[a. Altmann] Gersonides' Commentary on Averroes' (BookSee.org)

7/24/2019 [a. Altmann] Gersonides' Commentary on Averroes' (BookSee.org)

1/31

GERSONIDES'

COMMENTARY

ON AVERROES' EPITOME OF

PAR

VA

NATURALIA,

I.

3

ANNOTATED CRITICAL EDITION

By

ALEXANDERALTMANN

The

hitherto

npublished

ext

resented

ere

n a critical

dition

forms

he

section

n "the nature

f

dreams

nd kindred

ivine

apprehensions"i.e. divinationnd prophecy)n Gersonides'

Commentary

n

Averroes'

pitome

f Parva

Naturalia

Be'iir

Sefer

Ha-Hifsh

We-Ha-Muhash iisfir

e-Ibn

Rushd).

This

section

ultimatelyorresponds,

s far as the text

ommented

pon

s

concerned,

o

Aristotle's

wo

smalltreatises

e Insomniis

nd

De

Divinatione

er

Somnumwhich

figure

s Nos.

4

and

5 in the

Latin

Parva Naturalial

nd

which,

ccording

o a number

f

testimonies,2ere ontainedn the second reatisemaqdla) f

the

(lost)

Arabic

Parva Naturalia

nown

by

the name Kitdb

al-Hiss

wal-Mahsiis.3

ur

text

may

therefore

e described

s a

1

See Paul

Siwek

d.,

Aristotelisarva

Naturalia

Graece

t

Latine

Rome,

1963),p.

ix.

The

name

Parva Naturalia"

was first

pplied

oward

he nd of

the

13th

enturyyAegidius

omanus

Giles

of

Rome).

2

See al-Risdla

l-Mandmiyya

attributed

o

Avicenna);

Moshe

ibn

Ezra,

Kitcb

al-MubhadIara

al-Mudhakara;bn

Baijja,

Tadbir

al-Mutawahbid;

ee

S.

Pines,

The

ArabicRecension

f Parva Naturalia nd the

philosophical

doctrine

oncerning

eridical

reams

ccording

o al-Risa-la

l-Mandmiyya

and

other

ources,"

srael

Oriental

tudies,

V

(1974),

120,

138.

The

relevant

Moshe

bnEzra

passage

not

pecifically

eferred

o

by

Pines)

was

pointed

ut

by

M.

Steinschneider,

Die Parva

Naturalia

es

Aristoteles

ei

den

Arabern,"

Zeitschrift

er

Deutschen-Morgenldndischen

esellschaft,

7

(1883),

490. It

is

found

n

p.

120,

ines

12-13of A. S.

Halkin's dition

Jerusalem,

975).

3

TheArabicrecensionf Parva Naturalia omprisednly hefirstixof

the

nine

Aristotelian

reatises

hich

igure

n theLatin

text. t took

ts

name

from o.

1

De

Sensu

t

Sensibile).

he ix exts

ere

rranged

n

three

maqilfit,

and

the section

epresenting

e

Insomniis

nd

De Divinatione

er

Somnum

appeared

s

the ast

the

hird)

f

maqdla

I.

No

ms.

of heArabic ecension

r,

for

hat

matter,

f

any

Hebrew

r Latinversion

f t

has survived.

n Hebrew

GERSONIDES COMMENTARY

ON AVERROES EPITOME OF

P RV

N TUR LI II. 3

ANNOTATED CRITICAL EDITION

By ALEXANDER ALTMANN

The hitherto unpublished text presented here in a critical edition

forms the section on

the

nature of dreams and kindred divine

apprehensions (i.e. divination and prophecy) in Gersonides

Commentary on Averroes Epitome of Parva Naturalia

(Be )ur

Seier Ha-lfush We-Ha-Mubash

Qi ur

Le-Ibn Rushd . This section

ultimately corresponds, as far as the text commented upon is

concerned, to Aristotle s two small treatises De Insomniis and

De Divinatione per Somnum which figure as Nos. 4 and 5 in the

Latin Parva Naturalia

and which, according to a number of

testimonies,2 were contained in the second treatise

maqala

of

the (lost) Arabic Parva Naturalia known by the name Kitab

al-lfiss wal-Mabsus.3 Our text may therefore be described as a

See Paul Siwek ed.,

Aristotelis Parva Naturalia Graece et Latine

(Rome,

1963), p. ix. The name Parva Naturalia was first applied toward the end

of

the 13th century by Aegidius Romanus (Giles

of

Rome).

See al-Risala al-Manamiyya (attributed to Avicenna); Moshe ibn Ezra,

Kitab al-Mu/:lat/ara wal-Mudhakara;

Ibn

Bajja,

Tadbir al-Mutawabbid;

see

S

Pines, The Arabic Recension

of

Parva Naturalia and the philosophical

doctrine concerning veridical dreams according to al-Risala al-Manamiyya

and other sources, Israel Oriental Studies, IV (1974), 120,

38

The relevant

Moshe ibn Ezra passage (not specifically referred to by Pines) was pointed out

by M

Steinschneider,

Die Parva Naturalia

des Aristoteles bei den Arabern,

Zeitschrift der Deutschen-Morgenliindischen Gesellschaft, 37 (1883), 490. It is

found on p. 120, lines 12-13 of A.

S

Halkin s edition (Jerusalem, 1975).

3

The Arabic recension

of

Parva Naturalia

comprised only the first

Eix

of

the nine Aristotelian treatises which figure in the Latin text.

It

took its name

from

No 1

De Sensu et Sensibile . The six texts were arranged in three maqalat,

and the section representing De Insomniis and De Divinatione per Somnum

appeared as the last (the third) ofmaqala II. No ms. of the Arabic recension or,

for that matter,

of

any Hebrew

or

Latin version

of

it has survived.

In

Hebrew


2/31

2 ALTMANN

[2]

kind f

palimpsest

fvarious

ayers,

viz.

he

riginal

ristotelian

text f

De

Insomniis

nd

De

Divinatione

er

Somnum;

he

Arabic

versionr, ather,araphrasef hesereatises;verroes'pitome

of

he

Arabic

ersion

nMoses bn

Tibbon's

ebrew

ranslation;4

and Gersonides'

ommentary

Be'iir).

A

fewobservations

on-

cerning

hese

ayers

ill e

n

place.

Little

eed e

said bout heAristotelianext nd

ts

uthenticity

which as been stablished

eyond

oubt.s s

for

he

ost

Arabic

version

f

the wo

treatises,6

t

bore

only

emote

esemblance

o

theGreekext,s Pines asshown.7 hecrucial oint fdifference

relates

o

Aristotle's

xplanation

f

veridical

reams

s

owing

o

either

mere

coincidences"

sympt6mata)

r

physiological

nd

psychological

auses. he

Arabic

ersion

ejected

he

ssumption

of

ccidentalausation

nd

ttributedhe

ccurrence

fveridical

dreams

o a

solicitous rovidence

perating

hrough

he

Agent

Intellect,

view

hat s of

decidedly

toic

rigin.

t s

this

toically

inspiredoctrinefdivination,ines aspointedut, hatwas

responsible

or heriseof the

heories

f

dream-visionnd

pro-

references

he

phrase

al-.biss

al-mahsas

s

rendered

ha-.hsh

we-ha-muhash

nd,

occasionally,

a-margish

e-ha-murgash.

ee

Steinschneider,

oc.

cit.,

pp. 478,

481

f.,

484

ff.

4

Qissyr

efer

Ha-.Hfish

We-Ha-Muhash

e-Ibn

Rushd,

d.

by Henry

$evi)

Blumberg

s

PublicationNo.

62

of

the

Mediaeval

Academy

f America

(Cambridge, ass. 1954);hencefortho be referredo as Blumbergl. lum-

berg's

dition f the

Arabic

ext

Talkhts

itdb

l-Ifiss

wal-Mabsas)

hence-

forth alled

Blumberg2

-

appeared

as PublicationNo. 80

(1972)

of the

Academy.

he

Latin

version

Compendium

ibri

Aristotelise

Sensu t

Sensato)

wasedited

y

Emily

.

Shields

with he

ssistance

f

Henry

lumberg

Publica-

tion

No.

54;

1949).

In

theArabic

ext

he

ection n

dreams,

ivinationnd

prophecy

s

marked

off

s

chapter

facl)

3

of

treatise

maqdla)

I

(pp.

66.1-92.9).

n

the Hebrew

version

here s no formal

ubdivision f

any

treatise

ma'amar),

nd our

section s found n pp. 43.7-60.8. n the Latinvulgate ersion hesection

forms hefinal

art

f

the

book" De

Somno

t

Vigilia

pp.

94.20-125.65).

5

See

Siwek,

oc.

cit.,

p.

xi

f.

6

It shouldbe

pointed

ut that

he

text

f

Averroes'

pitome

ncorporates

only

few

elements

f De

Insomniis,

nd this

uggests

hat

the

underlying

Arabic

ecension

as

similarly

tructured.

7

See

Pines,

oc.

cit.,

assim.

ALTMANN [2]

kind

of

palimpsest of various layers, (viz. the original Aristotelian

text of De Insomniis and De Divinatione per Somnum; the Arabic

version or, rather, paraphrase

of

these treatises; Averroes

Epitome

of the Arabic version in Moses

ibn

Tibbon s Hebrew translation;4

and

Gersonides Commentary

B e ~ u r .

A few observations con

cerning these layers will be in place.

Little need be said

about

the Aristotelian text

and

its authenticity

which has been established beyond doubt.

s

As for the lost Arabic

version of the two treatises,6 it bore only remote resemblance to

the Greek text, as Pines has shown.

7

The crucial point

of

difference

relates to Aristotle s explanation of veridical dreams as owing to

either mere coincidences (symptomata) or physiological and

psychological causes. The Arabic version rejected the assumption

of accidental causation and attributed the occurrence of veridical

dreams

to

a solicitous Providence operating

through

the Agent

Intellect, a view that is of decidedly Stoic origin. It is this Stoically

inspired doctrine

of

divination, Pines has pointed out,

that

was

responsible for the rise

of

the theories of dream-vision

and

pro-

references the phrase al-/.liss wal-ma/.lsus is rendered ha-/.lush we-ha-mu/:lash and,

occasionally, ha-margish we-ha-murgash. See Steinschneider,

loco

cit., pp. 478,

48

f., 484

f

i ur

Seier Ha lfush We-Ha-Mu/:lash Le-Ibn Rushd, ed. by Henry ~ e v i

Blumberg as Publication No.

