Commentators:R. Avraham ibn Ezra/0

Ibn Ezra – Intellectual Profile

This page is a stub.
Please contact us if you would like to assist in its development.

Ibn Ezra

Name	R. Avraham ben Meir Ibn Ezra ר' אברהם בן מאיר אבן עזרא, ראב"ע
Dates	1092 – 1167
Location	Andalusia / Italy / Provence / France / England
Works	Commentaries on Torah and part of Nakh, math, science, and grammar works.
Exegetical Characteristics
Influenced by	R. Saadia Gaon, R. Yonah ibn Janach, R. Yehudah Hayuj
Impacted on	Most Jewish Bible commentators. His though great impact on Chasidei Ashkenzaz

Background

Life

• Name – Avraham ben Meir ibn Ezra¹
• Dates – 1088/89-1164 or 1092-1167²
• Location –  Andalusia, Italy, France, Provence, England.³
• Education – Ibn Ezra was a polymath, engaging in many disciplines including Bible, Talmud,⁴ Midrash, grammar and philology, philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, astrology,⁵ and poetry.⁶
• Occupation – Poet, teacher,⁷ and Bible commentator
• Family – Not much is known of Ibn Ezra's family. It is possible that he sired five children,⁸ but only one is known by name,  Yitzchak, who was a poet of note.⁹ It is possible that he predeceased his father.¹⁰ 
• Teachers – 
• Contemporaries – R. Yehuda Ha-Levi,¹¹ Rabbi Moshe ibn Ezra,¹² Rabbi Joseph ibn Tzadik,¹³ Rashbam, R. Tam.¹⁴
• Students – 
• Time period – Ibn Ezra lived during the Almohad's invasion of Moslem Spain and their forced conversions of Jews to Islam on pain of death. This likely contributed to Ibn Ezra's leaving of Spain and his subsequent wanderings.¹⁵ He wrote an elegy, "אֲהָהּ יָרַד עֲלֵי סְפָרַד", lamenting the destruction of the Jewish communities in Spain in the aftermath of the invasion.¹⁶  In addition, the first (1095) and second crusades.(1150) took place during his lifetime.

WorksIbn Ezra was a prolific writer, leaving behind many works in a variety of fields from poetry to astronomy:

• Biblical commentaries –
• Ibn Ezra wrote a commentary on all five books of the Torah,¹⁷ Yeshayahu,¹⁸ Trei Asar, Tehillim,¹⁹ Iyyov, the five Megillot,²⁰ and Daniel.²¹
• It is possible that Ibn Ezra wrote on the other books as well, as he himself periodically refers his reader to such explanations,²² but these works have not survived.²³  The commentaries on Mishlei and Ezra-Nechemyah attributed to him were likely authored by Moshe Kimchi.²⁴ 
• Ibn Ezra is somewhat unique among commentators in having written two distinct commentaries for each of several books, including Bereshit, Shemot, Trei Asar, Tehillim, Esther and Shir HaShirim.
• Grammar – Ibn Ezra wrote several grammatical works including: ²⁵ספר מאזנים, ספר צחות²⁶, שפת יתר,²⁷ שפה ברורה²⁸, and יסוד דקדוק²⁹.  He also translated several works of R. Yehuda Ibn Chayyug into Hebrew.
• Astronomy and mathematics –   Ibn Ezra wrote many astrological works including: Reshit Hokhmah,³⁰ Safer Ha-Te’ammim,³¹ Keli Nechoshet,³² Ta’ame Luhot Al-Ku’arizmi, ³³ Sefer Ha-Ibbur,  Response to Three Questions of Rabbi David Narboni, and Sefer Ha-Me’orot³⁴

• Rabbinics – No Talmudic novellae or Halakhic codes of Ibn Ezra are extant.  There is, though, one citation that might testify to his having written on the Talmud.  In his introduction to his commentary on Megillat Esther, R. Zecharyah b. Saruq writes, "ואנכי ראיתי חדושי הראב"ע מסכת קידושין והם בתכלית הדקות והאימות".
• Philosophy / Jewish thought – Ibn Ezra's philosophical views can be found scattered throughout his Torah commentaries, but he also wrote several works which heavily focused on such issues. His work, יסוד מורא וסוד התורה, discusses the rationale behind Biblical commandments.³⁵  His ערוגת המזימה פרדס החכמה deals with the existence of God, while ספר השם, as its name suggests, discusses the names of God. 

