Aztec Metaphysics—Two Interpretations of an Evanescent World

This paper contrasts two contemporary approaches to Nahua metaphysics by focusing on the stance of the Nahua tlamatinime (philosophers) regarding the nature of reality. Miguel León-Portilla and James Maffie offer the two most comprehensive interpretations of Nahua philosophy. Although León-Portilla and Maffie agree on their interpretation of teotl as the evanescent principle of Nahua metaphysics, their interpretations regarding the tlamatinime metaphysical stances diverge. Maffie argues that León-Portilla attributes to the tlamatinime a metaphysics of being according to which being means permanence and stability and thus, since earthly things are continuously changing, being cannot be predicated of them, hence earthly things are not real. I present textual support to show that León-Portilla does not read Nahua metaphysics through the lens of a metaphysics of being and thus that León-Portilla does not interpret the tlamatinime as denying the reality of earthly things. I then provide an exegetical analysis of León-Portilla’s texts to show that, in his interpretation, metaphysical concerns are intimately linked to existential questions regarding the meaning of human life. Ultimately, I argue that, in León-Portilla’s interpretation, the tlamatinime conception of art functions as poiesis, that is, as the process of aesthetic creation that gives meaning to human life.