62 of

the e d ~ e v l Academy of America

(Cambridge, Mass. 1954); henceforth to be referred to as Blumberg

1

.

Blum

berg s edition

of

the Arabic text (Talkhi Kitiib

al lfiss

wal-Ma/:lsus)

-

hence

forth called Blumberg

2

- appeared as Publication No. 80 (1972) of the

Academy. The Latin version (Compendium Libri Aristotelis

e

Sensu et Sensato

)

was edited by Emily L. Shields with the assistance

of

Henry Blumberg (Publica

tion No. 54; 1949).

In

the Arabic text the section

on

dreams, divination and prophecy

is

marked

off as chapter (la l) 3 of treatise (maqala)

II

(pp. 66.1-92.9).

In

the Hebrew

version there is no formal subdivision

of

any treatise (ma amar), and

our

section

is

found

on

pp. 43.7-60.8.

In

the Latin vulgate version the section

forms the final part of the book

e

Somno et Vigilia (pp. 94.20-125.65).

See Siwek,

loco

cit., p. xi f

6

It

should be pointed out that the text of Averroes

Epitome

incorporates

only a few elements

of e

Insomniis, and this suggests that the underlying

Arabic recension was similarly structured.

7 See Pines,

loco

cit., passim.


3/31

[3]

GERSONIDES'

COMMENTARY ON

AVERROES

3

phecy

within slamicand

Jewish

medieval

hilosophy.

re-

construction

f

the

ost

text's

utline

f

the

Arabic

version

r

paraphrasehould e possible n thebasisof Averroes'pitome

andwith he

help

f he

eferences

o t

n

pre-Averroian

ritings.8

The

ccomplishment

f

his

ask,

which annot e

attempted

ere,9

willenable

us to

provide

n answer

o

the

question

osed

n

a

different

ense

y

Blumberg:

What s new r

different

nAverroes'

Epitome

of

the

Parva Naturalia?"

Some of

the

aspects

of

the

Epitome erely

eemed ew

ecause f

heir

eing

t

variance

ith

Aristotle hilethey,nfact, erive rom heArabic ersion.

Averroes'

Epitome f

Parva

Naturalia

completed

n

1170

C.E.)

seems

o have chieved

uch

opularity

mong

ewish

hilosophers

that t

ousted,

s

it

were,

he

Arabic ersion.

or

t

appears

hat

references

o

the

Kitdb

al-Hiss

wal-Mahsiis

n

post-Averroian

Hebrew

writings

re

invariably

o Averroes'

pitome

f

it.10

The

influence

his

work

xercised

n

the Jewish iscussion

f

veridical reams nd prophecy as considerable.11oses of

Narbonne

ncorporated

ong

passages

rom

he relevant

ection

(II, 3)

in

his

Commentary

n the Guide

II,

36)

in

order,

s he

explained,

o

do

ustice

o

the

pistemological

roblem

fveridical

dreams

nd

prophecy

hathad

been

gnored

y

Maimonides.12

Gersonides'

e'ifrl3

incorporates

substantial

ortion

of

8

Ibid., .

145.

9

Some

notes

o the

ext

will

ndicate,

hough,

hich

oncepts

erive

rom

the

Arabic

ecension.

10

So

obviously

n

Joseph

Kaspi,

'Amudey esef

U-Maskiyot

esef,

d.

Werbluner,

.

44

for

he

uotation

ee

Blumbergl,

8.10-11);

Moshe

Narboni,

Be'ur

Le-Sefer

Moreh

Nebhukhim,

d.

Goldenthal,

I,

36

(43a-b),

where

quotations

re

ndiscriminately

ntroduced

nthename f either

bn Rushd

or

Aristotle's

.Hush

U-Mubash.

or

the texts

ee

BlumbergI,

3.15-44.3;

54.11;

45.1-46.7;

6.11-48.5;

8.7-53.3.

11Cf.Blumbergl,p.x-xi.

12

Ed.

Goldenthal,

3b lines

45-47.

Cf. Colette

Sirat,

Les

Theories

es

Visions

urnaturelles

ans

a

PenseeJuive

u

Moyen

Age Leiden,

1969),pp.

155-158.

13

See M.

Steinschneider,

ebrdische

Obersetzungen,

. 155;

BlumbergI,

pp.

ix-x.Another

fragmentary)

ommentary

n

Averroes'

pitome

f

Parva

Naturalia

Be'uir

a-Hfish

We-Ha-Muhash)

s

extant

n

a ParisMs.

(see

Stein-

[3]

GERSONIDES COMMENTARY ON AVERROES

3

phecy within Islamic and Jewish medieval philosophy. A re

construction of the lost text s outline of the Arabic version or

paraphrase should be possible

on

the basis

of

Averroes

pitome

and

with the help

of

the references

to

it

in

pre-Averroian writings.

8

The accomplishment

of

this task, which cannot be attempted here,9

will enable us

to

provide an answer

to

the question posed in a

different sense by Blumberg:

What

is new

or

different in Averroes

Epitome

of

the

Parva Naturalia?

Some

of

the aspects of the

Epitome

merely seemed new because of their being at variance with

Aristotle while they,

in

fact, derive from the Arabic version.

Averroes

Epitome

of

Parva Naturalia

(completed

in

1170

C E

seems

to

have achieved such popularity among Jewish philosophers

that

it ousted, as it were, the Arabic version. For

it

appears

that

references to the

Kitab al-lfiss

wal Ma/:zsus in post-Averroian

Hebrew writings are invariably

to Averroes Epitome

of

it.

IO

The influence this work exercised

on

the Jewish discussion of

veridical dreams

and

prophecy was considerable.

I I

Moses

of

Narbonne incorporated long passages from the relevant section

(II, 3 in his Commentary on the

Guide

(II

36

in order, as he

explained,

to

do justice

to

the epistemological problem

of

veridical

dreams

and

prophecy

that

had been ignored by Maimonides.

12

Gersonides

e ~ i i r I

incorporates a substantial portion

of

8 Ibid., p. 145

9 Some notes to the text will indicate, though, which concepts derive from

the Arabic recenion.

10 So obviously in Joseph Kaspi, eAmudey

esef

U-Maskiyot Kesel, ed.

Werbluner, p.

44

(for the quotation see Blumberg

58.10-11); Moshe Narboni,

Be ur Le-Sefer Moreh Nebhukhim, ed. Goldenthal, II,

36

(43a-b), where

quotations are indiscrirninately introduced in the name of either Ibn Rushd or

Aristotle s lJush

U Mu/:tash

For the texts see Blumberg

43.15-44.3;

54 11;

45.1-46.7; 46.11-48.5; 48.7-53.3.

11

Cf. Blumberg

1

pp. x-xi.

12 Ed. Goldenthal, 43b lines 45-47. Cf. Colette Sirat, Les Theories des

Visions Surnaturelles dans

fa

Pensee Juive

du

Moyen Age (Leiden, 1969), pp.

155-158.

13

See M. Steinschneider, Hebriiische Obersetzungen, p. 155; Blumberg1,

pp. ix-x. Another (fragmentary) Commentary on Averroes Epitome of Parva

Naturalia (Be ur Ha-Ifush We-Ha-Mu/:zash) is extant in a Paris Ms. (see Stein-


4/31

4

ALTMANN

[4]

Averroes'

ext utomits umerous

arge

nd

small

assages

hat

failed

o

elicit

is omment.s

customary

n other fhis

ommen-

taries nAverroes' ritingsf theepitomeype, e offersoth

glosses

nterspersed

ith he

ext s

a

sort f

running

ommentary

and

separate

hematic

otes

or

excursusesntroduced

y

the

stereotyped

ormula

Amar

evi.

The

glosses,

hough xplanatory

in

intent,

ccasionally

llow

his

personal

iewpoint

o

obtrude

itself.

he

excursuses

ive

him n

opportunity

o

state

is

opposi-

tion

o

theories

xpressed

y

Averroes

r

merely

o make

supple-

mentaryoint.

Gersonides

rote is

Be'iir

s the ast of a number f com-

mentaries

n Averroian

pitomes

f Aristotle's

hysical ritings,

such as

Physics;

De

Coelo;

De

Generatione

t

Corruptione;

e-

teora;

De

PartibusAnimalium nd

De

Generatione

nimalium;

De

Anima;

Parva Naturalia

including

commentary

n Averroes'

Middle

Commentary

n

Physics).14

ll

these

works

y

Averroes

were vailable o him n Moses bnTibbon'sHebrew ersions,

except

for

the last-mentioned

hich

had

been

translated

y

Jacobben Makhir.15 e commenced

riting

hese ommentaries

in

1321,

and the

last,

the

Be'ifr

Sefer

Ha-Hi~ish

We-Ha-Mub

sh

Qiisfir

e-Ibn

Rushd,

as

completed,

ccording

o

the

olophon

f

twoof

the xtant

manuscripts

see

below),

n

the

first

f

Adar

I,

5084

February

7,

1324).

The

section

n

dream,

ivinationnd

prophecy,hichppears lose othe nd,wasthereforerittenn

the

early

part

of

1324.

By

that timeGersonides ad

already

finished first

raft f his

majorphilosophical

ork,

he

Sefer

schneider,

oc.

cit.,p.

156; BlumbergI,

. x),

fols.

316v-321v.

t

covers he

preface

nd

almost

he entire

irst reatise

Blumbergl,

-22.5).

The

author,

whosename s

given

s MHR

(mornii

ha-rabh)

ital,

might

e

identical,

s

Steinschneideribid.) uggested,ithMosheNarbonisurnamed,ccordingo

some,

Maestro

Vidal).

This

conjecture

as

some

plausibility

n view of

the

excellence f the

Commentary

nd Narboni'sknown

nterest

n the

work.

My

sincere hanks

re due

to Professorolette

irat

or

indly aving upplied

me

with

photostaticopy

of

this

ms.

14

See

Steinschneider,

ebr.

Obers.,

p.

119,

127,

130,

137,

145,

147,

155.

15

bid.

