User:Sangahfosho

Jewish Biblical exegesis and the different approached taken
There have been many commentaries to the Torah by different individuals of Judaism. Their goal is to articulate to their audience how they view the torah. In Judaism, there’s this sense of “we don’t really know.” To tackle this notion, commentaries try to bring some type of “closure” to the vagueness and uncertainty that exists in the Torah. We will take a look at two very important personalities that contribute to the writing of commentaries: Abraham Ibn Ezra, and Nissim ben Moses of Marseilles. Nissim ben Moses of Marseilles: A radical philosopher/rationalist, he had three different names for the commentary to the Torah that he wrote. The names were, Ma'aseh Nissim, Sefer ha-Nissim, and Ikkarei ha-Dat. Nissim’s approach to bringing closure was to “provide a naturalistic explanation for all seemingly supernatural elements of the Torah.” The creation story, the miracles in Egypt and the parting of the red sea were some examples of supernatural stories that he explained naturally. In his view, “Most miracles actually occurred, but they were the product of the superior knowledge of the prophet and his divinatory ability.” Some miracles he claims are to be understood metaphorically. Finally, Nissim’s explanation for the rewards and punishments received by the people of Israel, he claims was due to “the natural consequences of the individual's or nation's behavior.” Thus, Nissim ben Moses’s approach to biblical exegeses was one that chose to ignore the supernatural and instead explain biblical situations naturally.

Abraham Ibn Ezra Ibn Ezra uses grammar and language to convey his message. He is a rationalist, thus presents his view of Torah in a rational manner. He believed that using the “chords of grammar” and rationalism was the way in which joy of studying Torah could be achieved. He rejects the use of Midrashic text in solving the problem of interpretation. Instead, Ibn Ezra believed that the Torah can be understood rationally. If he came across a verse that he did not seem to understand, he clearly stated his inability to do so, instead of trying to “force” an interpretation that does not exist. Biblical exegeses can take on different forms depending on the authors. Through the works of Nissim ben Moses of Marseilles and Abraham Ibn Ezra, we have seen that even between these two individuals, their approach to understanding the Torah differ, Nissim is more of a naturalist. He interpreted the Torah ignoring the supernatural aspect that it contains, instead in viewed them and tried to explain them naturally. In the same sense, Ibn Ezra also tries to make sense of the Torah by relying heavily on grammar an rational thinking. These techniques and many others were done to bring clarity to a text that seemed vague, Torah.

--Sangahfosho (talk) 21:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC) citations:

Source Citation: Simon, Uriel and Raphael Jospe. "Ibn Ezra, Abraham ben Meir." Encyclopaedia Judaica. Ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik. Vol. 9. 2nd ed. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007. 665-672. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. UNIV OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK. 13 May 2008 .

Source Citation: Kreisel, Howard. "Nissim ben Moses of Marseilles." Encyclopaedia Judaica. Ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik. Vol. 15. 2nd ed. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007. 280. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. UNIV OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK. 13 May 2008 .