Abraham Ibn Ezra and the Rise of Medieval Hebrew Science [1 ed.] 9789004129733, 9789004500976

Citation preview

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA AND THE RISE OF MEDIEVAL HEBREW SCIENCE

BRILL'S SERIES IN JEWISH STUDIES GENERAL EDITOR

DAVID S. KATZ (Tel Aviv) ADVISORY EDITORS STUART COHEN (Bar-Han) ANTHONY T. GRAFTON (Princeton) YOSEF KAPLAN (Jerusalem) FERGUS MIllAR (Oxford)

VOL. 32

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA AND THE RISE OF MEDIEVAL HEBREW SCIENCE BY

SHLOMOSELA

BRILL LEIDEN· BOSTON 2003

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sela, Shlomo. Abraham Ibn Ezra and the rise of medieval Hebrew science / by Shelomo Sela. p. cm.-(Brill's series inJewish studies; v. 32) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 90-04-12973-1 I.Judaism and science-History. 2. Ibn Ezra, Abraham ben Meer, 1092-1 I 67-Contributions in science. 3.Jewish astrology. 4. Ptolemy, 2nd cent. I. Title. II. Series. BM538.S3S45 2003 181'.06-dc21 2002044053

ISSN 0926-2261 ISBN 9004 12973 I

© Copyright 2003 by Koninklijke Brill NY, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval ~stem, or transmitted in a1!)l form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission .from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate.fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subJect to change. PRImED IN THE NETHERLANDS

To my parents, Esther and David, with love and affection

CONTENTS

Preface ............................................................................................... XI Introduction ............ ,............................................................................ 1 Early Hebrew and Arabic Scientific Literature by Jews ................. 2 The Rise of Medieval Hebrew Science ........................................... 6 Ibn Ezra's Biblical Exegesis -Italian and French Periods ............ 9 Poetry, Theological Monographs and Science ............................. ; 12 Part One Abraham Ibn Ezra's Scientific Corpus ............................ 17 Introduction ................................................................................... 17 1. Mathematics, Astronomy, Scientific Instruments and Tools .... 19 2. Jewish Calendar ........................................................................ 38 3. The Astrological Encyclopedia ................................................. 57 4. Translations from Arabic into Hebrew ...................................... 75 5. General Characterization of the Scientific Corpus .................... 78 Organization and Scope ............................................................ 78 The scientific Book ofIbn Ezra, its Aims and Special Traits ... 85 Part Two The Creation of a New Hebrew Scientific Vocabulary .. 93 Introduction ................................................................................... 93 Abraham Bar I;Iiyya and Abraham Ibn Ezra ................................. 96 Ibn Ezra's View of the Hebrew Language .................................. 104 Gevulot 'Are$ - The Seven Climates ........................................ 107 MU$aq - Center ......................................................................... 113 Mishpatim - Astrological Judgments ....................................... 116 Nal;tash Barial;t - The Head of the Dragon and its Tail ............. 124 Shamayim - Heavens ................................................................ 126 Meshartim - Planets .................................................................. 129 Toledet - Nature ........................................................................ 130 I;Ieshev ha-'afudah - The Zodiac of the Astrolabe ................... 137 Conclusion .................................................................................. 140 Part Three Eight Macro-Astrological Rules ................................. 144 Introduction ................................................................................. 144 The Double Rhythm of Human History ...................................... 145 Medieval Nationality ................................................................... 148 Saturn and the Jews ..................................................................... 151

VIII

CONTENTS

Geographical Environment ......................................................... 158 Astrological Analysis of History ................................................. 162 Social Rank and Political Power ................................................. 168 The Fury of the Elements ............................................................ 170 The Wise Soul ............................................................................. 172 The Scholar vis-a-vis the Righteous Person ................................ 178 Wisdom, Salvation from the Stars and Religious Devotion ........ 184 Part Four Ibn Ezra's Universe ...................................................... 192 Astrological-Cosmological Exegesis .......................................... 192 Salvation from the Stars .............................................................. 195 Astrology versus Astronomy ....................................................... 199 Heavens and Earth ...................................................................... 208 The Heavenly Region .............................................................. 208 The Sublunary Region............................................................. 210 A Cluster of Sciences .............................................................. 211 A Demonstration of the Cosmic Structure .................................. 214 The Seven Spheres of the Seven Planets ................................. 214 The Slow Motion of the Host of Heaven ................................ 218 The Superior Sphere ................................................................ 224 The Two Primary Motions of the Heavens ............................. 233 Part Five Four Encounters with Claudius Ptolemy ...................... 238 Introduction ................................................................................. 238 1. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's Scientific Work ....................................................................... 240 Admiration and Approval ....................................................... 244 Disagreement and Rejection ................................................... 247 2. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in an Exegetical-Astronomical Discussion ...................................... 257 3. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in an Exegetical Discussion about the Jewish Calendar. ................................... 273 Karaites versus Rabbanites ..................................................... 277 The Controversy over the Length of the Solar Year ............... 280 Utility and Futility of Sciences in the Determination of the Jewish Calendar. ..................... 286 4. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in a Theological Excursus ............................................................. 288 Claudius Ptolemy and the Forty-Eight Constellations of the Sphere ............................................... 290 King Ptolemy, the Thief.......................................................... 296

CONTENTS

IX

The Theft of Science from the Jews by the Greeks ................. 305 The 'One Hundred and Twenty' Conjunctions ....................... 313 Conclusion ...................................................................................... 324 Appendix One Two Exegetical Examples Illustrating the Italian and French Periods .......................................................................... 331 Appendix Two

Hebrew Texts ...................................................... 336

Bibliography.................................................................................... 387 Works by Abraham Ibn Ezra....................................................... 387 Primary Sources .......................................................................... 390 Secondary Sources ...................................................................... 394 General Index .................................................................................. 403

PREFACE This book is the outcome of many years of research focused on the scientific and exegetical work of Abraham Ibn Ezra. Some of the topics treated in this book represent a significant expansion and refmement of the work carried out in previous articles. Abraham Ibn Ezra was also featured in my earlier book and though I touch on similar subjects and ideas in this book I have attempted to present the material in a new perspective. Firstly, I have intentionally shifted the center of gravity to science, while the afore-mentioned book focused on Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries and their interconnections with science. Secondly, I have targeted this book at an English readership since my previous endeavor was written in Hebrew and posed unsurpassable obstacles to many of my readers. In the final analysis, however, I have tried to remain faithful to a pivotal idea in both texts: The only effective manner to grasp the essential features of Ibn Ezra's thinking is to break the formal dichotomy between his scientific and exegetical work and follow his encyclopedic and interdisciplinary approach. I wish to express my sincere gratitude to a number of people who have contributed toward the realization of this book. First of all, Menachem Bloch for his expert and dedicated help and advice as English editor of this book. Without his assistance the publishing of this book could not have been accomplished. Dov Schwartz, Gad Freudentahl, and Ron Barkai, with whom I discussed several of the topics treated in this book, I am grateful for their intellectual stimulus and encouragement. Last but not least Moshe Garsiel, former Dean of the Faculty of Jewish Studies of Bar Han University, and the Alter and Haya Schneeweiss Chair in Jewish Philosophy and Ethics in Bar Han University, for their generous financial support.

INTRODUCTION The monograph by Geoffrey Chaucer (1340-1400), A Treatise on the Astrolabe, which he dedicated to his son, Lewis, in ca.1391, was the first competent work written in English to teach the use of the plane astrolabe. The astrolabe was an instrument of Greek invention extensively employed by astronomers and astrologers in antiquity and during the Middle Ages in solving technical problems relating to the position of the sun, moon, planets and stars in the sky. Chaucer was well aware that he was by no means a trailblazer in such an endeavour, and thus felt obliged to explain, in the introduction to his treatise, why there was a need for yet another book dealing with this subject. He therefore wrote as follows: This tretis, divided in 5 parties, wol I shewe the under full light reules and naked wordes in Englissh, for Latyn ne canst thou yit but small, my litel sone. But natheles suffise to the these trewe conclusions in Englissh as weI as sufficith to these noble clerkes Grekes these same conclusions in Grek; and to Arabiens in Arabik, and to Jewes in Ebrew, and to the Latyn folk in Latyn. I

What is remarkable in this citation is that, besides presenting what he deemed was a justification for the composition of the work, Chaucer's brief statement encapsulates the major stages of the history of science, as seen from the vantage point of a fourteenth-century intellectual: (a) the first, Hellenic phase, in whose framework sciences were rendered in the Greek language and emerged for the first time as a self-contained system of knowledge; (b) a second, Arabic phase, marked by the absorption of Greek science by the Islamic world, which not only translated the vast majority of the Greek scientific corpus into Arabic, but also expanded upon it, excelling in the construction of scientific tools; (c) a third, Jewish phase, characterized by casting scientific contents into a Hebrew mould, obviously for a Jewish reading public; (d) and a final, Latin phase, with which the author of the passage is himself identified, which conveyed the Graeco-Arabic scientific world view into Latin Christendom. We have cited the above passage by Chaucer as the very starting point of this book, mainly because we find in it an adequate historical context and also a brief reference to the title of this book. This, however, I ASTROLABE,

1987,p. 662.

2

INTRODUCTION

requires us to pinpoint precisely what Chaucer had in mind when he referred in this passage to Jewes who made their scientific contribution in Ebrew. In all likelihood Geoffrey Chaucer was pointing to the figure of the Spaniard Abraham Ibn Ezra (ca. 1089-ca.1167), the subject of this book, or to some later Jewish scientist who continued in the following generations under the same scientific tradition begun and handed down by Ibn Ezra. This seems most plausible in view of the fact that Abraham Ibn Ezra was the very first Jewish scientist to compose a treatise in Hebrew on the astrolabe. Moreover, as we shall presently see, Ibn Ezra did not compose merely a single treatise, as was commonly accepted, but four different versions of the same treatise: three versions in Hebrew and the fourth in Latin, with the help of a disciple. But Chaucer referred, in the plural, to Jewes writing in Ebrew, thus referring to a more general cultural phenomenon - a new intellectual movement, which, beginning with the work of Abraham Bar I:Iiyya (b. ca.l065-d. ca.1140), another fellow Jewish scientist who produced his Hebrew literary output, including philosophical and scientific works, in the first half of the twelfth century, 2 began the process of secularisation of the 'holy tongue' and the development of 'medieval Hebrew science'. This is a remarkable chapter in the general history of ideas, as well as in the intellectual history of Jewish culture in the Middle Ages. Let us therefore now turn back in time to explore the link between Jews and the sciences, as well as the link between Jews and the Hebrew language, in the transition from antiquity to the Middle Ages and during the early Middle Ages, particularly in the period after the emergence of Islam, in order to delimit more precisely in time and place the origins of this new movement.

Early Hebrew and Arabic Scientific Literature by Jews During the centuries from antiquity to the Middle Ages, Hebrew scientific works of various sorts were written. We find a mathematical treatise, Mishnat ha-Midot3; several treatises dealing, entirely or

2 For Abraham Bar Hiyya's life, and his literary and scientific contribution, see below, p. 96. 3 Mishnat ha-Midot, assumed to be the earliest Hebrew mathematical treatise, was composed, according to one opinion, in the second century C.E., but according to another opinion should be dated somewhere between the ninth and twelfth centuries, since it was influenced by Arabic material. See SARFATI, 1993, pp. 463-490.

INTRODUCTION

3

partially, with astronomy and astrology - Baraita de-Shmu 'el,4 Baraita de-Mazalot, 5 the Chapters of Rabbi Elieze~; a mystical treatise interspersed with some scientific material, Sefer Ye$irah 7; as well as two medical texts: Sefer Refu'ot, attributed to Asaph ha-Rofe8, and Sefer haMirka1;lOt (Book of Remedies), a medical text attributed to Shabbetai ben Abraham ben Joel Donnolo (913-985).9 These works were known and referred to by later medieval Jewish scientists, who occasionally drew on their contents and especially on their Hebrew terminology.1O Even though a thorough examination has not yet been carried out,11 the partial findings related to individual texts suggest that they represent chronologically isolated and disconnected scientific works that may hardly be described as a homogeneous corpus of Hebrew scientific texts belonging to a continuous scientific tradition. More representative of Jewish culture in the early Middle Ages were the literary attempts made under the rule of Islam and under the cultural ascendancy of the Arabic language. In the middle of the eighth century, with the completion of the Islamic conquest of the eastern, northern and part of the western shores of the Mediterranean, many Jewish communities came under the emerging power and culture ofIslam. Jews managed to successfully integrate into the ruling society without losing their religious and national identity. They willingly adopted the Arabic language, spoke Arabic fluently, wrote Arabic in Hebrew letters (Judeo4 Despite the example included for the year 776 C.E., it has been proposed that its early chapters date to the third century C.E. See SARFATI, 1968, pp. 52-55; BELLER, 1988,pp. 51-66; STERN, 1996,pp. 103-129. 5 As part of its scientific tenninology derives from the Greek language, it has been suggested that it was composed in southern Italy - a region still dominated by the Byzantine Empire until the last third of the tenth century - probably in the tenth century, by Shabbetai Ben Abraham Ben Joel Donnolo (913-985). See SARFATI, 1965, pp. 56-82. 6 The Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer, of which only a part may be considered scientific, was considered in the Middle Ages to have been written by Rabbi Eliezer of the second century C.E. But that opinion has been challenged in recent literature, which dates it to the early Islamic period. See SARFATI, 1968, pp. 52-55; BELLER, 1988, p. 55. 7 Sefer Ye$irah (The Book of Creation) is traditionally attributed to the patriarch Abraham. Recent research, however, maintains that it was composed either in the century before or after the rise of Islam. See W ASSERSTROM, 1993, pp. 1-30; GOLDSTEIN, 2001, p. 23 note 12. 8 Sefer Refu'ot (Book of Remedies) was attributed to Asaph ha-Rofe (Asaph the Physician), surnamed in some manuscripts as ha-Yarboni (the Astrologer). It is the earliest medical treatise written in Hebrew, probably dating from the seventh or the ei~hth century. On this treatise see MUNTNER, 1957. MUNTNER, 1971. 10 For an example showing Ibn Ezra drawing on Baraita de-Shmu 'el, see p. 125. 11 However, for a brief new examination of this movement, see GOLDSTEIN, 2001, pp. 20-22. See also SARFATI, 1968, pp. 52-60.

4

INTRODUCTION

Arabic), and employed Arabic in the composition of their literary works. At the same time, Jewish intellectuals gradually abandoned the use of Aramaic, but still persisted in the use of the Hebrew language, even though in a restricted manner. An interesting division of labour thus emerged out of this process, regarding the functions that Arabic and Hebrew should respectively fulfill. Hebrew became established as a 'solemn' language, fulfilling literary-aesthetic functions, while Arabic writing performed communicative functions. As stated by the late R. Drory: "In the Arabic text, it was important for the author that his words be well understood; in the Hebrew text, the important thing was that his words be beautifully pUt."12 This division of functions is well attested to in the literary production of Jews living within the orbit of Islam. Jews excelled in the composition, for the first time, of Hebrew secular as well as religious poetry, not least in al-Andalus, where they were well versed in classical Arabic. 13 Also, the general attraction of Islamic culture and the openness of Muslims to cooperation in scientific and cultural matters, led to the participation of Jews, together with Muslims, Christians and members of other communities, in the acceptance of the Greek world view and its integration in Arabic culture and language. The scientific output of scholars of Jewish descent, however, was by no means different from what was composed by Muslims or members of other religious communities, neither in their contents nor in the language in which they were couched. 14 This was the case of many outstanding scientists of Jewish extraction: Miisirjawyh al-Tabib (the Physician), active in the first quarter of the ninth century, who translated medical works for the Umayyad Caliph 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz (reigned 701-720);15 Miishii'llah (d. ca.815), an outstanding astrologer who was consulted by the Caliph aI-Mansur (reigned 754-775) in determining the date of the founding of the new

12 DRORY, 1992, pp. 53-66, especially pp. 60-61. 13 Hebrew poetry reached its peak, or its 'golden age', in the eleventh and twelfth

centuries. Participating in this movement were brilliant Jewish poets such as Shmuel ha-Nagid, who composed his poetry while serving his Muslim master in Granada as a military commander and administrator; Shlomo ibn Gabirol, who integrated in his poetry scientific motifs and neo-platonic philosophical ideas; and Judah ha-Levy, who excelled in his religious, pious Hebrew poetry but composed his philosophical classic, the Kuzari, in Arabic. 14 For a general review of the astrological and astronomical contribution of these scholars of Jewish extraction, see GOLDSTEIN, 2001 pp. 17-49; For a review of the medical work of scholars of Jewish extraction in the same period, see BARKAI, 1998, p~. 8-13. 5 TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, p. 80.

INTRODUCTION

5

city of Baghdad; 16 Sanad Ibn 'All, a member of the team of astronomers who worked under the sponsorship of the Abbasid Caliph al-Mamun (reigned 813-833);17 Sahl Ibn Bushr ibn Habib al-YahUdi, an astrologer active in the early ninth century who was the author of many books on astrology studied throughout the Middle Ages;IS Ali Ibn Dawud alYahUdi, an astrologer in Baghdad at the end of the ninth century known as the author of a single work in Arabic that is not extant;19 Dunash Ibn Tamim of Kairouan, who served the Fatimid Caliph aI-Mansur (reigned 946-952) and wrote in Arabic on astronomy and astrology;20 Ishaq ibn Sulayman (Isaac ben Solomon ha-Yisraeli 850-932?) who served 'Ubayd Allah al-Mahdi (reigned 909-934), the founder of the Fatimid dynasty, a prominent physician who wrote his medical treatises in Arabic. 2I However significant their contribution to the general history of science, their work can hardly be considered of any Jewish consequence. Their scientific work scarcely contains a shred of Jewish material, and in fact, the majority opted for a complete assimilation into their cultural environment, in many cases directly by conversion to Islam. The impact of the Jewish scientific contribution in the framework of Arabic culture may be adequately assessed by reading Categories of Nations, a book composed by Sa'id al-Andalusi, a philologist, natural philosopher, historian and judge living in al-Andalus in the eleventh century. In his book, Sa'id al-Andalusi described the role played by eight privileged nations that made a significant scientific contribution in the framework of Arabic culture, and, interestingly enough, one of those places of honor was reserved by him for the Banu Israel. But the relative weight of Andalusian Jewish scientists stands out from the general Jewish contribution, at least from the special Andalusian vantage point of Sa'id al-Andalusi. After relatively brief references to three Jewish scientists who were active in the eastern part of the Arabic world (see above notes 15, 18 and 21), Sa'id al-Andalusi devoted the bulk of the chapter to a description of the scientific activities of Andalusian Jewish intellectuals, some of whom were personal acquaintances. A long paragraph is devoted to I:Iasdai ibn Ishaq, generally known as I:Iisdai ibn Shaprut (ca.910-975), who is mentioned as a prominent 16 PINGREE, 1974, pp. 159-162; GOLDSTEIN, 2001, pp. 22-24. 17 TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, p. 80. But Sa'id al-Andalusi did not include Sanad

Ibn 'Ali among the Jewish scientists. GOLDSTEIN, 2001, pp. 24-27, 32. IS TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, p. 80; GOLDSTEIN, 2001, pp. 26-27. 19 GOLDSTEIN, 2001, pp. 26-27. 20 STERN, 1954, pp. 373-382; GOLDSTEIN, 2001, pp. 26-27. 21 TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, p. 80. See also BARKA!, 1998, p. 7, who stresses that the only traces of his religious identity may be found in his ethical conception of the practice of medicine.

6

INTRODUCTION

scholar in the art of medicine, "the first to open the door and teach the Jews of al-Andalus about their culture, their laws and their history," and one who was showered with the favours of the Umayyad Caliph alHakam ibn 'Abd-al-Rahman (reigned 961-976). Sa'id al-Andalusi goes on to mention Manahym ibn al-Fawwal of Zaragoza, a leading Jewish physician familiar with logic and other branches of philosophy. He continues with the famous grammarian and lexicographer Marwan ibn Janah (b. ca.990, Cordoba-d. ca.l050, Zaragoza), who, in addition to his medical practice and the authorship of a medical book, is also acclaimed by Sa'id al-Andalusi for his immense knowledge of both the Arabic and the Hebrew languages. Next, Sa'id al-Andalusi refers to a group of specific individuals either contemporaneous or personally connected with him. He mentions Ishaq ibn Qistar, who knew the foundations of medicine and was familiar with the science of logic and the opinions of philosophers, and died in Toledo in 1056; Sulayman ibn Yahya (Shlomo ibn Gabirol), who lived in Zaragoza, was fond of the science of logic, and died while still in his early thirties, ca. 1058. Finally, Sa'id alAndalusi provides a long, detailed mention of the scientific skills of AbU al-Fadll;lasdai ibn Yusuf ibn l;Iasdai, the grandson of l;Iasdai ibn Ishaq who lived in Zaragoza. 22 The Rise ofMedieval Hebrew Science

New historical vicissitudes in the Iberian Peninsula, however, doomed this honeymoon between Andalusian Jewish intellectuals and the Arabic language, and brought it to a gradual end. In order to counter-balance the declining Muslim power and the growing sway of the northern Christian kingdoms, two Berber dynasties, the Almoravides (1090) and the Almohades (1145), successively conquered al-Andalus and caused a substantial alteration in the Iberian political regime and cultural climate. In brief, these traditionalist Muslim regimes, characterized by a strict orthodoxy, placed obstacles to the study of unorthodox branches of science and put an end to the relative tolerance up to the time of the invasions. Under compulsion to embrace Islam, many families of the resident minorities of Christians and Jews opted for abandoning Muslim Spain. The vast majority of these communities fled from al-Andalus to Christian Spain, while many Jewish families abandoned the Iberian Peninsula altogether and immigrated to southern France, Italy or the Orient. 22 TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, pp. 80-82.

INTRODUCTION

7

As a result of their physical detachment from Muslim Spain, Jewish intellectuals gradually severed their links with the Arabic language and found another linguistic vehicle for expressing their intellectual aspirations. Although Jews who settled in Christian lands were quickly integrated and mastered the 'Christian languages', a remarkable transition from Arabic to Hebrew occurred. This is especially noticeable in the composition of works dealing with secular subjects. In contrast with the previous contributions of Jews to science - either written in Arabic but devoid of any significant Jewish imprint, or written in Hebrew but wrought in a disjointed body of texts - the new 'medieval Hebrew science' that emerged, beginning with the twelfth century until the end of the Middle Ages, was as a robust and continuous mainstream of original Hebrew compositions and translations into Hebrew, conveying, with a clearly Jewish character, the Graeco-Arabic world view to Jewish civilization. Some central but partial characteristics of this intellectual movement have already been studied by earlier and more recent scholarship research. To limit the scope to a few outstanding but by no means comprehensive examples, M. Steinschneider already gave in the nineteenth century a brilliant start to the study of the vigorous and wide movement of medieval translations into Hebrew;23 an overall assessment of the Hebrew movement of translations was carried out by A.S. Halkin and J.P. Rothschild;24 G. B. Sarfati investigated the mathematical terminology in Hebrew scientific literature of the Middle Ages;25 B.R. Goldstein focused his attention on translations of Arabic astronomical texts into Hebrew 26 and on the scientific contribution of prominent personalities such as Gersonides;27 G. Freudenthal studied the reception of sciences and the role sciences played in the medieval Jewish culture of Southern France;28 R. Barkai conducted research into the creation of

23 24 25 26

See especially STEINSCHNEIDER, 1956, pp. XV-XXIV. HALKIN, 1972; ROTHSCHILD, 1989. SARFATI,1968. HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967. This work includes a critical edition Ibn Ezra's Hebrew translation of Ibn al-Muthannii's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwiirizmi.

27 GOLDSTEIN, 1985. 28 FREUDENTHAL, 1993 (i). For an English reduced version, see FREUDENTHAL,

1995. After a detailed study of the development of sciences in the medieval Jewish culture of Southern France, G. Freudenthal arrived at the following paradoxical conclusion (see FREUDENTHAL, 1995, p. 30): "On the one hand, science was very widely studied; on the other hand, some sciences or scientific disciplines were not at all appropriated, and to those sciences that were appropriated, astronomy excepted, the Hebrew-writing scholars made few original contributions."

8

INTRODUCTION

the corpus of medieval Jewish texts on gynecology and obstetrics;29 R. Fontaine examined the work of medieval Jewish authors related to metereology;30 Y.T. Langerman has studied medieval astronomical Hebrew manuscripts and the reception of sciences in the Iberian Peninsula;3) R. Glasner examined Hebrew medieval texts dealing with physics;32 D. Schwartz studied astral magic in medieval Jewish thought;33 Tony Levy examined the mathematical contribution of medieval Jewish intellectuals;34 and a collective effort has lately been made to appraise medieval Hebrew encyclopedias. 35 Thus Hebrew was transformed into the standard written language for medieval Jewish science and philosophy. Less attention, however, has been accorded to the crucially important first steps of this new movement. If we wish to grasp and epitomize the initiation of this process, no better illustration may be found, it seems, than to study the work of Abraham Ibn Ezra. Ibn Ezra was a prolific writer on a great variety of subjects and one of the most original medieval thinkers. He rose to fame principally because of his outstanding Hebrew biblical exegesis, but he also wrote religious and secular poetry and a series of religious-theological monographs and grammatical treatises. However, Ibn Ezra's intellectual interests extended to the field of science as well. His main contribution to the history of science lies in the composition of a significant but relatively unknown scientific corpus. Its contents are typical of and faithfully reflect Ibn Ezra's times. Moreover, the vicissitudes of his life, as they transpired in place and time, as well as the organization and scope of his literary production, emerge as the very embodiment of the passage from Arabic to Hebrew and the rise of 'medieval Hebrew science'. Geographically, Ibn Ezra's literary production, at least as it has been handed down to us, was not written in al-Andalus, where he was born and grew up, and where he received his secular education in the best tradition of the Arabic-Andalusian science and his religious education 29 BARKAI, 1998. For an examination of the methods used to assimilate foreign concepts of female physiology, anatomy and pathology and a critical edition of Seier ha-Toledet (Book on Generation), see BARKAI, 1991. 30 See, inter alia, FONTAINE, 1995; FONTAINE, 2000. 3) See, inter alia, FISCHER, KUNITZSCH AND LANGERMAN, 1988; LANGERMAN, 1999, pp. 1-54. 32 See, inter alia, GLASNER, 1998; GLASNER, 2000. 33 See, inter alia, SCHWARTZ, 1996 (ii); SCHWARTZ, 1999; SCHWARTZ, 2001. 34 For a study of Bar l;Iiyya's and Ibn Ezra's mathematical work, see LEVY, 2001 (i); LEVY, 2001 (ii). For an assessment of the Hebrew versions of Euc1id's Elements and the problems of the relationship to Arabic and Latin versions, see LEVY, 1997 (i~, LEVY, 1997 (ii). 5 HARVEY (ED.), 2000.