Torah Commentary

Characteristics

• Verse by verse / Topical – Ibn Ezra's commentary is generally a local, verse by verse commentary, marked by brevity and an emphasis on grammar and linguistics. However, there are many exceptions where Ibn Ezra includes lengthy discussions of philosophical and other issues³⁶ including long excurses on God's name,³⁷ the Priestly Garments, Ten Commandments,³⁸ the Golden Calf and Aharon's role in the sin,³⁹ and Moses' request to see the face of God.⁴⁰
• Language – Ibn Ezra, somewhat unique among commentators of his era who came from Islamic lands, wrote his commentary in Hebrew rather than Arabic.⁴¹  Ibn Ezra's language is often cryptic and obscure,⁴² making it difficult to understand.⁴³
• Peshat and Derash – Ibn Ezra distinguishes between the authority he grants the interpretations of the Sages in legal and narrative material, finding their words binding with regards to the former but not the latter.⁴⁴
• Narrative material – According to Ibn Ezra, aggadic interpretations which are not in keeping with the literal meaning of the text do not have to be taken at face value.⁴⁵
• Legal material⁴⁶

• Grammar - Ibn Ezra's commentary is characterized by a heavy emphasis on grammar. He believed that knowledge of grammar is crucial to understanding the Biblical text, writing in the introduction to his Torah commentary: "ובעבותות הדקדוק נקשר".  See below ("methods") for discussion and examples of his grammatical insights.

• Philospohy See Ibn Ezra's comment on Gen. 18:21 and Ps. 1:6.
• Numerology - See Ibn Ezra on Ex. 3:15.

Methods

• Programmatic statements / Introductions – In his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ibn Ezra lays out his methodology in interpreting the Biblical text. He first discusses and rejects four distinct approaches to Biblical exegesis, and then presents his own.
• Grammar
• Scripture uses abridged phrases and sentences. See I.E. on Gen. 2:9; Gen. 6:13.
• Scripture often omits prepositions. The omitted preposition is to be supplied by the reader. See I.E. on Ex. 20:11.
• Scripture at times employs an adjective but leaves out the noun which it qualifies. See I.E. on Ecc. 10:1.
• At times Scripture omits the subject or object in a verse because it is implied by the verb used. See I.E. on Gen. 25:25; 48:1; 50:26.
• The vav is not always to be translated as "and". At times it is not to be translated. See I.E. on Gen. 1:2.
• When a verb in the singular governs a noun, the verb refers to each one of the plural. See I.E. on Gen. 49:22; Ecc.10:1.
• Scripture employs superfluous letters. See I.E. 1:5.
• Scripture at times employs the imperfect with the meaning of a perfect. See I.E. on Ex. 15:1.
• Scripture at times employs the perfect with the meaning of an imperfect. See I.E. on Gen. 23::13.
• The perfect is at times to be observed as a pluperfect. See I.E. on Gen. 2:8
• Reason
• Linguistics / Philology
• Use of cognate languages – Ibn Ezra noted that  Hebrew and Arabic sister languages and he occasionally uses Arabic to explain Hebrew words.

Themes

• Philosophy –
  
• • God – God is incorporeal, God is the All. Purpose of man is to know God, obey His laws, and cling to God.
    
  • The Precepts:  According to Ibn Ezra’s calculations, there are only about sixty mitzvot in the Torah, though he believed that each one has infinite implications.⁴⁷
  • "Every precept, be it minor or major, must be weighed in the scale of one's heart wherein the Eternal has implanted some of His wisdom. Thus if there appears something in the Torah that is intellectually impossible to accept or contrary to the evidence of our senses then we must search for a hidden meaning. This is so because intelligence is the basis of the Torah. The Torah was not given to ignoramuses.  Man's intelligence is the angel which mediates between him and his God. (Ibn Ezra Introduction to Commentary on the Torah).
  • Ibn Ezra distinguished among three types of mitzvot.
  • Rational laws. Ibn Ezra refers to these as pikkudim (deposits) because God deposited them in the mind, and they were known via human reasoning even before the Torah was given.⁴⁸ These include civil laws and injunctions against incest, adultery and the like.⁴⁹
  • Symbolic precepts. This category includes commandments that serve as reminders of the rational laws or of precepts that all Israelites, both men and women, are obligated to be conscious of at all times. The Sabbath, which recalls creation, is an example.⁵⁰
  • Esoteric commandments.  This group inlcudes commandments that possess a purpose that only a few can fathom.  An individual is obligated to observe  these commandments even if he does not understand their purpose or function.⁵¹ 
• Defense of Rabbinic Judaism against attacks by Karaites and others.
• Astrology – Ibn Ezra often speaks of astrological phenomenon and the role of the stars in determining what will take place on earth.  For example, he notes that each nation has its own unique constellation that guides it, while Hashem alone guides Israel.⁵² He states that the arrangement of the stars reveals what is new and destined for each day, reflecting the mind of Hashem.⁵³

Textual Issues

• Manuscripts – 
• Printings – 
• Textual layers – See Ibn Ezra's Torah Commentary for discussion of Ibn Ezra's own additions to his First Commentary.

