawbacks. 1 Menendez Pelayo, referring to this matter, stated that 'No creemos que el Arcipreste fuera te6logo sino canonista ... ',and Juan Ruiz himself admits that there are many theological interpretations with regard to certain questions, but only certain lawful applications of the same: Dotores mas de ciento, en libros e questiones, con fuertes argumentos, con sotiles razones, tienen sobre estos casos deviersas opiniones; (st. rr53abc) Furthermore, he warns his readers to take careful stock of their qualifications before attempting any religious interpretations: guardat non lo assolvades nin dedes la sentencia de casos que non son en vuestra pertenencia. (st. rr55cd) 1 Cf. Arnold Williams, 'Typology and the cycle plays: some criteria', Speculum, XLIII (1968), 677-84: 'the audiences towards which the great cycle plays were directed were popular, the burgesses of provincial towns, their servants, the gentry, free folk, and perhaps serfs of the sutTounding countryside, a sprinkling of the clergy and the nobility, on occasion even including a royal visitor. The kind of typology such an andience could effectively absorb had to be simplified, common, obvious. It will not do to cite Irenaeus, Tertullian, Augustine, Aquinas. These are as remote to the mediaeval audience as are Robert Graves or Maud Bodkin to the television viewer of today, and remoter than Marx or Freud. The modern scholar seeking to authenticate a typology must find his warrant in John Mirk, the Cursor Mundi, or the sermon literature sampled by Owst' (680).

296

FREE WILL IN THE LI BRO DE BUEN AMOR

297

Apart from considerations of the author's humility as a commonplace, we may also give credence to his sincere admission of unwillingness to enter into the realm of pure theological discussion: E por aquesto que tengo en cora96n de escrivir, tengo del miedo atanto quanto non puedo dezir: con la mi poca ciencia he grand miedo de fallir; (st. n34abc)

~.

In the second instance where the critic would prefer his own subjective interpretation of the Libro while choosing to disregard the extensive body of knowledge we possess of the mediaeval world little can be said. The purpose of this paper will be to survey the major critical attitudes concerning free will versus determinism in the Libro and estimate their effectiveness while providing, at the same time, a textual foundation of contemporary mediaeval Castilian authors in the didactic tradition against which the Archpriest's purpose and position may be more accurately judged. 1 The deterministic approach was clearly stated by Felix Lecoy, Recherches sur le 'Libro de Buen Amor' de Juan Ruiz, Archipretre de Hita (Paris 1938), when he remarked that, 'Si maintenant nous revenonsaJuanRuiz, il est facile de voir combien son opinion s'eloigne de I' opinion generalement admise dans les milieux contemporains quelque peu cultives ... Son developpement ne mentionne pas le libre arbitre. Seul Dieu dans sa toutepuissance peut faire devier le cours naturel des elements' (193). Ten years later, Americo Castro, Espana en su historia (Buenos Aires 1948), dedicated an entire subchapter, entitled 'Impulso vital, fatalismo y personalidad', to the problem which he defined as the fatalistic impact of Islam upon Spanish letters or the influence of mudejar art:' Quien sabe d6nde esta el seso fijo e inconmovible, si nuestros corazones van guiados por la mano de Dios y, ademas, por sus intermediarios los astros. Seguro, sin duda alguna, ... el alma poetica del autor discurre la a vez por las sendas literarias y morales del Islam' (441). Ulrich Leo, Zur dichterischen Originalitat des Arcipreste de Hita (Frankfurt a.M. 1958), supports Castro's opinion to the letter: 'ftir Rita's "mudejarismo" 16sen sich alle Probleme deterministisch, und der freie Wille spielt kaum eine Rolle; ... Hita also hatte, zur Einleitung seines Buches, seinen "mudejarismo" -als Fatalismus- auf das Thema des "amor loco" angewendet: der Hang der menschlichen Natur zur "Sunde" ist unbesiegbar. ("Natur" ist in diesem Gebrauch von "hado", "estrellas", etc. nicht verschieden)' (120). Nearly thirty years after Lecoy's work, Joan Corominas, in his recent edition of the t The most recent bibliographies of the Libro are to be found in: Carmelo Gariano, E! mundo poetico de Juan Ruiz (Madrid 1968); G. B. Gybbon-Monypenny, 'Estado actual de los estudios sobre el Libro de buen amor', An. Est. Med., III (1966), 575-609; H. H. Baumann, 'Neu Ausgaben des Libro de Buen Amor', Rom. Jb., XVII (1966), 242-57.