4

LTM NN [4]

Averroes text but omits numerous large and small passages that

failed

to

elicit his comment. As customary

in

other

of

his commen

taries on Averroes writings

of

the epitome type, he offers both

glosses interspersed with the text as a sort

of

running commentary

and separate thematic notes or excursuses introduced by the

stereotyped formula JAmar Levi. The glosses, though explanatory

in intent, occasionally allow his personal viewpoint

to

obtrude

itself. The excursuses give him an opportunity to state his opposi

tion to theories expressed by Averroes or merely

to

make a supple

mentary point.

Gersonides wrote his Be J

ur

as the last of a number of com

mentaries on Averroian epitomes

of

Aristotle s physical writings,

such as Physics; De Coelo; De Generatione et Corruptione; Me

teora; Partibus Animalium

and

Generatione Animalium;

Anima; Parva Naturalia

(including a commentary on Averroes

Middle Commentary on Physics .14 All these works by Averroes

were available to him in Moses ibn Tibbon s Hebrew versions,

except for the last-mentioned which had been translated by

Jacob ben Makhir.

15

He commenced writing these commentaries

in 1321, and the last, the e J

ur Seier Ha-lfush We-Ha-Mubash

Qi ur Le-Ibn Rushd, was completed, according to the colophon

of

two of the extant manuscripts

see

below), on the first

of

Adar II,

5084 (February

27,

1324). The section on dream, divination and

prophecy, which appears close to the end, was therefore written in

the early part of 1324.

By

that time Gersonides had already

finished a first draft of his major philosophical work, the

Seier

schneider, loco

cit.,

p. 156; Blumberg

p. x), fols. 316v-321v. It covers the

preface and almost the entire first treatise (Blumberg

1

,

1-22.5). The author,

whose name is given as M R

(moren;;'

ha-rabh Vital, might be identical, as

Steinschneider

ibid.

suggested, with Moshe Narboni (surnamed, according to

some, Maestro Vidal). This conjecture has some plausibility in view of the

excellence of the Commentary and Narboni s known interest in the work.

My sincere thanks are due to Professor Colette Sirat for kindly having supplied

me with a photostatic copy of this ms.

14 See Steinschneider

Hebr. Obers.,

pp. 119, 127 130, 137, 145. 147, 155.

15

Ibid.


5/31

[5]

GERSONIDES'

COMMENTARY

ON AVERROES

5

Milhamot

Adonai

1321).16

Yet

it

can

hardly

e

assumed hat hat

first

ttempt

ncluded

what

s

now

the second

treatise

ma'amar)

which deals with "dream, divination nd prophecy."For all

indications

re

to the effecthat

Miliamot,

I

(Chs.

1-8)

is

making

use

of

the

Be'fir. n

Chapter

7

there

s

a

distinct

eference

o

it.

17

Chapter

2

was

obviously

written

n

fulfillment

f

the intention

expressed

n Excursus II

of

the

Be'i~r

to treat the

problem

of

determinism

nd

free

choice

posed

by

the

veracity

f

dreams,

within

a more

congenial,

.e.,

theological

context.

The

Be'[ir

mustthereforee viewed s the trailblazer fMilhamot,I.

This

assumption

s furtherorroborated

y

the numerous

oints

of

contact

hat

obtainbetween he

two

texts,

s

many

of the notes

to

the

text

will

indicate.

The

opening

tatementn

Milhamot,

I

reflects he

critical

ttitude oward

Averroeswhich

s

also found

in some

of

the

excursuses

f the

Be'ir. It

reads:

Since

his

opic

s one of

the

very

recious

nes

both

n

account

f

itselfnd because fthefact hatmany ther recious opics obe

explored

n

thisbook

willbe clarified

y

dint f ts

clarification;

yet

his

opic

being

ne

bristling

ith

ifficulties;

e

thought

hat,

with

regard

o

it,

we should

not

rely

on what

s

mentioned

n

Averroes'

pitome

fParva

Naturalia;

or he

nvestigation

here

s

notas

complete

s

it

ought

o have

been;

and,

moreover,

he

text

contains tatements

hat re

not

true,

s willbe

explained

n

this

ma'amar.18

As a rule,the theoriesdevelopedby Gersonidesby way of

criticism

f

Averroes n the

Be'fir

re

restatedn

Milhamot

without

distinct

olemical

reference. n

exception

s the

explicit

repu-

diation

of

Averroes'

hesis

imiting rophetic

orecasts

o

causally

strictly

eterminated

vents

(95.3-5).

Gersonides

argues

that

biblical

prophecy

lso

announced

happenings

hat

from

he

aspect

of

natural

causality

could

be

termed

accidental.

He

admits,

however, hat n terms f thecausality f thecelestialbodies all

happenings

re

determined,

he exercise

of reason and

free

will

16

See

Charles

ouati,

a

Pensde

hilosophique

t

Thdologique

e Gersonide

(Paris,

1973),

pp.

49

ff.

17

Levi ben

Gershom,

efer

Milbhamot

donai

Leipzig,

866),

115.14.

18

Milbhamot,

2.1-6.

[5]

GERSONIDES COMMENT RY ON AVERROES

5

Milbamot Adonai (1321).16 Yet it can hardly be assumed that that

first attempt included what is now the second treatise (ma tamar)

which deals with dream, divination and prophecy.

For

all

indications are

to

the effect

that

Milbamot, II (Chs. 1-8) is making

use of the Be iir. In Chapter 7 there is a distinct reference to it.

I

Chapter 2 was obviously written

in

fulfillment

of

the intention

expressed

in

Excursus III

of

the Be ur to treat the problem

of

determinism and free choice posed by the veracity of dreams,

within a more congenial, i.e., theological context. The Be iir

must therefore be viewed as the trailblazer

of

Milbamot,

II.

This assumption is further corroborated by the numerous points

of contact that obtain between the two texts, as many of the notes

to

the text will indicate. The opening statement

in

Milbanlot,

II

reflects the critical attitude toward Averroes which is also found

in

some of the excursuses

of

the Be ur.

It

reads:

Since this topic

is

one of the very precious ones both on account of

itself

and

because

of

the fact

that

many other precious topics to be

explored in this book will be clarified by dint of its clarification;

yet this topic being one bristling with difficulties;

we

thought that,

with regard to it,

we

should not rely on what is mentioned in

Averroes

Epitome

of

Parv Naturalia;

for the investigation there

is

not as complete as

ought to have been; and, moreover, the text

contains statements that are not true, as will be explained in this

ma amar.

18

As a rule, the theories developed by Gersonides by way

of

criticism ofAverroes

in

the Be ur are restated

in

Milbamot without

distinct polemical reference. n exception is the explicit repu

diation

of

Averroes thesis limiting prophetic forecasts to causally

strictly determinated events (95.3-5). Gersonides argues

that

biblical prophecy also announced happenings that from the aspect

of natural causality could be termed accidental. He admits,

however,

that

in

terms

of

the causality

of

the celestial bodies all

happenings are determined, the exercise

of

reason

and

free will

16 See Charles Touati,

Pensee Philosophique et Theologique e Gersonide

(Paris, 1973), pp.

17 Levi ben Gershom,

Seier Milbamot Adonai

(Leipzig, 1866), 115.14.

18

Milbamot, 92.1-6.


6/31

6

ALTMANN

[6]

being

he

only

means

of

deflecting

hem.

Anothernstance

f

criticismfAverroes

(Milhamot,

06.5-8)

as no

precedent

n

the

Be'ifr. he mostglaring,houghacit, epartureromAverroes

in

both

laces

s

the

uperimposition

f

the

strological

iewpoint

upon

an otherwiseristotelian

ystem

n

which stral

ausality

s

considered

obe

a

mere unction

f

elestial otionsnrelated

othe

nativity

rinciple.

ersonides

bviously

nderstands

y

heoften-

quoted

hakhmey ishpetey

a-kokhabhim

he

astrologers,

nd

n

Milhamot

105.30-32)

he makes distinct eference

o

nativity

(the horoscope). enerallypeaking,ne mightaythatwhen

writing

Milfhamot,

I,

Gersonides ecast

nd

developed

deas

already

xpressed,

orthe

most

part,

n

the

Commentary.

he

notes

o the ext

will

nable he

reader o form ome

nsight

nto

the

houghtrocesses

hat

ed

from

he

ommentary

o

Milbhamot,

I.

Gersonides'

ommentary

nAverroes'

pitome f

Parva

Naturalia

is extantnfourmanuscripts:19

1)

Bodleian

Ms.

Opp.

Add.

40,

38.5

(fols.

267r-299r);

ee

Ad.

Neubauer,

atalogue

f

heHebrew

anuscripts

n he

odleian

Library

Oxford,

886),

No. 1373

pp.

491-492).

The

colophon

gives

hefirst

fAdar

I,

5084

February

7,

1324)

s

the

date

of

completion.

he

manuscript

s

written

n

beautiful

panish

ab-

binic haracters.

he

excursuses

re

neatly

et off rom

hetext.

The sectionublishederesfound nfols. 88v,ine26-295r,

line

8. It formshe

final

art

f

he

ubchapter

ntitled

a-Shinah

We-Ha-

Yeqisah

De

Somno t

Vigilia)

f the second

ma'amar.20

2)

Berlin

Ms. Or. 1055.6

folios

unnumbered

nd,

partly,

n

incorrect

equence).

he

date

given

n the

colophon

grees

with

that

fNo. 1.

The

writing

s n Rashi

cript

nd

t

s faded

n some

places.

The excursuses

o

not

tand

ut.

They

re ntroduced

y

the bbreviation

,.

3)

Ms. Jews'

College,

ondon

43.6

(fols.

172-195).

he

date

stated

n

the

colophon

s

Tebhet,

084

November,

323),

which

19

Steinschneider,

ebr.

Ubers.,

.

155 ists

1

and

2;

Blumberg',

. x,

men-

tions

1,

2 and 4.

20

This

follows

he

precedent

f theLatin

vulgate

ersion

see

note

).

6

ALTMANN

[6]

being the only means

of

deflecting them. Another instance of

criticism

of

Averroes (Milbamot, 106.5-8) has no precedent in the

Be J

ur.

The most glaring, though tacit, departure from Averroes

in both places is the superimposition

of

the astrological viewpoint

upon an otherwise Aristotelian system in which astral causality is

considered

to

be a mere function ofcelestial motions unrelated to the

nativity principle. Gersonides obviously understands by the

of

ten

quoted

bakhmey

mishpetey ha-kokhabhim the astrologers, and in

Milbamot 105.30-32) he makes a distinct reference to nativity

the horoscope). Generally speaking, one might say that when

writing Milbamot, II, Gersonides recast and developed ideas

already expressed, for the most part, in the Commentary. The

notes to the text will enable the reader to form some insight into

the thought processes that led from the Commentary to Milbamot, II.