Sources

Significant Influences

• Earlier Sources –
• R. Saadiah Gaon (892-942 C.E.)
• R. Moshe, Ha-Kohen ibn Giqatilah(11th century)
• R. Solomon ibn Gabirol.(1020-1070 C.E.)
• Grammarians - R. Judah ibn Chayyug ( c. 950-1000), R. Jonah ibn Janach (c. 920-c 970); R Menahchem ben Saruk (c. 910- c. 970 C.E.); Dunash ben Labrat (920-990 C.E.)
• –
• Teachers – 
• Foils – Post Talmudic Midrashic commentaries on Scripture . He writes: [The midrashic method] " was adopted by the scholars in the land of the Greeks and Romans,They do not rely on grammar but rather on Midrashic exegesis... Since the the interpretations quoted in these works are already found in the books of the ancients, why do these later interpreters tire us by writing them again....Anyone with a little bit of intelligence and certainly one who has knowledge of the Torah can create his own Midrashim. The Midrashic interpretations are like clothes to the naked body. Concerning such interpretations our sages of blessed memory said, a verse never loses its literal meaning." (Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Pentateuch; translated and annotated by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur Silver; N.Y. 1988. pp.11;13.).
• Karaitic Commentaries.
• Ibn Ezra concludes his introduction to his commentary on the Pentateuch as follows: "Heaven forbid that we should join the Sadducees who claim that the traditions of the Rabbinic sages contradict the literal meaning of Scripture and the rules of grammar. The fact of the natter is that our ancient sages are true and all their words are true. (Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Pentaeuch;Translated and Annotated by H. Norman Strickman & Arthur Silver; New York 1988, 17-19).
• Christian Commentaries.
• The third approach (approach to Biblical interpretation) is the way of darkness and gloom.... This is the approach of those who invent secret explanations for everything in Scripture (Christian Theologians).  They believe that the laws and statutes of the Torah are riddles. I will not expend much time answering them for, they are a people who do err in their heart (Ps. 95:10)....   we must interpret literally, take as it is written and believe  everything in the Torah which does not contradict reason.  We should not grope walls as the blind do...  Why should we turn what is evident into mysteries? 
• Isaiah 7:14 :Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
• "It is to me a matter of surprise that there are those who say the prophet here refers to their god. This can not be so, for  the sign was given to [King] Ahaz, and the man they consider god  was born many years afterwards. Furthermore  , the prophet says 'Yea, before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land [Syria and Ephraim, whose two kings thou hast a horror of], shall be forsaken.' Now Syria and Ephraim were wasted in the sixth year of King Hezekiah" thus the prophecy refers to the 8th cent. B.C.E. and not to the first century B.C.E.
• And The Lord Appeared:  "Behold, a few say that God is three men. He is one and he is three and they are inseparable They forget that Scripture expressly states and the two angels came to Sodom at even ( Gen. 19:1)." The latter clearly shows that the three are separable and can not refer to God who is one.

Occasional Usage

• –

Possible Relationship.

• According to Ezra Fleischer, evidence from the Cairo Geneza reveals that Ibn Ezra's son Isaac, married Judah Ha-Levi's daughter.⁵⁴ However, it should be noted that in all his references to Judah Ha-levi in his commentaries, Ibn Ezra never refers to Judah Ha-Levi as his father in law.

Impact

Later exegetes⁵⁵ 

• Rabbi Yehudah He-Chasid⁵⁶
• Rabbi David Kimchi (1160-1235)
• Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman (1195-1270)
• Rabbi Levi ben Gershon (1288-1344).
• Rabbi Don Yitzchak Abravanel (1437-1508).
• Maimonides - The many parallels between the teachings of Ibn Ezra and those of Maimonides (1138–1204) have led some to suggest that the works of Ibn Ezra influenced Maimonides.⁵⁷ Ibn Ezra also impacted on the Chasidei Ashkenaz.⁵⁸ 

Supercommentaries

• Filwarg, Yonah. Benei Reshef. Petrogrd , 19:00
• Krinsky, Yehudah Leib. Mechokeke Yehudah, New York 1975.
• Lipshitz, Avraham.Pirush R. Avraham ibn Ezra Al Hoshe'a., New York, 1988.
• Netter, Shelomo Zalmen. Pirush al Ibn Ezra (in Horeb editions of Mikra'ot Gedolot. New York Berlin, 1928)
• Meijler, Yitzchak. Ezrah Le-Havin, Saint Petersburg. 1902.
• Shemual ibn Motot. Megillat Setarim in Margaliot Tuva.Jerusalem, 1973
• <address>Simon, Uriel. Shenei Pirushei R. Avraham ibn Ezra Le-Terei Asor; Kerech Alef, Hoshe'a ,Yo'el, Amos. Israel, 1989.</address>
• <address>Sheinfeld, Nechemiah. Da'at Ezra.  Mosad Ha-Rav Kook. Jerusalem, 2010.</address>
• <address>Sherim, Yitzchak. Be'er Yitzchak. Israel, 5789.</address>
• <address>Yosef Ben Eliezer Tov-Elem Ohel Yosef in Margaliot Tuva.Jerusalem, 1973.</address>