INTRODUCTION

9

from his Jewish Spaniard masters. His first works date precisely from the time he abandoned al-Andalus and arrived at Latin Europe. From a purely literary perspective, then, Ibn Ezra first appeared on the scene when he was already fifty years old, in Rome, in 1140. Thereafter he led the life of an intellectual wanderer, roaming through Italy, France and England, teaching and writing prolifically, almost exclusively in Hebrew, on an extremely wide variety of subjects. 36 Chronologically, Ibn Ezra's literary career stretched from that year 1140 to the end of his life. The very fact that he commenced his literary activities in 1140, and did so in Hebrew, demonstrates that the message he intended to transmit in this particular language became vitally relevant only after he emigrated from al-Andalus and arrived in Latin Europe. The same fact strongly suggests that had Abraham Ibn Ezra not abandoned al-Andalus and had not changed his linguistic vehicle from Arabic to Hebrew, in all likelihood he would have sunk into complete oblivion, instead of becoming a prolific writer and one of the most original medieval thinkers.

Ibn Ezra's Biblical Exegesis - Italian and French Periods The biblical commentaries of Abraham Ibn Ezra attained extraordinary recognition in the Middle Ages. This popularity led to their subsequent inclusion in the Miqra 'ot Gedolot, an exclusive compilation of the most prestigious and distinguished medieval Jewish commentaries that also became the normative Jewish biblical exegesis. What is more noteworthy, his popularity begot a new Hebrew literary genre, which flourished in the 14th century - the genre of super-commentaries by other writers on Ibn Ezra's fascinating and obscure biblical commentaries. 37 Perhaps the main reason for Ibn Ezra's medieval success and popularity is precisely his encyclopedic approach to biblical exegesis. In his commentaries he introduced, besides a deep understanding of the biblical text, all branches of human knowledge, such as astrology, astronomy, mathematics, philosophy, grammar, logic, 36 We will not concern ourselves in detail with the problematic chronology and geographical setting of Ibn Ezra's wandering all over Italy, France and England, until required to do so, in the first part of this book, when dealing with his scientific works. However, the reader interested in Ibn Ezra's biography from a chronological, geographical and literary viewpoint may tum to the bibliography brought in the following notes. About Ibn Ezra's non-conformism and individualism viewed as part and parcel of his cultural contribution and wanderings, see GRABoYs, 1983, pp. 3-13. 37 For Ibn Ezra's super-commentaries, see SIMON, 1993, pp. 86-128; SCHWARTZ, 1996 (i), pp. 92-114.

10

INTRODUCTION

etc. 38 From a study of his biblical commentaries, as well as from the chronology of their composition, Ibn Ezra emerges as a roving intellectual transmitting his exegetical and world view to the Jewish communities that he came across in his wanderings. Ibn Ezra's exegetical career may be divided broadly into two: the Italian period and the French period. The Italian period includes his sojourn in two main Italian cities. First, after turning his back on alAndalus, in Rome, approximately between the years 1140-1143, he composed his commentaries on Ecclesiastes, Job, Lamentations, Daniel, Ruth, Esther and The Song of Songs. Thereafter, in Lucca, approximately from 1143 to 1145, he composed his first short commentary on the Pentateuch, as well as the commentaries on Isaiah and on the Former Prophets.39 The French period includes Ibn Ezra's exegetical work stretching approximately from 1153 to 1156. As recorded in the manuscripts, we know that these biblical commentaries were composed in a city named as RDWM, RDW A or DRWS.4o This toponym, written in Hebrew letters, has been persuasively identified by N. Golb as Rouen, the capital of Normandy; other researchers have claimed it to be Dreux, near the border once running between the Ile-deFrance and Normandy, or Rodez, in Languedoc. 41 In the French period, Ibn Ezra composed the second long commentary on the Pentateuch, from which are extant only a fragmentary version of his commentary on Genesis and the complete commentary on Exodus, and a second commentary on the Former Prophets, Daniel, Esther and The Song of Songs. Several features reflect the difference between the Italian and the French periods. First, the French period was devoted by Ibn Ezra to writing a second version of some of the commentaries he had already 38 For an analysis of the encyclopedic aspects of Ibn Ezra's literary work, see SELA, 2000, pp. 154-170. For a study of Ibn Ezra's integration of astrological and scientific ideas into his biblical exegesis, see SELA, 1999 (i). 39 For Ibn Ezra's literary production in the Italian period see the following works: ROSIN, 1898, p. 25; FLEISCHER, 1970, pp. 107-124; FLEISCHER, 1932, pp. 97-100, 129-31, 148-150, 169-71; FLEISCHER, 1933, pp. 134-136, 152-155; GOLB, 1998, pp. 155-158. In Rome, Ibn Ezra composed the grammatical treatise Sefer Moznayim (Book of Scales). In Lucca, he also composed two grammatical works: Sefer haYesod (Book of Fundamentals of Grammar) and Sephat Yeter (Language of Excellence), written in defense of the grammatical positions of Sa'adiah Ga'on a~ainst the criticisms of Dunash ben Labrat. o For this toponym, see Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 12:2 and the colophon of his long commentary on Daniel. 41 For a discussion of the meaning of the above-mentioned toponyms and for Ibn Ezra's literary production in the French period, see ROSIN, 1898, p. 25; FLEISCHER, 1930, pp. 79-84; GOLB, 1998, pp. 3-5,264-267.

INTRODUCTION

11

composed during the previous Italian period, in Rome and in Lucca. 42 This conduct characterizes his work on the biblical commentaries as well as a good deal of his scientific treatises, as will be shown in due course, and in both cases the same motives are at work. It tells us, on the one hand, that the pen was his main means of subsistence, and, on the other hand, that he was required to satisfy a demand that did not diminish during his wandering in Latin Europe. Thus, it would appear, when he arrived in a new town, he wrote a new version for a new audience. The reiteration of a new version also tells us about the enduring and increasing relevance of his commentaries, about the high quality of his work, as well as about his ability to continue arousing the attention and curiosity of a changing reading public along the route of his wanderings. Second, there is generally a significant difference in the relative length of the parallel commentaries he wrote in Italy and in France. Not by chance is the first version written in Italy of his parallel commentaries named by modern scholarship as the 'short commentary', whereas the second version written in France is designated as the 'long commentary'. The shortness and conciseness of the Italian commentaries, as compared with the French commentaries, should not be considered mere statistical data but a significant characteristic that generally translated into abstruseness and extreme terseness. On the other hand, the longer, more verbose and expansive French commentaries reveal that Ibn Ezra became more concerned than before regarding the need to produce work that would be clearer and more understandable to the reader. Third, perusing a pair of parallel commentaries to a single biblical verse will yield, in a number of cases, the perception that the audience addressed by Ibn Ezra in the first commentary was quite different from the reading public addressed in the second.43 A comparative study of two commentaries to the same biblical book, one of the Italian and the other from the French period, conveys the impression that in the chronological gap between the two commentaries, Ibn Ezra underwent a significant spiritual shift. Two illustrative examples are studied in 42 Abraham Ibn Ezra wrote two different commentaries on the following biblical books: Genesis, Exodus, Psalms, Daniel, The Song of Songs, Esther, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Qvadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. On Ibn Ezra's exegetical work see SIMON, 1983, pp. 47-60; SARNA, 1993, pp.. 1-27. ~3 For Ibn Ezra's exegetical approach, and especially for the relationship between the exegete and his readers, see: SIMON, 1988, pp. 23-42; FRIEDLANDER, 1877, pp. 143-4, 150-3, 161, 165, 169, 170-1, 176, 179, 181, 186, 194. See also Simon's criticism of Friedlander in SIMON, 1982, pp. 127-132.

12

INTRODUCTION

Appendix I (see below, p. 331), each of them presenting, face to face, a pair of parallel exegetical passages, one of the Italian and the other from the French period. These two examples illustrate two main ideas. First, the crucial role that the interest in science played in Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries, in both the Italian and the French periods. Second, the spiritual change that our author underwent in the interim: whereas in the Italian period Ibn Ezra was physically in Rome or Lucca but spiritually in al-Andalus, still addressing an Andalusian audience, in the French period, written ten years later, Ibn Ezra was compelled to acknowledge the fact that he would never return to al-Andalus and had to integrate into a new intellectual milieu.

Poetry, Theological Monographs and Science

Ibn Ezra's claim to fame would have been fully justified even had his literary work been confined to the domain of biblical exegesis. Our author, however, extended his literary interests to a wide range of subjects and literary genres. He composed Hebrew religious and secular poetry, sparkling with sarcasm, satire, parody, and polemics, and tending to ignore the boundaries between religious and profane domains. His poetry was written in the same vein as the Hebrew Andalusian poetry of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, that is, in an almost purely biblical Hebrew, but according to the themes and structures of Arabic poetry.44 Ibn Ezra also wrote monographs that, in line with his encyclopedic approach, mingled religious and theological contents with grammatical, cosmological and scientific material of various sorts. A typical case is Seier ha-Shem, (Book of the Name [of God]), a theological, grammatical, mathematical monograph whose purpose was to reveal the secret meanings behind the Tetragrammaton and its letters. In line with the above-mentioned encyclopedic approach, Seier ha-Shem includes, besides its main theological subject (chapters three, four, five, seven, eight), a grammatical discussion about the meaning of names (chapter one) and about the difference between substantives and adjectives (chapter two), together with a mathematical discussion concerning the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter (chapter six).45 Another case in point is Yesod Mor'ah (The Fundament 44 For Ibn Ezra's religious poetry, see SHIREY HA-QODESH, 1980. For his profane poetry, see DIWAN, 1886. For a general review ofibn Ezra's poetry, see LEVIN, 1956; ITZAHKI, 2000, pp. 53-59. 45 See HASHEM, 1834. For a modem annotated edition, see HASHEM, 1985. Seier ha-Shem was composed by Ibn Ezra during his sojourn in Beziers in Provence in

INTRODUCTION

13

of Awe), the last and most brilliant of his monographs, written in England in 1161 to explain the rationale of the commandments of the Jewish religion. After the customary, brief introduction, Abraham Ibn Ezra began this monograph with an open assault on those Jewish intellectuals who devoted themselves to the Jewish disciplines - for example, to the study of Bible, Talmud, or Hebrew Grammar - to the exclusion of all others. Each of the Jewish disciplines, he said, is magnificent and beneficial, but there is no justification for learning any one of them exclusively. In his opinion, the Jewish intellectual must combine and integrate all available human scientific knowledge if he wishes to elucidate obscure issues arising from the biblical or the Talmudic texts. Ibn Ezra proceeded to mention the following scientific branches: astronomy (l)okhmat ha-mazalot); astrology (mishpetei hamazalot); arithmetic, geometry and ratios (l)okhmat ha-heshbon hamidot we-ha- 'arakhim); natural science (l)okhmat ha-toledet); psychology (l)okhmat ha-nefesh); cosmogony (l)okhmat toledet hashamayim); logic (l)okhmat ha-mivt'a).46 In light of such an outspoken position, small wonder that Ibn Ezra's intellectual and literary interests extended to the field of science. Thus, the study of Ibn Ezra's scientific thought and contribution within the historical and cultural context of his times will be our main concern in this book. In this regard, two methodological remarks seem to the point. First, numerous scientific treatises by Ibn Ezra pertaining to various branches of medieval science will be examined and integrated into what we have named as Ibn Ezra's 'scientific corpus'. However, we deem it inappropriate to fragmentize our attention and study his oeuvre, as is customary in scholarly research, not as a whole piece but strictly divided into well-defined and isolated literary genres. In view of Ibn Ezra's encyclopedic approach, his tendency to blur the borders between the scientific and the non-scientific and to ignore the boundaries between the religious and the profane, we regard it highly desirable to explore his scientific thought throughout his whole literary oeuvre. We believe this approach will prove to be very fruitful in disclosing hitherto unknown ideas. Second, Ibn Ezra's thought will be sought, much as in the 1148 and dedicated to two of his students, as stated in the preface to the book. 46 YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, pp. 317-342. The Hebrew expressions /,1okhmat hamazalot, meaning in this particular context astronomy, mishpetei ha-mazalot, distinctly meaning astrology, and /,1okhmat ha-toledet, meaning natural science, all of them idiosyncratic expressions by Ibn Ezra, will be studied in detail in due course. Concerning the monograph Yesod Mor'ah and Ibn Ezra's sojourn in England, see FRIEDLANDER, 1894; FLEISCHER, 1931. For an assessment of Ibn Ezra's philosophical-religious-theological thought, see the following main works: FRIEDLANDER, 1877; ROSIN, 1898-1899; GREIVE, 1973; SCHWARTZ, 1999, pp. 62-91.

14

INTRODUCTION

classical fashion, in the exploration of his sources as well as in the study of the ways in which he introduced purely scientific concepts into his work. But the scope will be expanded to include the study of his scientific thought within the historical and cultural context of what has been here labeled as 'the rise of medieval Hebrew science'. Consequently, considerable attention will be paid to eminently cultural and seemingly 'non-scientific' factors. A relevant and crucially important topic in this regard is Ibn Ezra's vision of the Hebrew language and the study of his linguistic strategy when facing the necessity of creating a new scientific Hebrew nomenclature. In addition, much effort will be invested in exploring the ways employed by Ibn Ezra to introduce scientific contents and ideas into the Jewish civilization of his time. To better understand the main concerns of this book and illustrate their chief foci of interest, following is a list - by no means comprehensive - of some of the main questions which will be posed in due course: How did Ibn Ezra envisage the scientific book as such? How was Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus organized and shaped? On which scientific sources did he draw? What was Ibn Ezra's stance towards his scientific sources? By which means did he incorporate his sources and their scientific information into his scientific and non-scientific work? Are there any special features which reveal Ibn Ezra's unique contribution and special personality? What linguistic strategy did he adopt when faced with the need to create a new Hebrew scientific vocabulary? What was Ibn Ezra's view of the Hebrew language? Did Abraham Ibn Ezra develop any original idea in his scientific treatises? Did he conceive any innovative view of astrology? How did Ibn Ezra conceive the relationship between reason and faith? What was in his opinion the connection, if any, between scientific wisdom, salvation from the stars and religious devotion? How did he address the antagonism which may be seen as emerging between the deterministic postulates of astrology and the premises of religious faith? What were, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, the links and borders between astronomy and astrology, two interrelated but still discernible branches of medieval science? How did Ibn Ezra introduce astronomical and astrological materials into his scientific treatises and his biblical commentaries? To come to grips with these and other questions, this book will be divided into five parts. In each of them a special methodology will be employed to focus on a separate aspect of Ibn Ezra's scientific thought and work.

INTRODUCTION

15

The first part has been designed to provide a picture of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus, as detailed and comprehensive as possible given the present state of research. First, Ibn Ezra's scientific work will be studied in detail and broken up into four main genres: mathematics, astronomy, scientific instruments and tools; the Hebrew calendar; the astrological encyclopedia; translations from Arabic into Hebrew. Then, Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus will be reassembled as a whole in order to provide a global characterization. 47 The second part will be devoted to an analysis of the linguistic strategy adopted by Ibn Ezra when facing the colossal task of rendering into a Hebrew mould the scientific concepts that he had imbibed in the Arabic language. First, several relevant statements will be studied to grasp Ibn Ezra's view about the Hebrew language as well as his general approach to the appropriate methodology for translating scientific concepts and data into Hebrew. The rest of this part will be reserved to assessing in a practical manner Ibn Ezra's linguistic strategy through the detailed scrutiny of some outstanding examples. 48 The main purpose of the third and fourth parts will be to show that Ibn Ezra's singular and innovative contribution was not so much related to original astrological or astronomical doctrines or new technical data as to a singular combination of scientific ideas with religious, philosophical and cultural concepts. A special approach is proposed in these parts to assess Ibn Ezra's astrological and cosmological view: to focus attention on a specific part of his scientific work, namely, the introductions to some of his astrological treatises. These introductions, written in brilliant, incisive and extremely concise Hebrew, were not only meant to catch the reader's interest in the book but also presented his singular and personal view about the astrological subject to be dealt with. Three introductions to Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises will be studied in detail. 49 The fifth part will be devoted to studying Ibn Ezra's attitude towards his scientific sources, as well as the ways he employed to introduce their scientific information into his scientific and non-scientific work. This will be attained by exploring four 'encounters' between Abraham Ibn Ezra and Claudius Ptolemy, two scientists separated by a gap of one thousand years. The rationale behind this selection is that if we regard

47 This part is based on ideas presented in, and is a substantial extension of, my article SELA, 2001 (ii). 48 This part is a substantial extension of my article SELA, 2001 (iii). 49 This part is based on ideas presented in SELA, 2001 (iv) and Sela, 1999 (i) pp. 63-71; 154-160.

16

INTRODUCTION

the complete work of Ibn Ezra as a single piece, Claudius Ptolemy clearly emerges as his chief scientific source. Methodologically, this part has been also construed as a crossroads in which the two main parts of Ibn Ezra's oeuvre - that is, his scientific corpus, on the one hand, and his exegetical corpus, on the other- come into contact. That has been done with the intention of examining how Ibn Ezra embedded scientific contents in a non-scientific environment, and also of illuminating the figure of Claudius Ptolemy by comparatively studying the role Ptolemy played in both literary environments. The first encounter will be concerned with the role Claudius Ptolemy played in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus, both in its astronomical and astrological part. All three remaining encounters will be concerned with the singular perspective obtainable by studying the direct references to Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries. By and large, this book constitutes an exploration of Ibn Ezra's scientific thought by means of an analysis of excerpts from Ibn Ezra's scientific and non-scientific work. As these texts had been cited in their English translation, we have deemed it appropriate to cite the original Hebrew texts of the main quotations in an appendix. Thus, the English reader familiar with Hebrew will have not only an opportunity to compare the Hebrew sources with their English translations but also to enjoy Ibn Ezra's magnificent Hebrew style.

PART ONE

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

Introduction

Besides a large corpus of biblical exegesis, religious and profane poetry, grammatical and theological monographs, Ibn Ezra's intellectual interests also extended to science. In this area, his main contribution was the production of a significant but poorly known scientific corpus whose contents are typical of and faithfully reflect Ibn Ezra's times. On the one hand, Ibn Ezra's scientific contribution may be understood as the very embodiment of the first stages of what we have designated here as 'the rise of medieval Hebrew science'. This was a process in which Jewish scholars gradually abandoned the Arabic language and adopted the holy tongue as a vehicle not limited to religious contents but open also to express secular and scientific ideas. On a broader European stage, Ibn Ezra's scientific output may be understood as one of the multiple expressions of the 'twelfth century scientific renaissance'. It was a cultural process in whose framework the Greek scientific world conception was transferred to scholars in Western Europe, after being adopted, refined and extended by Islamic culture and the Arabic language. In this context, Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus represented an exceptional case: instead of the common Latin model embodied by the scholar coming from the Christian North and daring to penetrate the Iberian Peninsula to initiate a translation enterprise, we have in Ibn Ezra the opposite case of an intellectual imbued with Arabic culture, who abandons al-Andalus, roams around the Christian countries and delivers in his wandering through Italy, France and England, the scientific and cultural luggage that he amassed during his youth in al-Andalus.! Researchers in the past have explored some components of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus. A brilliant start was carried out in the closing years of the 19th century by the bibliographic contribution of Moritz Steinschneider2 and by Moritz Silberberg, who translated and edited a ! For a general or synoptic evaluation of Ibn Ezra's scientific contribution, see VALLICROSA, 1949, pp. 289-347; BARON, 1958, VIII, pp. 138-220; LEVEY, 1971, IV, p~. 502-503; GOLDSTEIN, 1996, pp. 9-21. LEVY, 2000, pp. 60-75. See, especially, STEINSCHNEIDER, 1880, pp. 59-128; STEINSCHNEIDER, 1925, pp.

18

PART ONE

critical edition of Ibn Ezra's Sefer ha-Mispar (Book of the Number).3 In the 20 th century, Jose Maria Millas Vallicrosa focused his attention on Ibn Ezra's astronomical works, editing two important Latin treatises ascribed by him to Ibn Ezra. 4 Also B.R. Goldstein, in connection with his research on Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi, which is an important astronomical Arabic source that has been lost but that is extant in Latin and Hebrew translations, edited, translated and commented upon the Hebrew translations, including the version carried out by Ibn Ezra. 5 But these important works cover quantitatively only a small part of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus. The overwhelming majority of the works comprising Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus were original treatises written in Hebrew, and this is the most neglected part of his scientific output. As a matter of fact, some of the Hebrew treatises by Ibn Ezra have been printed, but mainly in order to achieve important goals which were quite irrelevant to the scientific nature of the corpus. For instance, Raphael Levy edited the Hebrew text of Ibn Ezra's book Reshit lJokhmah (The Beginning of Wisdom), together with its medieval French translation, not so much because he was interested in the astrological subject-matter of this important Hebrew treatise, which is the most famous ofIbn Ezra's scientific corpus, as by his realization that the medieval French translation of Reshit lJokhmah was an excellent source in his research of the process of crystallization of the incipient French language. 6 Similarly, J. L. Fleischer, a scholar interested in Ibn Ezra's biography and literary work, published some of his Hebrew astrological works, but confessed openly that he undertook the task not so much by reason of being attracted by its contents as because he estimated that in the subject-matter of these texts he would be able to find important biographical data that would help him learn about Ibn Ezra's biography and biblical commentaries. 7 327-387.

3 MISPAR, 1895, pp. 27, 79. 4 LIBER DE RA TIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947; ASTROLABIO, 1940, pp. 9-29. 5 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967. 6 See LEVY, 1927, p. 65: "It is not primarily as a study of the literary significance of these treatises, howeveF, that the present work was undertaken. Its chief object is to investigate the language of the French translation from the point of view of French lexicography." See also RESHIT I;IOKl;lMAH, 1939, p. 15. 7 See what J. L. Fleischer wrote with remarkable frankness in the introduction to his edition of Ibn Ezra's first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim (Book of Reasons). TE'AMIM A, 1951, pp. 8-9: "I was not interested at all by the astrological-professional aspect of this book. Instead, I prepared photographs of the manuscripts of Ibn Ezra's astrological works because I meant to find in them new data to explore Ibn Ezra's

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

19

My main purpose in this part is to provide a picture of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus as comprehensive and detailed as possible, given the present state of research, by continuing and updating the work of those who in the past were interested in his output. I will add new, significant data that I discovered as a result of my exploration of Ibn Ezra's work, both those books that have been published as well as the works that are extant only in manuscript. The first chapters will be devoted to a study of the basic constituents of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus. To accomplish this purpose, Ibn Ezra's scientific work will be split up into four main genres and a separate chapter will be devoted to each: (1) Mathematics, astronomy, scientific instruments and tools; (2) Jewish calendar; (3) the astrological encyclopedia; (4) translations from Arabic into Hebrew. Within these genres, the treatises composing the scientific corpus, including various versions of the same treatise, will be treated separately and will follow a chronological order, to establish fundamental bibliographical facts, such as date and place of composition. At the same time, the scientific contents of these works will be briefly presented and their sources occasionally indicated. I will pay special attention to the matter of Ibn Ezra's problematic authorship of some works. In a concluding chapter, Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus will be reassembled as a whole, in order to provide a global characterization, which will try to highlight its general organization and shape, and to indicate its main aims and the special traits which reveal Ibn Ezra's personal contribution.

l. Mathematics, Astronomy, Scientific Instruments and Tools We begin our review with the works of Ibn Ezra which deal mainly with mathematics and astronomy. As we shall soon see, it was not principally with the purpose of providing pure theoretical knowledge in mathematics or astronomy that these works were written. They were mainly oriented towards solving technical astronomical problems arising from the astrological praxis. Of paramount importance in this context was his undertaking to explain and teach the use of scientific tools and instruments, such as the astrolabe and the astronomical tables. • SeIer ha-Mispar (Book of the Number): This treatise was written in Italy, possibly in the city of Lucca, approximately in 1146 or earlier, and therefore has to be considered Ibn Ezra's first scientific biography, the chronology of his works and new insights into his intellectual character."