Gersonides

Commentary on Averroes Epitome ofParva Naturalia

is extant in four manuscripts:

19

1

Bodleian Ms. Opp. Add. 4

38.5

fols. 267r-299r); see

Ad. Neubauer, Catalogue oj the Hebrew Manuscripts in the Bodleian

Library Oxford, 1886 No.

1373

pp. 491-492). The colophon

gives the first

of

Adar II, 5084 February 27

1324

as the date

of

completion. The manuscript is written in beautiful Spanish rab

binic characters. The excursuses are neatly set off from the text.

The section published here is found on fols. 288v line 26-295r,

line 8. It forms the final part of the subchapter entitled Ha-Shenah

We-Ha- Yeqi ah e Somno et Vigilia) of the second

ma Jamar 20

2 Berlin Ms. Or. 1055.6 folios unnumbered and, partly, in

incorrect sequence). The date given in the colophon agrees with

that

of No 1

The writing is in Rashi script and it is faded in some

places. The excursuses do not stand out. They are introduced by

the abbreviation

~ N

3 Ms. Jews College, London 43.6 fols. 172-195). The date

stated in the colophon is Tebhet,

1084

November, 1323 which

19

Steinschneider,

Hebr. Obers.,

p. 155 lists 1 and 2; Blumberg

l

, p.

x men

tions I 2 and

4.

20

This follows the precedent of the Latin vulgate version see note 4).


7/31

[7]

GERSONIDES'

COMMENTARY ON AVERROES

7

is

obviously

mistake

f

the

copyist

who substituted

he

date of

the

completion

f

the

Commentary

n the

Epitome

of

De

Anima

(see Steinschneider, ebraiischeUbersetzungen,. 147). It is

writtenn Rashi

script

nd

smudged

n

many

places.

The

volume,

which ontains

ix

commentaries

y

Gersonides,

was

presented

y

Moses

Mendelssohn

to Chief Rabbi Hirschel

Lewin

of

Berlin

(later

London)

on

Purim,

5533

(1773).

See

Charles

Duschinsky,

The

Rabbinate

of

the

Great

Synagogue

ondon

from

1756-1852

(Oxford,

921),

p.

38,

n.

38. The

dedication

s

writtenn

Mendels-

sohn'sownhand.

The

section

published

here

s

found

on

fols.

187v,

ine

27-182r,

bottom

ine,

and it

is

the

final

part

of the

sub-chapter

ntitled

Ha-Shinah We-Ha-

Yeqisah

n the

second

ma'amar.

4)

Ms. Elkan Adler

1744

fols.

150v-186v),

now

designated

s

Ms. 2457

in

the

Jewish

Theological Seminary

f

America

here-

after

called

JTS).

It

has no

colophon

and

is

written

n Rashi

script.The sectionpublishedhere s foundonlypartiallyn this

manuscript

ince

a

number

f folios re

missing

t

the

beginning.

The text

begins

with

he words

hineh

iqsheh

anu on

line

197

of

our

edition

fol.

179r,

ine

1)

and

continues

o

the

end

(fol.

182v,

line

24).

It

is the

final

part

of the

sub-chapter

a-Shinah We-Ha-

Yeqisah

n

the secondma'amar.

In theedition hatfollows, heAverroes ext ommented pon

and Gersonides' thematic xcurses

which

are

set

offfrom

he

text)

are

printed

n

regulai type,

while

Gersonides'

unning

om-

mentarythe glosses)

appear

n

spaced

characters.

n

this

way

the

readerwill ee

at a

glance

what

s

Averroes' nd

what

Gersonides'.

A

moredifficult

roblem

resented

tself

y

virtue f the fact

hat

Gersonides

often

breaks

off he

quotation

of the Averroes

ext,

indicatinghe, nmany nstances, ery xtensive reasofomission

by

the use

of

the

abbreviation',i.

To

delete he atter nd insert

the

missing assages

would have altered he

specific

haracter f

the

Be'iir,

and

merely

o advise the

reader

to look

them

up

in

Blumberg's

dition

of Averroes'

Epitome

would,

obviously,

not

have

been

an

ideal

solution.

We

therefore ecided

to

reproduce

[7]

GERSONIDES COMMENTARY O AVERROES 7

is obviously a mistake

of

the copyist who substituted the date

of

the completion of the Commentary on the Epitome

of

De Anima

see Steinschneider,

Hebriiische

Ub

ersetz

ung

en

,

p. 147 .

t

is

written

in

Rashi script and smudged in many places. The volume,

which contains six commentaries by Gersonides, was presented by

Moses Mendelssohn

to

Chief Rabbi Hirschel Lewin

of

Berlin

later London) on Purim,

5533

1773). See Charles Duschinsky,

The Rabbinate the Great Synagogue London from 1756 1852

Oxford, 1921), p. 38, n. 38. The dedication is written in Mendels

sohn s own hand.

The section published here is found on fols. 187v, line 27-182r,

bottom line,

and

it is the final

part

of

the sub-chapter entitled

Ha Shenah We Ha

e q i ~ h in

the second ma Jamar

4

Ms. Elkan Adler 1744 fols. 150v-186v), now designated as

Ms. 2457 in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America here

after called JTS).

t

has no colophon and is written in Rashi

script. The section published here is found only partially

in

this

manuscript since a number of folios are missing at the beginning.

The text begins with the words

hineh yiqsheh lanu

on line

197 of

our edition fo1. 179r, line

1 and

continues to the end fo1. 182v,

line 24 . tis the final part of the sub-chapter

Ha Shenah We Ha

e q i ~ h in the second ma Jamar

n

the edition that follows, the Averroes text commented upon

and

Gersonides thematic excurses which are set off from the

text) are printed in regular type, while Gersonides running com

mentary the glosses) appear

in

spaced characters.

n

this way the

reader will see at a glance what is Averroes

and

what Gersonides .

A more difficult problem presented itself by virtue of the fact that

Gersonides often breaks off the quotation of the Averroes text,

indicating the, in many instances, very extensive areas

of

omission

by the use of the abbreviation

~ .

To delete the latter

and

insert

the missing passages would have altered the specific character of

the e Jur

and

merely

to

advise the reader

to

look them up in

Blumberg s edition of Averroes

Epitome

would, obviously, not

have been

an

ideal solution. We therefore decided

to

reproduce


8/31

8

ALTMANN

[8]

the

missing

assages

n an

Appendix.

he text

we used is

not

Blumberg's

riticalext

ut

the one found n

theJTS Ms.

2302,

(Adler, 1853),fols. 165r-174r, hich, houghmentionedy

Blumberg,

as

not

ncorporated

y

him nto

he

ritical

pparatus.

We found

his ext o containome

uperior

eadings.

he

missing

passages

re

ndicated,

hough,

lso

with eferenceo

their

ocation

in the

Blumberg

dition,

o which

hereader

s

in

any

case

con-

stantly

lerted

y

marginal

eferences.

In

the

ritical

pparatus

hefour

manuscripts

re

designatedy

thesigla (Oxford), (Berlin), (London) nd-wjNew York).

The

symbolsdopted

re those sed n the

Blumberg

ditions

f

the

Epitome:

]

stands or

mission;

>

for

ddition;

1

for

corrections

y

he

cribe;

2

for

orrections

y

later

hand.

It

remains

or

meto

express

hanks

o the ibraries

hat

kindly

gave

me

permission

o use the

manuscripts

ndicated bove.

My

sincere

hanks

re thereforeendered

o

the curators

f

the BodleianLibrary, xford; he Deutsche taatsbibliothek,

Berlin/DDR;

he

Montefiore

ndowment,

ews'

ollege ibrary,

London;

and the

Library

f

the Jewish

heological

eminary,

NewYork. also wish o thank

rofessor

lfred .

Ivry

or

ut-

ting

t

my

disposal

microfilms

f

the

Berlin

nd Londonmanu-

scripts.

ALTMANN

[8]

the missing passages in

an

Appendix. The text we used is not

Blumberg s critical text but the one found in the JTS Ms. 2302,

Adler, 1853),

fo s

165r-174r, which,

though

mentioned by

Blumberg, was not incorporated by him into the critical apparatus.

We fo un d this text

to

contain some superior readings

The missing

passages are indicated, though, also with reference to their location

in the Blumberg edition, to which the reader is in any case con

stantly alerted by marginal references.

In the critical apparatus the four manuscripts are designated by

the sigla

N

Oxford),

:l

Berlin), , London)

and

New York).

The symbols adopted are those used in the Blumberg editions of

the

pitome

[ ] stands for omission; < for addition; xl for

corrections by the scribe; x

2

for corrections by a later hand.

It remains for me

to

express thanks

to

the libraries that kindly

gave me permission to use the manuscripts indicated above.

My

sincere thanks are therefore rendered to the curators of

the

Bodleian Library, Oxford; the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek,

Berlin DDR

the

Montefiore Endowment, Jews College Library,

London

and

the Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary,

New York. I also wish to

thank

Professor Alfred L. Ivry for put

ting at my disposal microfilms of the Berlin and London manu

scripts.


9/31

[9]

GERSONIDES'

COMMENTARY

ON AVERROES

9

112#17

rnnn

vt

.I i

mbi

1D1107jIV

jj1mp

n

11"

3r

'

1r

1

t

7

j=

;u

.10

~W 1

nr"W9

1

'"ll

Blumbergi

43.7

1M

[2.=

*x

~;1TN

lp

BR

8j19p 1)

iiNDj

nlI

]8

Bodl.

Ms

nlM

PN

1

~

'

"'"1

30

il0

K 'W 0P1Z

nI ~ll l

'll K

f

n1 31lOpp.Add.

-

Tl

1

nlnlL

n3

yv

I? i

1

=3

7vim

Wiw=

tO

t-1

-171

i

3

i,713

'.11340.38.5=288

133n1Tn

K?