¹ Ibn Ezra's father's name was actually Meir, not Ezra.  Ibn Ezra was simply the name by which the family was known. See Ibn Ezra's Introduction to his Torah commentary, where he writes: "ויהי פתח דברך מאיר, לעבדך בן עבדך מאיר. ומישועות פניך תבא עזרה, לבן אמתך הנקרא בן עזרא".  See also Tosafot Taanit 20b who points to the Ibn Ezra family name as an example of a "nickname"..

² Due to conflicting data in several manuscripts, the dates of Ibn Ezra's birth and death are disputed. For a discussion of the issue, see: י.ל. פליישר, "באיזו שנה מת רבי אברהם אבן עזרא?" בתוך: ר"א אבן עזרא: קובץ מאמרים על תולדותיו ויציוריו (תל אביב, תש"ל): 5-16. Fleischer cites a manuscript from the Vienna national library, Kraft catalog number XXXI-39, which states that Ibn Ezra died on a Monday, on the first day of 1 Adar 4927 (January 23, 1167) at the age of seventy-five. If this date is accepted, then Ibn Ezra was born in 1092. [See also M. Friedlander, The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah (London, 1873), p. xxvii n. 54.] However, in Ibn Ezra's introduction to his second commentary he states that he was 64 when he began to write it and several manuscripts include a note at the end of the Shemot commentary which states that he finished it in 4913 (1153). This would set his date of birth at (latest) 1088-89 [See צ. גרץ, דברי ימי ישראל, מתורגם ע"י ש. פ. רבינוביץ, כרך 4, (וורשא, 1916): 212] and would make him 78-79 (rather than 75) in 1167. Fleischer, thus, questions the 1167 date, preferring to accept that Ibn Ezra was 75 at death, but that he must have died earlier, in 1164.

³ It is not clear what forced Ibn Ezra to leave Spain and begin his journeying.  In his introduction to his commentary on Eikhah, he writes, "הוצאתני מארץ ספרד חמת המציקים" but he does not specify to which troubles he is referring, the Almohad invasions or perhaps his personal penury. Either way, his wanderings impacted his works on many fronts. Since his audience in Christians lands did not speak Arabic, he wrote in Hebrew.  This probably contributed to the fact that while the Arabic works of his predecessors (R. Saadia, Ibn Chiquitilla, and Ibn Balaam) have not survived, his have.  His travels also brought him into contact with many people, outside influences, and differing outlooks which he would not have encountered in Moslem Spain, including other sects such as the Karaites. This both enriched his commentary (he cites many diverse people and opinions) and forced him at times to take strong polemical stances, especially against the Karaites.

⁴ Ibn Ezra's commentary reveals a knowledge of Talmudic literature. According to Ezra-Tzion Melammed,  מפרשי המקרא (ירושלים, 1978): 678-694, Ibn Ezra refers to Rabbinic literature about 500 times.  He is quoted by Tosafot on Rosh HaShanah 13a as engaging in discussion with R. Tam with regards to the Talmudic passage at hand, also attesting to his Talmudic knowledge . Nonetheless, Talmud was not Ibn Ezra's primary field of study and it should be noted that Rabbi Shelomo Luria did not consider Ibn Ezra to be a Talmudist ("לא היה בעל תלמוד"). He charges that Ibn Ezra attributed Biblical laws to the Rabbis and Rabbinical laws to the Bible and claims that he permitted that which is forbidden and prohibited that which is permitted, concluding that his exegesis is not to be followed in matters of law . (Rabbi Shelomo Luria in his Introduction to the Yam Shel Shelomo on Tractate Chullin).

⁵ For discussion of Ibn Ezra's attitude towards astrology and how it influenced his exegesis, see Y. Langermann, "Some Astrological Themes in the Thought of Ibn Ezra", in Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra: Studies in the Writings of a Twelfth Century Polymath, eds. I. Twersky and J. Harris (Massachusetts, 1993): 28-55 and ש. סלע, אסטרולוגיה ופרשנות המקרא בהגותו של  אברהם אבן עזרא (רמת גן, 1999).  Ibn Ezra believed that astrology is a true science and was not only a student of the discipline but also a practitioner of its arts. He authored a number of works dealing with astrology, some of which were translated into Latin, and he played a major role in spreading the science in his travels.

