|
|
Page:13
Radak on Genesis : Creation, Humanity, and Torah ■ 13 of Eden story, build on Maimonides’ interpretations in a notably sustained way . Indeed, an aging Radak even undertook a journey to help defend Maimonides’ work against the harsh criticisms leveled by its detractors . 4 Nevertheless, influenced as he was by a variety of intellectual and exegetical traditions, Radak shows resistance to many of Maimonides’ claims . By way of introduction, consider the following example, which sharply illustrates how Radak’s independence stands in tension with his allegiance to Maimonides . 5 Near the beginning of Genesis, the text describes various “separations,” including between light and darkness and between the waters above and below the firmament Maimonides, for his part, draws an analogy between these two separations : . ) 6 4, : 1 ( each of them, he argues, signals a differentiation pertaining to the “form”—i . e . , the That is, the form defining essence—of the creations in question ( Guide 2 : 30 [ 352 ] ) . 6 of the upper waters differs from that of the lower waters, and light is formally distinct from darkness . Radak, by contrast, rejects this analogy, arguing that darkness does not possess a form of any kind . After all, as Maimonides himself affirms ( Guide 3 : 10 Hence, Radak [ 438 ] ) , darkness constitutes nothing more than the absence of light . 7 provides a different, more pedestrian explanation of the separation between light On Maimonides’ influence on Radak see Frank Talmage, “David Kim ִhi and the Rationalist 4 Tradition,” HUCA 39 ( 1968 ) : 177 – 218 ; idem, “David Kim ִhi and the Rationalist Tradition II : Literary Sources,” in Studies in Jewish Bibliography, History, and Literature in Honor of I . Edward Kiev , ed . Charles Berlin ( New York : Ktav, 1972 ) , 453 – 78 ( 460 – 65 ) . Both studies are reprinted in Frank Talmage, Apples of Gold in Settings of Silver : Studies in Medieval Jewish Exegesis and Polemics , ed . Barry Dov Walfish ( Papers in Mediaeval Studies 14 ; Toronto : Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1999 ) , 3 – 44 . See also the sections on Radak in Yechiel Tzeitkin, “The Characteristics of Biblical Exegesis in the Works of Peshat Commentators of the Maimonidean School of Provence in the 13 th and 14 th Centuries” ( Hebrew ) , PhD diss . , Bar - Ilan University, 2011 . On Radak’s role in the Maimonidean controversy, see inter alia Talmage, Man and Commentaries , 27 – 39 . Concerning Radak’s independence of Maimonides, cf . Tzeitkin, “Characteristics,” 60 – 62 . 5 In citations of the Guide, page numbers refer to Pines’ translated version . 6 Radak’s comment appears at Gen 1 : 4 . Addressing this difficulty in Maimonides, Sara Klein - 7 Braslavy proposes that, according to his reading of the text, God separated light from darkness by endowing the air with the form of light . Air that does not feature any light, by contrast, retains its default form . Hence, although “darkness” in and of itself merely denotes the absence of light, darkened air possesses a form that differs from that of illuminated air . See her monograph, Maimonides’ Interpretation of the Story of Creation , 2 nd ed . ( Hebrew ; Jerusalem : Reuven Mass, . 57 – 156 , ) 1987
|
|