1V

1Dt

D

I

;

ilWIn KT1

4

PO

/

W

1j'

t

t'

;

1V

.134

6p

289

5

fi71?17tg

1 1

4

1

J

lT- '1K

-

21 3-

N

KN2

-I

T

Y

7.-Yigh1

an

tnwilt

-l1?3

1

1il

luI *f

'lNS;37

i

15wwttr

xll =73NT[43.14-43.111

1n1

1iP

Wrtu

nrp

1i

P

nl lilnt*p

I,a

1Pt

i

tl

-tquln in -17 inn n .nnpnz6 m?vl I :ti nnu

ion

r1irW1

t1m

intuon

lm

il'ini

.yDW?2

23

)jtn

n

V2

n

43.1

1bn bl b"1 rlt

1107

bIM

I

:l=

.1B

N3}1

1[44.1-43.151

131

"TI

1

0

11?.1obln

10

,Tln- :.Iw 1

O

nXIM

I'nl'

nxini ;

l:: t

n -m

r,

t1,

pm 15

1

See

Blumbergl,

4.8-43.6.

2

Cf.

Pines,

The Arabic

Recension," p.

111-117.

3

Blumberg2,

6.4:

ru'yd.

4

Ibid.: kihana.

Toufic

Fahd,

La Divination rabe

Leiden,

1966),

p.

41

defines

ihdna

s

a form

f divinationffected

y

ncantationnd invocation

of

the

tars.

t

is a branch

f

magic.

5

Cf.

Gersonides, ilbamot,2.10-11;

104.27-28.

6

Blumberg2,

6.5:

wahy.

7

Cf.Aristotle, e DivinationeerSomnum,, 462b28; 463bl; II, 464a5.

The Arabicversion

pposed

his

view,

s

Pines,

oc.

cit.,137,

147

has shown.

8

Aristotle,

hysics,

I,

5,

196b10

f.;

f.

Milhamot,

2.7-10.

9

Paraphrasing

verroes'

entence

44.3).

[9] GERSONIDES COMMENTARY ON AVERROES

,tD,

l:3K

[ tD tD P D ,,]tD ~ K ~ ]

[CtD,,, 1:3

]

9

C , O ~ il iltD i l ~ n , ~ n i l 31 ]tD

1 il] tvit

n31 ,nK ]Blumberg

1

[2 nWp::l N C N; l ~ I P m o m ~ ~ WN m ~ ; N ; nnw;,;, ~ B O d l ~ ~ :

c n :3

C K

,, tD tD

, , , ,

3

c n

K P tD

C i t ~

n tDilit

K

~ K ~

Opp. Add.

- , , ~ i t

n , ~ n : 3 1 ~ 3 1 i 1

, ~ ~

tD,n:31 31 tD il

K C P ~ C :I,4.38.5:3288

~ ~ ~ T : 3

K ~

n ~ O ~

K il

it tDitil

nKT

4

cop

K p tD C i t ~ , .C p

K289

5

n , , n 3 1 i 1 ~ C :3, C , :3 , , , , , nKTiI

f K:3

iI:3 C t D ~ K K ~ ~ i I itT

C :3 6 . i l K : 3 ~ K P tD C i t ~ , .tD,nil C,, tDit K

tDK

C ] ] 3 1 i t ~ 5

7 . i t , p ~ ,

i l T ~ i l K ~ t D n K ~ ~ ,on ,

n tDilit

K

n K ~ ~

t D n ~ C tD]KiI

K il C ~ ~ K N[43.14-43.11J n ~ p

t D n ~ ,

n ~ p ~ P

C i t ~ ,

i 1 ~ P

C t v ~ K

,

~

~

K

iI

i t ,

P

tD iI ~

, il

T

. i t P ~ : 3

K

itT

31 D K il

Y : 3 ~ ~ n ~ ~ 3 1 : 3

Cil

cn K K

CK n nKil

n tDiliI

8 . 3 1 ~ t D i I ~ , ~ t D : I ~ T ~ t D , ~ ~

43 15

~ K ~ i l

,nK

o ~ K it Cit:l ~ K ~ i t :::l[44.1-43.15] K ~ n , ~ o , , ) ~ 1

tD iI

K tD

n tDiI ~ : I

Cit

tD,tDit

n tDitit K n i t ~ : I

: I ~ P D O ~ C P ~ i t

n , ~ n i l

n i l ~ : I : I i I iI iI itT

tD,n:l

ilT

.ciI n :10 , , , , : : ~ 3 1 ~ : I D , n n ~ C ~ ~ K Cit , ~ 9

n tDiIiI

KtD:3

n tDit COpil

n t D i I ~ n ~ 3 1 ~ n

cn tDiI

C , p , , ~ i t n , ~ n i l t D

i I : 3 ~ D K

i l K : 3 ~ i I

, ~ ilK :I]iI n t D i l ~ n ~ 3 1 ~ n

COpil

15

1 See Blumberg

1

, 34.8-43.6.

2 Cf. Pines, The Arabic Recension, pp. 111-117.

3 Blumberg

2

, 66.4:

r u ~ y t i .

4

Ibid.: kihtina. Toufic

Fahd,

La Divination Arabe (Leiden, 1966), p.

41

defines

kihtina

as a form of divination effected by incantation

and

invocation

of the stars. It is a

branch

of magic.

5

Cf. Gersonides, Milf.zamot 92.10-11; 104.27-28.

6

Blumberg

2

,

66.5: waf.zy.

7 Cf. Aristotle, De Divinatione per Somnum I, 462b28; 463b1; II , 464aS.

The

Arabic version opposed this view, as Pines, loc. cit. 137, 147 has shown.

8 Aristotle, Physics 11,5, 196b10 ff.; cf. Milf.zamot 92.7 10.

9 Paraphrasing Averroes sentence (44.3).


10/31

10

ALTMANN

[10]

.l,1

10770

=f41m

0t2

"t1 ,

W,

1

.~"

3

1"n""

K

1~K nu

20

n12'r~8r1

n1"

n

Int

K

-2

-r

0l

n i

1-

r

n

1m 'i

v

25

Ex-

inK1

i pw ~

D

1,K

t

~tnN

l0

M

12

cursus

,

12

lCUSUS

I

11WI

11'TW

D0 f

'ni

b

2

11"'

Ir9

I1 1

MlI

nt3,VI n3

5

10

Cf.

Milliamot,

2.11-13;113.23-24;

14.24-27.

11

Blumberg2,

7.7:

al-jinn.

or

the

distinction

etween

ngelically

ediated

veridical

reams

nd

demonically

ided

sorcery,

ee

Franz Rosenthal

tr.),

Ibn KhaldanThe

MuqaddimahNew York,

1958), II,

157.

On the

much-

debated uestionwhetherorcery as maderedundantyprophecy,eeibid.,

I, p.

205 f.

12

Cf. the

rabbinic

assages

uotedby

Maimonides, uide,

1I,

6.

13

See

below,

ines

58-269.

14

Cf.

Maimonides, uide,I,

6.

15

Gersonides'

utspoken

enial

f

the

existence

f demons

shedim)

"a

rare

phenomenon

n

the

Middle

Ages"

follows he

precedent

f

Averroes

(see

Steinschneider,

ebr.

Ubers.,

. 155,

note

353b).

For

the

views

f

other

medieval

Jewish

hilosophers,

f.

Maimonides,

uide,

,

7;

Isaac

Albalag,

Tiqqan

Ha-De'ot ed.G. Vajda,Jerusalem,973), 9.17-50.16;

.Iasdai

Crescas,

Or

Adonai,

V. 6.

Nalhmanides,

erashat

Torat

Adonai

Temimah

Kitvey

Ramban,

d.

H.

D.

Cheval, ,

pp.

147,

149)

inked

hedenial f shedim

o

the

heresy

f

Aristotelianism.

10

ALTMANN

[10]

C ~ ~ N '

1 0 . C ~ )

~ T ~ '

C ~ )

p ' ~ ~ ~ N

C O p ~

1 ~ l ~ ~ i t

l N' , ~ ,

~ ~ ~ ~

CN

, ) ~ n M N ~

,nN

~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ CM'''it C ~

C M ' ~ t D

M , ) ~ n M i t

~ O Cit ~ , ~ , itT . C i t M ' ~ O ~ C ~ i t M ' ~ ' M , ) ~ n M i t ~ N' it

~ ,

~ ,

~ N i t N ittD i t N ' ~ ~ ~ ' C ,tDit N ittD

C O P ~ ' O ~ N ' ~ i t

CittD M , ~ n ~

M' tD

it it

, NtD ~ i t N ' ~ ~ i t

C ' ~ N

~ M , , ~ , n , ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ 'N ~ ~ ~ N N ' ~

20

i t n ' ~ i t i t M ' i t ~ M ~ i t , ~ ~ C ~ , ~ C ~ , , ~ ~ ~ ~ i t ' N ~ M N i t t D ~

Nit

J 1 , ~ n i t C N . i t n ' ~ i t i t

J 1 ~ i t

'N C , t D ~ i t

O , ~ , i t

M ~ i t '

J 1 t D ' ~ N i t

C p C i t ' ~ , ' ' ' J 1 ~ ~ C ,itit O ~ ~ ~ ~ C i t ~ i t ~ ' ' ' i t COPil'

. i l n ' ~ i t i t M ~ i t 'N it,tD it M ~ i t ~ iI iI tD

J 1 T ~

CM'''it

, ~ ~ ~ n ~

''''37

C ~ O ' ~

, ~ , N'it i t N ' ~ ~ i t ' O ~ N'iI C nittD C N'

~ N

25 Ex

r p i t ~

N'it

OOpittD

)'

N

M T

,nN

' O ~

COPit

it it tD

i t ~ ' ' ' '

12

C ~ P i t

cursus I

' ~ ~ t D )'

M , ~ , ~ n i t

COpiI it iI tD i t ~ ' ' ' '

i t ~ t D ~

Oit

i t N ' ~ ~ i t '

J 1 , ~ n i l '

,,, tD ,

J 1 , , , ~ , , ~ ) i t

M , n ~ i t , , ~ n M TN

i t ~ t D ~ i I ~

CiI'

37 COpil

M , ~ n i l M ~ O

M37 iI C37 'M' N ~ itT ' N ~ ~ i t ~ i I ' C 37it

M ' N ' ) ~ ~

,,,

tD tD

CittD

M , ~ n ~ ~ O l ' ~ i l i l t D t

' ~ N t D O N' 1 3 . C p ~ i t

30

~ O Cil

' ~ N

' ~ M M

t D ~ N l ' ~ i t M N

~ O

N' ilTtD

37 MtD

'N' C ~ N ' ~ i I

C ~ N ' ~ N'p tD N' CN C iI'Nit . i t N ' ~ ~ N'it o n ~ C ~ N ' ~ i I ~ 7 tD i t ~ t D ~ 2 8 9

C ~ N ' ~ C 'N'P M , n ~ i t N 1 N ' ~

CtD ~ ' M t D ~

M ' ' ' ~ ' ' ~ ) i t M,n:;:)it

M37 )' N'iI C ' t D i I ~ N iltD O O P ~

~ O CiltD

' ~ N t D 1 4 . ' ~ ~ ' t D ' ~

l N :;: C ,tDit COp it M ~ O l N M ~ N i t 1 37 C N' C i t ~ 3 7

'tDN l ' ~ i l i t 35

i t N ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ N t D

C N'

15.M J137it

37 tD

l ~ t D , ~ N ~ ~ ~ , ~ , C ,tDit

10 Cf.

Mil/:lamot,

92.11-13; 113.23-24; 114.24-27.