20

PART ONE

work. This assertion is based upon the following two facts. First, Sefer ha-Mispar was surely written before or in 1146, since Ibn Ezra alludes to Sefer ha-Mispar as an already accomplished work in his Sefer ha'Ibbur (Book of Intercalation), which was definitely written in 1146 in the city of Verona (see below, p. 39). Second, in his Sefer ha-Mispar Ibn Ezra refers on two different occasions to the first Hebrew version of Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables) while using the future tense, thus alluding to it as a still unaccomplished work. 8 Since the first Hebrew version of the Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot was written in Lucca approximately in 1146 (see below, p. 22), it follows that Sefer ha-Mispar was written in 1146 or earlier, in Verona, Lucca or in Rome, which was Ibn Ezra's previous station in Italy. This treatise was already published by Moritz Silberberg in a critical edition in 1895, with a commentary and a German translation. 9 Sefer ha-Mispar was intended to be an arithmetic textbook, and as such it was divided into seven chapters, dealing with the following basic operations: multiplication, division, addition, subtraction, fractions, proportions and square roots. \0 Sefer ha-Mispar also presents and explains in its introductory chapter the decimal positional system, which assumes, besides separate symbols for 1 to 9, an additional "void" symbol for 0 as a placeholder. Ibn Ezra refers to it metaphorically as a "wheel, like straw before the wind", designed to keep the values in their degrees, and which in a foreign language (Arabic) is called sifrah".11 He claims that this system was an invention of the Hindu sages. 12 Also, in the introduction to his translation of Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi, Ibn Ezra informs us that Kanka, a Hindu scholar, "taught the Arabs the basis of numbers, i.e., the nine numerals", and that subsequently "all later Arabic scholars multiply, divide and extract square roots as is written in Muhammad b. Musa al-Khwarizml's book on Hindu reckoning".13 Hence, Sefer ha8 MISPAR, 1895, pp. 27, 79. 9 MISPAR,1895. \0 For a general review of the

contents of Seier ha-Mispar, see STEINSCHNEIDER, 1880, pp. 465-480; LEVY, 2000, pp. 67-70. For a discussion of some arithmetical and terminological topics related to this book, see SARFATI, 1968, pp. 131-139. II MISPAR, 1895, p. 3. The word sifrah, appears with the same meaning in Liber de rationibus tabularum, the Latin version of Ibn Ezra's Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lu./;Jot as cifre, which is a transliteration of an Arabic word meaning 'void' or 'zero'. See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 102, 114. 12 MISPAR, 1895, p. 2. 13 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 148,

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

21

Mispar was, most likely, based on al-Khwarizmi's Treatise on Calculation with the Hindu Numerals or the Book of Addition and Subtraction by the Method of Calculation of the Hindus, which may have expounded for the first time in Arabic the use of the Hindu numerals 1 to 9, and 0, and the place-value system, besides the four basic operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, as well as the extraction of the square roOt. 14 The Hebrew Sefer ha-Mispar was one of the first to introduce the arithmetic of al-Khwarizmi into Latin Europe, as well as the decimal positional system, in parallel with a Latin contemporary version entitled algorismus, a name that clearly reflects al-Khwarizmi's influence. 15 T. Levy has lately drawn attention to a manuscript of a Hebrew mathematical text ascribed by its colophon to Abraham Ibn Ezra. In this manuscript the Indian use of the zero is referred to, and the zero is called "small wheel" (galgal qatan). Interestingly enough, this fragment as well as other passages of the Hebrew mathematical text have been shown by him to have a precise equivalent, including omissions and errors, in a Latin text of the second half of the twelfth century. In T. Levy's opinion, this Hebrew text, which briefly deals with arithmetical issues but is mostly devoted to geometry, contains an early draft of a mathematical treatise by Abraham Ibn Ezra: its arithmetical part evolved into Sefer ha-Mispar, whereas its geometrical part apparently never circulated. The Hebrew text was translated into Latin at a very early date, perhaps during Ibn Ezra's lifetime: the Latin manuscript that contains it seems to date from the second half of the twelfth century. 16 301-302. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 365 (Y.l.l). 14 For a discussion of these two AI-Khwarizmi's arithmetical treatises, see TOOMER, 1973, p. 360; For a discussion of Al-Khwarizmi's role in the beginnings of al~ebra, see RASHED, 1984, pp. 17-29. The name of the Latin treatise is Liber ysagogarum Alchorismi and one of the eight extant manuscripts attributes it to Magister A. Names such as Adelard of Bath, Abraham Bar I:Iiyya and Petrus Alphonsi were presented as plausible candidates, but taking into account that Ibn Ezra wrote Sefer ha-Mispar, which clearly reveals AlKhwarizmi's influence, and given that the Latin treatise covers also Jewish topics, such as the Jewish calendar, the Hebrew names of the planets, etc. it is not impossible that Magister A. was Abraham Ibn Ezra. For a discussion of this Latin arithmetical treatise introduced in Latin Europe in the middle of the twelfth century, see especially ALLARD, 1991, pp. 233-83; See also COCHRANE, 1994, pp. 80-81, 8384 (n. 31,32); MAHONEY, 1978, pp. 150-151. 16 According to the colophon, as T. Levy explains, this text includes Sefer haMidot we-hu Sefer ha-Mispar Ie-rabbi Avraham ben Ezrah ben rabbi Me'ir haSefaradi, that is, the Book of Geometry, this is the Book of the Number by Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra son of Rabbi Me'ir the Spaniard. However, this Hebrew text is not the same as Ibn Ezra's Sefer ha-Mispar which was edited by M. Silberberg. The Latin text has been studied by Ch. Burnett who catalogued it under the title De

22

PART ONE

• Se/er Ta'ame; ha-Lubot (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables): Abraham Ibn Ezra presumably wrote this treatise in four different versions, two in Hebrew and the other two in LatinP The Hebrew versions are lost, but a Latin text, Liber de rationibus tabularum, was ascribed to Ibn Ezra and edited in 1947 by Jose Maria Millas Vallicrosa.1 8 We have sound evidence about Ibn Ezra's authorship over both Hebrew versions: according to the highly reliable testimony of Joseph Bonfils in his work Sa/nat Pa 'aneab - a supercommentary written on Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch at the end of the fourteenth century - Ibn Ezra wrote two different Hebrew versions of the astronomical tables, the first in Lucca and the second in Narbonne. As far as the first Hebrew version is concerned, besides being composed in Lucca, as Joseph Bonfils claimed, it is possible to establish with reasonable certainty that it was written in 1146, after Ibn Ezra wrote his Sefer ha-Mispar and shortly before he moved to Verona. 19 Regarding the second Hebrew version of Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot, we know for certain that it was composed in Narbonne, as Joseph Bonfils claimed, and it may thus be safely posited that it was composed after Ibn Ezra left Italy and arrived in Provence, between 1148 and 1154.20 As said above, the two Hebrew versions were lost, but we can arrive at an approximation of their contents by exploring other sources. In Joseph Bonfils' Safnat Pa 'aneab it is possible to trace four interesting references pointing directly to four passages in Ibn Ezra's Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot - two dealing with the motions of the moon, one with the prflfortione numerorum etfigurarum geometricarum. See LEVY, 2001 (i), pp. 295-305. I For a discussion of the different versions of this treatise, and especially regarding the presumed authorship of Ibn Ezra, see the following works: STEINSCHNEIDER, 1880, pp. 469, 494; VALLICROSA, 1938, 306-322; id., LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 11-21; VALLlCROSA, 1949, pp. 289-347. I dealt with this subject in two articles, and here I will confine myself to pointing out the main arguments: SELA, 1996, pp. 185-222; SELA, 1997,37-56. 18 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947. This treatise, as we will soon see, is the second Latin version of Liber de rationibus tabularum. 19 The last assertion follows from the following two points: first, as said above (see p. 20), in his Sefer ha-Mispar Ibn Ezra refers on two different occasions to Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot, that is, the Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables, while using the future tense, and so alludes to it as a still unfinished work; secondly, later in 1146, Ibn Ezra left Lucca and moved to Verona where he also wrote in 1146 the first version of his Sefer ha- 'Ibbur, a fact that was registered by Ibn Ezra himself in this book (see below, p. 39). 20 The second Hebrew version was quite certainly composed before 1154, when Ibn Ezra wrote the second version of his Sefer ha-Moladot, in whose Latin extant translation we found a reference to Liber de rationibus tabularum as a completed work (see below, p. 62).

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

23

longitude of Jerusalem, and one providing a very high opinion of Claudius Ptolemy. An analysis of these passages shows that their contents are either similar but not identical to parallel passages found in the Latin version, or non-existent in it altogether. 21 Similarly, a comparison between, on the one hand, numerous references to Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lu/.1ot found in the Hebrew scientific corpus of Ibn Ezra22 along with the already-mentioned four references to it found in Safnat Pa 'anea/.1, and, on the other hand, the contents of the Latin extant version, allows us to conclude that the Hebrew and Latin versions were similar in some details but quite different in other significant parts. Several manuscripts survive of the Latin version, which was edited by Jose Maria Millas Vallicrosa in 1947, who, following some hesitant claims by M. Steinschneider,23 also ascribed this work to Abraham Ibn Ezra. 24 Notwithstanding Millas Vallicrosa's important contribution in the edition of this work, some important obstacles still remain and need to be reckoned with before Ibn Ezra's authorship can safely be presumed. I will refer to these difficulties while providing bibliographical information about the Latin versions. In the Latin text there appears in several places the name of Abraham or Abraham Iudaeus in reference to its writer,25 a remark which clearly identifies the writer as a Jew whose name was Abraham. This, however, does not imply that Abraham or Abraham Iudaeus is the author of the Latin version, for the text may originally have been written in Hebrew and subsequently translated into Latin. Nor is it certain that Abraham or Abraham Iudaeus can be identified as Ibn Ezra. Still, in my opinion, the evidence suggests the following three points: (i) Ibn Ezra was the ultimate author of the contents found in the Latin text; (ii) the Latin text was not a mere translation from a Hebrew source; (iii) Ibn Ezra had some knowledge of the Latin language, a fact that works in favor of the possibility that he was in some way involved in the composition of the Latin version. These points may be defended with the following arguments. 21 The four references may be found in SAFNAT PA'ANEAl;I, 1911, I, pp. 14-15, 1718 284, 142. I have analyzed these four references in SELA, 1996, pp. 200-207. 2 For a review and analysis of these references see: LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 11-19; SELA, 1996, pp. 190-200. 23 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1880, pp. 469, 494. 24 LIBERDERATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 11-19. 25 The Latin text begins with the words "Dixit Abraham Iudaeus", and the name Abraham appears on several occasions, especially in the trigonometric chapter. See LIBERDERATIONIBUsTABULARUM, 1947,pp. 73,137,148,154,159.

24

PART ONE

(i) Abraham Ibn Ezra's authorship is based primarily on correspondences between the Latin text and Ibn Ezra's other known work. In this context, Millas Vallicrosa's main argument was to provide a series of references in Ibn Ezra's Hebrew scientific corpus pointing to a Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lul;lOt or Sefer ha-Lu/:lOt (Book of the Astronomical Tables).26 But, apart from the fact that this list may be further enlarged and that the references do not always point to topics which may be actually found in the Latin text, my main objection to this argument is as follows: Based on passages extracted from Ibn Ezra's Hebrew scientific corpus, these references point naturally to the lost Hebrew versions of Ibn Ezra's Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lu/:lOt or Sefer ha-Lubot, and so they cannot be presented as proof of Ibn Ezra's authorship of a Latin counterpart. I am of the opinion that a proper demonstrationmethodology should employ the opposite approach, namely, when considering the Latin text as the point of departure, lines of contact should be traced to link the Latin text with Ibn Ezra's Hebrew work. In this context, Millas Vallicrosa and especially B.R. Goldstein already made important contributions, showing that there is a close and direct correspondence of the contents between some parts of the Latin text and Ibn Ezra's translation of Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi. 27 What is more, additional evidence may be presented showing striking resemblance between certain passages of the Latin text and parallel passages of Ibn Ezra's whole Hebrew literary work, that is, the scientific corpus as well as his biblical exegesis and theological monographs. 28 26 LIBERDERATIONIBUsTABULARUM, 1947,pp. 11-19.

27 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 51-54, 73, 137, 148, 154, 159; HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MuTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 11, 200208,218,231,234. 28 I dealt with this problem in SELA, 1997, pp. 37-56. In this article I presented several links between the Latin text and Ibn Ezra's oeuvre, but I limited myself to two main topics: a scientific subject, specifically, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter, as well as a loaded religious topic, specifically, a comparison between the Hebrew and the Christian calendars. Yet additional striking instances may be supplied, and I will limit myself here to a single one. This is a passage found in the Latin text as well as in the first version of Seier ha- 'Olam, which discuss in Latin and in Hebrew the various amounts ascribed to the sun's declination in a similar approach and with almost identical wording: LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 77: "Nam indi dicunt 24 graduum integrorum declinationem solis esse, sed Abrachix et Ptholomeus dixerunt 23 graduum 51 minutorum, secundum horum sententiam arcus declinationis sic se habebit ad totum circulum ut 11 ad 83. Omnes vero alii magistri probationum dixerunt declinationem esse 23 graduum et 35 minutorum, exceptis Abnebimezor et Azarchel qui dixerunt earn esse 23 graduum et 33 minutorum"; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 81a-81b: "1:)1("';' 'I:):m '::I" W'l TI:)

mmn o'i'?n ;'''1:) TI:) ,m', m?171:) l"::I1:) '1", 1(';'1V '1:)1( O"I:)?~:J' ,ml:)?1V m?171:) '''::1 1(';'1V

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

25

(ii) As said above, a comparison of the references in Ibn Ezra's Hebrew scientific corpus to Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lubot or Seier ha-Lubot with the corresponding passages in Liber de rationibus tabu/arum shows that the Hebrew and Latin versions were similar in some details but quite different in other significant parts. Some of these differences - a reference to Jerusalem and a comparative and didactic approach to explain the points of convergence between the Jewish and the Christian calendars -suggest that the Hebrew and Latin versions were addressed respectively to Jewish and Christian audiences. 29 These similarities and differences support the possibility that both texts were different versions, and militate against the possibility that the Latin version was a mere translation of the Hebrew version. (iii) Regarding the question of Ibn Ezra's ability to write directly in Latin or of being involved in the composition of a Latin scientific treatise, an exploration of his biblical exegesis reveals some remarkable examples which clearly show that Ibn Ezra knew the Latin language well enough to refer critically to some parts of the Latin Vulgate, or to argue, with the help of words translated into Latin, against fellow Jewish commentators. 30 Consequently, we can assume that he was able, either 'l'll"l ':l:lll"W' C'l~W~ c'i',n K"' K'l"IW '~K T:l':lK' .n~Kl"I nll" ,,:l' K' C"~''':l mm c'i',n ,l"I"' 1":l K'l"I l"I'''ll''l nwi' ':l cnll' l"I~':lcm C":l~ -m,' 'i"i" 'KlI~W' '~:lm .K"l 1":l K'l"I mm ".1'" 1":l K'l"I ':l "~K' C":l~ ,m' 'i"i"W 'i"T 'K Cl"I':lK' "lll~ l:lK l:l K"n' l~ J"1n See another example, referring to two different versions of trepidatio, in LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 77: cf. Hebrew counterpart in 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOa.

29 In this context, it should be noted that in $AFNAT PA'ANEA1;I, 1911, I, p. 142, a reference is made to Ibn Ezra's Seier ha-Luhot giving the exact longitude of Jerusalem, a reference which does not appear in the Latin parallel text. Given the fact that the geographic parameters of Jerusalem are commonly endowed by Ibn Ezra with Jewish ritual and religious significance, that may explain why the Latin parallel version, which was presumably directed to a Christian audience, does not contain the same Jerusalem reference. Also, some passages may be found in the Latin text setting out, with a clearly comparative and didactic approach, the fundamentals of the Jewish intercalation alongside some traits of the Christian calendar. See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 98-100. These passages may be construed as an effort by the author, Abraham Iudaeus, to convey to a Christian audience the fundamentals of the Jewish calendar, stressing particularly the points of convergence which link it with the Christian calendar. 30 In his short commentary on Genesis 37:35 and on Isaiah 38:10, Ibn Ezra sharply criticizes Jerome because of his wrong translation of the Hebrew word She'ol by the Latin term in/emus. Also, in a commentary on Genesis 49:10, reported by Joseph Jacob of Modeville (See FRIEDLANDER, 1877, pp. 67-68), Ibn Ezra finds fault with Jerome because in his translation he distorted such a geographical term as Shilo and saw in it an allusion heralding the rise of Christianity. Conversely, in the short commentary on Exodus 30:23, Ibn Ezra employs the term myrrha, which is the Latin translation of the Hebrew word mor, to argue against his fellow commentator Sa'adiah Ga'on.

26

PART ONE

on his own or more likely with the help of a disciple, to write a scientific technical treatise in Latin. Indeed, there is another instance of a scientific treatise which, as we shall demonstrate (see below, p. 31), Ibn Ezra wrote in Latin with the help of a Christian disciple: a Book on the Astrolabe, a parallel version to his Hebrew Keli ha-Nei;1oshet. There is a further central feature of the Latin text - the geographical place of composition - which also must be reconciled with the known biography of Ibn Ezra in order to ascribe the book to him. The contents of Liber de rationibus tabularum show clearly that the text was written in the year 1154 in some unspecified location in France. 31 In fact, the Latin text records that "he tabule composite sunt secundum meridiem Pisanorum quorum remotio est ab occidentis termino 33 gradus",32 a remark implying that a previous and first Latin version had been composed in Pi sa. Therefore, when attempting to identify the author of the Latin text, it is crucial to determine whether Ibn Ezra dwelt or resided in the city of Pisa. We have plenty of information about Ibn Ezra's sojourn in the neighboring city of Lucca, where he developed a very rich literary production,33 including the parallel Hebrew version of Liber de rationibus tabularum. But previous research has not traced any reference to Ibn Ezra's residence in Pisa. Fortunately, however, a fragment of the second Hebrew version of Ibn Ezra's Seier ha- 'Olam (Book of the World) - implying that Ibn Ezra performed astronomical observations for clearly astrological uses in both Pisa and Lucca allows us to establish quite assuredly that Ibn Ezra did reside for some time in Pi sa. 34 31 This is highly reminiscent of the fact that the second version ofIbn Ezra's Seier ha-Moladot, which is extant only in a Latin translation, was also written approximately in the same year. Compare the two following references: a) LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 78: "anno 1154 ab incamacione Domini, quo hanc edicionem fecimus", see also p. 99; b) LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484, p. c 3v: "Hoc 1154 ab incamatione domini est adunatio eorum in triplicitate terrae". For the possibility that the second version of Liber de rationibus tabularum was composed in Rouen, see GOLB, 1998, pp. 293-4. 32 LIBERDERATIONIBUsTABULARUM, 1947,p. 87. 33 FLEISCHER, 1970, pp. 107-124. 34 In 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 89b, we read that Ibn Ezra recorded a list of22 cities, including Lucca and Pisa, accompanied by their respective city zodiacal sign (mazal medinah) and its ecliptic parameters. Yet, while in the case of the great majority of the cities Ibn Ezra limited himself to the routine annotation of the zodiacal sign and its exact ecliptic parameters, he adopted a completely different way of reporting regarding precisely the two cities of Lucca and Pisa; thus he wrote that "Pisa: some say that its sign is Piscis, but, according to my own observations, its sign is 3 degrees in Aquarium; Lucca: according to my own observations on two occasions, its sign is Cancer in the term of Jupiter". (italics added)

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

27

A general overview of the Latin text indicates that Ibn Ezra wrote this treatise in order to provide astronomical and astrological theoretical knowledge for whoever may be interested in using the astronomical tables 35 , and to expound and explain the main traits and uses of these astronomical tables. 36 The treatise begins by illustrating the astronomical and astrological features of each of the seven planets, and deals at length particularly with the sun and the moon. It continues with a trigonometric chapter, and ends with specific astronomical problems, such as establishing the moon's latitude, the latitude of cities, the seasonal hours, the twelve astrological houses or the first visibility of the lunar crescent. The author of the treatise refers explicitly to Greek and Hermetic sources such as Hipparchus, Ptolemy, Doronius and Hermes;37 Hindu astronomical tables are mentioned in general as 'tabulas indorum' and in particular as 'zij al-Sindhind';38 Arabic astronomers and astrologers are referred to in general as rnagistri probation urn and in particular by mentioning the names of notable scientists such as al-Khwarizmi, alBattani, aI-Sufi, Ibn Sina, Thabit b. Qurra, al-Nayrizi, Ibn Yiinus, Banu Sakir, Masha'allah, Abu Ma'shar;39 Andalusian scientists such as Ibn alMuthanna, Maslama, Ibn al-Safiar, Azarchiel are also mentioned. 4o 35 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 83: "Nunc autem antequam ratiocinemus de compositione tabularum quas fecimus secundum probationem predictorum virorum sibi consentientium, quedam convenienter ad totam astronomiam premittemus." (italics added) That the expression tota astronomia implies elements of astronomy as well as of astrology can be affirmed after an insrection of the following lines. See, for example, the contents of the next note. 3 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 84-85: "He tabule quas composuimus utiles sunt ad declinationem solis sciendum et altitudinem meridianam et ad inveniendum oriens per altitudinem solis et per umbram et ad cognoscendas horas temporales diei et noctis coequationem domorum orientis et ascensionis terrarum et ad apparitiones planetarum matutinas et noctumas et remotiones fixarum a recto circulo et ad cognoscendum cum quo gradu fixa sit in medio celi et cum quo sit in oriente et cum quo occidat, et ad arcum diurnum et nocturnum fixe ad sciendum quantitatem mutacionis visus secundum longitudinem et latitudinem et adunacionem solis et lune et oposicionem, et quando prima erit secundum visum et ad eclipsum lune et quantitatem eius et in qua parte, utrum scilicet dextra an sinistra, et suum colorem et ad cognoscendum sua tempora eclipsis et eclipsim solis, partesque omnes eius et omnes ductus qui sunt secundum latitudinem terre, et signa mobilia et fixa et bicorpa et recta signa et obliqua et longa et curta et omne opus astrolabii." 37 See the following references in LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947: Claudius Ptholomeus: pp. 74-82, 89, 93, 130-131, 143, 155, 160; Hipparchus (Abracaz or Abracax): pp. 75, 77, 80, 91, 105; Hermes: pp. 77, 160; Doronius: p. 160; Hermes: pp. 77, 160. 38 For the zij al-Sindhind (Scindehind, Acintdeindi) see ibid. pp. 75, 88; see references to the tabu/as indorum, pp. 81, 82, 89, 101, 120, 130. 39 See the following references. AI-Khwarizmi (Elcaurezmus): pp. 74, 75, 105, 109, 110, 126, 127, 144, 155, 160, 164, 166, 167; AI-Battani (Albateni): pp. 78, 80,

28

PART ONE

• Keli ha-Ne~shet (The Instrument of Brass - The Book on the Astrolabe). As far as I could determine, Abraham Ibn Ezra composed this treatise, which was designed to describe the physical configuration of the astrolabe and teach its astronomical and astrological uses, in three different Hebrew versions. What is more, Ibn Ezra wrote, with the aid of a disciple, a Latin version of the Astrolabe Book as well. The first Hebrew version of Keli ha-Ne1;oshet was composed, as Ibn Ezra himself annotated at the beginning of the rete's list of stars,41 in 4906 A.M. (anno mundi) that is, in 1146. The first version was written in Northern Italy, possibly in Lucca, before Ibn Ezra wrote his Seier ha'Ibbur (Book of Intercalation) and after he had completed the first Hebrew version of Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lu1;ot. We may conclude that from a fragment of the first version of Seier ha- 'Ibbur - written in 1146 in Verona (see below, p. 39) - wherein the reader is referred to Keli haNe1;oshet as an already completed work. 42 Also, in the text of the first version of Keli ha-Ne1;oshet, the author points out that he had already written a book dealing with the differences of opinion confronting the sages of Greece, India and Persia about the astrological aspects.43 This 83, 86; ai-Sufi (Azofi): pp. 78, 86, 87, 98; Ibn Sin§ (Abencine): pp. 76, 77, 79, 81, 82, 95; Th§bit b. Qurra (Tebith ben Core): pp. 76, 79, 81, 82, 83; AI-Nayrizi (Anarizi): pp. 76; Ibn Yunus (Abeniunuz): pp. 83, 86; Banu S§kir (fratres Beni Saquir): pp. 81,83; M§sh§'all§h (Mescella): pp. 75, 160; Abu Ma'shar (Albumasar): PI? 75, 160. ~o See the following references. Ibn al-Muthann§ (Abenmucenne): pp. 110, 130, 147, 153, 154, 155, 158, 160, 161, 163, 166; Maslama (Mezlame): pp. 75; Ibn alSaffiir (Abnezafar): p.75; Azarchiel (Acerchel, Azarchiel Rispanus): pp. 76, 77, 79, 80, 83, 86, 87, 93, 95. 41 NEl;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 31. I also consulted the following manuscripts: Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Reb. 1053 fols. 1b- 36b; Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Reb. 1061 fols. 148b- 164a (hereafter NEl;IOSHET A, BNF 1061); st. Petersburg, MS 311, fols. 4b- 20b; Moscow, MS Gunzburg 1080, fols. 53b- 67b; For another printed edition of this text see, NEl;IOSHET A, 1971. For a description of the rete, see below, pp. 108, 137. For one of the functions of the rete's list of stars, see below, p. 222. 42 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a. 43 NEl;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 29. Rere Ibn Ezra refers to the five astrological aspects, that is, geometrical-angular relationships between planets and other celestial bodies that fulfill a central astrological function in the horoscope. Those five astrological aspects are classified according to the difference of longitude between two planets of celestial entities: (a) trine; 120°. Ibn Ezra named this aspect mabat 'ahava, that is, aspect of love, so called because it exerts a benign influence; (b) opposition, when two planets are diametrically opposite. Ibn Ezra named this aspect, which has a malign astrological influence, as ha-milbama, that is, war, so called because, exerting an unfavorable astrological influence. it is regarded as a hostile aspect; (c) quartile, 90°; (d) sextile, 60°; (e) conjunction, 0°. For Ibn Ezra's own explanation of these astrological concepts and an example of how he employed the abovementioned terminology, see MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 20b. For a

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

29

passage, even though it has manifest astrological connotations, is closely related to astronomy, and therefore we estimate that it is a reference to the first Hebrew version of Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lubot, written in Lucca in 1146 or earlier.44 The second version of Keli ha-Nel;wshet, whose existence has not hitherto been known to modem research and which is extant only in manuscript,45 was also written in the year 1146 (4906 A.M.), as the author himself annotated at the beginning of the corresponding rete's list of stars. 46 It follows that the second version was written in the same year as the first one (in fact, as we shall see, a few months after). No wonder therefore that the second version is in some parts very similar to the first one - in the date of composition, in the rete's list of stars and in its general structure. However, the two versions have substantially different traits that make them distinct one from the other: (i) The two versions differ sharply in the details and formulation of some of the astrolabe's operations, inter alia, in relation to the procedure to find "the latitude of cities or places",47 to find "how many degrees each zodiacal sign will rise in the equator",48 the procedure to locate one of the rete's list of stars,49 or the procedure to locate one of the planets. 50 Concerning the last operation, we shall consider below a significant passage of the second version referring to Venus' visibility under very special conditions. That makes the second version unique in the framework of the three Hebrew versions, but at the same time marks out a connection with a strikingly similar reference that may be found in the Latin version of the Astrolabe Book (see below, p. 34). (ii) The two versions differ in their connection to Sefer ha- 'Ibbur (Book of Intercalation). In the second version of Keli ha-Neboshet, Ibn Ezra directs the reader to Sefer ha- 'Ibbur as an already accomplished general explanation of the astrological aspects, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 165-179. 44 See a similar opinion in LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 15. But Millas Vallicrosa regarded this passage as a reference to Liber de rationibus tabularum, the Latin version of Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lu/.1ot. 45 I made use of the following manuscripts: Mantova, Biblioteca di Mantova, Fonda Ebraico Mantovano, MS Ebr. 10, fols. 35-51 (hereafter NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10); Warsaw, MS Pinsker 26, fols. 58-71, left col.; Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1045 fols. 188a- 196b; Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1047 fols. 76a- 84b; St. Petersburg, MS 349, fols. Ib- 14a; New York, Jewish Theological Seminary MIC 2550/2, fols. 72-82. 46 NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 39b. 47 NEI;IOSHETB, MANT. 10, fols. 42b-42a cf. NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, pp. 22-23. 48 NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 41 b cf. NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 20. 49 NEI:IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 44b; NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 35. 50 NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 44b; NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, pp. 23-24.

