תשורה לחכם - ביקורת על 'תשורה לעמוס' תשס''ז

Yoel Elitzur

2011, Leshonenu

Teshurah le-‘Amos: Collected Studies in Biblical Exegesis Presented to Amos Hakham, ed. M. Bar-Asher, N. Hacham, and Y. Ofer, Alon Shevut: Tevunot, 2007, 581 pp. The twenty-seven variegated articles by leading scholars in this collection range from original biblical exegesis, to a profound analysis of the doctrines of the classical exegetes and other medieval sages, to literary and linguistic studies of the Bible. This volume contains three parts: “The Gates of Interpretation,” “The Gates of Bible,” and “The Gates of Wisdom.” The article surveys eleven of the papers in this collection, of which comments on several are summarized here. First I note the view of Rashi as a “pedagogic homilist” presented by Avraham Grossman and Elie Assis in their contributions. I suggest the possibility that various trends they attribute to Rashi actually derive from talmudic and midrashic doctrines. Bryna Levy’s discovery regarding Radak’s commentary on Kings is of great interest. She proposes that, regarding the son of the woman of Zarephath whom Elijah revived, Radak first wrote that the son was not quite dead, later himself correcting his commentary and writing that he was absolutely dead. She attributes the initial exegesis to an anti-Christian tack, which shifted during the controversy over Maimonides’ Guide, in which Radak was a participant. Whether Radak himself had a firm opinion on this matter, which he concealed for pedagogical or apologetic reasons, remains an open question. Sara Japhet examines the expulsion of the foreign women in Ezra’s day from the halakhic perspective. The halakhic aspect could have been more fully realized in my opinion; in addition, the importance of the national-religious aspect was overlooked: the fears of Ezra and the elders that the returnees would be absorbed by the local society. However, her article contains an intriguing sociolinguistic discovery: namely, that for marriage and divorce of the foreign women, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah use specific terminology that is not found in earlier or later sources, aimed at delegitimizing marriage with foreign women. Moshe Bar-Asher’s contribution treats the word ידיד. Bar-Asher cites evidence that, originally, its meaning was like the passive participle אהוב and that morphologically, the correct vocalization is יָדִיד in the qatil pattern. I suggest that perhaps the difference between qatil and qetil is simply phonological, with both representing the original qatil. In his thought-provoking article, Haim Sabato compiles instances in which post-talmudic sages retained the customs of the mishnaic and talmudic sages and derived halakhot from Scripture itself through midrashic exegesis. This fascinating article, however, overlooks some historical aspects and uses second-hand citations, which led to some errors. The most captivating section is found at the end of the book. It tells the story of Amos Hakham who achieved prominence in a single day, on winning the first International Bible Contest in August 1958, and how he came to be a leading biblical scholar and exegete.