11 Blumberg

2

, 67.7: al-jinn. For the distinction between angelically mediated

veridical dreams and demonically aided sorcery, see Franz Rosenthal (tr.),

Ibn Khaldun The Muqaddimah

(New York, 1958), 11j , 157. On the much

debated question whether sorcery was made redundant by prophecy, see ibid.,

I,

p. 205

12 Cf. the rabbinic passages quoted by Maimonides, Guide, II, 36.

13 See below, lines 258-269.

14 Cf. Maimonides, Guide, II, 6.

15 Gersonides' outspoken denial

of

the existence of demons shedim - a

rare phenomenon in the Middle Ages - follows the precedent of Averroes

(see Steinschneider, Hebr. Obers., p. 155, note 353b). For the views of other

medieval Jewish philosophers, cf. Maimonides, Guide, I, 7; Isaac Albalag,

Tiqqun Ha-Deeot (ed. G. Vajda, Jerusalem, 1973),49.17-50.16; I:Iasdai Crescas,

Or Adonai,

IV. 6. Nabmanides,

Derashat Torat Adonai Temimah Kitvey

Ramban,

ed. H. D. Cheval, I, pp. 147, 149) linked the denial

of shedim

to the

heresy of

Aristotelianism.


11/31

[11]

GERSONIDES'OMMENTARYN

VERROES

1

7.9

in

nn3;s

rininIwm

r7

v

ll n1

nrin

-18

tui

v

I"W

2921

Vt?

1K21m2

D

$;1

083

1223

11

f

trfrmnirriviT

minnlrvninixvat1NW

i

t

6.61

bl

vt,in

X

IVII81171

1

'-,IV4'i t)4X?

JY

tVjn

40

Y 11hW3 #1328~91#1' 7.inLki~

98

817~sft

S

13

nllnTn98 UT~

89Y18 HT =] 1MrJ~t 121 MVS~~NWRtu tr

BS

t]Y9110 lt

$SW

.11NN41Wi161,71

'11

imin

3

8N31WMM

It721

nhIm

.1ur

Ttt#O-Ittl

5

4.

1T=3

111ntill

tlinwn3w

n

mk

145.4-44.101

11

9

-121

IDb

il)?

5.

8989 020#

titt

8300

1

m'WS~'I ;7910t '892lb 1~NWt; n~I;r

901,,th7H

2

1n

fltn0

D

1

90I$

1ihrn

11'1

1'?T

X

1t?'7?

Vnmrn

t

iisml

n

pm-vn

vvm

r?=1Vw~

0

t]0t~

18

;11

ttfs

799

91

I3173 YND 'y

$UM

fsjlD

DI

t

8799

t0

90

minvftnll

2N

vo341

I ?TM

vx

~ttly

77

1

Il9

1W17

yl~

zn

'12V?M

6Ill

1.-Iy

nX

j1nrr44

nn

DtWW17

I*Xn

XnD

ln?

Inivi4olmi ivtrizirm)tmiN-m

WrivW

N

t

0

r

vNt6ip'W

t

1mq

-

Sia

m

18ND

rv-

tvuttt 55

22

'il

9 h

,

n 011?318nIn'??n

I'it

XI

nN

'4N

1tt

mm~nnr

-,

in

IT

11;lnn~

3.716111t)

t1;1

,7

jftm2-toK

"[46.4-45.111

lb1

n

n

inwinnh

torimnionw

It1

3',

1

4

7ntpn-,l

-IT

inr

3999

1

46

'1--

1 DI?

MV

WSW

334t

3-,

iln2

V"x1

0

Chmw2

s1vqn

Dvivi

mnw

n-m

vviiniz

l

iw

16

Cf.

Charles

Touati,

La

Pensde

hilosophique

t

theologique

e Gersonide

(Paris, 973),p.

406.

17

Cf.

Milhamot,

14.25-34.

18

Cf.

Milhamot,

6.20-23;

111.24-35.

19

Cf. A. S.

Halkin,

d.,

Moshe ben

Ya'akov ibn

Ezra,

Kitab

l-Mubadara

wal-Mudhakara

Jerusalem,

975),

122.23

f.

20

Cf.

Aristotle,

e

Insomniis,

II,

462a30.

21

See

Blumbergt,

7.8-10

Appendix,

o.

6);

line980.

22

Cf.

Pines,

oc.

cit.,

pp.

114 f.

("clear"

and "hidden"

dream-visions);

Milhamot,

08.30-32.

23

Cf.

Aristotle,

e

Divinatione

er

Somnum,I,

464b6-15.

24

Cf.

F.

Rahman, d.,

Avicenna's

e

Anima

London,

1959),

172.12-173.1.

[11]

GERSONIDES' COMMENTARY ON AVERROES

11

45

44.8

45.4

l K iI:lil i l n ' ~ i I i I O i l ~ ~ ~ n 'tDK O : l : l ~ i I ' i l n ' ~ i I i I n ' i I ~ ~ i I K ~ n K iltZ?

i I ~ : l ~ i l t Z ? ~ n K ~ : l ~ l ~

l : l ~ i I iI n OK' ilK':3:l K iltZ?

i I ~ ~

i l K ' : 3 : l ~

~

ilT

o , n ~ i I

O : l : l ~ i I

n ~ i I ~ ilM iI O K ~ : l i l

'KtZ?

n K ' ~ : l O K' 16.K') 1 , ~

iI iln

K'

o nil

o nil '

i l K ' ~ : l

~ i I l : l ~ i I i l T ~ ilT , ~

O ~

tZ? tZ?

K'K

40

~ n t Z ? ~ ilK':3:lil O K' 17

. i l n ' ~ i l i l 'K iI'tZ? iI

, ~ , ~ ,:3 n , , n ~ i I n ~ i I

i I ~ ' i I nKT ~ K t Z ? : l ' ~ ' i l n ' ~ i I i I 'K iI'W'''iI , ~ , ~ o ~ n M , , n ~ i I

'K

~ , t Z ? : l '

1 8 . ' ~ n

'il

'K ' ~ ' W ' ' ' ' O i l W ' ~ ~ ~ ,tZ? tZ? K'

OK

K':3' i I l ~ l

K ~ i I ~ , ~ ':l ilW'

:ltC n , ~ n i l ' ~ K : l ' O i l ~ ' ~ ' : l ' , ~ , n , ~ n ~ K ~ , ~ , , , O : l ~ K ~ O K

, , ~ ~ ~ n ' : l ' ~ T i I ' i I ~ t D n ~ i I

~ K

~ [ 4 5 . 4 - 4 4 . 1 0 ]

~ ,

19 p ~ ~ T ' ~ O : l ~

iI iI

O : l ~ K

M : l ~ T i I i I ~ t C n ~ i I

ilT'

i I : l t C ~

O ' i )

n , ~

'''iltC

K'

M , , ~ n t C i l i I

i I , n ~ i I '

M ~ M t C i I ~ i I , n ~ ~ O i l ~

n ' t C ~ n W ' i I i I

K'il ilTiI

n ~ i I

20 i I ~ ' ~ i I K'il

i I : l t Z ? ~

' i )iI ~ K iI:l tC iI n i' ~ ,,, iI

iI:lil'

1 ' ' ' ~ ' 'K l ' ' ' ~ ' ~

pn i'iI' ' W ' ~ i l i I '

~ i l l ~ p ~ ~

' i ) ~ ' , ~ n

i I i : l n ~

50

O ~ t Z ? i I

1

ilT iltC i''' O ~ i ' ) ' ~ ~ 'W'K O :l :l i'iI l ~ l ' ' ' ~ ' i I ilT iltC i''' O ~ i ' )

M n n i l ~ ,n'K , , , , , ~ , ,

'tCK K'ilil

' ~ ' i l l : l i ' ~ t C O ~ i ' ) ' ~ M ' t C ~ i I

tC,n:3

'W'K

: l t C ~

,nK ' i' ilT' 21. ilT ,nK

'K:3n tZ? , ~ ~

' ~ t l ) i I ~

~ K n

K ~ f , n ~

'M tCiI

' ' ' 'K

iI i'''''iI

'tl)K , n i'iI

~ ' ) i I

K'ilil

l :l i'iI

tZ?,,,),,tl)

OK O :l

tl) K'

iI'p tC

K:3:3

O n:3

tC tl) ~ K n K ~ ' ~ ~ i ' : 3 ' ~ t l ) i I ~ 55

22

' ' ' 'pn,

i I ~ ' ' ' t C n ~ M

~ P ~ ~

tl) tl) OK' ,nK ' ' ' 'K T ' ~ ' i I

n , ~ n i l ilT , ~ ~ ' K ' : 3 ~ iI:lil 2'l.1 n)'

K'iIiI

o ni l 1 ~ ~ TK'

'[46.4-45.1lJ . ~ iI,nn

i I ~ ' ~ i I

n ~ ,

tl)):lil

n , n ~ ~

,on, O : l ~ K

,

K' 0 iI tl) 24 iI nil' , n ) ~ i I 'K i I ~ P ~ ilT l ' ' ' ~ '

iI'P

O ~ i ' ) '

1

' i'

W'):l,

f n

OtC

O K ~ ~ : l O:l K

O ~ o i l t Z ? , n ~

,tl) ,,,tC

o n ~ : l ~ ' i ' ' ' ~ ' o n i'iI K ~

i I ~ ' ~ i I n ~ i I

' i ) n ~ M ilT' . M ~ K i I

16

Cf. Charles Touati, Pensee philosophique

et

theologique de Gersonide

(Paris, 1973), p. 406.

