R. Yosef Kara's Commentary on Neviim Rishonim1

Introduction

The Kirchheim Manuscript

R. Yosef Kara's Commentary on Neviim Rishonim is one of several important Northern French Peshat commentaries2 which survived until modern times in only a single textual witness.  This work was preserved in what is known as the 'Kirchheim manuscript', which was subsequently lost during the Shoah.3  Fortunately, S. Eppenstein transcribed much of the manuscript before it was lost, thus preserving its content for posterity.4  This AlHaTorah.org edition is primarily based on Eppenstein's edition, yet it incorporates some important additions and improvements, as detailed in the following sections.

Restoring Missing Chapters from the Commentary on Yehoshua

MS Kirchheim was missing the early chapters of Sefer Yehoshua and, as a result, Eppenstein's edition of the commentary began only in the middle of Yehoshua 8:13.  Recently, though, we discovered evidence that two of the missing Yehoshua chapters of R. Yosef Kara's commentary survived by being incorporated in a commentary on the Haftarot found in MS Cincinnati JCF 1 (one of these two chapters was also preserved in four other related manuscripts5).  The text of the commentary on these two chapters can now be accessed at Yehoshua 1 and Yehoshua 5, and it contains several novel interpretations.  The evidence for the identification of R. Yosef Kara as the author of these chapters can be divided into three main categories:

A. Structure of the Cincinnati MS

There are dozens of manuscripts in which Rashi's Torah Commentary is followed by a Haftarot commentary collated from Rashi's assorted commentaries on the books of Neviim.  In MS Cincinnati JCF 1, however, Rashi's Torah Commentary is followed by a very different Haftarot Commentary.  In fact, the Cincinnati Haftarot Commentary could be more precisely described as a conflation of two disparate commentarial endeavors:

The remaining two Haftarot from these twenty-three are both from the beginning of Yehoshua (Chapter 1, the Haftarah for Simchat Torah, and Chapter 5, the Haftarah for the first day of Pesach), where we do not possess the commentary of R. Yosef Kara.  Thus, given that each of the other twenty-one Haftarot in this second section can be sourced to either Rashi or R. Yosef Kara,14 and that these two Yehoshua chapters of the Cincinnati MS commentary bear no resemblance to Rashi's commentary,15 it would appear that R. Yosef Kara's lost commentary on the early chapters of Yehoshua is their likely source.16  This hypothesis can be confirmed to a reasonable degree of probability by the following analysis of both the content and language of the commentary on these two chapters.

B.  Content Parallels

There are five interpretations found in the Cincinnati commentary on these chapters of Yehoshua which closely match interpretations found elsewhere in R. Yosef Kara's extant commentaries. Table 1 displays these parallels.  While one of these interpretations17 can be found also in Rashi,18 the other four parallels are distinctive interpretations of R. Yosef Kara which differ from those of his fellow Northern French commentators:

These cases thus lend considerable support to the claim that these chapters of the Cincinnati commentary were compiled from the commentary of R. Yosef Kara.24

C.  Distinctive Linguistic Markers

Additional evidence can be adduced from an examination of the distinctive formulations used in the Cincinnati commentary, virtually all of which find parallels in the writings of R. Yosef Kara, and many of which are unique to him.  Perhaps the most blatant example may be found at the end of the interpretation of Yehoshua 5:9: "ופשוטו של דבר ויישובו כתבתי, ולא תסור ממנו ימין ושמאל".  This assertive language is indicative of a commentator of significant stature, who possesses a formidable self-confidence, enough to command the reader to adhere to his interpretation.  Almost identical formulae can, in fact, be found in at least four other places throughout R. Yosef Kara's literary oeuvre:25 Shemuel I 1:3 ("ומפתרון זה אל תט ימין ושמאל"), Yeshayahu 8:18 ("ומן הפתרון הזה לא תטה ימין ושמאל"), Yeshayahu 11:11 ("ומן הדרך הזה ומן הפתרון הזה אל תט ימין ושמאל"), Kohelet 10:10 ("ומפתרון זה לא תסור ימין ושמאל").26  The phrase is scarcely to be found in any other commentaries.27

Additional phrases found in MS Cincinnati 1 which are hallmarks of R. Yosef Kara and are only rarely used by other commentators include:

In addition to the above phrases which have a distinctive R"Y Kara flavor, virtually every phrase which appears in MS Cincinnati occurs also in other instances in R"Y Kara's commentaries.38  The cumulative weight of the linguistic analysis, thus, constitutes very strong evidence for R. Yosef Kara's authorship of the Yehoshua chapters in the Cincinnati MS.

Textual Improvements Enabled by New MSS Findings

Since Eppenstein's edition was based on a sole surviving textual witness, it had little recourse in cases where the Kirchheim MS had lacunae or was corrupted.  The Cincinnati MS and its group of related manuscripts now provide additional information and insights which allow us to improve our version of the text of R. Yosef Kara's commentary on two other Haftarot from Neviim Rishonim: Shemuel I 1 (the Haftarah read on Rosh HaShanah Day 1) and Melakhim II 10 (the Haftarah read on Parashat Shekalim).39  An analysis of Table 2 and Table 3 will IY"H be coming soon...

Acknowledgments and Manuscript List

AlHaTorah.org's edition of R. Yosef Kara's Commentary on Neviim Rishonim utilizes a number of manuscripts.40  We gratefully acknowledge the libraries which house them for preserving these texts for posterity:

We also thank Mosad Harav Kook for their gracious generosity in granting us permission to utilize their edition (Jerusalem, 1972) of R. Yosef Kara's commentary on Melakhim II.

Finally, we express our appreciation to the staff of the Institute of Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts for all of their assistance.

×