Christianity
Found 13 Search results
The First Dream
Rabbi Yaakov MedanAccording to the conventional interpretation by the Sages, the Four Kingdoms refer to Babylon, Persia/Medes, Greece, and Rome. Later interpretations extend Rome into Christianity, while others combine Rome with Greece, allowing the fourth kingdom to be Yishma’el - Islam. These interpretations assume that the prophecy ends with a Jewish kingdom in the end of the days and therefore must span throughout human history. An alternative interpretation suggests that the four kingdoms are Babylon, Persia/Medes, Alexander the Great, and the Diadochi kingdom which comprises the Ptolemy and the Selucids, and the dream extends itself to the kingdom of the Hashmona’im. Many prophecies deviate from their initial intentions due to man’s deviation from God’s path, and are destined to be fulfilled in the future.
Three Prophecies Regarding the Future
Rabbi David SabatoIn three prophecies in the unit of prophecies of consolation, Yirmiyahu foresees the changes that will take place at the time of the redemption.
The first prophecy deals with Israel being replanted in their land and the new relationship between the actions of the fathers vs. the consequences to the sons.
The second prophecy deals with a new covenant and its consequences. The difference between the old covenant and the new one relates not to the contents or the addressee as Christianity believes, but to the manner in which it will be made and its consequences. The prophet contrasts the old covenant that was broken by the people and the new covenant that apparently will not be broken because it will be engraved on the hearts of the people. One of the general motifs in the book of Yirmiyahu is the internalization of holiness and opposition to the formal, mechanical conception of holiness. Standing out against this in many places in the book of Yirmiyahu is prayer and moral deeds as a condition for holiness. The underlying problem with the tablets of the covenant and ark is their remoteness from the people, which allows people to escape from them. The removal of the ark and the transfer of its contents inwards into the hearts of the people will create the desired change and turn the covenant into an eternal covenant.
The third prophecy addresses the rebuilding of Jerusalem which will be holy to the Lord and will not be plucked up again forever.
Rashi encounters the Christian World in his commentary to Mishlei
Dr. Lisa Fredman | HourA glance at Rashi's commentary reveals that Rashi was very aware of the world around him. Some of his comments relate to the world around him in different ways, be it Old French, situations of the time, or anti-Christian polemics. What motivated Rashi to write acomment? For years it was accepted that he wrote exegetical comments in response to a difficulty in the text. Recent scholarship has added that occasionally he comments because there is a very important idea he seeks to convey, even if there is no difficulty in the text. We see how the polemics come to the forefront in his commentary on Mishlei, especially as it relates to the symbolic "foreign woman" in Mishlei.
Rashi
Part 1
Dr. Avigail RockIt is impossible to exaggerate Rashi’s importance in shaping the worldview of the Jewish People; it may be said that after Tanakh and Talmud, Rashi’s commentaries are next in line in terms of their influence. Rashi’s commentary on the Torah is the point of departure and the foundation of many of the biblical commentators who come after him.
While the character of Rashi’s parshanut on Tanakh was oriented towards peshat, the simple meaning of the text, it was also influenced by the need to contend with Christian claims, at a time when Christian scholars of that faith were attempting to wrestle with biblical passages on the basis of peshat. We may also find polemical content in Rashi’s commentary as he contends with Christian biblical exegesis.
Rashi sees himself, above all, as a champion of peshat, However, Rashi adds that in his commentary he will integrate certain midrashim which are harmonious with the syntactic structure of the verse, only if the additional details which are found in the midrashim dovetail with the context and sequence of the verses.
Rashi - Part 6 - Rashi and Christianity (I)
Dr. Avigail RockThe comments and midrashim that Rashi brings not because of any interpretative need, nor because of their educational or moral significance, but rather because of their exigency for his generation, a generation living beneath the shield and the sword of the Christian faith are examined.
Rashi sometimes strays from the peshat of the verses because of the need to contend with Christian claims against the Jews, out of his desire to strengthen the spirit of his nation.
There is no doubt that Rashi, in his commentary to Shir Ha-shirim, is responding to the First Crusade. Similarly, in his commentaries to a number of psalms and the Book of Yeshayahu, Rashi relates to the cruelty of the Christians, their claims against the nation of Israel, and the punishment that God is destined to bring upon them.
Also in the Torah itself, we find anti-Christian trends in Rashi's commentary.