17 Cf. Mill)amot, 114.25-34.

18 Cf.

Mill)amot,

96.20-23; 111.24-35.

19 Cf. A. S. Halkin, ed., Moshe ben Y a ~ a k o v ibn Ezra, Kitiib al-Mul)iidara

wal-Mudhiikard (Jerusalem, 1975), 122.23

20 Cf. Aristotle,

De Insomniis, III,

462a30.

21 See Blumberg

1

, 47.8-10 (Appendix,

No.6);

line 980.

22 Cf. Pines, loco cit., PP. 114 f. ( clear and hidden dream-visions);

Mill)amot, 108.30-32.

23 Cf. Aristotle, De Divinatione per Somnum, II, 464b6-15.

24

Cf. F. Rahman

s

ed., Avicenna's De Anima (London, 1959), 172.12-173.1.

46.4


12/31

12 ALTMANN

[12]

rI

-

t

'1")

.

nt)3?

I

In

t

TI

t I

13'K

I

V7.

1

i

1

"V

I?

I

'

V

n1",

M290

-"

g

1n

1

1t

;3.

,

I

?

,t

"2

,'n

m

-

it,

nto"

X,

112011

~W13

1"Iftir1=1

-12wrlnimt7rinnin1vi

r?~i

~a

omnwrintrininubivnm

itmr

monmrwrrinnviilmri

;li~313;1n

v

xl~

ron

47mK

rmimn

i-tw~m

z

in

ymon

imt

"1[46.15--46.71

"2V1?" lT1ftil

6 61111-1V3

-112"1

1

'jjj'"V=

It'['?'i

28

11-011-12,-11

j')rj

?3ktj

[27

nj31

t-,j

bloo

wtnvi

-1m

in]

70

46.15

n

Y3ti;lj

9.3-IV2?3ttl

Wlor

Y13l1Ytr;1

n

rrn

IV

nYt

25

Blumbergl,

6.8

Appendix,

o.

5).

26

Blumberg2,

0.11:

ribat.Cf. 55.11

(Blumberg1,6.16); Aristotle,

e

Somno

t

Vigilia,

,

454b11,

7.

27

Aristotle,

nalytica

osteriora,, i,

71al,

11-17.

See W.

D.

Ross,

Aris-

totle's

rior nd

Posterior

nalyticsOxford, 949),pp.

503-505

11,17).

28

Blumberg2,

1.8:

al-ma'rifa l-tasdiqiyya al-tasawwuriyya.

verroes

relates

he

distinction

etween ffirmation

(tasdlq)

nd formationf

concept

(tasawwur)

o

Aristotle's istinction

etween he

that

nd

the what

f a

thing

(Anal.Post.,71all). Theusehemakeshere f this pistemologicalistinction

is

anticipated

n

theArabicversion f

De

Divinatione.

or

Ibn

Baijja

reports

something

o

this

ffect;

ee

Pines,

p.

cit.,

p.

138.

29

The

terms

o'el

and

emsa'[

re

explained

n

Averroes'

pitome f

Aris-

totle's

rganon;

ee Jacob

en

Makhir's

Hebrew ersion

ntitled ol Melekhet

Higgayon

Riva

di

Trento,

559),

2r-v,

13v

and

passim.

The

passage

from

Shemtob

alaqera's

De'ot

Ha-Pilosofim

uoted

n

Blumberg2,

.

154,

n.

16

represents

he ame

Averroes

ext

with

ut

slightly

ifferentebrew ermino-

logy.)

As

Averroes

oints

ut,

tavsdiq

immat; asdaqah)

nd

tasawwur

siyyfr)

proceed

ach from wokindsof

priorknowledge,

iz.

"preparatory"

the

nominal

efinition

reparatory

o the

concept;

ontrariesr contradictories

preparatory

o

the

affirmation)

nd

"active,"

.e. causative

the

parts

of the

real

definition

re

productive

f the

concept;

the

syllogism roduces

he

affirmation).

There

s

some

onfusion

n

the

exts

n

respect

f he

erminology.lumberg1,

47.1

reads:

mast'a

we-nose'

o'el

we-emsa'i

which

orresponds

o one of the

Arabic

eadings

f

Blumberg2,1.9).

All mss.of Gersonides'

ommentary

n

the

text nd

the JTS

ms.

of the

Epitome

ead

simply: o'el we-emsa't.

er-

sonides'

commentary

estifieso this

reading.

n

place

of

emsa't (in

the

Epitome

f

Organon)

acob

ben

Makhirhas

haysharah,

hile

Falaqera

uses

mast'a,

oth

Hebrew

erms

endering

rabic

mauti',

s

does the

Latin

term

preparans Shields,

100.28).

The

reading

msa'i

could be

a

corruption

f

12

ALTMANN

[12]

, , n ~

:

, , ~ , n ~ ~

i ~ i

T, t

i

~ r n

t i

, N

t

~ i

i

~ N290

- ]37:1

~ i1 i1 ~ : 1 N ~ ~ N tON t t O ~ i 1

n t O i 1 ~

i 1 ~ N ~

i1:1Ci1 t1 ;'''i1n : 1 ~ . ; , ~ , n : 1 1 ]37i1 1 ~

t 1 i 1 ~

n ~ ~ N'it tON

t

]

,

~

~ t1it:1 : 1 t O n ~ i 1 n ~ i 1 n t O ~ , n

; , ~ , n i t

, n ~ ~ : 1

i t ~ ~ i 1

n ~ i t ~ 3 7 ~ n :I M:I 65

t ] ] ~ ; , ~ N t 1 M ~ ] : I ~ t1it:l : l t V n ~ i t

n ~ i t

t V ~ n t 1 ] ~ N 25.itT ,nN ~ N t V

3 7 ] ~ n i t ~ :ltV , n ~ 3 7 ~ : 1 i Tn

itit

t V N ~

l ~ i 1

~

t 1 i 1 ~ t 1 , n ~ ~

t i

tVN

; ~ ~ i 1

n ~ i 1

n37']M :I n t 1 ] ~ N . ~ M t V ~ i t tV,nit N'it'

] ~ ~ 3 7 3 7 , ] n ~

it i1tV

; [46.15-46.7] / , ~ , : l t V n ~ i t n ~ i t

26 t V i ~

,n'ittV

:137:1 it].,tV:I

28

n

~ i t ,

n n ~ N i t it 7 , ittV [27

n ~ ~ i t ~ C : I

N:1M; 70

46.15

n ~ i i t i t

~ 3 7 ~ : I i t ~ ,

2 9 . 3 7 ~ ~ N ~ 3 7 ~ i137 ''';' 1 ~ t

]

~ .,]tV 7 : ~ : I

25 Blumberg

1

, 46.8 (Appendix,

No.5).

26

Blumberg

2

,

70.11: ribat. Cf.

55.11

(Blumberg1, 36.16); Aristotle, De

Somno

et

Vigilia, I, 454b11, 27.

27 Aristotle, Analytica Posteriora, I,

i,

71a1, 11-17. See W. D. Ross, Aris

totle's Prior and Posterior Analytics

(Oxford, 1949), pp. 503-505 (11,17).

28

Blumberg

2

,

71.8: al-maf rifa al-ta$diqiyya wal-ta$awwuriyya. Averroes

relates the distinction between affirmation (ta$diq) and formation of concept

(ta$awwur) to Aristotle s distinction between the that and the what of a thing

(Anal. Post.,

71a11). The use he makes here

of

this epistemological distinction

is anticipated in the Arabic version of De Divinatione. For Ibn Bajja reports

something to this effect; see Pines,

Ope

cit., p. 138.

29 The terms pof el and em$af i are explained in Averroes Epitome Aris

totle's Organon; see Jacob ben Makhir s Hebrew version entitled Kol Melekhet

Higgayon (Riva di Trento, 1559), 2r-v,

13v

and passim. (The passage from

Shemtob Falaqera s Def ot Ha-Pilosofim quoted in Blumberg

2

,

p. 154, n.

16

represents the same Averroes text with but a slightly different Hebrew termino

logy.) As Averroes points out,

ta$diq (immiU; ha$daqah)

and

ta$awwur ($iyyur)

proceed each from two kinds of prior knowledge, viz. preparatory (the

nominal definition preparatory to the concept; contraries

or

contradictories

preparatory to the affirmation) and active, i.e. causative (the parts

of

the

real definition are productive of the concept; the syllogism p r o d u c e ~ the

affirmation).

There is some confusion in the texts in respect of the terminology. Blumberg1,

47.1

reads: ma a we-nose' pof el we-em$af i (which corresponds to one

of

the

Arabic readings of Blumberg

2

,

71.9). All mss. of Gersonides Commentary on

the text and the JTS ms. of the Epitome read simply: pof el we-em$af i. Ger

sonides commentary testifies to this reading. In place of em$af i (in the

Epitome

of

Organon) Jacob ben Makhir has haysharah, while Falaqera uses

ma a,

both Hebrew terms rendering Arabic

maute,

as does the Latin term

preparans

(Shields, 100.28). The reading em$af i could be a corruption

of


13/31

[131

ERSONIDES'

OMMENTARYNVERROES

3

nj'T?JnnY1~;jLrjt)

3-,l

OD

0

DS ;n

inurom

i*?jnr

5?ntvr

riv

vin

itvtt

ivninn

v2?nx=

rviinn

omvim

;Iown

orw

~n

ririmt

';

uvronmt?

?jts1nj?3fj'7',J-,?Xqi'r'i

M?Irl-11V "I 6 I13)n

1;10

1"?Vi

In~tt

-7-17-1?V

5

T1711,

1P~t3l"It

lf

"Ilwnrinmi'mIVI

1172l7pw

on~

t'lljp

n

;1

at

rswul

"23,-l

b

rip.)v

ItsY]N7lktl

m,'?

mn

v-12-Tis

mnlLrin

m6

i'714~Vl;lltJ133KI-17;1Wi~~

0

f

1-173-tT31

pv

qn??nwm-9-in

xNf?'1 '13

~i't

5?=

9snKs

viin,1T

x

n

nmri6vvrnovimm

nwrin

rlmtn lmtrivrmlf timamKsitimwti-,1:3l'IrVin

tZ~w-I

Imm

it

z

11VI-

n

i?3.7j7

6

~tul

I~l

lip-gr*

.1.7n

?v

7?