⁶ Many of Ibn Ezra's poems have been collected by D. Kahana in his book, רבי אברהם אבן עזרא: קובץ חכמת הראב״ע (ורשה, תרפ"ב). See also the Ben Yehuda Project for a collection of his poems available online. In one of these, Ibn Ezra himself attests to his early poetic career, writing: "לפנים בנערים הבינותי שירים / בצואר העברים  נתתים לענקים" (ibid. p.22).  His poems are a source of much biographical information, speaking of his wanderings, poverty, and misfortunes. Thus, for instance, he humorously describes his threadbare cloak, "מעיל יש לי והוא כדמות כברה לחיטה להנפה או שעורה" (ibid, p. 11).  Elsewhere he laments his inability to make a living, "איגע להצליח ולא אוכל / כי עיותוני כוכבי שמי / לו אהיה סוחר בתכריכים / לא יגיעון אישם בכל ימי"  (ibid, p.10). One poem speaks of the illness which prompted his vow to expound upon the Torah ("ונדרתי לאל נדר י בחליי לבאר דת בהר סיני נתונה", ibid, p.70). Two of his poems are well known to all, having been incorporated among the songs sung on Shabbat, "כי אשמרה שבת" and "צמאה נפשי" (originally written as an introduction to the prayer of "נשמת כל חי").

⁷ During his wanderings it seems that Ibn Ezra supported himself by tutoring and writing commentaries for various wealthy patrons. In the introduction to his commentary on Eikhah, he writes:"ואני אברהם ב״ר מאיר מארץ מרחקים / הוצאתני מארץ ספרד חמת המציקים / וספרי אלהי בגלותי היו בידי מחוקקים".  He might also be alluding to such patrons in his introductory poem to the Torah, with a double entendre: "וכל תומכו מאושר".  It is likely for this reason that Ibn Ezra wrote more than one edition of his commentary on several books (Bereshit, Shemot, Trei Asar, Tehillim, Esther and Shir HaShirim), each for a different sponsor.

⁸ See his Second Commentary to Shemot 2:2 where, in discussing how to determine dates of birth, he writes, "I myself have tried it five times", perhaps implying that at the time of the writing, he had five children. [It is possible, however, that he is not speaking of his own family at all, but how he attempted to determine the dates of birth of other children.]

⁹ Yitzchak is reported to have converted to Islam while in Babylonia. See Chapter 3 of Al-Charizi's ספר תחכמוני where he writes, "וְיִצְחָק בְּנוֹ גָּם הוּא מִמְּקוֹר הַשִׁיר שָׁאָב. וְעַל שִירֵי הַבֵּן מִזִּיו הָאָב. אַךְ בְּבוֹאוֹ לְאַרְצוֹת מִזְרַח. כְּבוֹד ה' עָלָיו לֹא זָרָח. וְהֵסִיר מֵעָלָיו מְעִילֵי הַדָּת הַיְקָרִים. וּפָשַׁט אֶת בְּגָדָיו וְלָבַשׁ בְּגָדִים אֲחֵרִים.".  In a poem, "יריבוני עלי עזבי ברית אל" attributed to Yitzchak (though not all agree that he is fact the author), he confesses to his conversion, but claims that it was but an outward show ("ואם אומר משגע הוא "נביא א-ל, ואודנו בראשית כל תפלה, בפי אומר ולבי יענני: מכזב את ועדותך פסולה), closing with a plea for forgiveness, "כבר שבתי לצל כנפי שכינה / אבקש ממך הא-ל מחילה".  See, though, J. L. Fleisher, "Eleh Toledot Yitzhak ben Avraham" Apiryon 5:1 and D. Kahana, Rabbi Avraham ibn Ezra Vol. 2 (Warsaw, 1922):78-81 who dispute the allegations of conversion. According to Kahana, Yitzchak’s patron converted to Islam and the apostasy was mistakenly attributed to Yitzchak.

¹⁰ See Ibn Ezra's heartrending poem, "אבי הבן" where he speaks of the death of his son: "אֲבִי הַבֵּן קְרַב לִסְפֹּד, כִּי אֵל מִמְּךָ רִחַק  / אֶת-בִּנְךָ אֶת-יְחִידְךָ אֲשֶׁר אָהַבְתָּ, אֶת יִצְחָק... אַךְ לָרִיק יָגַעְתִּי וְיָלַדְתִּי לַבֶּהָלָה / כִּי-אֵיךְ יִשְׂמַח לִבִּי – וַיִּגְוַע וַיָּמָת יִצְחָק".  Some, however, have suggested that the poem is not a lament over Yitzchak's death, but over his apostasy (see the previous note).

