R. Chananel b. Chushiel

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

R. Chananel

Name	R. Chananel b. Chushiel רבנו חננאל בן חושיאל, ר"ח
Dates	c. 965 – 1055
Location	Kairouan
Works	Commentaries on Talmud and Talmud
Exegetical Characteristics
Influenced by	His father R. Chushiel, R. Hai Gaon, R. Saadia Gaon
Impacted on	R. Nissim b. Yaakov, Rif, Rambam

Background

Life

• Name – Ḥananel (or "Chananel"); some historians believe that his given name was Elhanan, but at some point later in his life he became referred to by the name Ḥananel.¹
  • Hebrew name – חננאל בן חושיאל (or, possibly, אלחנן בן חושיאל) 
• Dates – c. 970-1057²
• Location – Kairouan (or "Qayrawan"), in modern-day Tunisia. Most historians believe that R. Hananel was born in Italy, likely Bari, and emigrated to Kairouan as an adult.³
• Occupation – Rabbinical judge and head of the local house of study⁴
• Family – R. Ḥananel's father, R. Ḥushiel b. Elhanan, was an Italian who became the rabbinic leader of Kairouan. A tradition states that R. Ḥananel had nine daughters but no sons.⁵
• Education – Some have thought that R. Ḥananel studied in the Geonic Yeshivot of Babylonia, but this is likely not the case.⁶
• Teachers – Throughout his commentary, R. Ḥananel constantly refers to "his teachers," who remain unnamed. It is likely that R. Ḥananel learned most of his Torah from his father, R. Ḥushiel b. Elhanan, who was the rabbinic leader of Kairouan.⁷
• Contemporaries – R. Hai Gaon,⁸ R. Nissim b. Yaakov, Shmuel haNagid
• Students – R. Nissim b. Yaakov
• Time period – R. Ḥananel is considered to be among the transitional figures between the era of the "Geonim" and the "Rishonim."⁹ 
• World outlook – R. Ḥananel refers to his act of writing down his explanations of the Gemara as מלאכת שמים, heavenly work.¹⁰ 

Works

• Biblical commentaries – Many of the Spanish commentators on the bible quote citations from R. Hananel's commentary on the Torah, though the complete work is lost.¹¹
• Rabbinics –  
  • Talmudic novellae – R. Hananel wrote a running commentary on the more commonly studied sections of Talmud Bavli: orders Mo'ed, Nashim (with the probable exceptions of Nedarim, Nazir, and most of Sotah), and Nezikin, as well as the tractates of Berachot, Hulin, and Niddah.¹² Some believe that he wrote a commentary on Zevahim, but others dispute its attribution to R. Hananel.¹³
  • Halakhic codes – Citations from halakhic works attributed to R. Hananel indicate that he wrote some smaller monographs on select halakhic topics.¹⁴
  • Responsa – Several responsa of R. Hananel are mentioned by medieval commentators, although a collection has not survived.¹⁵
• Misattributed works – Commentary on Horayot, Sefer Miktzo'ot¹⁶

Torah Commentary

Textual Issues

• Providence - The original commentary of R. Hananel to any biblical book is not extant, and even fragments of this work have been identified definitively. However, several dozen citations from his commentary appear in rabbinic works from Medieval Spain.¹⁷
• Publications - Citations from R. Hananel's commentary have been collected (mostly from R. Bachayei's commentary) and published by Avraham Berliner in 1875,¹⁸ along with a few pages from R. Hananel's commentary to the book of Yechezkel (as well as his commentary to Makkot). In 1972, an updated edition with additional material was published by Mossad Harav Kook and edited by R. Charles Chavel,¹⁹ and this edition (together with newly discovered citations from a manuscript)²⁰ was included in the Torat Chaim edition of the Torah published by Mosad Harav Kook.²¹ 
• Authenticity - Some have questioned whether or not R. Hananel did indeed write a commentary to the Torah. Instead, they suggested that perhaps sometime in the eleventh or twelfth century, a compendium was made from commentaries of the Geonim (particularly, R. Saadia, R. Shmuel b. Hofni, and R. Aaron Sarjado), which was erroneously attributed to R. Hananel.²²

Characteristics

• Structure, Style, and Scope – Because the original Torah commentary of R. Hananel is unavailable, the original language, structure and style of the work cannot be ascertained. However, some quotations appear to be fairly lengthy and appear as essays on broad topics are sometimes only tangentially related to the biblical verse.²³
• Meaningful symbols – Seemingly extraneous details in the Torah are explained by R. Hananel as having a religious meaning, message, or symbolism.²⁴ This is especially true for lists of items that appear outwardly to have no religious meaning, such as the enumeration of animals sent by Yaakov to Esav, or descriptions of the Temple vessels.²⁵ 
• Peshat and derash – In some cases, R. Hananel offers a creative reading of a biblical phrase which appear to be motivated by a desire to align the "peshat" reading with the interpretation of Midrash; his commentary to Shemot 21:24, for example, emphasizes the textual clues that the rule of עין תחת עין, "an eye for an eye" must be interpreted as monetary compensation.²⁶  
• Creativity - Several comments from R. Hananel's commentary demonstrate significant creativity, often deviating from traditional readings of the biblical verse (such as those of the Targums).²⁷