30

PART ONE

work. 51 But, in Seier ha- 'Ibbur itself, he refers to Keli ha-Neboshet as an already accomplished work. 52 The explanation for these apparently incompatible cross-references is that Seier ha- 'Ibbur was written some time in the year 1146 between the redaction of the two different versions of Keli ha-Neboshet. The first version of Keli ha-Neboshet was written sometime early in 1146, and this is the version referred to in Seier ha'Ibbur. The second version was written late in 1146, after Ibn Ezra finished Seier ha- 'Ibbur, and in this second version of Keli ha-Neboshet Ibn Ezra refers to Seier ha- 'Ibbur as an already finished work. (iii) It is possible to locate in both versions of Keli ha-Neboshet a series of distinct references that draw a clear dividing line between the first and second versions of Keli ha-Neboshet. 53 In clear contrast with the first version, Ibn Ezra mentions Seier ha-Lubot in the second version several times using the future tense as a work not yet written. 54 Hence, we can conjecture that after moving from Lucca to Verona or Mantova, Ibn Ezra had to compose a new version of the Seier ha-Lubot, a task that he eventually accomplished after he arrived in Provence. Similarly, references to Seier ha-Mishpatim (Book of Astrological Judgments), which appear several times in the first version of Keli ha-Neboshet,55 disappear completely from its second version. The third version of Keli ha-Neboshet, which also is extant in manuscript,56 was written almost two years later, early in 1148 (4908 A.M.), as the author recorded in the corresponding rete's list of fixed stars. 57 The details, wording and composition of the third version are 51 NEI;IOSHETB, MANT. 10, fol. 46b. 52 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a.

53 But we also find in both versions of Keli ha-Ne./;lOshet some similar references to other works by Ibn Ezra. Thus, in both versions of Keli ha-Nel;lOshet, Ibn Ezra refers to an already written book dealing with the differences of opinion of the sages of Greece, India and Persia concerning the astrological aspects. See NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 47b cf. NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 29. As said above, I believe that both references point to the first Hebrew version of Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lu/;lOt, written in Lucca in 1146 or before. Likewise, as in the first version, we continue to find in the second version references to Seier ha-Moladot (Book of Nativities), a reiteration that is clearly accounted for by the fact that Seier ha-Moladot remained until 1148 an unaccomplished project. See NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 36b cf. NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p~. 9,14. 4 NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fols. 37a, 42a. 55 NEI;IOSHET A, BNF 1061, fols. 157b, 158b, 159b; NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, pp. 25, 29, 30,31. 56 I used the following manuscripts: Warsaw, MS Pinsker 26, fols. 58-71 (hereafter NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26), right col.; Paris, BNF, MS Heb. 1054 fols. 4blOa; Moscow, MS Gunzburg 179, fols. 11lb- 116a; Moscow, MS Gunzburg 937, fols. 2b- 14a. 57 NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 67b, right col..

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

31

substantially different from those of the previous two versions. What is more, in the rete's list of fixed stars we find 36 stars, while the two previous versions included only 23 stars. 58 As in the second version, the third version continues to refer the reader to Seier ha-LuJ;lOt in the future tense. 59 But in the third version, for the first time, we detect a reference in future tense to an astrological treatise entitled Reshit /fokhmah, a book that Ibn Ezra was to complete within the next weeks or months.60 From this evidence we may conclude that the third version of Keli haNeboshet was the first work that Ibn Ezra wrote in Provence, after he left Italy. The fact that Ibn Ezra composed yet another version of the same Book on the Astrolabe, just before he began the composition of his astrological encyclopedia headed by Reshit /fokhmah, is additional proof of the importance of the astrolabe in solving astronomical as well as astrological problems. A Latin manual describing the astrolabe and teaching its uses is available in two manuscripts in the British Library - Ms. Cotton Vesp. fols. 40-37 (hereafter ASTROLABIO, VESP A II) and Ms. Arundel 377 fols. 63-68 (hereafter ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377) - following copies of the Latin text of Liber de rationibus tabularum ascribed to Abraham Ibn Ezra. Moritz Stein schneider was the first to draw attention to this text and to relate it to the work of Jewish medieval scientists. To corroborate his assertion, Steinschneider quoted a passage of the Latin text that mentioned a personage named Abraham, undoubtedly a Jew, dictating the astrolabe manual to a disciple. This disciple could not conceal his deep admiration for his teacher and wrote: "Ut ait philosophorum sibi contemporaneorum Abraham magister noster egregius quo dictante et hanc dispositionem astrolabii conscripsimus ... ".61 But Steinschneider was uncertain whether the author was Abraham Ibn Ezra, Abraham Bar I:Iiyya, or Abraham Zacuto. 62 The subsequent chain of events regarding the research on this text was very similar to that related to Liber de rationibus tabularum. The Polish researcher A. Birkenmajer conjectured that Ibn Ezra was the author of this Latin text and communicated his opinion to Jose Maria Millas Vallicrosa. This distinguished Spanish 58 NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fo!' 67b, right co!. cf. NEI:IOSHET A, 1845, p. 31; NEI:IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fo!' 39b. The star lists of the first and third version of Keli ha-Neboshet were meticulously studied by B.R. Goldstein, in the context of his research on star lists in Hebrew. See GOLDSTEIN, 1985 (ii), 185-208. 59 NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fols. 59b, 60a, 66a, right co!. 60 NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fo!' 65b, right col.. 61 ASTROLAB10, VESP AII, fo!' 40r ; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fo!' 68r • 62 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1956, p. 569.

32

PART ONE

historian of science, upon retul1)ing to his homeland after the Spanish Civil War, continued the research, and in 1940 published an important article on this Latin text. The methodology of this article was similar to that adopted in relation to Liber de rationibus tabu/arum. Millas Vallicrosa edited the Latin text of this astrolabe manual and cautiously suggested that Ibn Ezra was its author. 63 To corroborate his assertion, Millas Vallicrosa cited mainly two passages, in addition to the passage mentioning Abraham magister noster. The first one goes on to explain that "locum lune in tabulis coequationis planetarum secundum artem quam dedimus de coequandis planetis ad quamuis horam sume", a somewhat vague statement which in Millas Vallicrosa's opinion referred to the astronomical tables that Ibn Ezra had written previously.64 The second passage alludes to a singular astronomical phenomenon that allegedly could be observed in England - "si quis fuerit in Anglia cum sol fuerit a parte capricomi ... " - a reference that in Millas Vallicrosa's opinion indicated that the Latin text was composed by Ibn Ezra in England during his residence there, approximately in 1160. 65 We shall later return to this passage and offer a different interpretation for it. Although Millas Vallicrosa made a formidable contribution to the elucidation of the issue, he restricted his analysis to the contents of the Latin text. Millas Vallicrosa was aware only of the first Hebrew version of Keli ha-Neboshet, but he did not compare even this text with the Latin one, excusing himself by writing that the World War was raging when he published his article. 66 No doubt, given that Ibn Ezra wrote three versions of Keli haNeboshet, his authorship of a Latin counterpart should be based on a comparison of the Hebrew texts to the Latin text. After such an examination which I made, the weight of evidence seems to favor Millas Vallicrosa's hypothesis about Ibn Ezra's authorship. The three Hebrew versions are very similar to the Latin text not only in the description of the astrolabe - as expected, since they describe one and the same instrument - but also in their sources, the composition of the treatises and the wording employed to explain the uses of the astrolabe. The 63 ASTROLABIO, 1940, pp. 9-29. 64 ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fo!. 39r ; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fo!' 66r cf. ASTROLABIO, 1940,pp. 2,19. 65 ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fo!. 39r ; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fo!' 67v cf. ASTROLABIO, 1940, pp. 3-4, 22. Concerning Ibn Ezra's sojourn in England, see FRIEDLANDER, 1894, pp. 47-60; FLEISCHER, 1931, pp. 69-76,107-111,129-133,160168, 189-203.

66

ASTROLABIO,

1940, p. 5. note 3.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

33

overwhelming majority of the scientific sources recorded in the Latin text - the magistri probationum as a distinct group of astrologers and astronomers, Ptolomeus, Enoch (Hermes), Mesella (Masha'allah), Albumassar (AbU Ma'shar), Doroneus (Dorotheus of Sidon), Andruzgar (Andruzgar b. Saadi Faruch), Anurizi (al Fadl b. Hatim al Nayrizi) may be found in the scientific corpus of Ibn Ezra, not least in Liber de rationibus tabularum. 67 The Arabic transliteration of the names of the sources, as seen above, and also of the components of the astrolabe terms such as alhidada, alilac, assabata, acemuth, almucantarath68 indicates clearly that the Latin text author received his scientific education in al-Andalus, as indeed did Ibn Ezra. Moreover, some technical expressions may be found which are strongly reminiscent of the Hebrew parallel terminology found in the different versions of the Keli ha-Neboshet. For example, the expression ductus planetae, whose Hebrew counterpart is nihug ha-kokhav,69 or the operation of ponere in linea medii caeli, whose Hebrew counterpart is lasim be-be$i hashamayim,70 or the central and general term iudicia, reserved in the Latin text for the 'astrology rules', whose Hebrew counterpart is mishpatim, a Hebrew word used for the first time with a clear astrological connotation by Ibn Ezra. 7l A common characteristic of paramount importance is that, although the astrolabe is known as an instrument mainly intended for 67 ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fols. 39r_40v; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fo!' 67r. For some of these names mentioned in Liber de rationibus tabularum, the Latin version of Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot, see above, notes 37, 39. The only personage that appears in the Latin text and that I was incapable of iocating in the other works of Ibn Ezra is Avennouausth Christianus. 68 ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fo!. 38 v; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fols. 63 r_64v; ASTROLABIO, 1940, pp. 9-11. 69 ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fo!' 40 r cf. RESHIT I;IOKl;IMAH, 1939, ch. X, p. lxxv. Re§arding this procedure, see below, note 72. 7 ASTROLABIO, VESP A II fo!. 40 r cf. NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 19; NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fo!. 41 b; NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fo!. 60a, right col.. This procedure implies positioning some point of the rete over the midheaven line of the astrolabe, that is, the projection of the observer's meridian. 7l ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fo!. 40r. The Hebrew counterpart, mishpatim, was used profusely by Ibn Ezra in his Hebrew literary output, not to mention his biblical exegesis. Ibn Ezra coined this new Hebrew word, or furnished the new astrological meaning for the old biblical word mishpa!im, that is,judgments. This subject will be expanded in the next part of this book, in a discussion about Ibn Ezra's special strategy in the creation of a Hebrew scientific vocabulary. See below, p. 116. After his death, the new Hebrew word was widely used in its new astrological meaning and with the explicit or implicit reminder that the word mishpatim originated in Ibn Ezra's literary work. For Ibn Ezra's role in the dissemination of those terms, see SELA, 1999 (ii), pp. 159-194.

34

PART ONE

astronomical uses, an important portion of the texts of the four versions, the three Hebrew versions and the Latin version as well, was devoted to typically astrological procedures. Since the astrolabe allows the determination of the pattern of the heavens at any (past, present or future) time (birth, coronation, foundation of a city, etc.), it was extremely useful in computing the fundamental components of the horoscope. This was particularly true for those parts which entail calculations related to spherical-trigonometry, thus making it possible to skirt tedious calculations which would otherwise have been necessary. In this context, the four versions are very similar and refer to all three horoscope-related procedures: (a) arranging the twelve astrological houses; (b) establishing the astrological aspects; (C) performing the procedure of ducere gradus. 72 Furthermore, those astrological topics are treated in a very similar way in the four versions. We will see later (see below, p. 88) that a main strain characterizing Ibn Ezra as a writer is that he is very fond of treating the technical aspects of an issue by recording the disputes between different schools of thought on how to solve the problem. Now, this is precisely a trait that may be easily detected in all four versions, Hebrew as well as Latin, of the Astrolabe Book.1 3 But what about the place and time of composition of the Latin version of the Astrolabe Book? Let us re-examine the passage that Millas Vallicrosa cited in substantiating his assertion that the Latin text was written in England approximately in the year 1160. The referred-to passage is part of a chapter entitled De loco planete cognoscendo, which describes several techniques for establishing the location of a planet, and especially for finding out whether the planet is retrograde or stationary. After dealing with Jupiter and Mars, the author proceeds to treat the special case of the inferior planets, Mercury and Venus. The underlying 72 In this procedure, explained by Ptolemy in TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (lO) pp. 271307, a certain planet (called apheta in Greek, indicator in Latin, or paqid in Hebrew) is directed from one of the five aphetic houses, called by Ibn Ezra the five places of domination (meqomot serara we-memshala) to one of the five places of death or dangerous places (maqom mesukan). This means computing the angular distance between two celestial places, that is, between a place of life and a dangerous place, being the resulting number of degrees converted subsequently into a number of years. Thus the life expectancy of the new-born, or the date of some especially dangerous event in his life, may be calculated beforehand. Regarding this procedure, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 411-419; TESTER, 1987, pp. 84-5. 73 Compare the following places: NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, pp. 29-31; NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fols. 46b-49a; NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fols. 64a-66a, right col.; ASTROLABIO, 1940, pp. 22-29. See a similar approach and treatment of the topics dealt with in the Astrolabe Book also in other works of Ibn Ezra: LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 84-85; 93-94; 97-98; TE'AMIM A, BNF lO56, fol. 44a; MISHPETEIHAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fols. 71b-71a.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

35

point here is that Mercury and Venus never get very far from the sun, so that it is almost impossible to employ the same techniques that were previously implemented in connection with Jupiter and Mars. Nevertheless, the author of the Latin version goes on to explain: "Simili modo operandum est de uenere, si quis fuerit in Anglia cum sol fuerit a parte capricorni et uenus a sole remotissima quod est 47 gradibus, alibi autem non. "74 (italics added) This interesting passage in the Latin text is closely connected to a very similar passage that may be found in the second Hebrew version of Keli ha-Nel;lOshet: "You will be able to know the position of Venus or Mercury when they rise or set, but at midheaven it is impossible to see them... However, if you happen to be in the seventh climate, namely the climate called Little Brittania by Ptolemy75 and which is located after Inglaterra in the western side, then you will be able to see Venus at midheaven when the sun is in the sign of Scorpio and Venus is at the end ofthe sign of Cancer. But in all the other places, it is impossible [to see Venus at midheaven]."76 (italics added) It follows, then, that England is mentioned in these two parallel passages only in order to corroborate that Venus, normally observed not far from the sun and appearing as an evening star or a morning star, may be seen exceptionally a sole remotissima or at midheaven.77 The crucial point to be stressed here is that Ibn Ezra thought fit when dwelling in Northern Italy to refer, relying upon some unknown source,78 to a singular astronomical phenomenon that may be observed in England, since the second version of Keli ha-Neboshet, where this passage may be found, was written in 1146 in Mantova or Verona. Thus, the link adduced by Millas Vallicrosa between the report of this singular phenomenon and Ibn Ezra's allegedly dwelling in England is severed. What is more, this interest in England (as an especial geographic parameter or a suitable location for performing astronomical observations) may be also detected

74 ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fol. 40v. and ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 67v: Translation: "As far as Venus is concerned, this procedure may be operated in a similar way (as for Jupiter and Mars) if someone happens to be in England when the sun is in the sign of Capricorn, and Venus is located 47 degrees away from the sun. But in other places it is impossible to operate in this way." 75 See ALMAGEST, 1984, p. 88. 76 NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 44b cf .NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 66b, right col. 77 This passage from the second Hebrew version of the Keli ha-Nehoshet makes this version unique in the whole context of the three Hebrew versions. It especially makes the second version clearly distinct from the first version of Keli ha-Nehoshet. 78 I was incapable of finding this source, but it might have been some discussion about Venus' visibility based on Almagest XIII, 7-10.

36

PART ONE

in Ibn Ezra's first version of Seier ha- 'Ibbur, which was undoubtedly written in Verona, Italy, in 1146.79 We thus reach the conclusion that the mention of England in the report of astronomical observations does not indicate that the Latin version of the Astrolabe Book was written in England. Taking in account the very similar report in the second version of Keli ha-Neboshet, written in Northern Italy, we may be quite certain that the Latin version of the Astrolabe Book belongs to the Italian phase of Ibn Ezra's career, so that probably the Latin version of the Astrolabe Book was written in Verona or Mantova, at the same time approximately as the second version of Keli ha-Neboshet. To strengthen this conclusion, the interesting hypothesis of Enea Datei may be brought up, according to which Ibn Ezra gave astronomical advice to the city of Mantova to build four towers called Torri del Sole. The relative position of these four towers, which were built some time close to the middle of the twelfth century, was chosen and designed, as Enea Datei has shown, to exactly reflect the four main stations of the sun's path, namely the two equinoxes and the two solstices. 80 Thus, the possibility arises that Abraham Ibn Ezra, who wrote in Mantova a treatise dealing with Hebrew grammar called Seier $abut, and possibly the second Hebrew version of Keli ha-Neboshet as well, also composed in the same city a Latin parallel version of the Astrolabe Book, motivated by the need to provide advice to the council of the city of Mantova in its endeavor to determine the location for the Torri del Sole. • Seier ha-'Ebad (Book on the Unit): Ibn Ezra wrote this short mathematical treatise, which dealt with the attributes of numbers, at an unspecified place and date. However, we know for certain that Seier ha'Ebad was composed prior to 1148, since Ibn Ezra referred to it as a completed work from within his Seier ha-Shem (Book of the Name [of God]), a theological, grammatical, mathematical monograph composed in the city of Beziers in Provence in 1148. 81 The book is divided into nine short chapters, each of which deals with the characteristics of one of the nine numerals, which are explained employing various elements belonging to arithmetical, geometrical and combinatorial analysis as well as astrology and theology.82 Seier ha- 'Ebad is regarded as a

79 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 8-9.

80 DATE!, 1993,pp. 57-65. 81 HASHEM, 1985, IV, p. 423. 82 For a general review of Sefer ha- 'Ebad, see

465; LEVY, 2000, pp. 63-67.

STEINSCHNEIDER,

1880, pp. 464-

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

37

mathematical book of lesser importance than Seier ha-Mispar,83 and yet it is the first Hebrew work dealing with the attributes of numbers. Moreover, Seier ha- 'E1)ad may be considered an outstanding mathematical treatise precisely because of its concern with pure mathematics, without any pretension of serving, as is the case with Seier ha-Mispar, as an auxiliary or practical tool for related subjects such as solving astronomical-astrological problems or establishing the Hebrew calendar. While indebted to neo-Pythagorean Arabic arithmetic, Seier ha'E1)ad's direct sources are very difficult to ascertain.84 A close examination, however, reveals that some elements of Seier ha- 'E1)ad were transferred by Ibn Ezra into his biblical exegesis, his theological monographs and the mathematical parts of some of his scientific works. A good example is the quasi-theological treatment furnished in Seier ha'E1)ad of the number one, acknowledged as able to count itself while all the other numbers cannot do so, construed as the fundament of all numbers and endowed with the power of generating all the other numbers, and regarded as different from any other number while all the other numbers are similar to it. Such ideas, couched in almost the same terms as in Seier ha- 'E1)ad, may by found in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 3:15, in Yesod Mor'ah (The Fundament of Awe) and Seier ha-Shem (Book of the Name [of God]), two theological monographs, in Seier ha-Mispar (Book of the Number)8S and in Liber de rationibus tabularum, where such ideas are presented in amplification of the decimal system. 86 Seier ha- 'Ebad was already edited and commented upon in 1921 and has since been rendered in a modem edition. 87

83

See SARFATI, 1968, pp. 139-140.

84 See LEVY, 2000, p. 66. 8S See long commentary on Exodus 3:15, YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, XII, p. 342;

HASHEM, 1985, III, p. 422. 86 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 124: "Simile enim est 10 quod inicium secundi ordinis est unitatis, et 100 et 1000 et deinceps, et secundum eos si diametrus fuerit unitas circumferentia erit radix denarii qui unitati assimilatur, et si radix denarii diametrus fuerit, circumferentia erit denarius. Et si diametrus est decem, circnmferentia erit 31 gradus et 37 minuta de 60 et 22 secunde, qui numerus est diameter centenaria qui simi/is est unitati, et radix millenarii qui similiter unitati assimilatur. Notum antem est quod 100 est quadratus denarii. Quod si 100 diametrurn ponamus, qui est radix 10.000, circumferentia eius erit diametri millenarii, et radix 100.000." For an analysis of this and other related passages, see SELA,1997,pp.42-44. 87 'EI;IAD, 1921. For a modern edition see 'EI;lAO, 1985.

38

PART ONE

2. Jewish Calendar The calendar was always a very pertinent matter high on the agenda of an educated medieval Jewish audience. This was true because the ritual and social connotations emanating from calendaric concerns were of enormous consequence for the collective religious awareness of medieval societies, not least for the national identity, from within and from without, of a minority medieval community. By the tenth century, almost two centuries prior to Ibn Ezra's generation, there was already in force a regular and stabilized system which superseded the calendaric rules administered by the Supreme Court of Palestine under Roman rule. Even though there was very little to add to the permanent calendaric regulations themselves, Ibn Ezra, as well as other twelfth century Spanish Jewish intellectuals of the Rabbanite camp such as Abraham Bar ijiyya and Maimonides, made a significant contribution in this field. They began to write about the calendar in Hebrew, a landmark innovation which enabled their work to span the cultural borders separating eastern and western Jewish communities. And yet, their work was not only documentary, informative or explanatory but also marked by a spirited complement of polemics, not least when they came to study and discuss the sources to which they were purportedly indebted. On the one hand, they reverted to what they deemed as the ultimate sources of Jewish law, in order to strengthen and safeguard the Jewish calendaric regulations as they knew and described them. On the other hand, they explained the foundations of the Jewish calendar by implementing the tools provided by the new Greek-Arabic astronomy with whom Andalusian intellectuals had become acquainted during the last decades. The latter point is our main justification for designating the calendaric work of Ibn Ezra, Abraham Bar Hiyya and Maimonides as scientific. And yet, it would be more appropriate to designate this special type of scientific literature as composed of treatises including scientific topics that were applied to Jewish ritualistic and social needs. In this field Abraham Ibn Ezra made an influential contribution. In contrast to his colleagues, he addressed calendaric issues in his biblical commentaries, and even endowed these references with a very particular flavor. 88 Ibn Ezra also devoted parts of his Liber de rationibus 88 One example is Ibn Ezra's commentary on Leviticus 25:9, the text of which will be presented and analyzed in due course. See below, p. 273. See also the following biblical commentaries by Ibn Ezra: prefaces of the short and long commentaries on the Pentateuch, Genesis 1:14,7:11,8:3,8:14; Exodus 12:2; Leviticus 23:4, 23:24; Psalms 81 :4; 104: 19; Esther 9:22; etc.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

39

tabularum to present before Christian readers the points of contact linking the Jewish and the Christian calendars, and presumably also parts of the lost Hebrew counterpart Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lubot (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables), to deal with the astronomical aspects of the Jewish calendar. 89 But Ibn Ezra also wrote several specialized works in Hebrew about the Jewish calendar, which we now briefly review. • SeIer ha-'Ibbur (Book of Intercalation). Abraham Ibn Ezra wrote this treatise, designed to describe certain central aspects of the Jewish calendar and explain its fundamentals, in two different versions, as Joseph Bonfils reports in his super-commentary $aphnat Pa 'aneab. 90 The first version of Seier ha- 'Ibbur,91 which was originally designed to consist of three chapters, was written in Verona in 1146 (4906) - as Ibn Ezra himself noted in the text of the book92 - in between the composition of the first and the second version of Keli ha-Neboshet (see above, p. 29). The second version of Seier ha- 'Ibbur, which is at present lost, was written in Narbonne - as Joseph Bonfils reported in $aphnat Pa 'aneab - and we assume that it was composed later than 1148, after Ibn Ezra had moved from Italy to Provence.93 Besides some secondary calendaric topics, the first chapter of the first version of Seier ha- 'Ibbur deals for the most part with the determination of the molad. This Hebrew term, meaning literally the birth of the moon, refers to the conjunction of the moon and sun and is a parameter of utmost importance for establishing the beginning of the lunar month of 89 The following are the calendaric topics discussed by Ibn Ezra in Liber de Rationibus Tabularum: (a) the computus iudeorum of the tropical year, which is

shown as extremely close to the results attained by Ptolemy and by those who assess that the exact length of the solar year is more than 365 days plus a quarter of a day (LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 75-6); (b) the Jewish version of the metonic cycle, which is presented in the framework of a comparison with the versions which Ibn Ezra attributed to the Chaldeans, to C. Ptolemy, to ai-Sufi and the magistri probationum (the Arabic astronomers) (LIBER DE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 98-99); (c) the thirty years' cycle adopted by the Muslims for their lunar years (LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 98-99); (d) a comparison between the Jewish and the Christian methodologies for the intercalation (LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 99-100); (e) a comparison between the Jewish and the Christian methodology for reckoning the Jewish Passover and the Christian Easter (LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 99). 90 SAFNAT PA'ANEA1:I, 1911, I p. 142. For a general review of this work see 'AQABI' A, 1953, pp. 304-316. 91 This first version is available in manuscripts and has been already published by S.Z.H. Halberstam in 'IBBUR, 1874. We used this edition. For another printed edition, see IBBUR, 1971. 92 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 8b, 9a-9b. 93 SAFNATPA'ANEA1:I, 1911, I p. 142.