1

-snsr

iittvi

itv

vi~n

-liulintwi

VU-1

WN2S

111"W=73n

5

nn~rii

vin~

minn

7saz

?3*n

vtntri

imt

it

m

riv

N

mtr

v~t

rrm

llmn

rivw=

inngrivini

n1Lnl

m

N'

m-iivxriv

rimxrnimv

a

12sm

inninm

si

s~mn

lmirivmni

n~;

mast'a,

or

yedi'ah

masa'at

Blumbergl,

3.2-3)

s

reproduced

n

our text s

yedi'ah

emrsa'it

Appendix,

No.

15).

Narboni,

whose

Commentary

n the

Guide

II,

36)

contains

xtensive

uotations

rom

verroes'

pitome,

eems

o

have

understood

emsa'i

as

the

"middle term"

(ha-gebhul

ha-emrsa't)

f

the

syllogismGoldenthal,

p.

cit.,

3a, bottom).

Averroes'

Middle

Commentary

n

Anal.

Post.

pericopae

-2

of

book

1)

operates

with

the terms

tasawwur formatio)

nd

tasdiq verificatio)

ut does

not

mention

fc'il

and

mauti'

(see

L.

Minio-Paluello,

ed.,

Aristoteles

atinus,

IV 3 [Bruges-Paris,954],AppendixI, pp. 114f).

30

Cf.

Aristotle,

Anal.

Post.,

I,

ii,

71b19.

31

Ibid.,

II,

xix,

100a4-5.

See

Ross,

op.

cit.,

pp.

676

f.

32

Blumbergt,

8.15-49.2

Appendix,

o.

9);

52.11-53.3

Appendix,

o.

15).

33

Averroes

nsists

hat

hough

he active"

ause

n

divinations

the

Agent

Intellect

the

revealed

nowledge eing

nalogous

o

the

primary,

ndemon-

strable

premises

n

normal

ognition), prior

"preparatory"

nowledge,

i.e.

acquaintance

ith he

person(s)

ffected

y

the

revealed nformations

indispensable

such

knowledge

eing analogous

to

the nominaldefinition

preparatoryo the real one). Here Gersonides isputes his condition n

grounds

fhisown

personal xperience

s related

n

the xcursus.

n

Milhamot

(105.12-17;

107.18-33)

he

seems

to

revert o

Averroes'

osition

see

also

Commentary

n the

Torah,

Balaq, 196d).

[13]

GERSONIDES' COMMENTARY ON AVERROES 13

Excursus

M , ~ , M

J

il31 , il

M'

, 3 ,

)

Cil ~

3

1 ~

3

:J

M 3 , , il M

~ ~

, ~ il

~ ~ W i l pM31 C i l ~ WN

M , w n ' ~ i l

3 1 ~ ~ N : J i l ~ ' ' ' '

C i l ~

M ' : J n ~ i l

i l ~ W : J 31 M

'WN il31 '''il

MNT

C N

3 1 . M ' ~ ' p i l i l N

M31 ' N

M

~ ,

M

, 3 31 M N

N il

'31' )il l ~ i l ilM'N c p N'W i l N ' ~ 75

T ' ~ ' i l

C ~ ' ) i l C ~ ~ 3 1 : J :J il '31 N'ilW 31 n ' ~ ' p i l ~ M ) ' ~

C ' P ~ ,:J N ~ CN 3 1 ~ ~ N i l l ~ i l

i l

C'p W ~ CN C N Cil' N

1'''31

~ ~ M

N ilW

32

ilT

,nNW i l ~ : J ' ~ N W , ~ ~ ilN' W, l:JN' ~ N

C P ~ i l

, n , ~ , ~ n : J

C N

31 W il il

ilT

33

3 1 ~ ~ N i l

l ~ i l il C'p W

80

i l ~ ' P W

, , ~ ~

~ ~ ~ : J ' ' M ~ ' ~ W ~ N '

'N

' M n ) W ~ W ~ N '

'N il'P W

~ ~ : J

3 7 ~ ~ N i l 1 ~ i l

ilT

~ N

C

~ ~ M

N ~

il31 '''il

nNTW

:J'WnN' .CMW 'il

W N N ~

: M N'W

P ~

,nN

c n ~ ' ~ N

n ~ N M : S

C ~ ~ N

ilT'

.il:J 31 W

CW ' N W ~ 1N

, 'MW 'il

i l ~ ' P N ~

W Nil ilT' ~ P T i l '

: J '31 ' ~ ' 3 1

~ n : J M N' 'WN N'ilil W Nil n N N'ilil i l ~ ' i l M , n ~ ~ ~ : J ' M ~ ' ~ M

85

'M' ' W ' : J ~ ~ ' ' M ~ , ~ n , ~ ~ ~ , ~ n : J M N' 'WN

W'''Nil

N'ilW M ~ N M ~ '

M ~ ~ ~ '

~ : J 1 ' ~ ; ' ~ M 3 1 : S ~ ~ ' , : s ~ ~

M,n ),

~ , ~ n : J

'N':S 'WN

~ ~ 3 1

MNT

N ~ M ~

l NW

~ ~ N

' N ' : J ~ N'il i l T ~ ' ~ , ~ n : J M N' 'WN l )'N:J , ~ ~ ~

M ~ : J

;'''il i l N ~ n ~ ilT il il

CNW

3 1 ~ ~ N i l l ~ i l O ~ )

~ ~

O'p W il31 ''';'

ma (a,

for

yedt h ma aeat

(Blumberg

1

, 53.2-3) is reproduced in our text as

yedt h

em aeit (Appendix, No. 15). Narboni, whose Commentary on the

Guide (II, 36) contains extensive quotations from Averroes' Epitome, seems to

have understood

em aei

as the middle term

(ha-gebhul ha-eln a

e

i

of

the

syllogism (Goldenthal, Ope cit., 43a, bottom).

Averroes' Middle Commentary on Anal. Post. (pericopae 1-2 of book 1)

operates with the terms

ta awwur (Jormatio)

and

ta diq (verificatio)

but does

not mention

Jeri

and m utf (see L. Minio-Paluello, ed.,

Aristoteles Latinus,

IV 3 [Bruges-Paris, 1954], Appendix II, pp. 114 f).

30

Cf. Aristotle, Anal. Post., I, 71 b19.

31 Ibid., II, xix, 100a4-5. See Ross, Ope cit., pp. 676

f.

32

Blumberg

1

,

48.15--49.2 (Appendix, No.9); 52.11-53.3 (Appendix, No. 15).

33 Averroes insists that though the active cause in divination is the Agent

Intellect (the revealed knowledge being analogous to the primary, indemon

strable prenlises in normal cognition), a prior preparatory knowledge,

i.e. acquaintance with the person(s) affected by the revealed information

is

indispensable (such knowledge being analogous to the nominal definition

preparatory to the real one). Here Gersonides disputes this condition

on

grounds of his own personal experience as related in the excursus. In Mil/:lamot

(105.12-17; 107.18-33) he seems

to

revert to Averroes' position (see also

Commentary on the Torah, Balaq, 196d).


14/31

14

ALTMANN

14]

7"tum

nsb?

tp'

t

61to

tNT

Vwo

ll"I

t6

Y

2V

i

m

turv

I1'w

0

8803

t

828

NfW

8

VItt'';NL9@t88I

t

it'

Zt~

VBI

Pi

NiTV

ff Y8NW

/1313

l? in

t1mr7

6tv17312

Upim

im

1

n

N

Nn$

ft

290

;I

Yf'iz

*3

8#1N'9~~

29

i33

IXDC~ll

1N'NW

83imm J39

120810~ 010887t?

rm?1m3

-,l?0

omzmr13trj7

1

-rn3-9m,

r

uplm=2

12W

N"M

i

n

8(71

N

61t3

1D

*$21

DN

1WOR

MWI

l=3Iurr

5

.1-N'3iit1i

inr-im

n

'mivaiimcm

irv

mto"%

l

Ivlmnv

In%1Y3ntsw1

i1nown

ini

i?

wwn

fm-l

imT

~o

isvic7

'[47.11-47

1-1

4

in

wti1

iYvio

)?ti

wrtitvo

"1

itM

10n

matrt D

7.

-,TT

3

h

'47.13-47.121

'InI

ir'iry

y-ot't'3W

i3

ftrn

00

niltfR1,31,11171

IN-11Ir

willptl

Il'6m

il

00

1-irr

ln

1

i9novvir-7,in$

n

iiDN

W

m

5

wo13'

3v

i

N

v?

nrispn

womirim

rorimpm

*

7itit

mN

mWtrits

Dllmo

n

131f

l

'l

XI

~l"12P61wil

i

n

n

inbutm,6 ntv

rivz

ibmwn

~nnn

11.9

m

1117"6i

-11i

tv

vn?

It"Mt

nW3"u

"111:7

13

I'2

05

pmi

-trt74ir-m

gm

tipri?

un

i

l

nioinn

ri-

lliI-11yi-I

'Dn

6J8

It

V

n#@

Y11-'pn

1tv8.

MlxT

3nll2

3

[48.6-48.21M"'11

7X73Noft"Illw73

2Ii

IM

8.

;ibtvrT37

111DI73

-ranwinri

tinntm

3nl

03

,liv

ion

Irimv

.17mviliI i

on1S'

,1

lmt

im

4-gr

t*lm

.71

1

tinntv

9817:1

jpl

n

tim

rb

it

n13

u

niviv

init

mN8.

ftv3K

'm

tlitlttlts)

l?*i -111

trl

J?Iirlrm

rtovo

n

v??ln

,7ni

imi

,i2t91lm

in

nXT

31-t

-t'7

'

9V21

'131=t)

in

1rlm

n

31

m

t

m

8

rim

iblIS"I3%T?

.-Tn9

uimtswivint

3

nwn3m

n

imrn

'3m?

191mv

T

.fpW

9D3~i

nn

411WI

olv

3

1 l

rumorl

tNrtn

*ktl

7V

n

1TI

%

VZn

~m

n

iftmil

y

~olvir

"tl

6

r"61ni

1111

X

tN19-9'

N

M

1

9

111-l

4nVl

?%v

i

tW'

V

nit

20

-48,151

7

D1

tail-mmiz?

min

trion

imism

nt

Documents

[a. Altmann] Gersonides' Commentary on Averroes' (BookSee.org)