Basic HTML Version
Kanarfogel
78
Recent research has pointed to a number of possible influences
on Nahmanides’ writings that also require further study. R. Yehu-
dah ha-Levi’s impact on Ramban in regard to the primacy of the
land of Israel has been duly noted.45Ha-Levi’s significant role in
regard to the parameters of natural law has also been demonstrat
ed 46A number of other phrases and concepts in Ramban’s thought
may owe their origins to ha-Levi, whose
Kuzari
reflects elements
of merkavah mysticism 47 Some of ha-Levi’s material may have
been brought to Ramban’s attention via Avraham ibn Ezra who,
in addition to having a major impact on Ramban’s biblical exegesis,
also had an influence on Nahmanides’ kabbalistic conceptions.48
P I E T I S T IN FLU EN C E S
R. Eleazar of Worms, who was cited by Ramban in his letter to
the rabbis of northern France and was linked in kabbalistic
pseudepigraphy to Ramban, also had a significant amount of
Rashba, among those of other leading medieval Spanish talmudists, were never
mentioned in Yizhak Baer’s^
History of theJews in Christian Spain.
Baer includes,
o f course, material from other parts of Ramban’s corpus. See Ta-Shma, “Halakhah,
Kabbalah u-Filosofiyyah bi-Sefarad ha-Notzerit,”
Shenaton ha-Mishpat ha-Ivri
1 8 - 19 (1992-94): 479-95 .
45. See M. Idel, “The Land o f Israel in Medieval Kabbalah,”
The Land of
Israel: Jewish Perspectives,
ed. L.A. Hoffman (Notre Dame, 1986), pp. 17 6 -178 ;
Shalom Rosenberg, “The Link to the Land o f Israel in Jewish Thought,”
The
Land of Israel: Jewish Perspectives,
pp. 148-56 ; A. Ravitzky,
A l Da‘at ha-Makom,
pp. 42 -55 ; E. Wolfson, “By W ay o f Truth,” p. 151, n. 36.
46. See Michael Nehorai, “Torat ha-Nes veha-Teva Etzel ha-Ramban ve-
Zikatah le-R. Yehudah ha-Levi,”
Da‘at
17 (1986): 23 -3 1 (and cf. D. Berger’s
response in
Da‘at
18 [1987]: 169-170).
47. Elliot Wolfson, “Merkavah Tradition in Philosophical Garb—Judah ha-
Levi Reconsidered,”
Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research
57
(1991): 179-242; Scholem,
Origins,
p. 223-24, 4 1 0 - 1 1 ; Septimus, “Open Rebuke,”
pp. 14—16, 27. 30; Idel, “W e Have No Kabbalistic Tradition,” pp. 59, n. 33, 69;
Wolfson, “By Way o f Truth,” 105, n. 6; Safran, “R. Azriel and Nahmanides:
Two Views o f the Fall o f Man,” p. 84, n. 43, p. 100, n. 84. Cf. I. Twersky,
Rabad,
pp. 27 5 -76 , 280, and Howard Kreisel, “Judah Halevi’s Influence on
Maimonides: A Preliminary Appraisal,”
Maimonidean Studies
2 (1991): 9 5 - 12 1 .
48. See Septimus, “Open Rebuke,” p. 23, nn. 42, 43; Scholem,
Origins,
p.
4 1 1 , n. 108; and Wolfson, “By Way o f Truth,” 115, n. 37. Regarding Ramban’s
relationship to the exegetical methods o f Rashi and Ibn Ezra, see Septimus,
“Open Rebuke,” pp. 17 -18 , nn. 27 -28 , and 19 -20 , nn. 3 1 -32 , and Y.S. Licht,
“Ramban,”
Entziklopediah Mikra’it,
8:683-89.