40

PART ONE

the Jewish calendar. In this chapter, however, the treatment of this and other calendaric issues is arithmetical and lacking any astronomical feature. This arithmetical calculation requires the multiplication of relatively large numbers, an algorithm which was not easy for people in the Middle Ages. To solve the problem posed by the calculation of the molad, Ibn Ezra provided not merely one but four methods, each of them revealing in a particular way his propensity to amuse himself by playing with numbers and words. He not only played with the intricacies of numbers by presenting his material in the form of riddles, but also went to the extreme of expounding the fourth way for calculating the molad not in prose but by means of a rhyming poem. 94 The second chapter, which is more than twice as long as the first, was designed to discuss the theoretical fundamentals of the Jewish calendar. This task was carried out by applying important elements of Greek and Arabic astronomy, particularly relevant points furnishing a scientific explanation for cyclic time and providing the rationale behind the Jewish calendar. The following astronomical topics were dealt with: (a) the mean conjunction of sun and moon and the determination of the length of the lunar month;95 (b) the details of a widespread controversy between several astronomical schools about the length of the solar year;96 (c) two astronomical phenomena which may alter the reckoning of the tropical year and the exact moment when the Sun enters the constellation of Aries (tequfah). These are, first, the solar motion when computed by the instrumentality of the solar eccentric sphere, and, second, two different versions of trepidatio, one propounding an oscillatory motion of the equinoxes and the other proposing another oscillatory motion that makes the poles of the eighth sphere move back and forth;97 (d) the mean motion of the moon;98 (e) the visibility of the new crescent. 99 In addition, the second chapter brings interesting and valuable information about the differences related to the calendar which divided Jewish society from within and from without. Here, Ibn Ezra discusses the following polemical foci:

94 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. Ib-2a. For an explanation of those four different methods, see MANDELBAUM, 1975, pp. 29-35. 95 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 3a-3b; 96 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a. For the text describing this controversy and a commentary on it, see below, p. 280. 97 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOa. In this regard, see below, p. 221. 98 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOb. 99 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. lOb-lIb.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

41

(a) The controversy about the calendar between the Rabbanites and Karaites. This discussion is focused, on the one hand, on an attack against Ben Zutah and other Karaites who contradicted the intercalation methodology,100 and, on the other hand, on an attack against the Karaite Judah ha-Parsy, who neglected the lunar aspects and said that the people of Israel reckoned their calendar according to the sun. I0I (b) The controversy between Jews and Christians, which is thrown into relief by Ibn Ezra, who claimed that "the calendar of the Gentiles depends on the Jewish calendar". With this assertion, Ibn Ezra pointed to the controversy within the Christian camp over the question of whether Easter should always be celebrated on a Sunday or on the actual day of the Jewish lunar month (l4th ofNisan).102 (c) The controversy, originated in Talmudic times but still attracting attention and stirring up emotions in Ibn Ezra's time, over the length of the tropical year. This disagreement found expression in two rival systems: the school headed by Mar Samuel, which proposed a value of 365 Y4 days for the tropical year, and the system devised by Rav Adda Bar 'Ahabah, which obtained a value of 365 days, 5 hours, 997 parts and 48 secondary parts. The latter school was considered by Ibn Ezra, as well as by other intellectuals contemporaneous with him such as Abraham Bar ijiyya and Maimonides, to be more accurate and to have obtained a more correct value for the tropical year than that of Mar Samuel. The account of this controversy stretches across most of Ibn Ezra's Seier ha- 'Ibbur. \03 (d) Polemical references to some former Spaniard Jewish scholars who wrote about the Jewish calendar, in all likelihood in Arabic. This is the case with Isaac Ben Baruch the Spaniard (1035-1094), who is taken to task twice by Ibn Ezra for some remarks he wrote in a book about the calendar,I04 and especially with Ben ijasan (fl. ca.950). The latter is sarcastically referred to as a 'prominent Spaniard sage' (bakham gadol sepharadi) in the short commentary on Genesis 4:14 by Ibn Ezra, who in his Seier ha- 'Ibbur advises the reader not to pay heed to what Ben ijasan had written in his three books dealing with the Jewish calendar. lOS Ibn Ezra argues with the Ge'onim about the visibility of the new crescent lO6 100 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 7a. 101 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a. This passage is quoted and analyzed in p. 281. 102 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 6b-7a cf. LIBERDERATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 99. 103 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. Sa-1Oa;

104 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOb, 11a; lOS 106

'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOb. See also below, p. 333. 'IBBUR, 1874, p. Ila.

42

PART ONE

and also with Abraham Bar I:Iiyya about the interpretation the latter gave in his own Sefer ha- 'Ibbur to a midrash that has a bearing on calendaric calculations. 107 The third chapter is absent in the printed edition of Sefer ha- 'Ibbur. Moreover, most of the manuscripts of the first version of Sefer ha- 'Ibbur also include only two chapters. But, curiously enough, Ibn Ezra commenced the treatise with a table of contents from which we learn that the third chapter was programmed to deal with ''the true [reckoning of the] vernal equinox (tequfat ha- 'emet), the conjunction of the luminaries, the visibility of the moon in every country, either eastern, western or northern, the timing of the eclipses of the moon and the sun, the extent of the eclipse as measured from the diameter and from the body (of the star) and the duration of the eclipse (zman ha-qadrut}".108 What is more, Ibn Ezra referred several times, in the first two extant chapters, to the topics and contents of the third chapter. From these references we may conclude that the third chapter was intended to include strictly astronomical subjects and highly technical topics, such as the first visibility of the moon,109 irregularities in the lunar cycle, II 0 the rising times of the zodiacal constellations, III or the length of the solar year. 112 This situation brought us, in an earlier study of Ibn Ezra's scientific work, to the conclusion that either Ibn Ezra left the third chapter unaccomplished, or that, because it included heavy and obscure astronomical contents, later copyists presumably did not regard it as relevant enough, and thus excluded it from their manuscripts. I \3 Fortunately, a manuscript has been found which purportedly includes a fragment of the third chapter. I 14 Even though a preliminary inspection of the text, done on the basis of a deficient microfilm of the manuscript, did not render the complete text clearly, its legible and comprehensible 107 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 5b, 11a. Ibn Ezra reiterated his criticism of Abraham Bar l;Iiyya in a responsum he wrote to David Ben Joseph of Narbonne. This time, however, he did not mention Bar l;Iiyya by name even though he discussed these matters and took issue with him at great length. THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, p. 1. Ibn Ezra's reference to Abraham Bar l;Iiyya is studied below, on p. 47. 108 'IBBUR, 1874, p. V cf. 'IBBUR, VAT 48, fol. 59b. 109 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 4a-4b, 8a, 11a. 110 'IBBUR, 1874,pp. 3b, lla. III 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 4a. 112 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 3b. 113 SELA, 2001 (ii), pp. 113-4. 114 Vatican Ms Ebr. Urbinati 48 (hereafter 'IBBUR, VAT 48), fols. 72a-75a. I'm obliged to S. Walter for having brought to my notice the existence of this manuscript. WALTER, 2001, pp. 211-214. I intend in the near future to produce a printed edition of the fragment which includes the third chapter.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

43

parts afford highly instructive information. The chapter begins with the following statement: The third chapter: before I discuss the true [reckoning of the] vernal equinox (tequfat ha- 'emet), I ought to draw up tables of the arcs and cords, afterwards tables of the declination of the sun to the north or to the south, as well as tables of the shadows. Only after we are acquainted with these subjects will we be able to calculate the latitude of any place, any hour of the day or of the night, the parts of the hour, the arc of the day, how many degrees each zodiacal constellation ascends in any place. Thereafter I will draw up tables of the place of the luminaries and the place of the caput draconis (rosh ha-teli), for which there is a great need when we come to calculate the eclipses of the luminaries (qadrut hame 'orot).115

The text continues with a discussion of the cords and arcs (yeterim weqeshatot), the degrees of the numbers (ma 'alot ha-mispar) and their division (.(Jiluq), the calculation of the intercalated years ('ibbur) and of the turning points of the solar year (tequlot).116 Most interesting is the arithmetically-oriented section devoted to the degrees of the numbers (sha 'ar ha-ma 'alot), which creates an interesting link between this work and Seier ha-Mispar. The author begins by stating that the numbers from 1 to 9 belong to the first degree, from ten till the end of the ninth group of tens belong to the second degree, from one hundred till the ninth group of hundreds belong to the third degree, and so on. Then, in a digression, we read the following: "This is the reckoning method of the scholars of India: they employ digits from one to nine, and when they wish to write the number ten, they write N0 117 because in this manner they indicate that it is one in the second degree, and instead of one hundred they write NOO, and instead of one thousand they write NOOO ••• ".llS In short, the author of this text employs the essentials of the decimal positional system (which assumes, besides separate symbols for 1 to 9, an additional "void" symbol for 0 as a placeholder) in order to illuminate the discussion about the degrees of the numbers. What is noteworthy in this regard is that we found in Ibn Ezra's Seier ha-Mispar a very similar treatment of the degrees of the numbers (ma 'alot hamispar), together with a very similar reference to the decimal positional system, which is also seen there as an invention of the scholars of

liS 'IBBUR, VAT 48, 116 'IBBUR, VAT 48, 117

llS

fol. 72a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 338 (1.7) fols. 72a-75a. The Hebrew letter N represents the number 1. 'IBBUR, VAT 48, fol. 72b.

44

PART ONE

India. 119 Thus, a close link is established between the third chapter of Seier ha- '/bbur and Seier ha-Mispar, which, as mentioned above, was written by Ibn Ezra in Italy approximately in 1146 or earlier, that is, shortly before he wrote Seier ha- '/bbur.120 The third chapter of Seier ha- '/bbur, as it appears in Vatican Urbinati Ms. Ebr. 48, fol. 75a, ends abruptly with the following words: "and with the astrolabe you should add the ascendant zodiacal constellation at any hour in the eastern part to the hours; I wrote about the shape and the appearance of the stars and the luminaries taking into account the longitude of the places, and the meaning of (the word) longitude is your distance from the eastern cardinal point". 121 In all likelihood, the interruption was caused by the highly technical topics and obscure astronomical contents of the remainder of the third chapter, which supposedly deterred a later scribe from continuing his work. The same argument may also account for the fact that the other extant manuscripts include only the two first chapters of Seier ha- 'lbbur. All in all, even though we hardly find in it any allusion to the subjects which were recorded in the table of contents or in the above-mentioned references which are traceable in the first two chapters - this fragment of the third chapter of Seier ha- '/bbur gives every appearance of being an authentic work by Ibn Ezra. As mentioned above, we find in it a close link to Ibn Ezra's Seier ha-Mispar, which was written shortly before Seier ha'/bbur. We also notice in this fragment some of the traits which characterize Ibn Ezra as a scientific writer: his penchant for enlarging the scope either by presenting a different opinion belonging to a different time and culture or by commenting on difficult terms which occur in the text. What clinches the argument in favor of Ibn Ezra's authorship, however, is the special scientific nomenclature: we find in this brief text technical terms peculiar to Ibn Ezra, such as qadrut hame 'orot, that is, the eclipse of the luminaries, and especially the very characteristic term keli ha-ne.(Joshet, which is the term invented by Ibn Ezra to designate the astrolabe. • Three Responsa. These responsa related to the Jewish calendar were composed by Ibn Ezra in answer to three questions posed by a certain David Ben Joseph of Narbonne. Let us recall that in Narbonne, Ibn Ezra also wrote the second Hebrew version of Seier Ta 'amei ha119 MISPAR, 1895, pp. 1-5. 120 Let us also recall that

Ibn Ezra alludes to Seier ha-Mispar as an already accomplished work in the second chapter of his Seier ha- '/bbur. See 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 4a. 121 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 339 (1.8)

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

45

Lubot (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables) as well as the second version of his Sefer ha- 'Ibbur, as Joseph Bonfils claimed, and it may thus be safely stated that these responsa too were composed by him during his sojourn in Narbonne, after he left Italy and arrived in Provence between 1148 and 1154. The three questions and the corresponding responsa were published in 1847 by M. Steinschneider, who also added a few short annotations. 122 Since its publication, however, Ibn Ezra's responsa have hardly received any attention by modem research. Ibn Ezra's authorship of this work can be unequivocally established in view of the following evidence: (a) in his supercommentary Safnat Pa 'aneab, Joseph Bonfils quoted a whole passage that he claimed to have been taken from an epistle which Ibn Ezra wrote in answer to some questions posed to him beforehand. Under closer scrutiny, the passage quoted in Safnat Pa 'aneab, which contains an additional commentary by Ibn Ezra on Genesis 1: 16, emerges to be an almost exact quotation of a fragment of the third responsum;123 (b) the text of the responsa includes Hebrew words and expressions, such as mU$aq (center) and bakhmei hamazalot (astronomers-astrologers), which clearly attest to Ibn Ezra's pen (see below, p. 113); (c) the topics and formulations of two among the three responsa bear striking similarities to parallel passages that Ibn Ezra wrote in the first version of his Sefer ha- 'Ibbur as well as in other parts of his work. 124 All in all, these three brief responsa not only provide a concise and telling illustration of Ibn Ezra's approach to the calendar, but also voice the calendaric concerns shared by an educated Jewish reading public in Provence in the middle of the twelfth century. We will now review the contents of the three responsa. In the first responsum, Ibn Ezra was queried about the value and usefulness of a special calendaric table covering two hundred and fortyseven years and including thirteen cycles of nineteen years. This table was composed by Nabshon Ga'on (d. 880) in order to attempt to establish the exact recurrence of weekdays in new moons and festivals of certain years. 125 Ibn Ezra, for his part, punned on the Hebrew word See THREE QUESTIONS, 1847. SAFNAT PA'ANEAI;I, 1911, I p. 42: "The geometricians (.(lakhmei ha-midot) stated that the diameter of the moon when it is in opposition to the sun is equal to the diameter of the sun, (as seen from the earth), that is, one degree and thirty-one parts ofa degree." cf. THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, p. 3, wherein instead of the geometricians (.(lakhmei ha-midot) appear the astronomers (.(lakhmei ha-mazalot). This passage is quoted below in note 134. 124 For the second responsum, for example, see below, notes 127 and 128. 125 BARON, 1958, VIII, p. 192 n. 59. 122 123

46

PART ONE

RM"Z, which stands for both hint and two hundred forty-seven, emphasizing that the table creates a discrepancy of 986 parts, and suggesting that David Ben Joseph abandon that table, since it is worthless and should sink into oblivion. 126 In the second question, David Ben Joseph threw into relief the link between the Christian and the Jewish calendars. Ibn Ezra was required to explain why a gap of four weeks occurred in 1139 between the Jewish Passover and the Christian Easter. Ibn Ezra explained that this gap always occurs in the sixteenth year of the nineteen-year cycle. In his opinion, the discrepancy is accounted for by the fact that the Christians endorse an erroneous tropical year of 365 '14 days (the same as that adopted by the Jewish school headed by Mar Samuel) and that they determine the moment when the Sun enters the constellation of Aries (tequfat Nissan) only after the twentieth of Mars. 127 To prove this an error, Ibn Ezra called for the help of fellow astronomers of different ages, schools and nations. He presented the diverse opinions of Indian, Persian, Greek and Islamic astronomers about the length of the solar year: all of them were at variance about the length of the solar year but they all concurred in denying that the length of the tropical year is 365 '14 days. 128 In the third question, which occupies two thirds of the responsa 's total length, Ibn Ezra is asked about the meaning of the mysterious Hebrew expression Z"T TRMB, a combination of letters which stands for seven days, nine hours and six hundred and forty-two parts (each equal to 1/1080 of an hour).129 An examination of other contemporary Hebrew works on the calendar reveals that behind this chronological value there hides a controversy dividing Jewish calendar scholars regarding the chronology of the world's creation. 130 In his third 126 THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, p. l. 127 THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, p. l. Ibn Ezra's reference to this problem in this

responsum is very similar to his approach in the first version of Sefer ha- 'Ibbur (see 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 6b) and also in the chapter of Liber de rationibus tabularum that

deals with the points of contact between the Jewish and the Christian calendars. See LIBERDE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 100. 128 Ibn Ezra presented the same controversy, dividing Indian, Persian, Greek and Islamic astronomers over the length of the tropical year, in a very similar manner in the following places: commentary on Leviticus 25:9; Liber de rationibus tabularum (LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 74-6, 79); Sefer ha- 'Ibbur ('IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a); 'Igeret ha-Shabbat (,IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 64-5); Sefer haMoladot (MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 59a); first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam (,OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81a); both versions of Sefer ha-Te'amim (TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 37b' TE' AM 1M B, 1941, pp. 34, 40). 129 For this special division of the hour into 1080 parts, see p. 307. 130 This controversy is also referred to by Maimonides in SANCTIFICATION OF THE

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

47

responsum, Ibn Ezra explained that Z"T TRMB represents the interval between the vernal equinox of the first year of creation and the first conjunction of the sun and moon in Nissan. 131 More than by these bits of technical data, the attention of the reader of this responsum is aroused by the fact that it was mainly polemical. After briefly referring to the chronological and technical aspects of the issue, Ibn Ezra unleashed an attack on an unnamed 'commentator' (ze ha-mefaresh) who, in his opinion, provided an erroneous explanation of Z"T TRMB. In fact, Ibn Ezra said, the commentator's cardinal error was that he misinterpreted two interrelated sources: (a) an apparent contradiction in Genesis 1: 16 - wherein the moon is variously named as the greater and the lesser luminary; (b) a famous midrash explaining this contradiction by suggesting that the moon was made into a lesser luminary after being punished for complaining to God about its status relative to the sun. 132 Based on both these sources, Ibn Ezra said, this anonymous commentator asserted that "the moon deserved to be named by two appellations in the fourth day (of Creation): [it was named] the lesser luminary because its light waned when it was created; [it was named] the greater luminary because afterwards on the same day (that is, after nine hours and six hundred and forty-two parts) its light waxed and illuminated the earth." Who was this unnamed 'commentator'? It turns out that Ibn Ezra was referring to Abraham Bar l;Iiyya, who indeed in his own Sefer ha- 'Ibbur explained the meaning of Z"T TRMB in line with Ibn Ezra's words in his responsum. 133 In the remainder of the third responsum, which extends over more than the half of the whole responsa, Ibn Ezra devoted NEW MOON, 1967, 9:3, p. 37; by Ibn Ezra in 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 5a-6a; and by Abraham Bar ijiyya in 'IBBUR, 1851, III, 7, pp. 96-98. 131 As may also be learnt from a similar reference in Seier ha- 'Ibbur, in Ibn Ezra's opinion Z"T TRMB does not represent any real chronological phenomenon but a mere chronological value which is the result of a mistake due to the erroneous methodology adopted by the school headed by Mar Samuel. See 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 5a-6a. 132 /fullin 60a; Midrash Rabah Bereshit VI, 3; Chapters a/Rabbi Eliezer, chap. 5. 133 'IBBUR (Abraham Bar ijiyya), 1851, III, 4, p. 88: "The Tequfah (of Nissan) preceded the (first) molad according to Rav Adda by nine hours and six hundred and forty-two parts because the moon complained about its status relative to the sun ... and God diminished the moon's light... but the body of the moon was not made smaller, as the majority of the people believe, only its light waned and afterwards waxed. This is the reason why Scripture named the moon with two appellations: the greater luminary because its light waxes till it becomes a full moon; the lesser luminary because its light wanes and disappears completely." Ibn Ezra referred explicitly to Abraham Bar Hiyya and argued with him in similar terms in the first version of Seier ha- 'Ibbur. See 'IBBUR, 1874, P 5b ..

48

PART ONE

himself to the refutation of Bar J:Iiyya's interpretation. In the first place, Ibn Ezra reconciled the apparent contradiction regarding the moon in Genesis 1: 16 by providing, as is customary with him, a commentary that highlights the peshat, that is, the simple, obvious, literal meaning of the biblical text. In fact, he wrote, expanding on the commentary he himself had written in Lucca in 1145, that "both the sun and the moon were named greater luminaries because their light is greater than the light of the stars, and the light of the sun is the greatest of all. Hence, the light of the moon is greater that the light of the stars but is lesser than the light of the sun."134 Ibn Ezra's main concern, however, was to provide a new rationalistic and scientifically orientated explanation of the midrash. The emphasis Bar J:Iiyya put on the literal and plain meaning of the midrash, not least his unqualified approval of the opinion that the moon complained about its status relative to the sun and was punished for that, was something that Ibn Ezra could not bear. Both the philosophers ('anshei ha-tushiah), who think that the moon has a soul, and the researchers ('anshei hamebqar), who believe the moon has a body made up of stone and glass and copper, Ibn Ezra said, will repudiate the opinion that the moon would have complained to God about its status relative to the sun. 135 After demolishing the basis of Bar J:Iiyya's argument, Ibn Ezra put forward his own interpretation of the midrash. In his opinion, that the moon was allegedly punished for complaining about its status relative to the sun should be construed as a metaphor for a definite astronomicalastrological phenomenon. That a star "offends", "fights" or "quarrels" with another star means that the former star is in opposition to the latter, that they are separated one from the other by one half of the sphere, that is, by six zodiacal signs. As the sun has its own light and the moon does not, when the sun is in opposition to the moon it (the moon) shines so fully that its light is equal to the light of the sun. In this situation, as is acknowledged by the astronomers (bakhmei ha-mazalot), the diameter of the moon seems, from the earth, to be equal to the diameter of the sun, that is, one degree and thirty-one parts of a degree. Then, after 134 Thereafter, not content with mere explanation of the biblical text, Ibn Ezra strengthened his argument by invoking the help of the astronomers. THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, p. 3: "The astronomers (bakhmei ha-mazalot) assess that the diameter of the moon is equal to the diameter ofthe sun (as seen from the earth), that is one degree and thirty-one parts of a degree. Hence, when the moon shines with full light, it is seven signs away from the sun and exactly in the opposite degree and location to the sun." cf. SAFNAT PA'ANEAI;!, 1911, I p. 42. 135 THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, p. 3.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

49

having "offended" the sun, the moon gradually looses its light and dims. 136 • 'Igeret ha-Shabbat (The Epistle on the Shabbat). 'Igeret haShabbat was first edited in 1839 by S.D. Luzzato and later in 1894 by M. Friedlander, but since then this work, not least its scientific contents, has received scarcely any attention by modern scholarship.137 This fictional epistle was written by Abraham Ibn Ezra in December 1158 in one of the cities of England, as he specifically reveals in the opening sentence of this work in terms becoming his Jewish and scientific background. 138 In its sequel, Ibn Ezra wove an intriguing literary fiction to support the contents and message of the epistle. A messenger sent by the Shabbat appeared before him in a dream with a letter containing an appalling complaint: "Yesterday, your students brought books of commentaries on the Torah, in which they were exhorted to violate the Shabbat day."139 The grievance of the Shabbat against him, even though couched in rhymed verse, was voiced by Ibn Ezra in extremely vague terms: neither the verse of the Torah, nor any detail about the alluded commentary on it, nor the commentator to blame for it were referred to. Nevertheless, as if stirred by a guilty conscience and as if he knew a priori the source of all this trouble, Ibn Ezra quickly found in his house the alluded-to verse and the commentary on it, but kept a tantalizing silence regarding the identity of the commentator. It turned out to be a commentary on Genesis 1:5, which, in explanation of the words 'and it was evening and it was morning', stated that "when the morning of the second day [of Creation] had come, then one complete day emerged, for the night comes after the day!".140 Evidently, what gave much offence to the Shabbat was the implication that the day begins in the morning, and 136 THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, p. 3. See also above, note 134. 137 For the printed editions, see 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1839; 'IGERET HASHABBAT,

1894/5. An English translation of the introduction to the epistle may be found in JACOBS, 1893, pp. 35-58. If this work has attracted some attention, it is because the Epistle on the Shabbat contains an alternative third commentary by Ibn Ezra of Genesis 1:5. For bibliographical, literary and historical references about this work, see the following: FRIEDLANDER, 1894, pp. 52-60; GRAETZ, 1894, VI, pp. 373-5; FLEISCHER, 1931, pp. 129-133, 160-168; GOLB, 1998, pp. 301-303. 138 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 61: "In the year 4919, in the middle of Saturday night, on the fourteenth day of the month of Tevet [= December 7, 1158], I, Abraham Ibn Ezra the Spaniard, was in one of the cities of the island called qe$e ha'are$ (Angleterre), which is part of the seventh among the gevulot ha- 'are$ [that is, the seventh climate] of the inhabited part of the earth." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 336 (1.1). For the use of the biblical expression gevulot ha-'are$ as a s)'nonym for the 'seven climates', see below, p. 107. 139 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 62. 140 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 62-3.