Themes

• Tradition – as in R. Saadia's many works, R. Hananel's commentary emphasizes the importance, authenticity, and authority of the rabbinic tradition.²⁸
• A striking example of this tendency is R. Hananel's position that the Jewish calendar was always determined according to the set calculation used in modern times and was never dependent upon witness testimony regarding the new moon.²⁹ 

Sources

Significant Influences

• Earlier Sources – The Talmudic commentary of R. Hananel relies heavily on both the commentaries and responsa of the Babylonian Geonim,³⁰ on oral traditions that he heard from his teachers,³¹ and on the Talmud Yerushalmi.³² R. Hananel's Torah commentary appears to be largely based upon the Torah commentaries of R. Saadia Gaon and R. Shmuel b. Hofni Gaon.³³ 

Occasional Usage

• R. Hananel sometimes draws on rabbinic sources outside of the Talmud and Mishnah, such as the Tosefta and Midrash Halakha.³⁴

Impact

Later exegetes

• Spanish commentators from the medieval era, such as Ramban³⁵ and R. Bachyei,³⁶ often quote Rabbeinu Hananel. In the introduction to his work, Rabbeinu Bachyei calls attention to this fact, and refers to Rabbeinu Hananel as הפטיש החזק, the mighty hammer.
• Medieval aids to Talmud study and halakhic analysis - particularly, the "Sefer ha-Arukh" by R. Natan of Rome and the "Ohr Zarua" by R. Yitzhak of Vienna - quote extensively from Rabbeinu Hananel.
• R. Yitzhak Alfasi ("Rif") rarely quotes Rabbeinu Hananel by name, but in the vast majority of instances, anonymous quotations in his work can be attributed to Rabbeinu Hananel.³⁷ 
• Rambam's halakhic decisions are often based upon R. Hananel's interpretations³⁸ or editions of the Gemara.³⁹

Supercommentaries

• –

¹

This is based upon the fact that a letter of R. Hushiel b. Elhanan, the father of R. Hananel, refers to his son "Elhanan," who also appears in documentary evidence as a judge in Kairouan at the exact same time period as R. Hananel, and there is no evidence that R. Hushiel had two sons who were both rabbinic scholars. Menahem Ben-Sasson, The Emergence of the Local Jewish Community in the Muslim World: Qayrawan, 800-1057 [Hebrew, צמיחת הקהילה היהודית בארצות האסלאם] (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1996), p. 225-229

² Paris manuscript Mosseri II 133, quoted in Jacob Mann, Texts and Studies (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1931), p. 246.

³ Rashbam to Bava Batra 86b refers to R. Hananel as איש רומי, "a man from Rome," (which is a general reference to Italian lands), and if R. Hananel is to be identified as the same "Elhanan" referred to in a letter by R. Hushiel b. Elhanan to R. Shmaryah of Egypt, then direct evidence exists for R. Hananel being born in Italy. This letter was published by Solomon Schechter, "Geniza Specimens. A Letter of Chushiel" The Jewish Quarterly Review, 1899:11, 643–650

⁴ Multiple documents attesting to these roles have been found in the Cairo Genizah. See Menachem Ben-Sasson, p. 225ff

⁵ R. Avraham ibn Daud, Sefer ha-Kabbalah (G. Cohen ed., Hebrew section p. 58)

⁶ R. Chaim Yosef David Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim entry on "Rabbeinu Hananel" quotes from the responsa of Maharam "ha-ketzarot" no. 91 who surmises that R. Hananel studies with R. Hai Gaon because the latter is quoted in the commentary, and this is also assumed by Rabbeinu Tam, Sefer ha-Yashar, Teshuvot no. 46). R. Azulai notes that this is not necessarily the case, and modern scholars have pointed out that whenever he quotes teachings from the Geonim, R. Hananel always cites what he "saw," indicating that his knowledge of Geonic teachings are sourced in written texts rather than his personal education. This is evident from a fragment of his commentary to Bava Batra 63a which survives as quoted by R. Zechariah Agamati's Sefer ha-Ner: כענין הזה פירוש מקצת הגאונים ומפני שהיא מלאכת שמים כתבנו [מה] שקיבלנו מרבותינו מפה לאוזן וכתבנו פירוש הגאונים שראינו

⁷ Sefer Tashbetz Part 1 72. The Sefer ha-'Arukh (page 166) refers to R Hananel on Bava Batra 40b who says ואמר דפרש לה אביו חושיאל ז”ל הכי להאי לישנא. Another instance of an author associating R. Hananel with his father's teaching is in Meiri Sanhedrin 27b.

