Talmudic Methodology and Aristotelian Logic: David ibn Bilia's Commentary on the Thirteen Hermeneutic Principles

This article analyzes the commentary of R. David Ibn Bilia (Portugal, first half of the fourteenth century) on the Thirteen Hermeneutic Principles enumerated in the introduction to the Sifra. The commentary’s originality lies in its comprehensive and consistent application of Aristotelian logic to t...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Jewish quarterly review
Main Author: Ravitsky, Aviram (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Penn Press 2009
In: The Jewish quarterly review
Further subjects:B Talmudic methodology
B Inference
B Allegory
B Antinomianism
B Maimonidean hermeneutics
B gezerah shavah
B Thirteen Principles
B Rabbanites
B Hermeneutics
B double faith theory
B Controversy
B Karaites
B Logic
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Summary:This article analyzes the commentary of R. David Ibn Bilia (Portugal, first half of the fourteenth century) on the Thirteen Hermeneutic Principles enumerated in the introduction to the Sifra. The commentary’s originality lies in its comprehensive and consistent application of Aristotelian logic to the realm of Talmudic-rabbinic methodology. Ibn Bilia’s project can be considered a Maimonidean interpretation of Jewish sources, although it deviates from the Maimonidean line by applying allegorical interpretation to the realm of the law. It is most likely that Ibn Bilia’s goal in his commentary was to defend the authority of the Talmud against the critique of contemporary radical rationalists, by demonstrating the affinities between Talmudic methods and Aristotelian principles of logic, and also to show that logic and philosophy were indispensable for the proper understanding of Jewish law. In the context of the controversy concerning the relationship between wisdom and tradition, Ibn Bilia’s commentary should be seen as voicing a middle position between two warring camps. From a hermeneutical point of view Ibn Bilia seems to have regarded Talmudic sources as having two layers of meaning – the plain-outer and the philosophical-inner. The first layer This article analyzes the historical and cultural significance of Ibn Bilia’s commentary, its sources in the Talmudic and Aristotelian literature, and its hermeneutical methods.
ISSN:1553-0604
Contains:Enthalten in: The Jewish quarterly review
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1353/jqr.0.0044