50

PART ONE

not, as is normative Jewish belief, at sunset. Not only did this entail the risk of leading to the desecration of the Shabbat, but also, as Ibn Ezra clearly expressed it, the possibility that "Jews should be an object of scorn and derision in the eyes of Gentiles". 141 This commentary brought into focus an aspect of the calendar which not only jeopardized the religious Jewish identity from within but also affected their identity as a national minority from without. A reader confining himself to the opening paragraphs would hardly have guessed that the Epistle on the Shabbat in its main parts is a scientific treatise about the Jewish calendar. Ibn Ezra was commanded by the messenger to "fight the battle of the Torah against the Shabbat's enemies", and he, on his part, pledged himself to write "a long epistle about the beginning of the day of the Torah". In fact, the major part of the epistle dealt with clear calendaric topics; it had an introduction and three chapters, each one dealing with the beginning of the three chief periods of cyclical time: the year, the month and the day. In the introduction, Ibn Ezra immediately presented the reader with the "two primary motions of the heavens", a pivotal Ptolemaic astronomical theory that is propounded by him as a point of agreement among the 'scholars of the ordinances of heaven' (mashlei Quqot shamayim), an alternative name for the astronomers and astrologers derived by Ibn Ezra from Job 38:33. The two primary motions of the heavens are set forth, with the assistance of several illustrative verses carefully culled from the biblical text, as generating the fluctuating weather, as bringing about the change in the length of the days, and as signaling the four tequlot (the solstices and the equinoxes) which mark the beginning of the four seasons. The Ptolemaic theory was placed at such a strategically important place in the epistle because Ibn Ezra believed that it was the most appropriate means of laying the astronomical foundation for the subsequent determination of the appropriate beginnings of the year, the month and day.142 141 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 63. 142 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 63: "This is the beginning of the epistle. There is no disagreement among the scholars of the ordinances of heaven (Job 38:33) that there are two circles which embody the two superior motions whose mU$aq [that is, center] (Job 36:16) is the earth. The two circles intersect at two points, and from there they separate, as one of the circles tilts to the south and also to the north at the rate of two-fifths of a sixth of the circle [that is, 24 degrees]. One of the motions encompasses all the motions of the spheres, its direction is eastward, and [in its framework] the twelve zodiacal signs rise in twenty-four hours, and the seven planets too rise almost in the same amount [of hours]. The second motion is westward, and it too encompasses all the motions of the spheres, for the poles of the

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

51

The first chapter, even though it was specifically meant to discuss the beginning of the year, commences with a relatively lengthy debate on the length of the tropical year. In line with other, similar passages across the length and breadth of Ibn Ezra's oeuvre, the first part of the debate was portrayed by Ibn Ezra as a controversy extending from antiquity to his own times and dividing national astronomical schools on the question of whether the exact length of the solar year is more or less than 365 days plus a quarter of a day.143 Next Ibn Ezra shifted the focus from external scientific debates to internal clashes of opinion dividing the Jewish camp. He began by setting a sharp critical eye on the mysterious Karaite Judah ha-Parsy, who proposed a solar calendar very similar to the Julian calendar endorsed by the Christians. 144 He continued by presenting the main arguments which divided the two famous talmudic schools headed by Mar Samuel and by Rav Adda Bar 'Ahabah. These two systems are brought in order to discuss their diverging opinions about the length of the tropical year, the timing of the four tequlot, as well as the metonic cycle and the method of intercalation. 145 The beginning of the year is taken up only in the final section of the first chapter, and the discussion about it is informed with the same eclectic approach that pervaded the discussion about the length of the tropical year. This last section is prefaced by a relativistic statement according to which anyone can set at will the beginning of the year, whose cyclical period is illustrated by the figure of a circle. This is followed by a series of opinions which represent the diverse positions held by various scientific schools, nations and religions on this subject. planets' spheres are similar to the poles of the sphere of the zodiacal signs, and the sun alone keeps the line of the zodiacal signs, and does not deviate northward or southward ... and [its motion] is the true year ... and since the year is divided into months, and the month is dependent on the moon, which is the smaller luminary, therefore I divided this epistle into three parts: the first part dealing with the year of the Torah, the second with the month of the Torah and the third with the commencement of the day of the Torah". For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 336 (1.2). 143 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 64-5. Ibn Ezra embedded the same debate about the length of the tropical year in such an unexpected place as his commentary on Leviticus 25:9, in the framework of an argument with the Karaite Judah ha-Parsy. For a detailed study of this biblical commentary, see below, p. 273. Ibn Ezra also introduced the same scientific controversy in Liber de rationibus tabularum (LiBER DE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 74-6, 79), Seier ha-'Ibbur ('IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a), the Responsa to Joseph Narboni (THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, pp. 1-2, see above, p. 40), Seier ha-Moladot (MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 59a), Seier ha- 'Olam ('OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81a) and in both versions of Seier ha-Te'amim (TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 37b; TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 34, 40). 144 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 65. For Ibn Ezra's polemical stance against Judah ha-Parsy, see below, p. 275. 145 'IGERETHASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 65-67.

52

PART ONE

Ibn Ezra's approach, however, was not merely ornamental or eclectic, but taken to stress that there is no point in trying to apply any objective yardstick in determining the beginning of the year. His underlying aim was to emphasize that the only feasible way is that provided by the Rabbanite approach, which asserts the necessity of relying on an arbitrary body of human knowledge (such as the talmudic corpus) to solve the problem. 146 In contrast with the first chapter, the second begins from the very start with its original subject. First, Ibn Ezra sets forth the main criterion for the determination of the beginning of the month: The month belongs to the moon since only its light, from among all the other stars, is renewed; therefore the beginning of the month should be determined by the molad, that is, the conjunction of the moon and sun. The major setback, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, is that there is a substantial gap between the 'mean' molad, determined by the mean motion of moon and sun, and the 'true' molad, which takes into account, as the old sages oflsrael put it, that sometimes the moon "travels by a long road" and sometimes "travels by a short road".147 In addition, there are some misconceptions and deeply-rooted calculating errors, which Ibn Ezra tries to unveil. I48 Ibn Ezra also has harsh words against some Jewish pseudo-astronomers living in Christian countries, who, without being knowledgeable in astronomy and equipped with only standard Jewish calendaric formulas, tum to the Christians and reveal to them the secrets of the Jewish intercalation in an incorrect manner. 149 Quite surprisingly, after 146 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 68-70. For Ibn Ezra's opinion about the role that sciences play in this pro-Rabbanite approach, see below, p. 286. 147 B. Rosh Hashana 25a. For an explanation of this talmudic expression see SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 17:23-24, pp. 72-3. This is one of the subjects which Ibn Ezra intended to discuss in the third part of his Seier ha- 'Ibbur. See 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 3b, lla. See also Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 12:2; 34:21 and on Leviticus 23:4. Interestingly enough, Ibn Ezra applies the same talmudic expression to describe some anomalies in the solar motion. See, for example, NEJ:IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 37b, wherein he refers the reader to his astronomical tables. See also BELLER, 1988, pp. 63-4. 148 The Ge'onim, for example, did not take into account, as the astronomers do, that sometimes the moon 'travels by a long road' and sometimes 'travels by a short road'; that geographical longitude and latitude cause significant alterations in the time of the first visibility of the new crescent. See 'IGERET HASHABBA T, 1894/5, pp. 70-1. 149 This is not so much a problem of holding in strictest secrecy the secrets of the Jewish calendar as it is a point of honour and "nationalistic" pride. This point is emphasized by Ibn Ezra when he maintains that those inter-religious contacts should be established at the highest level, not by charlatans and amateurs but by scholars and specialists in the Jewish calendar. For an analysis of this passage, see SELA, 1996, pp. 216-7.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

53

succinctly providing the astronomical rules which in his opinion explain the secret behind the talmudic formula that the moon sometimes "is born before midnight",150 and after stressing that there are no shortcuts on the way to astronomical knowledge, Ibn Ezra presented what in his opinion is the solution to the problem: the beginning of the month, as written in the Mishnah, should be determined by the reappearance of the moon's light as seen with the naked eye. 151 The third chapter begins by pointing out the four times which may serve as an adequate beginning of the day: noon, evening, midnight and morning. This opinion is astronomically justified by calling up the two primary motions of the heavens and drawing an analogy between them. Whereas the four tequlot aptly mark the beginning of the four seasons of the western annual motion and their division, noon, evening, midnight and morning indicate the beginning of the four quarters of the easterly daily motion and their division. The scientific vantage point, in Ibn Ezra's view, is embodied by the opinion of the bakhmei ha-mazalot, that is, the astronomers and astrologers, who argued that noon is the most adequate beginning of the day. They did so, Ibn Ezra says, both on geometrical grounds, which he declines to spell out, and on observational grounds, that is, because the shadow cast at noon is the shortest. Ibn Ezra, however, responds that even with the instrumentality of the astrolabe or the gnomon it is hardly possible to determine noon with necessary accuracy, and the same applies, even more strongly, to midnight. 152 After eliminating noon and midnight, morning and evening still remain to be discussed, two times which are relatively easier to determine but hard to acknowledge, because of their loaded cultural and religious connotations. Loyal to his Jewish heritage, Ibn Ezra exerts himself to demonstrate that evening is the best choice, at least from his own cultural and religious vantage point. First, to clinch the argument, he again gears the western annual motion to the eastern daily motion. More precisely, he draws a parallel between the daily solar motion and the solar motion along the zodiac so that, for example, the period between morning and 150 B. Rosh Ha-Shanah 20a. For an explanation of this talmudic expression, see also 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. lla, lib. 151 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 70-72 cf. B. Rosh Ha-Shanah 22a 152 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 72. Interestingly enough, even though he was intimately acquainted with the astrolabe, or perhaps precisely because of that, Ibn Ezra stresses here and there the inability of the astrolabe and of the gnomon to attain accurate results. See in this regard: 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 65; LIBER DE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 79, 81, 83, 88-89, 92, 93; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81a.

54

PART ONE

noon is made comparable to the period between the vernal equinox and the summer solstice; and the autumnal equinox, that is tequfat Tishrei, is analogous to the evening, when the sun crosses the horizon downwards. All that enables Ibn Ezra to assert that if Tishrei betokens the proper beginning of the year according to Jewish belief, so, of necessity, evening, the parallel point in the sun's daily path to the autumnal equinox, must mark the proper beginning of the day. In this last section, Ibn Ezra abandons astronomy and sets out to quote a long series of talmudic and biblical quotations which are interpreted by him as pointing to the conclusion that evening marks the beginning of the day.153 Despite all the explanatory effort invested, the obligation imposed on Ibn Ezra to reckon with Genesis 1:5 still looms large, as it was precisely a commentary on this verse which apparently triggered the complaint of the Shabbat and the subsequent composition of the epistle. No wonder then that the last section of the epistle was devoted by Ibn Ezra to setting forth an alternative commentary on Genesis 1:5. At this stage, it seems appropriate to bring into focus a deferred question: whose commentary was it that was presented by Ibn Ezra as provoking the Shabbat's condemnation? We shall review the opinion of recent scholarship and briefly furnish some additional new clues. The standard answer to that question is that Ibn Ezra was referring to Rashbam, Rabbi Samuel Ben Me'if (ca.1080-ca.1160), a talmudic

commentator and fellow biblical exegete. This thesis may be defended on the following grounds. First, not only did the period of activity of both commentators coincide, but also Ibn Ezra spent some time in northern Europe, which is where Rashbam dwelt. Moreover, Rashbam appears to have resided in Rouen, in the very same years that Ibn Ezra apparently sojourned there, so that it is plausible that the one was acquainted with the work and thought of the other.154 Second, Rashbam, in his own commentary on Genesis 1:5, referring specifically to the first part of this verse, wrote that "light always comes first and darkness afterward", a statement which may, but not necessarily should be, read as postulating that the day precedes the night. 155 Third, some of Ibn Ezra's commentaries have been construed as referring critically to Rashbam's biblical commentaries. 156 So that the opinion that Ibn Ezra 153 154

'!GERETHASHABBAT, 1894/5,pp. 72-74. GOLB, 1998, pp. 297-303. But see also the reservation brought in MONDSCHEIN, 2001, p. 15, note 3. ISS ROSIN, 1882,p. 5. 156 MARGALIOT, 1953, pp. 357-369; cf. SIMON, 1964, pp. 130-138; MONDSCHEIN,

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

55

was referring to Rashbam is the commonplace answer to the aboveposed question, supported by almost all those who came across the Epistle on the Shabbat, even though for different reasons. IS7 However, some significant points militate, in my opinion, against this position. First, it is noteworthy that Ibn Ezra, who in many cases did not abstain from providing the names of his sources, not least when taking issue with them, never referred by name to Rashbam, nor the latter to him. Second, if both of them lived in Rouen or in northern Europe and were acquainted the one with the work or the other, why did Ibn Ezra wait till he arrived in England to pass judgment on Rashbam's commentary on Genesis? In other words: why did Ibn Ezra not take advantage of his second commentary on the Pentateuch, which was apparently written in Rouen and which included some parts that might be read as references to parts of Rashbam's commentary on Exodus?IS8 Third, and this is the quintessence of our argument, Ibn Ezra's commentary on Genesis 1:5, as developed in his Epistle on the Shabbat, embodies a veritable volte face in his exegetical stance, and is not a mere reiteration or variation of the two other commentaries he wrote on the same verse. Moreover (and this is a point which oddly enough did not arouse the attention of the experts in the intricacies and technicalities of Ibn Ezra's exegesis), this change of heart may be seen as emending and rectifying the previous opinion which Ibn Ezra held when he wrote the two other commentaries on the same verse. These two other commentaries, in their tum, and not only Rashbam's commentary on Genesis 1:5, may be fairly understood as undermining the traditional Jewish position and giving offence to the Shabbat, by suggesting that the day begins in the morning and not at sunset. Let us now briefly tackle this last point. To begin with, it is worth noting that the plain text of Genesis 1:5 has basis enough to provide justification for both the Christian and the Jewish versions of the beginning of the day. While the first part of the verse - "And God called the light day, and the darkness he called night" - puts the light before the darkness and thus might be construed as supporting the Christian version,159 the second part of the verse 2001, pp. 15-45. 157 ROSIN, 1882, pp. 30-32; GRAETZ, 1894, VI, pp. 373-5; FLEISCHER, 1931, pp. 164-166; SIMON, 1964, pp. 130-138, esp. 136; GOLB, 1998, pp. 301-303; MONDSCHEIN, 2001, pp. 40-45. But see also the reservations expressed by FRIEDLANDER, 1894, pp. 52-60. 158 See above, note 156. 159 In all likelihood, Ibn Ezra was referring to some unspecified patristic biblical

56

PART ONE

"and there was evening and there was morning, one day" - places the evening before the morning and so might be read as confirming the Jewish position. The latter may be seen as true, however, on condition that both evening and day are being defined as the components of "one day", so that the evening antecedes the morning. Interestingly enough, in his first two commentaries on Genesis 1:5, Ibn Ezra emphasized that the second part of the verse is not a definition of the day, so that there is no point in trying to understand from it which are the components of the day and what is their chronological order (first evening and afterwards morning). In Ibn Ezra's opinion, such an interpretation should be rejected because it is tantamount to asserting that the verse contains a glaring contradiction. He expressed this idea clearly in Lucca around 1145 in the first commentary on Genesis 1:5, in which he wrote that "once it is stated that God called the light day, it is impossible to maintain that the evening, too, is considered part of the day". He reiterated the same idea ten years thereafter in Rouen, at the very beginning of his second commentary on Genesis 1:5, wherein he wrote that "since the evening is [part of the] night, it makes no sense that Scripture should designate the evening and the morning as 'one day'. As the night is the opposite of the day, how could it be possible that the night should be designated as day?"160 Moreover, to assume that Genesis 1:5 brings a definition of the day, setting forth its components and their chronological order, is tantamount to maintaining that the biblical text not only holds contradictory ideas but is also redundant to a great extent, in view of the fact that the same formula appears, time and time again, after the end of each of the days of Creation. 161 commentaries on Genesis. Bede (ca.673-735), in his De temporibus, following the patristic definition of the beginning of the day, maintains: "Divine authority, which in Genesis decreed that days should be calculated from dawn to dawn, ordained in the Gospel that the period of a whole day should begin at sunset and end at sunset ... It might well be asked why the people of Israel who,following the tradition ofMoses always preserved the order of the day from dawn to dawn, should have begun all their feast days, as we do today, at sundown, and finished them at sundown". (italics added) RECKONING OF TIME, 1999, pp. 23-4, 272-273. Ibn Ezra, for his part, not only believed that this position entails the risk ofleading to the desecration of the Shabbat but also the possibility that "Jews should be an object of scorn and derision in the eyes of Gentiles". See 'IGERETHASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 63. 160 SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, p. 159. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 337 (1.4). 161 See FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1988, pp. 33-34 (with slight changes): "Once it is stated that God called the light 'day', it is impossible to maintain that the evening, too, should be considered part of the day. The correct interpretation [of 'and there was evening and there was morning, one day' (Genesis 1:5)] is that the evening

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

57

In sharp contrast with that, in the third commentary on Genesis 1:5 brought in the Epistle on the Shabbat, Ibn completely retracted the above-mentioned opinion and asserted from the very start that ''the meaning of there was evening and there was morning is that from evening to evening is one day". In order to corroborate this statement, Ibn Ezra introduced new evidence proving, in glaring contradiction to what he had maintained in the other two commentaries, that sometimes the biblical text brings two opposite notions in the framework of a single word. A case in point is Genesis 5:2, wherein "male" and "female" are subsumed under a single name and called Adam. 162 As a corollary, Ibn Ezra comes to the conclusion that "the day includes both times, which are included in one motion... and therefore it is clarified with the evidence of the biblical Creation that the day extends from evening to evening".163 In light of all that, the possibility should not be ruled out that the Epistle on the Shabbat was, rather than an attack on Rashbam, an apology written by Ibn Ezra to defend himself against attacks launched against himself, as well as in order to cancel the dangerous implications of his two earlier commentaries on this verse. What is noteworthy about Abraham Ibn Ezra, the exegete and the scientist, is that he embedded his new and innovative commentary in a scientific treatise concerned with the calendar. 3. The Astrological Encyclopedia

The main part of Ibn Ezra's scientific writings consists of a series of astrological treatises which may well be considered an astrological encyclopedia. l64 This nomenclature may be justified on two main passed, and the morning of one day also came (so that the evening is detached from 'one day' but the morning is attached to it). If the intention [of this verse] is to teach that the evening and morning make a day, then what is the meaning of '[and there was evening and there was morning,] a second day'." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 337 (1.3). 162 For an analysis of Ibn Ezra's exegetical change of heart, see SIMON, 1964, pp. 92-138, esp. 98-100. 163 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 75. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 337 (1.5). 16'1 Jose Maria Millas Vallicrosa bestowed the term encyclopedic to describe one of the main characteristics of the scientific output of Abraham Bar Hiyya and Abraham Ibn Ezra as well. See VALLICROSA, 1938, pp. 306-322; VALLICROSA, 1987, pp. 219-262. But, as far as Abraham Ibn Ezra is concerned, Millas ValJicrosa did not add any comment or explanation in support of his statement. For a study of the encyclopedic characteristics of Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises and literary work see SELA,2000,pp.154-170.

58

PART ONE

grounds. First, not all the astrological works of Ibn Ezra but the majority, that is, at least one version of each of these astrological treatises, may be regarded collectively as the product of a steady and concentrated effort carried out in one single year, 1148 (4908 A.M.), and in one and the same place, the city of Beziers in Provence. Second, from a thematic point of view, these treatises may be considered as chapters of a single major work, since some of them are designed as general textbooks, while others deal separately with the four main systems of Arabic astrology: nativities, elections, interrogations and universal astrology. 165 • Reshit Uokhmah (Beginning of Wisdom): Abraham Ibn Ezra completed this book in Tamuz 4908 A.M., that is, approximately June 1148. 166 This treatise was the first link in a continuous and concentrated effort whose output was composed of seven treatises, covering the various branches of astrology, and was written in a single year, 1148, and in one and the same place, the city of Beziers in Provence. Reshit lJokhmah was not the first work that Ibn Ezra wrote in France. As we have seen above, Ibn Ezra wrote the third version of Keli ha-Nel)oshet early in 1148, and from within this book he referred the reader to Reshit lJokhmah, as a not-yet-completed work. 167 Ibn Ezra divided Reshit lJokhmah into 10 chapters, dealing with three main subjects: (a) a general description of the fixed stars, the zodiac constellations and their astrological characteristics [chapters i, ii, iii]; (b) a general description of the planets and their astrological characteristics [chapters iv, v, vi, vii]; (c) a general discussion of miscellaneous astrological concepts, such as the lots, aspects and some elements of universal astrology [chapters viii, ix, x]. Thus, Reshit lJokhmah is a textbook that explains the most basic tenets of the various branches of astrology. It was considered by Ibn Ezra to be his chief astrological work, testified by the multiple references to Reshit lJokhmah annotated by Ibn Ezra from within his other astrological treatises, in order to elucidate various astrological concepts. 168 When writing Reshit lJokhmah, considered the first and 165 For a synoptic review of Ibn Ezra's astrological works, see STEINSCHNEIDER, 1880, pp. 495-498; ROSIN, 1898-1899, pp. 250-251; LEVY,1927, pp. 11-13. 166 RESHITijOKI:lMAH,1939, ch. x, p.lxxvi. 167 NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 65a, right co!.. 168 See, inter alia, the ensuing references to Reshit /fokhmah, annotated in the following Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises: MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 48b, 59a, 60a, 61 b; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 62b, 67b, 68a; MIVI;lARIM A, 1969, p. 11; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 86a; 'OLAMB, VAT 477, fol. 90a.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

59

most important component of Ibn Ezra's astrological encyclopedia, Ibn Ezra already planned its other components. Therefore, from within Reshit /fokhmah he referred his readers, using the future tense, to Sefer ha- Te 'amim (Book of Reasons), the second component of his astrological encyclopedia, and also to Sefer ha-Moladot (Book of Nativities), the third component. 169 Reshit /fokhmah was translated after Ibn Ezra's death into various European languages. Among these, the rendering into medieval French excels. This translation, undertaken by a Jew called Hagin under the guidance of Henry Bate in 1273, was extremely useful in learning about the crystallization of the incipient French language.17° The French translation, alongside an English translation and the Hebrew text, were edited by Raphael Levy in 1939.171 • SeIer ha-Te'amim (Book of Reasons). Ibn Ezra regarded the first component of his astrological encyclopedia, that is, his Reshit /fokhmah, as a work that was not self-sufficient, since the treatise presented raw astrological concepts without introducing their reasons, that is, their rational explanations. Consequently, while still in the midst of his introduction to Reshit /fokhmah, Ibn Ezra wrote that "when this book is finished, I shall compile a treatise explaining the astrological reasons".172 He accomplished this task in 1148 (4908 A.M.),173 and the outcome was his Sefer ha- Te 'amim, a treatise which Ibn Ezra found necessary to rewrite in an additional version, considerably different in content from the first one. 174 The first version of Sefer ha-Te'amim was written while the imprint of Reshit /fokhmah was still fresh in Ibn Ezra's memory. The two works are so tightly connected that it makes sense to think that they were composed almost simultaneously. Sefer ha- Te 'amim closely follows the inner structure and organization of Reshit /fokhmah, that is, it strictly keeps the division into 10 chapters adopted in Reshit /fokhmah and explains the reasons for astrological concepts in precisely the order in which the same concepts appear in Reshit /fokhmah. Moreover, Ibn Ezra was so absorbed in his commentary on Reshit /fokhmah that he omitted writing 169 170 171 172 173 174

RESHIT ijOKl;lMAI;I, 1939, LEVY, 1927, pp. 19-32.

ch. vi, pp. xliv, Ivii.

See note 166.

RESHIT ijOKl;lMAH, 1939, p. v. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 34a,

37a. For a discussion of the two versions of Sefer ha-Te'amim, see the introduction to the editions of both versions: TE'AMIM B, 1941, edited by Naphtali Ben Menachem, pp. v-xix; TE'AMIM A, 1951, edited by J. L. Fleischer, pp. 5-24. HALBRONN, 1996,pp. 171-184.

60

PART ONE

an introduction to the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim altogether, and began this treatise directly with a discussion of the first item appearing in the first chapter of Reshit lfokhmah, that is, with the question of why the sphere is divided into 360 degrees. 175 The two works are so closely linked that in Seier ha-Moladot (Book of Nativities), the next astrological treatise of the astrological encyclopedia, Ibn Ezra refers to Seier ha- Te 'amim as Seier Ta 'amei Reshit lfokhmah, namely "Book of Reasons of Reshit lfokhmah".176 Yet, even when writing the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra carefully thOUght about the continuation of his astrological encyclopedia. Therefore, he promised to explain some topics more thoroughly in Seier ha-Moladot and Seier ha- 'Olam (Book of the World) or Seier ha-Ma/;lbarot (Book of Conjunctions), both of them still non-existent works, and at the same time he also referred the reader to Keli ha-Ne/;loshet, that is, to the third Hebrew version of the Astrolabe Book, already written before Reshit lfokhmah early in the same year 1148.177 A second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim is attributed to Ibn Ezra. Some researchers, however, cast doubts on the actual connection between Reshit lfokhmah and the so-called second version of Seier haTe 'amim. Moritz Schteinschneider, in an article written in 1870, conjectured that the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim was connected, not to Reshit lfokhmah, but to Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, another astrological textbook by Ibn Ezra. 178 Eighty years later, J. L. Fleischer, in the enlightening preface he wrote to the printed edition of the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, expanded on Schteinschneider's brief remarks and advanced the following opinion: What the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim is to Reshit lfokhmah, the second version of Seier haTe 'amim is to Mishpetei ha-Mazalot. 179 This hypothesis, however, should in my opinion be rejected, and the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim can be safely considered, just like the first version, as a commentary on Reshit lfokhmah. That can be confirmed on the grounds that Ibn Ezra started the second version of Seier ha-Te'amim with the following statement: "Behold now, I have 175 RESHITijOKI;lMAH, 1939, I, p. vi, cf. SEFERHA-TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 34b. 176 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 48b. 177 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 35a, 36b, 43b, 44a, 45b. 178 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1870, pp. 341-342. 179 TE' AMIM A, 1951, pp. 19-22. To clinch his argument, Fleischer put emphasis on

two main points: (a) there are some conspicuous differences between the two versions of Sefer ha- Te 'amim; (b) some astrological items are referred to in both the second version of Sefer ha-Te'amim and Mishpelei ha-Mazalot, whereas they are ostensibly not touched upon in Reshit /fokhmah.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

61

taken upon myself to lay the foundations of the Book of the Beginning of Wisdom (Sefer Reshit f:/okhmah)."180 In a subsequent chapter, in which the introduction to the second version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim will be subjected to a comparative scrutiny, new evidence will be brought to show close connections between the second version of Sefer haTe 'amim and Reshit f:/okhmah (see below, p. 197). Why should this version be regarded as the second version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim? The key that makes possible the chronological arrangement of the two versions of Sefer ha- Te 'amim may be found in two different references to Sefer ha- 'Olam : While in one version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim Ibn Ezra writes, using the future tense, that "/ will explain the mansions of the moon in Sefer ha- 'Olam", 181 in the other version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim Ibn Ezra goes on to say, using the past tense, that "the two luminaries control life, and the place of conjunction or its opposition control every renewed thing, as was written in Sefer ha'Olam".182 (italics added) From this we clearly learn that the referred-to Sefer ha- 'Olam was written in between two different versions of Sefer ha- Te 'amim. Since the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam was composed by 1148, we conclude that the other version of Sefer ha-Te'amim was written after that date. What precisely was the period of time separating the two versions we cannot determine, but it may be clearly noticed that the time that elapsed since Ibn Ezra finished his Reshit f:/okhmah was not short. Even though it may be noted that Ibn Ezra addressed, in the second version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim, concepts and topics that may be found in Reshit f:/okhmah, the division in 10 chapters, as well as the ordering of the topics as adopted in Reshit f:/okhmah, disappear completely in the second version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim. Also, from within the second version of Sefer haTe 'amim, Ibn Ezra referred the reader, using the past tense, to different parts of his "astronomical tables",183 and we assume that with these words he is alluding to the second Hebrew version of his Sefer ha-Lubot and to the Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot written in Narbonne (see above, p. 180 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. I. 181 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 43b. 182 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 33. 183 When explaining the concept of long and short zodiacal signs, Ibn Ezra refers

to Sefer ha-Lubot ha-beleq ha-gadol, that is to the 'main chapter' of the Book of Astronomical Tables - see TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 5 - and when dealing with two technical astrological topics, such as establishing the astrological aspects and the calculations related to the procedure of 'ducere gradus planetae' (see above, notes 43, 72), Ibn Ezra refers the reader on two occasions to Sefer Ma 'ase ha-Lubot, that is the Book to Proceed with Astronomical Tables - see TE' AMIM B, 1941, p. 41.