¹¹ Ibn Ezra was on close terms with Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi. In his Biblical commentary, he cites him over 20 times. Various traditions even suggest that there were family ties between the two. Some claim that Ibn Ezra's son Isaac was married to Yehuda HaLevi's daughter.  [See שלמה ד. גויטיין, "רבנו יהודה הלוי לאור כתבי הגניזה", תרביץ כ"ד (תשט"ו - 1955): 141-143]. Others claim that Ibn Ezra and Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi were cousins, while yet others suggest that Ibn Ezra married R. Yehuda HaLevi's daughter [See, for example, Abarbanel on Shemot 2:2, where he refers to Yehuda HaLevy as Ibn Ezra's "חותן". See also the discussion of E. Fleischer and M. Gil in their book יהודה הלוי ובני חוגו (ירושלים, 2001)]. However, there are no contemporary records that substantiate these traditions. Shelomo Pirchon (מחברת הערוך ד:ב) attests to Ibn Ezra's accompanying R. Yehuda HaLevy to Africa and a letter from the Cairo Geniza reveals that Ibn Ezra’s son, Yitzchak, accompanied Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi on his journey to Egypt [See ש. ד. גויטיין, "הפרשה האחרונה בחיי רבנו יהודה הלוי", תרביץ כד (תשט"ו): 27.]  The two were on such intimate terms that after R. Yehuda HaLevi's death, Ibn Ezra wrote a poem in his honor, imagining the great poet inviting him to join him in the next word.

¹² Rabbi Moses ibn Ezra (c. 1055- c.1135) was a prominent poet from a powerful family with connections to the court of Granada. He was brought up in wealth and culture. Rabbi Moses composed both secular and liturgical poetry. He and Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra were not related.

¹³ Rabbi Joseph ibn Tzadik was a dayyan (religious judge), philosopher and poet. His work Olam Katan (The Microcosm) was praised by Maimonides and is alluded to in Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch.

¹⁴ Rabbi Jacob ben Meir Tam (1100 -1171) was a grandson of Rashi, a tosafist, and and one of the leading Talmudic authorities of his age. Ibn Ezra made the acquaintance of R. Tam in his journeys from southern to northern France. The two broke bread and Rabbenu Tam later paid homage to Ibn Ezra in a poem: "I am Abraham’s acquired servant / I bow and prostrate myself before him." Ibn Ezra responded:  "Is it right for the shepherd and knight of God’s people to lower his head in a letter to a despised man / Far be it for the angel of God to bow before Baalam."

¹⁵ See his introduction to Kohelet where he speaks of leaving Spain in haste and fear, "ומארצו נפרד, אשר היא בספרד, ואל רומי ירד, כנפש נבהלת."  The sentiment is echoed in his introduction to Eikhah, where he similarly speaks of being forced to leave due to oppressors or other troubles: "ואני אברהם ב״ר מאיר מארץ מרחקים / הוצאתני מארץ ספרד חמת המציקים".

¹⁶ M. Cohen, in his work, Under Crescent and Cross (New Jersey, 1994): 183, notes the uniqueness of the elegy, being the only “clear cut example of a poetical Jewish reaction to an outbreak of Islamic persecution.”  It reads, in part, "אֲהָהּ יָרַד עֲלֵי סְפָרַד רַע מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם / וְסֶפֶד רַב עֲלֵי מַעֲרָב לְזֹאת רָפוּ יָדַיִם / עֵינִי עֵינִי יֹרְדָה מַּיִם / בְּכוֹת עֵינַי בְּמַעְיָנַי עַל עִיר אַלְיוֹסְנָהּ / בְּאֵין אָשָׁם לְבָדָד שָׂם הַגּוֹלָה שָׁכְנָה / בְּאֵין סַלֵּף עֲדֵי אֶלֶף שְׁנַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה / וּבָא יוֹמָהּ וְנָד עִמָּהּ וְגַם הָיְתָה כְּאַלְמָנָה / בְּאֵין תּוֹרָה וְאֵין מִקְרָא וְהַמִּשְׁנָה נִטְמְנָה". See here for the full text.

¹⁷ Several English translations exist.  See: Ibn Ezra’s Commentary on the Pentateuch, translated & annotated by H. Norman Strickman & Arthur Silver, Translation of Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Pentateuch, translated by Allan R. Benyowitz and see also J. F. Shachter's translation of the commentaries to Vayikra and Devarim.

¹⁸ For an English translation, see: Ibn Ezra on Isaiah, Ed. and translated by Michael Friedlander (London, 1873).

¹⁹ For an English translation, see: Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Commentary on the First Book of Psalms, translated & annotated by H. Norman Strickman (Boston, 2009, 2016).

