Which classical Biblical commentator do YOU identify with? With whom do you connect on a personal or existential level, and why? In this experimental piece I explain why, for me, the answer is: Radak.
1) Which thinkers was Radak the ambassador for? Earlier rishonim, Geonim, and/or Chazal?
2) This might be a wholly different article, but how do you determine who is a rishon and who isn’t? I’ve heard that the Shulchan Aruch marked the end of the rishonim, but it seems like you might include (literally or ideologically) later commentators like Abarbanel, for example.
(1) yes - the earlier Rishonim, Geonim, and Chazal
(2) For me, the answer depends on whether you're talking halachically or non-halachically.
Halachically, I've heard that R' Yosef Karo is treated as the last Rishon and first Acharon. Specifically, that the Beis Yosef should be regarded like a Rishon and the Shulchan Aruch should be regarded as an Acharon. Not sure if I buy that EXACT distinction, but I do think it reflects a reality in halacha because of how the Shulchan Aruch became a gravitational center for halachic texts in a way that the Beis Yosef was not.
As for the non-halachic realm: in my mind, I treat it like a club. You can gain entry to the club based on three criteria: how you think, how you write, and how you regard himself vis a vis the earlier chachamim. For example, Sforno does all three, so he's clearly in the club. Abravanel thinks and regards himself as a Rishon, and that's enough to get him in the club, even if he doesn't write like one. The GRA lived way after the Rishonim, but he thought, wrote, and (at least, according to some) regarded himself as a Rishon, so he's in the club. Moshe de Leon may have lived during the same time period as the other Rishonim, but he didn't think, write, or regard himself as a Rishon. I realize that these criteria are debatable, as is their application, but they are the criteria I use.
You won't be at all surprised as to which commentator I identify with. Shadal appeals to me because he is traditional and modern at the same time, and because he expresses himself so clearly and beautifully. As his translator, I am not the original thinker that he was, but as you are for Radak and other Rishonim, I am an "ambassador" for Shadal, presenting his teachings to a new readership. Thank you for helping me clarify my own role.
Two questions:
1) Which thinkers was Radak the ambassador for? Earlier rishonim, Geonim, and/or Chazal?
2) This might be a wholly different article, but how do you determine who is a rishon and who isn’t? I’ve heard that the Shulchan Aruch marked the end of the rishonim, but it seems like you might include (literally or ideologically) later commentators like Abarbanel, for example.
Anyways, fascinating article!
(1) yes - the earlier Rishonim, Geonim, and Chazal
(2) For me, the answer depends on whether you're talking halachically or non-halachically.
Halachically, I've heard that R' Yosef Karo is treated as the last Rishon and first Acharon. Specifically, that the Beis Yosef should be regarded like a Rishon and the Shulchan Aruch should be regarded as an Acharon. Not sure if I buy that EXACT distinction, but I do think it reflects a reality in halacha because of how the Shulchan Aruch became a gravitational center for halachic texts in a way that the Beis Yosef was not.
As for the non-halachic realm: in my mind, I treat it like a club. You can gain entry to the club based on three criteria: how you think, how you write, and how you regard himself vis a vis the earlier chachamim. For example, Sforno does all three, so he's clearly in the club. Abravanel thinks and regards himself as a Rishon, and that's enough to get him in the club, even if he doesn't write like one. The GRA lived way after the Rishonim, but he thought, wrote, and (at least, according to some) regarded himself as a Rishon, so he's in the club. Moshe de Leon may have lived during the same time period as the other Rishonim, but he didn't think, write, or regard himself as a Rishon. I realize that these criteria are debatable, as is their application, but they are the criteria I use.
You won't be at all surprised as to which commentator I identify with. Shadal appeals to me because he is traditional and modern at the same time, and because he expresses himself so clearly and beautifully. As his translator, I am not the original thinker that he was, but as you are for Radak and other Rishonim, I am an "ambassador" for Shadal, presenting his teachings to a new readership. Thank you for helping me clarify my own role.
Yup. Not surprised! :) But I'm glad that I helped you to clarify your role!