Nahmanides’ Disputes with Rashi as a Gateway to His Worldview

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Shalem Yahalom
{"title":"Nahmanides’ Disputes with Rashi as a Gateway to His Worldview","authors":"Shalem Yahalom","doi":"10.1163/15700704-12341370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAlthough he highly praises Rashi’s Torah commentary, Nahmanides emphasizes that Rashi’s work is not beyond criticism. This article points out one aspect of Nahmandes’ disagreement with Rashi. Rashi, for his part, is willing to cite traditional Midrashic commentaries without significant additions, assuming that tradition is an effective tool for transmitting reliable information. Nahmanides argued with Rashi over this claim. Rather than sufficing to repeat exegetical traditions, in his Torah commentary, Nahmanides expands them and raises alternatives. In this way, he asserts the importance of analyzing all information critically. This article demonstrates how reservations regarding tradition stand behind several exegetical and halakhic disputes between Rashi and Nahmanides. Through analyzing this principle, the study demonstrates how Nahmanides, under the guise of a guardian of tradition, constructed an original, creative spiritual world in the areas of exegesis, halakha, and kabbalah.","PeriodicalId":40689,"journal":{"name":"Review of Rabbinic Judaism","volume":"5 1","pages":"207-228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Rabbinic Judaism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700704-12341370","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although he highly praises Rashi’s Torah commentary, Nahmanides emphasizes that Rashi’s work is not beyond criticism. This article points out one aspect of Nahmandes’ disagreement with Rashi. Rashi, for his part, is willing to cite traditional Midrashic commentaries without significant additions, assuming that tradition is an effective tool for transmitting reliable information. Nahmanides argued with Rashi over this claim. Rather than sufficing to repeat exegetical traditions, in his Torah commentary, Nahmanides expands them and raises alternatives. In this way, he asserts the importance of analyzing all information critically. This article demonstrates how reservations regarding tradition stand behind several exegetical and halakhic disputes between Rashi and Nahmanides. Through analyzing this principle, the study demonstrates how Nahmanides, under the guise of a guardian of tradition, constructed an original, creative spiritual world in the areas of exegesis, halakha, and kabbalah.
纳赫曼尼德与拉希的争论是了解他世界观的途径
虽然他高度赞扬Rashi的Torah注释,Nahmanides强调Rashi的工作并非无可非议。本文指出了Nahmandes与Rashi分歧的一个方面。拉希则认为传统是传递可靠信息的有效工具,他愿意引用传统的米德拉西语评论,而不需要大量补充。Nahmanides与Rashi就这一说法进行了争论。在他的《托拉》注释中,纳赫曼尼德没有重复训诂传统,而是扩展了训诂传统,并提出了其他选择。通过这种方式,他强调了批判性地分析所有信息的重要性。这篇文章展示了关于传统的保留意见是如何在Rashi和Nahmanides之间的几次训诂和哈拉基争议背后站立的。通过分析这一原则,本研究展示了Nahmanides如何在传统守护者的伪装下,在训诂学、哈拉卡和卡巴拉领域构建了一个原始的、创造性的精神世界。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信