|
|
Page:12
■ Creation, Humanity, and Purpose 12 Born to a family of Spanish origins, Radak draws on the Andalusian tradition of philological exegesis transmitted by his father Joseph Kim ִhi, Abraham Ibn Ezra, and other influential figures . Raised in Narbonne, he also maintains a palpable affinity toward midrash, in the eminent Narbonnese tradition of Rabbi Moses the Preacher . His commentaries, moreover, show the unmistakable influence of Rashi and, to a lesser degree, other exegetes of Northern Europe . 2 Radak’s worldview, however, rests mainly on the thought of Moses Maimonides With the completion of The Guide of the Perplexed around 1190 and . ) 1204 – 1138 ( its full translation into Hebrew some fifteen years later, Maimonides’ philosophy, grounded in the Arabic Aristotelian tradition, would exert increasing influence on Numerous assertions by Radak draw on the ideas of the great our commentator . 3 Jewish philosopher . And his treatments of some longer passages, such as the Garden A wide - ranging portrait of Radak, his influences, and his work appears in Frank Talmage, David 2 Kim ִhi : The Man and the Commentaries ( Harvard Judaic Monographs ; Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1975 ) . See also Mordechai Z . Cohen, “The Qim ִhi Family,” in Hebrew Bible Old Testament : The History of Its Interpretation , vol . 1 part 2, ed . Magne Sæbø ( Göttingen : / Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000 ) , 388 – 415 . Discussion of Radak’s use of midrash and attitude toward rabbinic interpretation appears in Naomi Grunhaus, The Challenge of Received Tradition : Dilemmas of Interpretation in Radak’s Biblical Commentaries ( New York : Oxford University Press, and in my essay, “ Peshat and the Authority of ִHazal in the Commentaries of Radak,” AJS ; ) 2013 Review 31 ( 2007 ) : 41 – 59 . On Radak’s dependence on Rashi, see Grunhaus, “The Dependence of Rabbi David Kim ִhi ( Radak ) on Rashi in his Quotation of Midrashic Traditions,” JQR 93 On the question of the influence of Rashbam and R . Joseph Bekhor Shor, see, . 30 – 415 : ) 2003 ( respectively, Jonathan Jacobs, “Was R . David Kim ִhi ( Radak ) Familiar with the Commentary of R . Samuel b . Meir ( Rashbam ) on the Torah ? ” ( Hebrew ) , Shnaton 20 ( 2010 ) : 115 – 33 ; idem, “From France to Provence : The Influence of Ribash on Radak’s Commentary on the Pentateuch,” JSQ 26 . 61 – 146 : ) 2019 ( For an overview of Maimonides’ thought in relation to the Arabic philosophical tradition, see 3 Sarah Pessin, “The Influence of Islamic Thought on Maimonides,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ( Spring 2016 Edition ) , ed . Edward N . Zalta, https : / / plato . stanford . edu / archives / spr2016 / entries / maimonides - islamic / . Regarding the strong influence on Maimonides of the Islamic intellectual culture that he inhabited, see Sarah Stroumsa, Maimonides in His World : Portrait of a Mediterranean Thinker ( Jews, Christians, and Muslims from the Ancient to the Modern World ; Princeton and Oxford : Princeton University Press, 2009 ) . See also, inter alia, the classic treatment of Maimonides’ philosophical sources by Shlomo Pines in his translation of the Guide ( Moses Maimonides , The Guide of the Perplexed [ Chicago and London : University of Chicago Press, 1963 ] , lvii - cxxxiv ) .
|
|