62

PART ONE

22). Besides, in that work, Ibn Ezra mentioned Seier ha-Moladot as a completed treatise,184 and Seier ha-Me'orot (Book of Luminaries) as a work in progress. 185 • SeIer ha-Moladot (Book of Nativities): As said above, Ibn Ezra planned the composition of Seier ha-Moladot from as early as 1146, as may be learned from references to it from within the first version of Keli ha-Neboshet, composed in 1146. 186 After completing the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra continued in the same year of 1148 with the composition of Seier ha-Moladot. 187 This is a treatise concerned with genethlialogical astrology, whose fundamental principle is that the destiny of the new-born is determined by the configuration of the celestial sphere at the instant of birth. Seier ha-Moladot was considered by Ibn Ezra as one of his most central astrological works, as may be learned from the many references to it from within the other parts of Ibn Ezra's scientific cOrpus. 188 Ibn Ezra deals in Seier ha-Moladot first with the fundamental problem of determining the criteria to be employed in order to choose an ascendant for the nativity, according to which the astrological houses may be calculated. The central and major part of the treatise is divided into twelve chapters, each of them dealing with one of the twelve astrological houses and the techniques to interpret their astrological characteristics. Ibn Ezra concluded the treatise with a discussion of the so-called tequlat ha-shanim (revolutiones annorum in Latin or tabiiwil al-sinin in Arabic), that is, the calculation of the years, or fraction of years, which have passed since the birth of an individual. The Hebrew text of Seier ha-Moladot has not yet been edited in a critical edition,189 whereas a Latin translation was already published in Venice in 1484, under the title Liber Abraham Iude de nativitatibus. This translation was performed by Henry Bate, together with other translations of Ibn Ezra's works into Latin and French, about one hundred years after Ibn Ezra's death.190 A superficial examination of the

184 185 186 187

TE'AMIMB, 1941, p. 36. TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 34. NEI:IOSHET A, 1845, p. 14. In the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra refers several times to Seier ha-Moladot, a sign that its composition was imminent. See TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 35a, 44a, 45b. 188 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 36; MIVl:lARIM A, 1969, pp. 9, 10; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 63a, 63b; 'OLAMB, VAT 477, foJ. 90a. 189 So that there is still need to read Seier ha-Moladot in manuscripts. See, inter alia, MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 46b-61b. However, for a non-critical edition of the Hebrew text, see MOLADOT, 1995. 190 UBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484. Ibn Ezra's treatise was printed in Venice by Erhals Ratdolt together with the Magistralis Composition AstrolabU, written in 1274

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

63

Latin text suggests that the Latin translation follows the Hebrew text in its general organization and division into twelve chapters, and also in its topics, wording and sources. 191 However, a more attentive perusal and a collation of the Hebrew and Latin texts springs a surprise: whereas the Hebrew text of Seier ha-Moladot commences with a remarkable introduction, in which Ibn Ezra presents eight astrological, universal principles that override the private fate of the new-born,l92 the Latin text begins with an encomium of the astrolabe, and proceeds to present some astrolabe models. 193 Also, the Hebrew text concludes, as noted above, with a discussion of the tequlat ha-shanim, a chapter which is completely non-existent in the Latin translation. An examination of dozens of manuscripts of the Hebrew version of Seier ha-Moladot indicates clearly that, despite some minor deviations between them, all of these Hebrew manuscripts stem from a single text that is significantly different from the Latin translation in both aspects noted above. This assertion is corroborated also by the fact that Seier ha-Moladot and Liber Abraham Jude de nativitatibus appear to be substantially different in their dates of composition. As we noted above, the Hebrew Seier haMoladot was written in 1148. But in the Latin text the author refers to a conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter and goes on to explain that "hoc 1154 ab incarnatione Domini est adunatio eorum in triplicitate terrae". 194 Most interestingly, this chronological remark regarding the year 1154 links Liber Abraham Jude de nativitatibus with the second Latin version of Liber de rationibus tabularum, where we read, inter alia, "anno 1154 ab incarnacione Domini, quo hanc edicionem fecimus".195 What is more, in Liber Abraham Jude de nativitatibus, the author refers to his own Liber

by Henry Bate. Concerning Henry Bate's translations, see LEVY, 1927, pp. 28-29. 191 To corroborate that, the following two passages referring to Hermes, may be collated. LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484, fo1. 2 (a): "Dixit Hermes quod locus lune in hora infusionis spermatis in matrice erit gradus oriens in nativitate, gradus oriens in concepti one est lune locus in nativitate; quod verum esse probatione cognitus est nisi nativitas vel septimo vel undecimo fuerit"; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 47a: 1,m '~N" 0I711~m ,on':2 OIll'~OI rm 111':2 11n~'~01 0I711~0I N'OI '7'~0I 111':2 0ll:2701 O'i'~ O'N '7'~:2 07'117 '7'~0I 111' 1111'7 7:m OIll'~OI 111' 'lll" ON ::1"11 OIll'~OI 111':2 0ll:2701 0111'01 0111 '7'~0I 111':2 11n~WOl '~~ :2"i':2 0',7'l:2 11~N Nm 'l'~N1II OIl 7::1' ••• 00ll'~0I 111' 01'01 '11~ 1111'7 7::1'l '7'~0I l71' 'll7" ON' ."N"'OI 111'111:1 01 'TO! 111'111:2 ,7,m '7"111 0'i"ll7 111' i" O'NOI

':2"

om 0'111'111

192 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 46a-47b. This introduction will be studied in detail

in a subsequent chapter. See below, p. 145. 193 LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484, fo1. 2 (a): "Optimum instrumentorum ad invenien~um ?,radum orientem in nativitatibus est astrolabius quo quanto perfectus tanto melior... 194 LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484, fo1. 3 (cr. 195 LIBER DE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 99. See also p. 109.

64

PART ONE

de rationibus tabularum,196 in a passage that is non-existent in the corresponding Hebrew text. Since this mention is a reference to an already completed work, we assume that it is an allusion to the second Hebrew version of Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lu/;lOt, which presumably was written in parallel with its Latin counterpart. We therefore conclude that Liber Abraham Iude de nativitatibus is the Latin translation of a second version of Seier ha-Moladot whose existence was hitherto unknown. If the second version of Seier ha-Moladot was composed around 1154, then in all likelihood Abraham Ibn Ezra wrote it during his sojourn in Rouen, the capital of Normandy. 197 The Hebrew original of this second version is at present lost. • SeIer ha-Miv,barim (Book of Elections) and SeIer ha-She'elot (Book of Interrogations). Following the composition of the first version of Seier ha-Moladot, Ibn Ezra wrote two new treatises, each of which dealt with two astrological systems. These systems were originally developed as part of Greek astrology, became part and parcel of Arabic astrology, and subsequently were adopted by Hebrew and Latin astrologers. Seier ha-Miv/;Iarim deals with an astrological system (called katarkhai in Greek, ikhtiyarat in Arabic, electiones in Latin and miv/;Iarim in Hebrew) designed for choosing the most auspicious moment for accomplishing a specific act, by the expedient of casting the horoscope and observing the place of the moon in the astrological houses. The second treatise, Seier ha-She 'etot, deals with an astrological system (called eroteseis in Greek, masa 'il in Arabic, quaestiones in Latin and she 'elot in Hebrew) designed to reply to questions addressed to the astrologer and relating to common incidents of daily life, such as matters concerning someone who goes missing, discovering a thief or recovering a lost item. While both systems require interpretation by the astrologer of the horoscope cast at the moment at which the question was posed, the latter system is related to magic and requires, as Ibn Ezra wrote in his treatises, that the thoughts of the client should be adequately read by the astrologer. 198 196 LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484, foJ. 3 (a)': "In primis ergo secundum tabulas probationum, oriento invento, domos quoque secundum terrae latitudinem aequa, secundum terrae latitudinem aequa, secundum artem a nobis in astrolabio traditam, non secundum magistros astronomie quorum falsitate in libro de rationibus tabularum ostendimus." This passage was already noticed by 1. Millas Vallicrosa, who thereby raised the conjecture that the Latin translation contained an additional version of Sefer ha-Moladot. See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 16. 197 For this possibility, see GOLB, 1998, pp. 293-4 198 Regarding both astrological techniques, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 458486; TESTER, 1987, pp. 88-92; PINGREE, 1973, pp. 123-125. Concerning the need for

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

65

Both treatises were composed by Abraham Ibn Ezra in two different versions, the first in 1148, and the second at a later date that is very difficult to establish. Even though the contents of both versions of each of the treatises are similar, the four versions are clearly distinguishable by the remarkable introductions with which Ibn Ezra prefaced each of them. Thus, while in the first version of Seier ha-MivQarim Ibn Ezra endows the superior soul the power to prevail over the verdict dictated by the horoscope, in the second version of the same treatise, without changing the main message, Ibn Ezra sets the possibility of changing human fate into the context of Jewish tradition and religion. 199 A parallel change of mind appears in the two versions of Seier ha-She 'e!ot. In the first version, Ibn Ezra presents the main tenets of two opposing schools of astrologers, the first opposed to the validity of the astrological system of quaestiones, the second adhering to it by arguing that there is a direct link connecting stars, body and soul. The same two schools appear in the introduction to the second version, but both schools are here presented by Ibn Ezra as headed by two kings, the first named Ptolemy the King and the second Doronius the King,200 an interesting remark which reveals how deeply immersed Ibn Ezra was in the Arabic Andalusian cultural climate. 201 Of these four treatises, only the first version of Seier ha-MivQarim has been edited in a critical edition,202 while the other three treatises are available only in manuscript. 203 Both Seier ha-MivQarim and Seier haShe 'e!ot were referred to, using the future tense, from within Seier haMoladot, an indication that their composition was imminent. 204 After Ibn reading thoughts, see SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 62b. 199 For the introduction to the first version of Seier ha-Miv/;1arim, see MIV1;IARIM A, 1969, p. 9. For the introduction to the second version of Seier ha-Miv/;1arim, see MIVI;IARIM B, BNF 1058, fol. 9a. 200 For the introduction to the first version of Seier ha-She 'elot, see SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 62b. For the introduction to the second version of Sefer ha-She'elot, see SHE'ELOTB, BNF 1058, fol. la. 201 In this introduction, as well as in other places, Ibn Ezra endorses a myth according to which astrologers and astronomers, such as Claudius Ptolemy and Doroteus from Sidon, were transformed into kings. For the myth of the savant-king in medieval Arabic culture, particularly regarding Claudius Ptolemy viewed as Ptolemy the King, see the following sources: Albumasar, DE MAGNIS CONJUNCTIONIBUS, 1489, fol. c (7); KITAB AL-ULUF, 1968, p. 131; TABAQAT AL'UMAM, 1991, p. 27. For Ibn Ezra's utilization of this myth in both his scientific and exe~etical work, see below, p. 305. 20 MNI;IARIM A, 1969, edited by 1. L. Fleischer. 203 MIVI;IARIM B, BNF 1058, fols. 9-14; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 62-70; SHE'ELOT B, BNF 1058, fols. 1-8. For a non-critical edition of the first version of settr ha-She'elot, see SHE'ELOT A,1995. 04 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 54a, 65b.

66

PART ONE

Ezra completed the first version of Sefer ha-Mivbarim and Sefer haShe 'elot, he referred retrospectively from within them to Sefer haMoladot,205 to Sefer ha- Te 'amim206 and to Reshit /fokhmah. 207 • Sefer ha-Me'orot (Book of Luminaries). This astrological treatise, concerned mainly with medical astrology, appears to have been written, like the other components of the astrological encyclopedia, in two versions. This assertion rests mainly on two references to Sefer haMe 'orot dealing with medical astrology. One, Ibn Ezra refers to Sefer ha-Me 'orot from within the first version of Sefer ha-She 'elot, using the past tense. 208 Two, Ibn Ezra refers also to Sefer ha-Me 'orot, but using the future tense, from within the second version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim, which was written substantially later than the first version of Sefer haShe 'elot. 209 Thus, we arrive at the conclusion that the first version of Sefer ha-Me 'orot was composed before Ibn Ezra wrote the first version of Sefer ha-She'elot, that is, still in 1148. But, since Ibn Ezra refers to Sefer ha-Me 'orot in the future tense from within the second version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim, we also come to the conclusion that the second version of Sefer ha-Me'orot was composed some time after 1149. The first version of Sefer ha-Me 'orot was edited in 1933,210 while the second version is at present lost. Sefer ha-Me 'orot deals with medical astrology, and, more precisely, with the influence that the moon exerts on man's health. Ibn Ezra started off with an interesting cosmological introduction, in which a tripartite division is outlined, one that highlights the differences (a) between the fixed stars, which keep their celestial relationships when moving, (b) between the planets, which constantly change their position in relation to the zodiacal orb, and (c) between the sub-lunar world, whose change in matter as well as in mind is a consequence of the planets' movements. A distinctive mark of this introduction is that Ibn Ezra, who in other places deals with the controversy related to the position of the sun's orb (below MIVI;lARlM A, 1969, p. 10; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 63a, 63b. SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 63a, 63b. MIVI;lARlM A, 1969, p. 11; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 62b, 63a, 70b. SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fo!. 66a: "if someone is able to locate the place of the moon at the beginning of the illness, then it is possible to know if the patient will live or die, and also to know the turning point of the affliction, and I have already eXfolained that in my Seier ha-Me 'orot." (italics added) 09 See TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 34, where Ibn Ezra goes on to explain that the Moon "is the decisive force, and when the Moon arrives at a bad place the newly born will die, as I will explain in Seier ha-Me 'orot". (italics added) 210 ME'OROT, 1933, edited by J. L. Fleischer. For a non-critical edition, see also ME'OROT,1971. 205 206 207 208

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

67

or above the orbs of Mercury and Venus) without making clear his own position, chose this introduction to reveal his opinion, which is that the sun's orb is the second, after the moon's orb. 211 • Seier ha-'Olam (Book of the World). This treatise is concerned with the branch of astrology dealing with the collective fate of mankind, by means of astrological forecasts as well as astrological analysis of past history. That Ibn Ezra regarded this treatise as a future project from as early as the beginning of 1148 can be confirmed on the basis of some references found in the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim, in which he calls the book by two alternative titles: Sefer ha- 'Olam (Book of the World) or Sefer ha-Ma.(Jbarot (Book of Conjunctions).212 This second name, which Ibn Ezra later dropped, nevertheless reveals two interrelated and important traits of Sefer ha- 'Olam. First, the title Book of Conjunctions points directly at the main source used by Ibn Ezra, namely AbU Ma'shar's Kitab al-qiranat (De magnis conjunctionibus annorum revolutionibus ac eorum profectionibus); second, the word 'conjunctions' included in the title of the book hints at Ibn Ezra's main macro-astrological doctrine, namely the examination of Saturn-Jupiter conjunctions, a technique explained and implemented in AbU Ma'shar's book. Indeed, Joseph Bonfils, who knew Ibn Ezra's scientific work quite well, also alluded to this treatise, using the name Sefer Mishpetei ha'Olam (Book of World Judgments),213 a title that also appears in several manuscripts of Sefer ha- 'Olam (first version).214 This treatise, like the others mentioned above, was composed in two versions. One of them was published in a very poor edition in 1937,215 the other version remains at present in manuscript. 216 For convenience, I call the published version the 'first version' and the unpublished version the 'second version'. But, this nomenclature does not necessarily reflect the chronological order of their composition, since on both versions there appears the year 4908 A.M. (=1148) as the year of composition,217 211 ME'OROT, 1933, p. xlii. 212 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 36b, 43b 213 SAFNAT PA'ANEAl;I, 1911, I pp. 75, 309, vol. II p. 27. But in other passages the same book is entitled Seier ha- 'Olam, see vol. I, 201 vol. II, p. 36. 214 'OLAM A, 1937, fol. 86b. 215 'OLAM A, 1937, edited by J. L. Fleischer using Rome, Vatican MS Ebr. 390. See also 'OLAM A, 1971, edited by Me'ir Y~baq Bak'al. I used the following extant manuscripts: Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1056 fols. 80b-86b (hereafter 'OLAM A, BNF 1056); Cambridge, Classmark ADD 1517, fols. 50b-53b. 216 I used the following extant manuscripts: 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fols. 86b-95a; Cambridge, Classmark Add 1186, fols. 74b-83b. 217 'OLAMA,BNF 1056, fol. 82b; 'OLAMB, VAT 477, fol. 91b.

68

PART ONE

and in some manuscripts of the first version there also appears the date of composition as Marbeshvan 4909 A.M. (=November 1148).218 Seier ha- 'Olam may be thought of as the final component of Ibn Ezra's astrological encyclopedia, since in both versions we find only retrospective references referring to previous astrological works already composed during 1148. Thus, in the first version of Seier ha- 'Olam, Ibn Ezra refers the reader to Reshit /fokhmah and Seier ha-Mivbarim,219 whereas in the second version he alludes to Keli ha-Neboshet, Reshit /fokhmah and Seier ha-Moladot. 22o As said before, both versions were composed in the same year, and we assume that a gap of a few months separates them. Perhaps Ibn Ezra composed the second version to fulfill the request of a new student or audience, after he had delivered the manuscript of the first version, or after he had moved from Beziers to another city in Provence. Both versions describe at the outset, clearly following AbU Ma'shar's Kitiib al-qiriiniit, the periodic conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter as divided into three main groups: great (960 years), middle (240 years) and lesser conjunctions (20 years).221 Nevertheless, both versions differ plainly one from the other in other aspects. Ibn Ezra began the introduction to the first version with a harsh attack on Abu Ma'shar, who, in his opinion, was astronomically wrong in relying on the mean motion of the planets according to Hindu theory and Hindu astronomical tables. 222 Next, Ibn Ezra developed a remarkable and detailed combinatorial analysis aimed at explaining why the total number of the conjunctions of the seven planets is precisely one hundred and twenty, a bit of information that he extracted from the fiftieth article belonging to one of the most popular medieval treatises, the apocryphal Centiloquium, attributed to Claudius Ptolemy.223 A similar though shortened combinatorial treatment of the one hundred and twenty conjunctions motif, but theologically oriented, may be found in Ibn 218 Concerning this point, see the introduction to Sefer ha- 'O/am in 'OLAM A, 1937, p. 34. 219 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 83b, 86a. 220 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fols. 90a, 92a, 93b. 221 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 80b; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fols. 86b-87a cf. DE MAGNIS CONJUNCTIONIBUS, 1489, fol. a (3). For an explanation of these conjunctions and how Ibn Ezra utilized them in his work, see p. 163. 222 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 80b. Nevertheless, Abraham Bar ijiyya endorsed the astronomical methodology related to the mean motion of the planets. See MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, p. 117. 223 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 80b cf. CENTlLOQUIUM, 1938. For a Hebrew medieval translation, see SEFER HA-PERI, BNF 1055.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

69

Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 33:21. Both combinatorial references to the total number of the conjunctions of the seven planets will be studied in detail in a subsequent chapter (see below, p. 313). On the other hand, the second version is easily distinguishable from the first by a remarkable passage giving an astrological explanation of the history of the monotheistic religions, more precisely, endowing some special conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter with the capacity of bringing about and exerting influence on the birth of powerful figures and prophets in history, such as Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, which subsequently led to the establishment of new religions. 224 • Mishpetei ha-Mazalot (Book of the Judgments of the Zodiacal Signs). This treatise, an astrological textbook introducing the most general tenets and topics related to this art, is embedded in some of the manuscripts that make up the collection of Ibn Ezra's astrological works (see below, note 234). Nevertheless, Mishpetei ha-Mazalot remains the most poorly known and least researched part of Ibn Ezra's astrological works. One of the main reasons for this is the fact that, even though Ibn Ezra was accustomed to profusely employing cross-references in his treatises, in the case of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot such references are virtually non-existent. Even Ibn Ezra's authorship over this book has to date not been fully demonstrated. However, some attempts have been made to clarify the probable relationship between Mishpetei ha-Mazalot and other parts of Ibn Ezra's astrological work. Moritz Schteinschneider, in an article written in 1870, was the first to note the existence of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot. He ascribed it to Ibn Ezra and conjectured that it represents a second and shorter revision of Seier ha-Te'amim. 225 J. L. Fleischer, a scholar who edited some of Ibn Ezra's astrological works, expanded on Schteinschneider's brief remarks. Since in his opinion the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim is a commentary on Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, he advanced the hypothesis that this astrological work should be regarded as a second and later version of Reshit .8okhmah. As already mentioned regarding the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim (see above, p. 60), this hypothesis should be totally rejected. That the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim was designed as a commentary on Reshit .8okhmah can be unhesitatingly confirmed on the grounds that Ibn Ezra himself asserted that design expressly in the opening words of the introduction. 226 224 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 88b. See the text of this quotation on p. 295. 225 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1870, pp. 341-342. 226 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 1: "Behold now, I have taken upon myself to lay the

70

PART ONE

At this preliminary stage of research, before an overall and clearer picture is obtained by a careful scrutiny of the relevant manuscripts, it would seem premature to attempt to settle the question about the possible relationship between Mishpetei ha-Mazalot and other components ofIbn Ezra's astrological encyclopedia. On the other hand, relying on the available evidence, we consider it opportune to address the following two issues: (a) Ibn Ezra's authorship of this treatise; (b) the time and place in which Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was composed. An examination of the technical terminology used in Mishpetei haMazalot demonstrates that this treatise is undoubtedly the work of Abraham Ibn Ezra. As we shall see later (see below, p. 75), a clue that clearly identifies Ibn Ezra is his particular translation strategy, which was based on the exploration of the biblical text in order to locate 'original' Hebrew words endowed with scientific meaning, avoiding the creation of new Hebrew words based on cognate Arabic words or on loan translations of Arabic words. Thus, in the lexical texture of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, we may find the special word gevul taken by Ibn Ezra from Psalms 74:17, a word literally meaning 'border' or 'frontier' but which, in his opinion, was designed originally to express the technical concept of the 'seven climates', known in the ancient world and the Middle Ages.227 Also, in the text of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, we may detect the very peculiar Hebrew word mU$aq, taken by Ibn Ezra from Job 36:16, 37:10 and 38:38, literally meaning 'solid', 'stable' or 'strong', but intended by him to designate the concept of center. 228 In a previously published article, I argued in favor of the possibility that Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was composed in Italy, presumably in Lucca or Verona, approximately in 1146, so that Mishpetei ha-Mazalot should have been regarded as the first astrological treatise written by Ibn Ezra. 229 Two main arguments were offered to defend this hypothesis: (a) In the first version of Keli ha-Nel;oshet, written early in 1146 in Lucca or Verona, Ibn Ezra promised to explain some astrological subjects - namely the astrological aspects and houses - and referred the reader on five different occasions, using the future tense, to a treatise foundations of the Book o/the Beginning o/Wisdom (Se/er Reshit lfokhmah)." 227 For the usage of this special Hebrew word in Mishpe!ei ha-Mazalot, see, for instance, MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fo!' 68b. For the usage and justification of this word in Ibn Ezra's work, see below, p. 107. 228 For the usage of this special Hebrew word in Mishpe!ei ha-Mazalot, see MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fols. 74a, 74b, 75b, 76a, 78a, 78b. For the usage andJustification of this word in Ibn Ezra's work, see below, p. 113. 22 SELA, 2001 (ii), pp. 115-120.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

71

in the making that he entitled Sefer ha-Mishpatim (Book of the Judgments).230 We favored the possibility that Sefer ha-Mishpatim (Book of the Judgments) should be regarded in fact as identical with Mishpetei ha-Mazalot (Book of the Judgments of the Zodiacal Signs), both because of the analogy of the names and because the topics referred to in the first version of Keli ha-Neboshet may be found in Mishpetei ha-Mazalot.23\ An examination of the second version of Keli haNeboshet, written later, in 1146, reveals the striking fact that these references to Sefer ha-Mishpatim have completely disappeared. This interesting feature led me to suggest that Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was written in between the time of composition of the first and the second versions of Keli ha-Neboshet, namely, sometime in the middle of 1146. (b) Two references within the text of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot point directly to two scientific treatises whose first versions were written by Ibn Ezra in 1148 or prior to this date. The first reference, using the future tense, explicitly points to Sefer ha-Moladot, a treatise whose first version was eventually written in 1148.232 The second reference, using the past tense, explicitly points to the Book of the (Astronomical) Tables, whose first Hebrew version was composed in Lucca in 1146.233 Relying on these two references, and presuming that they point to the first versions of Sefer ha-Moladot and of the Book of the (Astronomical) Tables, one may conclude that Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was composed prior to 1148 but after 1146. New evidence, however, has led me to rethink this conclusion. An examination of fourteen manuscripts of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, carried out in the framework of a critical edition of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot which is now in preparation, furnished some important additional bits of data. 234 As a result, we now propose the following hypothesis: Mishpetei 230 231 232 233

NEI:IOSHET A, BNF 1061, fols. 157b, 158b, 159b. MISHPETEIHAMAzALOT, VAT 477, fols. 71a-71b, 76b-77a. MISHPETEI HAMAzALOT , VAT 477, fols. 84b, 85a. MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fol. 71b: "you should establish the astrological houses by the way of the rising times, such as I explained it to you in the

Book of the (Astronomical) Tables".