Rashi
Part 7 - Rashi and Christianity (II)
Dr. Avigail RockIn the Torah itself, we find the following pro-Israel and anti-Christian trends in Rashi's commentary that appear to be a response to Christianity:
- The Eternal Selection of Jewish Nation
- The Jewish Nation as a Moral People
- The demonization of Esav as a symbol of Christianity
- The defense of Yaakov and his entitlement to the birthrite and the blessings
These interpretations of Rashi cannot be seen only as encouraging the Jewish community at a time of persecution; it appears that Rashi’s aim is to teach his generation how to answer theological challenges.
R. Yosef Bekhor Shor
Dr. Avigail RockR. Yosef of Orléans, (northern France) was a 12th-century exegete who has become known through the generation as Ri Bekhor Shor. He was a Tosafist, a student of Rabbeinu Tam, and he was influenced mainly by Rashi’s commentary and the commentaries of Mahari Kara and the Rashbam. Like his predecessors Mahari Kara and Rashbam, he was a member of the peshat school. It appears that Ri Bekhor Shor forges a path that is a middle way between Rashi and the pursuers of the peshat. These are his major exegetical principles:
- Ri Bekhor Shor aims to explain the verses without non-biblical information; however, when the derash is appropriate for explaining the peshat and for the general context of verses, or when one may explain it as being in keeping with biblical reality, he will not hesitate to bring a midrash.
- The Torah does not provide superfluous information. All information provided is in fact essential.
- Verses should be explained within their specific context, a reverse method to the foreshadowing principle of Rashbam.
- Verses should be explained based on understanding the state of mind of the human actors.
- Verses should be explained according to the reality of the biblical era.
- God directs the world in a natural way as much as possible, and the use made of miracles is the absolute minimum.
- An expansive and consistent approach to the question of the reasons of mitzvot.
- In the Peshat vs. Halakha discussion, Ri Bekhor Shor is closer to Rashi’s approach with exception in which he explains the verses according to a Peshat that differs from Halakha.
- A tendency to counteract Christian interpretations of the Torah.
R. Avraham ibn Ezra
Part 1
Dr. Avigail RockIbn Ezra, grew up in the Golden Age in Spain and thus received a wide-ranging education. On the one hand, he acquired great expertise in the works of great Jewish minds throughout the generations; on the other hand, he was also fluent in Arabic, and he was involved in the rich Muslim culture, its literature and its scientific innovations.
Ibn Ezra was not only a sharp-tongued thinker; he was a believing Jew, with a passionate love for his people and his Creator, for the Torah and its commandments - a man of science and a man of spirit.
Ibn Ezra wrote commentaries on the Torah, and various books of Neviim and Ketuvim. It appears from his words that he wrote commentaries to other books of Tanakh as well, but they have been lost. He wrote two commentaries to the Torah, Peirush Ha-katzar and Peirush Ha-arokh, the Short and Long Commentary.
Ibn Ezra’s commentaries, unlike those of the commentators of northern France, are difficult to comprehend.
In Ibn Ezra’s introduction to his commentary, he presents different approaches to biblical interpretation followed and expresses criticism of each:
- The scholars of Spanish yeshivot weaved philosophical views into their commentaries on the Torah.
- The Karaites, who deny the tradition of the Oral Torah.
- Those who understand the Torah as allegory. Ibn Ezra mainly opposes this as a path leading to Christianity.
- The homiletic exegetes in Christian lands, who do not relate to the peshat of the verses, instead following the Midrashic approach.
Radak - Rav David Kimchi
Dr. Avigail RockThe Radak — R. David Kimchi — was born and active in Provence, in southern France, near Spain. The Radak was a member of a family of Spanish grammarians and exegetes. Like R. Avraham ibn Ezra, the Kimchi family brought the fundamentals of linguistics and grammar from Spain to France.
Despite the fact that Radak sees himself as a pashtan, he does not hesitate to cite derash. However, when the Radak quotes these sources, it is obvious that he has a distinction between peshat and derash.
Two principles guide the Radak in citing Midrashic sources:
- When it is difficult to resolve the peshat without the derash.
- For the lovers of derash - in order to explain the text and engage his readers.
The view of the Radak is that the Torah is not a historical tome. Those stories of the Patriarchs which have been selected to put into the Torah with all of its details must fulfill one criterion: teaching a moral lesson.