²⁰ For an English translation of the commentary to Shir HaShirim, See: Ibn Ezra's Commentary on The Song of Songs, Translations and Annotations, by Richard A. Block (Hebrew Union College, 1982).  Ibn Ezra's Commentary on Kohelet has been translated and annotated by H. Norman Strickman.

²¹

²² See his comments to Devarim 32:4 (where he references an explanation to a verse in Yehoshua), 29:20 (referencing his comments to Shofetim 11:21; see also Ramban Vayikra 27:29 who cites Ibn Ezra on this verse), Shemot 27:21 and Tehillim 51:2 (where he refers the reader  to explanations on Shemuel I 3:3 and Shemuel II 12) and Devarim 21:17(regarding a comment on Melakhim II 2:9).  Radak also cites Ibn Ezra's explanation of Shemuel I 27:10.
Ibn Ezra also references his explanations to Yirmeyahu (see IE Vayikra 20:20), Yechezekel (See IE First Ocmmentary shemot 28:41), Mishlei (See IE Shemot 31:3), Ezra-Nechemyah (see IE Devarim 23:2) and Divrei HaYamim (see IE Vayikra 26:34..

²³ U. Simon (ibid) notes that already in the fourteenth century, supercommentaries attest that they did not have any of Ibn Ezra's commentaries to the Former Prophets, Yirmeyahu, Yechezkel, Mishlei, Ezra-Nechemyah or Divrei HaYamim.

²⁴ See U. Simon, "Abraham Ibn Ezra" in HBOT 1:2 (Gottingen, 2000): 377-387. 

²⁵ Ed. M. Wolinsky (Berlin, 1923).

²⁶ Ed. G. H. Lipmann (Furth, 1827).

²⁷ Ed. G. H. Lipmann (Frankfurt, 1843).

²⁸ Ed. G. H. Lipmann (Furth 1839)

²⁹ Ed. Aloni (Jerusalem, 1975).

³⁰ Reshit Hokhmah. Edited and translated into English. By R. Levi and F. Kenterah. Balimore, 1939.

³¹ Two versions. First version: Ed. byY. L. Fleisher. Jerusalem, 1951. Second version. Ed. by N. Ben-Menahem. Jerusalem, 1951.

³² Two versions. First version: Ed. Edelman Koenigsburg 1845. Second version . Ed. by Judah ben Solomon Warsaw 1856.

³³ Ta’ame Luhot Al-Ku’arizmi. The Introduction to this work was published by Kahanah in his Rabbi Avraham ibn Ezra , Warsaw 1922.

³⁴ Sefer Ha-Me’orot, Ed. Y.L. Fleisher, Yearbook Of Jewish Studies in Romania. Vol 5 (Bucharest, 1932).

³⁵ Despite this goal or providing rationalizations, it is important to note that Ibn Ezra emphasizes that observance of the commandments should not be conditional on understanding.  He compares a person who refuses to observe the laws until he knows the reasoning behind them to a child who refuses to eat bread until he understands how the ground is plowed, the grain planted, the flour sifted, or the dough kneaded and baked. "The correct thing for a child to do is eat normally and, as he grows, ask a little at a time until all of his questions are answered" (Yesod Mora VeSod HaTorah 8:1).

³⁶ The essays are occasionally introduced with the words "Avraham the Author says", or "the Words of Avraham".

³⁷ See Ibn Ezra on Ex. 3:15 and 33:21.

³⁸ See the second Commentary to Shemot 20:1.

³⁹ See his commentaries to Shemot 32:1.

⁴⁰ See his First Commentary on Shemot 33:18 and his Second Commentary to Shemot 33:21.

⁴¹ As discussed above, this was likely a result of his wanderings.  In the Christian lands in which he traveled, people did not understand Arabic. The choice of language is also likely the reason that the commentary survived.

⁴² This might, at times, have been intentional, as when his content was controversial. It is also possible that Ibn Ezra was targeting the educated elite rather than the masses and / or writing for students or patrons with whom he learned personally and would comprehend his truncated style.  A third factor which might contribute to the difficulty is that Ibn Ezra was often forced to coin Hebrew terms for mathematical or astronomical concepts which were not in use at the time, and might not have been accepted by future generations..

⁴³ This is likely what sparked so many supercommentaries.