⁸ In his commentary to Shabbat 115b, R. Hananel quotes an explanation from "Rabbeinu Hai the Gaon, light of Israel, may he live and prosper forever," indicating that he must have been alive at the time.

⁹ He is recognized as such by R. Avraham ibn Daud, Sefer ha-Kabbalah, R. Menachem Meiri in his introduction to Avot, and many others. He is often referred to as "Rabbi Hananel Gaon," or recognized as belonging both to the era of the Geonim and the Rishonim. For example, Rashba (She'eilot u-Teshuvot 4:118) writes כי רבינו חננאל ז”ל שהיה מן הגאונים ובקי בדברי הגאונים ז”ל שקדמוהו, and similarly after naming R. Hananel as one of the first three "Rabbanim" (in contrast with the Geonim), Meiri writes "ונשוב לדברינו והוא מהזמן הנז׳ והנה ר״ל מעת גאונות ר׳ חננאל", referring to R. Hananel as a Gaon. Cf. Meiri's comment to Gittin 21b, "כך היא סברת ראשוני הגאונים ורבינו חננאל בכללם"

¹⁰ R. Hananel's commentary to Shabbos 138b. This phrase appears in the Talmud Bavli (e.g. Eruvin 13a, Sukkah 26a) but may be a play on words from the verse in Yirmiyahu 44:19. Rambam, in his introduction to his Mishnah Torah, similarly writes that all writers who composed works to extract halakha from the Talmud are engaged in divine work: ועוד חיברו הלכות פסוקות בענין האסור והמותר והחייב והפטור בדברים שהשעה צריכה להן, כדי שיהיו קרובין למדע מי שאינו יכול לירד לעומקו של תלמוד. וזו היא מלאכת י״י שעשו בה כל גאוני ישראל מיום שחובר התלמוד ועד זמן זה

¹¹ Some have questioned whether the citations attributed to him are truly products of R. Hananel, because no contemporary source makes mention of R. Hananel having written a commentary on the Torah. See 

¹² Meiri, Introduction to Avot writes that R. Hananel wrote commentaries to שלשה סדרים, three orders.

¹³ See sources cited in Y. M. Dubovick, "Likkutim mi-Sifrei de-Bei Rashi", in Yeshurun 33 (2015), p. 32 n. 18

¹⁴ Among those more recently published is a work on the laws of checking animals, in a collection titled Sefer "Shittah Mekubetzet," (Modiin Illit: Kiryat Sefer, 2012), and a monograph on the laws of tzitzit, edited by Shraga Abramson in Peirushei Rabbeinu Hananel al haTalmud (Jerusalem: Lev Sameach, 1994). 

¹⁵ For example, see Rashba to Gittin 85b: ובתשובה לרבנו חננאל ז״ל כגון אלו הדברים שאינן מפורשין אם יבא אדם לכתוב אלו הדברים שמא יפלו ביד אדם שאינו הגון וילמדו לשקר לפיכך אין לנו אלא מן הפה לאוזן לנאמנים. 

¹⁶ See Shraga Abramson, Perushei Rabbeinu Hananel la-Talmud (Jerusalem: Lev Sameach, 1994)

¹⁷ Most of these citations are from the commentary of R. Bachayei, but can also be found in the works of R. Avraham ibn Ezra, Ramban, Rashba, R. Yehoshua ibn Shu'eib, and in an additional manuscript collecting various commentaries on the Torah (see below).

¹⁸ These were published mostly as a list of citations, expanded slightly from an earlier list of citations collected by Solomon Yehudah Rappaport (as published in his "Bikkurei ha-'Ittim, 1732).

¹⁹ In addition to Berliner's collection, Chavel added a citation from the "Arukh" and from Tosafos (Kiddushin 62a), although it is unclear whether these authors are drawing upon R. Hananel's Torah commentary or from his commentary to the Talmud.

²⁰ First published by Eliezer Horowitz in Hadarom, 1977: אלעזר הורביץ, "שרידים חדשים מפירושי רבינו חננאל מגניזת קאהיר", הדרום מד (תשל"ז)

²¹ One additional citation which has not been incorporated in any of these published collections can be found in Sha'arei ha-Avodah attributed to R. Yonah Gerondi, ed. Zilber (Bnei Brak, 1961), p. 41

²² See S. Abramson, above. Chavel responded to this suggestion in an article published in Hadarom in 1977, published alongside a Genizah manuscript which cited R. Hananel's Torah commentary: חיים דוב שעוועל, "בענין 'פירוש רבינו חננאל על התורה'״, הדרום מד (תשל"ז)
 

²³ For examples of such excursions, see R. Hananel to Bereshit 29:19, 50:10, Shemot 12:40, 14:31, 32:35)

²⁴ R. Bachyei quotes such interpretations from R. Hananel to provide significance or symbolic meaning to the tree under which Avraham served his guests (Bereishit 18:4; also found in R. Saadia's commentary), or to show that the Torah refers obliquely to men collecting enough Mann for their households to teach that a man is obligated to provide for his wife and children (Shemot 16:16).