298

BHS, XLVII (1970)

RICHARD P. KINKADE

Libra (Madrid 1967), 1 declares, in reference to the Archpriest's comment 'Yo creo los estr6logos verdat naturalmente' (14oa), that, 'Este pasaje es realmente revelador de la mentalidad de J. Ruiz. Observa atinadamente Lecoy que esta actitud es poco comun en literatura y corresponde mejor a la del vulgo' (p. 108, n. l4oc). In the same note Corominas adds, 'Replica A. Castro que esto es verdad en las literaturas europeas, mucho menos en las semiticas .. .' It is curious to note that Corominas cites Castro's attitude on free will by referring to the English translation, The Structure of Spanish History (Princeton 1954), of the revised edition, Espana en su historia (Mexico 1954), since the latter omits entirely the subchapter on fatalism. The impact of Castro's opinion may still be felt today as can be seen in a recent work by Rafael Lapesa, De la edad media a nuestros dias (Madrid 1967), where he says of Castro: 'Su teoria sobre el mudejarismo del Libra de Buen Amor no se ha resentido en nada esencial' (74). Anthony Zahareas, The Art of Juan Ruiz, Archpriest of Hita (Madrid 1965), has even dedicated an entire chapter of his work, 'Astrology, Worldly Love and Free Will', to the subject and concludes that the author's purpose is 'to show that man cannot escape his destiny ... Juan Ruiz never once mentions free-will which, in a Christian scheme of things, can overcome whatever is ordained by the stars ... he knows that the orthodox argument of free will contradicts his own argument of man's helplessness which in turn he relates to the refusal to stop indulging in Love' (194-95). This particular chapter was also published in the same year as an article, 'The stars: worldy love and free will in the Libra de buen amor', BHS, XLII (1965), 82-93, though Zahareas confuses the matter by adding in a footnote to his chapter that 'Professor Otis Green wrote me that he also finds Juan Ruiz's views on free will fairly orthodox. This is a debatable problem as A. D. Deyermond shows in "The Greeks, the Romans, the astrologers and the meaning of the Libra de buen Amor", RomN, V (1963), l-4. Of course Juan Ruiz knew the orthodox positions and incorporates them, as usual, in his book. To parallel a given tradition is one thing, to extract out of such parallels the Archpriest's own position is another matter' (p. 193, n. 22). In another recent article on the subject, 'Juan Ruiz's Prologue', MLN, LXXXII (1967), 149-70, P.L. Ullman states that the author's words are 'merely a reiteration of a fundamental tenet of Augustine, for whom temptation is the condition of man, a result of the fall, and not possibly overcome by the strength of free will' (161). Ullman, however, in an earlier article, 'Stanzas 140-150 of the Libra de buen Amor', PMLA, LXXIX (1964), 200-05, had declared that, 'Professor Raymond Willis ... has pointed out to me that ... Juan Ruiz clearly shows that man does indeed have free will, given to him by God if he is willing to 1

All references to the text of the Libra are taken from this edition.

FREE WILL IN THE LI BRO DE BUEN AMOR

299

attain it through prayer' (p. 202, n. 13). Ullman ('Prologue') also takes Zahareas (The Art) to task for his 'misuse of the word voluntarism' which he feels is an application of the 'Kantian definition' to the Middle Ages {cf. p. 151, n. 6). Here, Ullman would like to prove, by citing Augustine, that the Archpriest was conscientiously 'making a case for voluntarism' since the 'voluntarist, ... ascribes the role of moving the will to the grace of God' (153-54). In opposition to these deterministic interpretations, the case for free will was clearly stated by W. Kellerman, 'Zur Charakteristik des Libra del Arcipreste de Rita', ZRPh, LXVII (1951), 225-54: 'Die Entmachtung der Sternenmacht wird nun aber religios von der Mitwirkung des Menschen ausgelost. Er kann