⁴⁴ This distinction is laid out already in his introductory remarks to Torah, where he writes that he plans  "לבאר כל כתוב כמשפטו, ודקדוקו ופשוטו / רק במצות ובחקים אסמוך על קדמונינו". He then elaborates, exclaiming that "heaven forbid" that he would ever explain against the Sages, "הרבים ונכבדים בחכמתם ומעשיהם", but notes that this is only true with regards to mitzvot. Elsewhere, "בכתוב שאין שם מצוה", he feels no compunction to follow his predecessors, "ומהשם לבדו אירא, ולא אשא פנים בתורה".
See, similarly, his introduction to the First Cםmmentary: "ובעבור הדרש, דרך הפשט איננה סרה / כי שבעים פנים לתורה / רק בתורות ובמשפטים ובחוקים / מצאנו שני טעמים לפסוקים / והטעם האחד כנגד המעתיקים, שהיו כולם צדיקים / נשען על אמתם בלי ספק בידים חזקים".
Ibn Ezra's distinction is rooted in his strong desire to explain the text according to its simple sense, using the rules of grammar and logic, on the one hand, and his need to uphold the Oral Law and opinions of the Sages in the face of Karaites who rejected these. Unlike Rashbam, he did not feel that he was at liberty to explain legal sections of Torah against the Midrash, for that would fuel the arguments of his opponents and lead many to question or reject the legal rulings of the Sages.

⁴⁵ Thus Ibn Ezra notes that the Rabbinic statement that “Noah drank from his vineyard on the day he planted it” is not to be taken literally.  Neither is the Rabbinic statement that  that God showed Moses the knot of the tefillin to be taken according to its plain meaning. "These words (of the sages) are correct. However, its meaning is not in accordance with that of the wise men of this generation who interpret the Rabbinic statement literally. On the contrary, this has a deeply hidden secret meaning."

⁴⁶ "If it were not for the men of the Mishnah and Talmud, the Torah of our God and its very memory would have  everything perished. For these scholars properly analyzed everything in the Torah, They explained and clarified the precepts and statutes of the Torah for us in accordance with their tradition. At times they find clear evidence for their traditions in the Torah, At other times, they find mere supports for their traditions. One who is intelligent can discern when the sages understand a text literally and when they do midrashically. For all their interpretations do not follow one course "  (Yesod Mora 6. The Sectet of the Torah; A translation of Abraham ibn Ezra's Yesod Mora; 1995 by H. Norman Strickman p. 84).

⁴⁷ See Strickman, H. Norman, "Abraham ibn Ezra’s Yesod Mora.” Ḥakirah, the Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought, 12: 156.  See also י. כהן ואץ סימון, יסוד מורא וסוד התורה (בר אילן, 2007): 96.

⁴⁸ Yesdo Mora 5:1. The Secret of the Torah, p 5.

⁴⁹ Most of  the laws of the Decalogue (not including Shabbat) would be classified in this category.

⁵⁰ Yesod Mora 5:2; The Secret of the Torah, p. 78.

⁵¹ A person who refuses to observe the laws until he knows the reason for their observance "will be like a child who refuses to eat bread until he first knows how the ground was plowed, the grain planted, harvested, winnowed, cleaned, ground, sifted, kneaded and baked. If a child acts thusly, he will surely die of starvation. The correct thing for a child to do is eat normally and, as he grows, ask a little at a time until all of his questions are answered. Similarly, an intelligent person can ultimately learn the very many clearly stated reasons, which the Torah itself offers for the precepts. However, there are commandments the reason for which “only one man in a thousand knows.” (Ibid.11:7; The Secret of the Torah, pp. 159,160.)

⁵² See his comments to Devarim 4:19-20.

⁵³ See Ibn Ezra Tehillim 19:2-5 and Tehillim 69:29, "All the decrees that are destined to come are there [in the heavens] written."

⁵⁴ See Chaim Shirman, Toledot Ha-Shirah Ha-Ivrit Be-Sefarad Ha-Notzerit U-Vedarom Tzorfat, Israel, 1997. p.15 footnote 10.

⁵⁵ See Dan Yosef, Iyunim Be-Sifrut Chasidut Ashkenaz. Israel, 1975, p. 169-171.
Also see Lifshitz, Yosef Yitzchak. Echad Be-Khol Dimyonot One God; Many Images. Israel, 2015, p. 68-72.

⁵⁶ See Dan Yosef, Iyunim Be-Sifrut Chasidut Ashkenaz. Israel, 1975, p. 169-171.
Also see Lifshitz, Yosef Yitzchak. Echad Be-Khol Dimyonot One God; Many Images. Israel, 2015, p. 68-72.

⁵⁷ For discussion, see H. Norman Strickman, Abraham ibn Ezra's Yesod Mora, Vol. 12.pp.159-165 and I. Twersky, Did R. Abraham ibn Ezra Influence Maimonides? In Rabbi. Abraham ibn Ezra: Studies In The Writings Of a Twelfth Century Jewish Polymath. Harvard University Press. 1993

⁵⁸ See J. Dan, Rabbi Judah He-Hasid, (Israel, 2005):122-130 and J. Lifshitz, One God; Many Images :Dialectical Thought In Hasidei Ashkenaz (Israel, 2015): 68-72.