²⁵ R. Hananel to Bereshit 32:15 and Shemot 25:39, respectively. 

²⁶ Another example may be his commentary to Bereshit 35:10, where R. Hananel reads the angel's blessing to Yaakov that "he no longer be called by the name Yaakov" as actually meaning, "your name will no longer be exclusively Yaakov," as in, the additional name of Yisrael would not replace Yaakov. This would comport with the rabbinic teaching in Talmud Bavli, Berachot 13a that the name "Yisrael" would not replace the name of "Yaakov." R. Saadia Gaon translates the verse similarly in his Tafsir

²⁷ For examples just in the book of Bereshit, see R. Hananel's commentary to 15:2-3, 16:5, 19:8, 35:10, 42:1, 48:7, 48:14. However, in nearly all these cases, R. Hananel's interpretation is similar to that of R. Saadia. 

²⁸ See his comments to Bereishit 18:19 (also to be found in R. Saadia's commentary) and Shemot 21:24. 

²⁹ R. Hananel to Shemot 12:2. This position is discussed (and defended) extensively by R. Menachem Mendel Kasher, Torah Sheleimah vol 13 (p. 46ff)

³⁰ For example, in defining several of the activities listed in the Mishnah of Shabbat 74b, several (but not all) of R. Hananel's comments are nearly identical to those appearing in the commentary of R. Hai Gaon quoted in Otzar Hageonim there. A careful and detailed study of the relationship between R. Hananel's commentary and that of the last Geonim (R. Sherira and R. Hai) was done by Yosaif M. Dubovick, "Rabbenu Hananel and the Geonim of Babylonia," Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 2015

³¹ R. Hananel refers to these oral traditions as קבלות, "received matters." R. Hananel differentiated between interpretations or traditions he heard from his teachers and those of the Geonim; see for example his comment to Shabbat 123b: "ורבותינו הגאונים אמרו פי׳ אחר. ואנן כתבנו מה שקבלנו מרבותינו" and similarly to Eruvin 83b: "וכבר ראינו פי׳ לרבותינו הגאונים זולתי זה אבל אנו כתבנו הפי׳ שהיא קבלה בידינו"

³² This is evident from nearly every page of R. Hananel's Talmud commentary

³³ See above

³⁴ For example, his commentary to Shabbat 34b cites Tosefta Zavim, and to Ketubot 33b cites Mekhilta.

³⁵ Examples where Ramban quotes Rabbeinu Hananel's commentary to the Torah include Shemot 10:14, Vayikra 20:17, Bamidbar 20:8, among other instances. Most of these quotations appear to from additions which Rambam made later in his life; see https://alhatorah.org/Commentators:Ramban%27s_Updates 

³⁶ Some significant examples include Rabbeinu Bahyei's commenatry to Bereshit 20:2, 31:19, 43:10, 50:10, Shemot 5:22, 12:2, 13:17, 19:16, 25:19, Vayikra 23:40, Devarim 7:26. In his commentary to the Torah, R. Bahyei will also quote from R. Hananel's commentary to the Talmud; see Shemot 22:17.

³⁷ R. Shimon b. Zemah Duran (15th century Spain and Algeria) comments (Tashbetz, 2:272): ובכל מקום שכתוב בהלכות ואיכא מאן דאמר הוא ר״ח ז״ל

³⁸ For an example, compare Rambam's Hilkhot Megillah u-Chanukah 3:7 to Rabbeinu Hananel's commentary on Taanit 28b.

³⁹ This is noted, for example, by R. Meir Simcha of Dvinsk in his commentary, "Ohr Sameach" to Rambam's Hilkhot Shabbat Ch. 14 and 17. Rambam quotes Rabbeinu Hananel by name once in a letter, She'eilot u-Teshuvot ha-Rambam no. 251 (Blau ed., p. 459). However, the relationship between Rabbeinu Hananel and Rambam was well known in early modern times, as recorded by R. Yosef Caro in his spiritual diary Maggid Meisharim (Parashat Vayakhel): ומידע תנדע דכל דבעי הרמב"ם על הרוב אינון קושטא בגין דאיהו אדבק גרסאי קדמונאי כגון ר"ח ורבינו האי דגרסתהון ברירא