Just as one may learn from the positive acts of the forefathers, so one may learn from their negative acts. The Radak does not engage in apologetics; instead, he writes explicitly that the narratives which describe the negative acts of the Patriarchs have been written in order to help us avoid this sort of behavior.
The Radak points out consistently that the Torah often uses repetitious language, not because each word introduces new meaning, but because the verse seeks to stress the significance of a given issue. This view stands in stark contrast to that of Rashi, who argues that generally speaking, one must assign meaning to every word, as there cannot be any redundancy in the biblical text.
Ramban
Part 1
Dr. Avigail RockRabbi Moshe ben Nachman was born in an area in northeast Spain that was heavily influenced by Spanish Muslim culture and by French Ashkenazic culture. The Ramban’s writings reflect Spanish philosophy as well as the studiousness which characterized Ashkenazic Jewry.
A poem that the Ramban pens in the introduction to his commentary on the Torah reveals a number of its characteristics:
- He intends to offer new interpretations and not to explain the verses sequentially.
- When the Ramban does not interpret a given verse, we may assume that he intends to accept Rashi’s approach.
- It is a wide-ranging, comprehensive commentary, in which the Ramban uses specific verses as jumping boards to general topics.
By viewing two examples, one can observe that the Ramban, in his commentary to a lone verse, may relate to many facets of exegetical, halakhic and philosophical issues; he seeks an explanation which jibes with the details of many wider contexts. The proof is not local, but wide-ranging, comprehensive, taking in a broad perspective. One may see also the analytical style constructed, in which the Ramban, in an organized, consistent way, lays out the issues, brings different opinions and deals with them until he develops his own view.
Ramban
Part 2
Dr. Avigail RockThis lesson is dedicated to a number of philosophical topics that recur throughout the Ramban’s commentary on the Torah.
Maaseh Avot Siman Lebanim – The events that transpire with the forefathers is an omen for the children.
This historical view of the Ramban is of great significance, not just in the field of exegesis, but also because it has such a clear polemical anti-Christian aim. Indeed there is an allusion to the future in the stories of the forefathers, but the allusion is for Israel’s future — what is decreed upon their seed — but not for others, who are not of their seed.
The Superiority of the Land of Israel
The superiority of the Land of Israel predates Avraham and to the People of Israel. The overturning of Sodom was due to the superiority of the Land of Israel. As opposed to the other lands of the worlds that are managed by angelic representatives of God, the Land of Israel is managed by God directly.
The main significance of the fulfillment of commandments is in the Land of Israel.
Nissayon – Test
The test is designed to serve not the Tester, God, but rather the one who is being tested. The nissayon in the Torah is an opportunity which is provided for the righteous to apply in practice their dedication to God and to earn a reward for this. In this way, they will receive a reward not only for their potential dedication, but for their actual dedication as is described with regard to Akeidat Yitzhak and the mann.
The Chizkuni — R. Chizkiya ben Manoach
Dr. Avigail RockThe Chizkuni wrote a comprehensive commentary on the Torah, and his style is very clear and accessible.
It appears that the Chizkuni had three aims in composing his commentary on the Torah:
· To collect all the explanations in keeping with the peshat from the works of the commentators who preceded him.
· To explain Rashi’s’ commentary by adding or changing to Rashi's words, by resolving difficulties in Rashi, and by pointing out inconsistencies in Rashi’s commentary.
· To write an independent commentary on the Torah. Despite the fact that the Chizkuni utilizes many commentaries for the purposes of writing his work, there are more than a few original commentaries to be found in its lines, characterized mainly by his attempt to understand reality and the psychological motivations of the characters in each narrative.
Rashi on Isaiah 53: Peshat or Theology?
Professor David Berger | Hour and 5 minutesThe “suffering servant” chapter in Isaiah was the most theologically sensitive biblical passage for Jews in Christian Europe. Rashi strikingly understands the servant as the Jewish people whose suffering atones for the sins of the nations of the world. A common understanding of his motive is his search for an explanation of Jewish tribulations during the First Crusade. Such an explanation, however, would be psychologically unsatisfying, and the possibility that Rashi was motivated primarily by considerations of pshat is greatly enhanced by indirect but compelling evidence that other medieval Jews who disagreed with him provided interpretations that reveal--against their will--that their own deepest instinct pointed to his understanding as the straightforward meaning of the passage.