234 I made use of the following fourteen manuscripts: Rome, Vatican MS Ebr. 477, fols. 68a-86 a; Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1058, fols. 14b-26b; Cambridge, Classmark ADD 1517, fols. 40-44; Codex Ms. Sasson 823, fols. 69-86 ; Mtinchen 202, fols. 150b-164a; New York 2626, fols. 75b-91a; Viena 185, Cod. Heb. 132, fols. 1-6; Oxford 2025, fols. 49a-65a; Miinchen 45, fols. 423a439b; Berlin 220, fols. 33b-40b; Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1057, fols. 68b-82b; Manchester 1775, fols. 48b-57a; Moscow-Gunsburg 421, fols. 41b-51a; Colombia X 893 IB 53; st. Petersburg 150 B, fols. 141a-153b; St. Petersburg 294 B, fols. la-16a; St. Petersburg 70 B, fols. 76a-89b; St. Petersburg 447 B, fols. 53a-67a. For a non-critical edition, see MISHPETEI HAMAzALOT, 1995.

PART ONE

72

ha-Mazalot was written by Ibn Ezra in Rouen, a few years after he completed his astrological encyclopedia. Thus, Mishpefei ha-Mazalot pertains to the French period of Ibn Ezra's exegetical work, stretching approximately from 1153 to 1156, in which he composed a second version of some of the commentaries he had already produced during the previous Italian period, in Rome and in Lucca. Although it may still be regarded as an isolated work, separate from the astrological encyclopedia, Mishpefei ha-Mazalot should also be considered one of Ibn Ezra's most mature astrological works, and a later, if not final, one. Following are the main arguments brought to support this new assumption: (i) In all the examined fourteen manuscripts of Mishpefei ha-Mazalot, in the section devoted to a description of the differences of opinion about the calculation of the horoscopic houses, we read the following passage: The beginning of the [horoscopic] houses changes in relation to the latitude of the countries. Thus, sometimes the beginning of the tenth [horoscopic] house calculated according to the rising times is the same as the beginning of the ninth [horoscopic] house calculated according to equatorial degrees. It may even occur in the high latitudes that the beginning of the [tenth horoscopic] house calculated according to the rising times is [the same as the beginning of] the eighth [horoscopic] house [calculated according to equatorial degrees]. Example: in this place, whose latitude is 50.5°, if the ascendant is at the beginning of the sign of Cancer, the midheaven is at 24° at the sign of Aquarius; this may be clearly and umeservedly observed with the astrolabe. 235

Let us bring into focus the illustrative example (dimyion) furnished by Ibn Ezra, a common feature in his scientific works (see below, p. 86). It is true that the example concerns "the high latitudes", but why should Ibn Ezra have precisely specified that his example applies to "this place whose latitude is 50S"? The assertion that "this may be clearly and unreservedly observed with the astrolabe" suggests that this is not merely a random example, and that the values presented are the result of observation and calculation performed at the specified place. Indeed, what particularly captures our attention is that the value 50.5° represents the latitude of Rouen, or of a place in the neighborhood of Rouen. 236 Let us recall that, as recorded in numerous manuscripts of Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus and Daniel, we know that these biblical 235 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058,

338 (I.6).

236 MATTHEW, 1996, p. 235.

foJ. 16a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p.

Rouen: 49° 26' N.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

73

commentaries were composed in a city named as RDWM, RDWA or DRWS. This toponym, written in Hebrew letters, has been persuasively identified as Rouen, the capital ofNormandy.237 (ii) We have a very similar case, which strengthens the assumption brought in (i), in the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam. As in Mishpetei haMazalot, in the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam too, Ibn Ezra provided an illustrative example (dimyion) to describe the practical steps which are necessary to ascertain the day in which the "revolution of the year" (tequfat ha-shanah) occurs, that is, the day in which the Sun enters the sign of Aries. A prerequisite for this specific procedure is to know beforehand the latitude of the place where the observation is made. Therefore, Ibn Ezra provided a very specific value and wrote that the solved exercise is relevant to "the place whose latitude is 42° 39'''.238 Interestingly enough, this is approximately the latitude of the city of Beziers in Provence,239 which is precisely the place where Ibn Ezra composed the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam in particular, and his astrological encyclopedia in general. (iii) Two manuscripts, as compared with the remaining twelve, present a remarkable deviation in the section devoted to the planetary lots. All fourteen manuscripts bring an identical text as far as the lots of the Sun and Moon are concerned. As for the lots of the remaining five planets, however, two among the fourteen manuscripts bring the following text: "I have already mentioned the lots of the five (remaining) planets in Reshit lJokhmah. "240 In contrast, all the other twelve manuscripts bring, instead, a description of the lots of the five planets, a text which, even if it is not identical, is a summarized paraphrase of the parallel reference to the lots of the five planets in Reshit lJokhmah. 241 If this is not a mere interpolation of a scribe interested in abbreviating his work and sparing in the use of expensive parchment, and since Reshit lJokhmah was composed in 1148 as the first link of the astrological encyclopedia, this brief reference to Reshit lJokhmah may be considered crucial evidence that Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was composed later than the astrological encyclopedia, in all likelihood in Rouen, Northern France.

237 GOLB, 1998, pp. 3-5, 264-276. 238 'OLAMA,BNF 1056, foJ. 81b. 239 MATTHEW, 1996, p. 232. Beziers: 43° 21' N. 240 Cambridge, Classmark ADD 1517, foJ. 43b; Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de

France, MS Reb. 1057, foJ. 79b.

241

lxvii.

MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF

1058, foJ. 24a. cf. RESHIT I;IOKl;lMAH, 1939, IX, p.

74

PART ONE

(iv) The evidence brought above in (a) and (b) may be reconciled with the new assumption that Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was written by Ibn Ezra in Rouen, a few years after he completed his astrological encyclopedia. As for (a), it may be assumed that Ibn Ezra postponed the composition of Sefer ha-Mishpatim (Book of the Judgments) till he arrived at Rouen, and then named it Sefer Mishpetei ha-Mazalot. As for (b), it is not impossible that the two references to Sefer ha-Moladot and to the Book of the (Astronomical) Tables pointed not to the first, but to the second version of these treatises. As stated above, the second version of Sefer ha-Moladot was probably written in Rouen (see above, p. 64), whereas the second Hebrew version of Book of the (Astronomical) Tables was composed in Narbonne, after Ibn Ezra arrived in Provence at some time between 1148 and 1153 (see above, p. 22). Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was organized as a sequence of discussions of various subjects covering the main elements of astrology. Following are its main topics, in the order in which they appear in the treatise itself: (a) the zodiacal constellations and their astrological characteristics; (b) the astrological houses and the differences of opinion expressed by the astrologers about their proper arrangement; (c) the planets and their astrological characteristics; (d) the astrological aspects; (e) the astrological lots; (f) the procedure of nihug ha-kokhav (see above, note 72). In this clearly astrological milieu, we may also observe naturally embedded, interesting astronomical observations, related mainly to the elongation of the planets in relation to the sun. 242 The main difficulty in determining the place and date of composition of Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was due to the basic fact that for a modern reader this treatise has remained a marginal work in the frame of his scientific corpus. The chief and fundamental reason for this is that Ibn Ezra, who customarily linked all his works in a net of cross-references, completely ignored Mishpetei ha-Mazalot. How can we account for this striking fact? If, as suggested above, Mishpetei ha-Mazalot was composed in Rouen in the period stretching approximately from 1153 to 1156, it seems only natural that Ibn Ezra did not refer to it from within his astrological encyclopedia, which was composed in 1148.

242 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT LANGERMAN, 1988, pp. 257-258.

477, fol. 76a. cf.

FISCHER, KUNITZSCH AND

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

75

4. Translations from Arabic into Hebrew

Three translations of Arabic scientific treatises into Hebrew are ascribed to Ibn Ezra. However, only in one case may we safely assert that Ibn Ezra was actually the translator, while there are good reasons to cast serious doubts on Ibn Ezra's role in the two remaining cases. We will now discuss these two questionable translations - an astrological treatise of Masha'aWih and a text dealing with the astronomy of Ibn alMuthanna - both of which are particularly important since they are no longer extant in the original Arabic. The first is the Book ofMashti 'allah on Eclipses of the Moon and the Conjunctions of the Planets, and the Tequfot of Years (revolutiones annorum).243 Ibn Ezra's authorship of this translation was first suggested, with some reservations, by Moritz Steinschneider. 244 Later, B. R. Goldstein translated the work into English and added some commentaries on it, acknowledging Ibn Ezra as its translator. 245 The second debatable translation was also attributed to Ibn Ezra, again with some reservations, by Moritz Steinschneider. This is one of the two extant Hebrew translations, preserved in MS Oxford, Bodleian Library, Michael 400, fols. 45 r_74r of Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi. 246 The Hebrew text of the "Michael version" was edited and translated into English by B.R. Goldstein, who in this case refuted Steinschneider's claim regarding Ibn Ezra's authorship.247 We will now see on what grounds Ibn Ezra's authorship in these two cases may be disavowed. First of all, in neither of these translations does the translator identify himself, a trait not typical of Ibn Ezra, whose presence is clearly and explicitly felt in all his works, and who normally identifies himself in the introduction to his works as Abraham the Spaniard. An additional, noteworthy, and in my opinion, crucial argument that may be brought forward is related to Ibn Ezra's special approach to overcoming the formidable task of filling the linguistic void in the Hebrew language, when undertaking to transfer Arabic sciences into a Hebrew mold. An entire chapter will be devoted to this fundamental facet of Ibn Ezra's scientific work; in the meantime, let us 243 BOOK ON ECLIPSES, BNF 1045. For a printed non-critical edition of the Hebrew text see BOOK ON ECLIPSES, 1971. 244 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1956, par. 378-379; STEINSCHNEIDER, 1880, p. 497. 245 BOOK ON ECLIPSES, 1964, pp. 205-213. cf. GOLDSTEIN, 1996, pp. 14-15. 246 STEINSCHNEIDER. 1956, par. 356. 247 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, especially pp. 9-11, 15-144,306-404.

76

PART ONE

note that an exploration of the scientific terminology implemented by Ibn Ezra shows a remarkable characteristic, namely, the consistent use of some old biblical Hebrew words, which in Ibn Ezra's opinion express central scientific concepts. This approach leads Ibn Ezra to adopt in particular cases a very peculiar and conspicuous position as a translator, significantly different from that adopted by other Jewish contemporary writers and translators, who also wrote in Hebrew but adopted a translation strategy based mainly on the coinage of new Hebrew words, which were either cognates of Arabic words or loan translations of Arabic terms. In clear contrast to them, Ibn Ezra obstinately avoided the use of cognate or loaned words stemming from the Arabic language, particularly in cases where in his opinion original scientific Hebrew terms were available in the biblical text. 248 It is precisely the violation of these rules of translation, steadfastly observed by Ibn Ezra in all his work, that leads us to assert that the two above-mentioned translations were not carried out by Ibn Ezra. As far as the Book of Masha 'allah on Eclipses is concerned, its translator consistently used, in at least 12 instances, the Hebrew word 'aqlim, which is the cognate translation of the Arabic term 'iqlim, a word that served to describe each of the 'seven climates' .249 But in his genuine works, Ibn Ezra completely avoided using the word 'aqlim, and instead he consistently and frequently used, in both his exegetical and scientific works, the Hebrew biblical word gevul. 25o As far as the Michael version of Ibn al-Muthanna s Commentary is concerned, we note the disregard of the aforementioned rule of translation normally followed by Ibn Ezra, as well as other central rules governing his work. It is possible to detect in the Michael version the use of the Hebrew word aqklim, and the absence of the word gevul. 251 And, in order to express the fundamental concept of 'center', we notice in the Michael version the use of the Hebrew word merkaz, a cognate word borrowed from the Arabic markaz. But the Hebrew word merkaz was completely avoided by Ibn Ezra, who employed instead in his works the biblical word mU$aq.252 248 We will be mainly concerned with Ibn Ezra's scientific terminology in the second part of this book. See also SARFATI, 1968, pp. 145-6. 249 BOOK ON ECLIPSES, BNF 1045, fols. 181 a-182b; BOOK ON ECLIPSES, 1971, pp. lIS. 250 The word gevul, more precisely gevulot are$, was taken by Ibn Ezra from Psalms 74:17 to express the concept of the 'seven climates'. For Ibn Ezra's utilization of this biblical expression see below, p. 158. See also above, p. 70. 251 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MuTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 357. 252 Abraham Ibn Ezra endowed the rather bizarre Hebrew biblical word mU$aq, meaning literally in Job 36:16, 37:10 and 38:38 'solid', •stable , or 'strong', with a

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

77

Ibn Ezra's authorship of the second extant Hebrew translation of Ibn al-Muthannd's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of alKhwdrizmi, the so-called "Panna version" (extant in Panna, Bib. Palatina, MS 2636, fols. 1_13 V) is indisputable. That can be safely affirmed on the basis of the fact that Ibn Ezra attached to it an outstanding introduction, in which he not only proclaimed his identity as Abraham the Spaniard and specified the year 1160 as the date of composition, but also presented his own version of the transmission of Hindu and Greek astronomy to the Arabic sciences. 253 This translation was discovered by Moritz Steinschneider, who published its introduction for the first time. 254 Millas Vallicrosa, in an article published in 1938, was the first to establish that the author of this work was Ahmad ibn alMuthanna ibn 'Abd aI-Karim, who according to Said al-Andalusi authored a work named Ta'di/ Zij al-Khuwarizmi.255 The Parma version, as well as the Michael version, were edited and translated into English by B.R. Goldstein. Both J. Millas Vallicrosa and B.R. Goldstein showed that parts of Ibn al-Muthannd's Commentary were introduced into Liber de rationibus tabularum, the Latin version of Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot, an additional ground for asserting that Ibn Ezra was engaged in its composition. 256 Regarding the aforementioned characteristics ofIbn Ezra's scientific terminology, the Panna version is in total contrast to the Michael version. The aforementioned word mU$aq, completely absent in the Michael version, is conspicuous in the Panna version, and is used precisely in the places where the word merkaz is employed in the

variety of correlated meanings: from the basic notion of 'point', the meaning of shades into the concept of the 'geometric center of the circle', and thus is viewed as a synonym of the earth, located at the cosmic center of the spheres. For Ibn Ezra's utilization of this biblical word, see below, p. 113. The use of the word merkaz was adduced by B.R. Goldstein, in addition to stylistic traits which distinguish in his opinion the Michael version from the Parma version, in order to claim that the Michael version translation was actually not carried out by Ibn Ezra. See HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 9-11. 253 See the introduction in HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 300-302. 254 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1870, pp. 325-392; 25 (1871), pp. 388-428; for the text of the introduction see STEINSCHNEIDER, 1870, pp. 356-359; see also STEINSCHNEIDER, 1956, par. 356. Later D. Smith and Y. Ginsburg translated Steinschneider's Hebrew text of the introduction into English and added a commentary. See SMITH AND GINSBURG, 1918, pp. 99-108. 255 VALLICROSA, 1938, pp. 306-322. cf. TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, p. 53. 256 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 51-54; HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 11,200-208,218,231,234.

mU$aq

78

PART ONE

Michael version.257 Besides, Ibn Ezra made use in the Parma version of another outstanding biblical expression, namely na/;Jash Baria/;J, taken from Job 26:13 and Isaiah 27:1. This expression literally means the slant serpent, but is used by Ibn Ezra to express the technical astronomical term of the nodes, that is, two points of intersection between two spheres: the sphere of the zodiac and the sphere of inclination. 258

5. General Characterization of the Scientific Corpus Having dealt separately with each of Ibn Ezra's scientific works, we will now delineate the general features of this corpus. The following questions will be asked: How was Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus organized and shaped? What was its scope? How did Ibn Ezra envisage the scientific book as such? What was its main purpose? Are there any special features which reveal the unique contribution and special personality of the author? Organization and Scope At first sight, after having described, one by one, Ibn Ezra's scientific works, we might assume that this corpus was divided into many parts: a sum-up of all the above shows that Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus was composed of 30 different works, dealing with multiple and various subjects. Nevertheless, a more scrutinizing assessment reveals a different picture. (a) The large total number of books does not signify that the corpus is composed of completely distinct and independent treatises, since this number (30 works) is mainly the result of the sum of the multiple versions of Ibn Ezra's treatises. Two cases are particularly suggestive: Abraham Ibn Ezra wrote presumably four different versions of the Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables (see above, p. 22) and of the Book on the Astrolabe (see above, p. 28) as well. What is more, the absolute majority of Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises were composed in at least two different versions. This is a quality that characterizes the scientific corpus as well as the biblical commentaries of Ibn Ezra,259 and 257 To corroborate this point, see, inter alia, p. 340 (II.6) and p. 341 (II. 7). 258 For Ibn Ezra's utilization ofthe expression nabash Bariab, see below, p. 124. 259 Abraham Ibn Ezra wrote commentaries on the majority of the biblical books,

and in most of the cases he wrote two different commentaries on the same book, a

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

79

in both cases the same motives are at work. On the one hand, the pen was Ibn Ezra's main means of subsistence; on the other hand, he was required to satisfy a demand that increased during his wandering in Latin Europe. Thus, probably when he arrived in a new town, he wrote a new version for a new reading public. (b) As a matter of fact, if we disregard the multiple versions, we get only 17 distinct treatises, including one translation from Arabic into Hebrew, all of which are now listed, arranged chronologically by the date of the first version, and including a note about the different versions and their place and date of composition: Hebrew Name

Translation of the Name

Versions

Sefer ha-Mispar

Book of the Number

Sefer Ta 'amei haLubot

Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables

Liber de rationibus tabu/arum

Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables

Keli ha-Neboshet

Book on the Astrolabe

Sefer ha- 'Ibbur

Book of Intercalation

1. Hebrew, Lucca, ca.1146 2. Hebrew, prior to 1146 1. Hebrew, Lucca, ca.1146 2. Hebrew, Narbonne, ca. 1148 1. Latin, Pisa, ca.1146 2. Latin, France, 1154 1. Hebrew, Lucca, 1146 2. Hebrew, Mantova, 1146 3. Latin, Mantova, 1146 4. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 1. Hebrew, Verona, 1146 2. Hebrew, Narbonne,

short commentary as well as a long one. For a list of the biblical books on which Ibn Ezra wrote a second commentary, see above, p. 11.

80

PART ONE

Reshit .8okhmah

Beginning of Wisdom

Seier ha-Te'amim

Book of Reasons

Seier ha-Moladot

Book of Nativities

Seier ha-Mivbarim

Book of Elections

Seier ha-Me 'orot

Book of Luminaries

Seier ha-She'elot

Book of Interrogations

Seier ha- 'Olam

Book of the W orId

Seier ha- 'Ebad

Book on the Unit

Three Responsa

Three Responsa

Mishpefei ha-Mazalot

Book of the Judgments of the Zodiacal Signs

ca. 1148 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 2. Hebrew, France, after 1148 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 2. Hebrew, Rouen, 1154 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 2. Hebrew, France, after 1148 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 2. Hebrew, France, after 1148 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 2. Hebrew, France, after 1148 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 2. Hebrew, France, 11481149 1. Hebrew, Beziers, 1148 1. Hebrew, Narbonne, ca. 1148 1. Hebrew, Rouen, 1154

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

1geretha-Shabbat Ta 'amei al-Muthanna

The Epistle on the Shabbat Translation of Ibn alMuthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi

81

1. Hebrew, England, 1158 1. Hebrew, England, 1160

(c) The scope of the corpus may be further condensed if the subjectmatter of these treatises is taken into consideration. In this case, the corpus falls into two main sections. (i) The first section includes works designed to develop technical-theoretical skills related mainly to astronomy and mathematics, especially designed to teach the use of scientific tools and instruments, such as the astrolabe and the astronomical tables, or to explain the astronomical foundations and how to determine the Hebrew calendar. (ii) In contrast, the second section is composed exclusively of astrological treatises, which may be divided into two main groups: In one, we find general reference books, designed to describe, teach and explain the fundamentals of astrology. In the other, we find a series of astrological works designed to deal with the various branches of astrology. (d) Notwithstanding this double division and despite the multiple topics included in them, the scientific corpus may well be regarded in an overall view as a single body of texts, dealing with a rather homogenous body of knowledge. This assertion may be argued on the basis of several factors. First, we should consider the most common term employed by Ibn Ezra himself to refer to his own work and to the scientific branches that make up his scientific corpus. For this, Ibn Ezra coined a new Hebrew expression: bakhmei ha-mazalot - that is, the persons engaged in bokbmat ha-mazalot, that is, the 'science of the zodiacal signs'. The range of meanings of this conspicuous term is wide, and an analysis of the contexts in which it was used plainly reveals that Ibn Ezra referred collectively with one and the same expression to a broad variety of activities belonging to four main scientific branches: astrology, mathematics, astronomy and regulation of the calendar. Thus, on the one hand, the bakhmei ha-mazalot are frequently described as theoretical and practical astrologers whose activities include writing books about and engaging in genethlialogical astrology,260 or universal astrology,261 as 260 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!' 58a; commentary on Exodus 23:25; long commentary on Daniel 2:2.

82

PART ONE

well as resolving common technical problems of astrology, such as the arrangement of the astrological houses 262 and the astrological aspects,263 or the technique called nihug ha-kokhav (ductus planetae).264 But Ibn Ezra's bakhmei ha-mazalot are also mathematicians and astronomers. In this regard, they are described as dealing with trigonometric problems,265 engaged in astronomical tasks like mapping the skies,266 writing and using astronomical tables and the astrolabe,267 and establishing the relative order of the planetary spheres. 268 Special mention should be made of the bakhmei ha-mazalot as experts who specialize in the calculation of time reckoning parameters, such as the length of the tropical year and solar day, the precise moment of the equinoxes and solstices, and the mean conjunction of sun and moon. In addition to his scientific treatises,269 Ibn Ezra also mentions bakhmei hamazalot in his biblical exegesis, where they appear as the ultimate authority on the parameters of the Jewish calendar.270 Interestingly enough, bakhmei ha-mazalot appear in Ibn Ezra's Seier ha- 'Ibbur not only as the representatives of Greek and Arabic astronomy, but also with reference to the Jewish astronomers of Talmudic times who regulated the calendar.271 (e) A similar picture emerges when exploring the subject-matter of Ibn Ezra's scientific treatises. Thus, a clearly astronomical book, such as Liber de rationibus tabularum, begins by describing the astrological attributes of the sun272 , allots a similar treatment to the moon,273 and 261 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 84a; long commentary on Exodus 32: 1. 262 TE' AM 1M A, BNF 1056, fols. 36b, 40b. 263 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 5 (b).

264 RESHIT I;IOKI:IMAH, 1939, ch. X, p. Ixxv. Regarding this procedure, see TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III, 10, pp. 271-307. BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 411-419. 265 MISPAR, 1895, p. 79. 266 NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 63a, right col.; short commentary on Exodus 23:20. 267 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lla; MISPAR, 1895, p. 27; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 22; NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 65a, right col. 268 TE'AMIMA,BNF 1056, fol. 35a. 269 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 37b; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81a; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 59a-59b; 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 3 (a), 11 (a). 270 Long commentary on Exodus 12:2; 18:13; 34:21; commentary on Leviticus 25:9. 271 See, especially 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 6 (b), 9 (a). 272 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 73-74: "Dixit Abraham Iudeus: Cognitum est corpus solare habere magnitudinem et secundum earn omnia vincere corpora, eiusque effectus tam in simplicibus quam in compositis manifestos esse, eumque in mundo caloris natural is in corde sedem habentis vicem optinere ... Item omnia iudicia astronomica secundum proportionem aliarum planetarum ad solem fiunt, secundum quod sunt orientales vel occidentales et secundum respectus eoram ad ipsum vel secundum quod subiacent luci eius."

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

83

includes a chapter dealing with the arrangement of the astrological houses and other technical problems related to casting the horoscope. 274 Also, although the astrolabe is known as an instrument essentially oriented to astronomical uses, all three Hebrew versions of Keli haNeboshet, as well as the Latin version of the Book on the Astrolabe, include, as has been said above (see p. 34), important chapters dealing with typically astrological procedures, such as the arrangement of the astrological houses, the calculation of the astrological aspects and the nihug ha-kokhav (ductus planetae) with the help of the astrolabe.275 On the other hand, a clearly astrological book such as Reshit /fokhmah, the main component of Ibn Ezra's astrological encyclopedia, begins by mapping the skies into 48 constellations and by listing the number of stars in each of the constellations276 - a list which follows closely and summarizes Ptolemy's star catalogue in Almagest VII,5. This was done, although the fixed stars, except for the twelve zodiacal constellations, have little effect on astrology. Also, another clearly astrological book such as Seier ha-Moladot contains an interesting chapter dealing with the exact length of the tropical year, reviewing and comparing the opinions of major Greek, Hindu, Persian and Arabic astronomers on this particular topic.277 (f) The scientific corpus may be also grasped as a homogenous body of texts because it is internally interconnected in a net of crossreferences, in a way reminiscent of a modern hyper-linked electronic text. This is especially true as far as the astrological encyclopedia is 273 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 97: "Nunc vero de luna, cuius potestas super noctem. Primum ergo de natura eius, quam astronomici asserunt humidam et frigidam, dicemus, et Phtolomeus dicit in libro 4 capitulorum quod ab adunatione solis et lune eius natura est calida et humida usque distiterit a sole per quadrantem integrum, et ab eo quadrante usque ad oppositum calida et sicca; ab opposito vero usque ad quadratum a sole frigida et sicca; a quadrato usque ad adunationem frigida et humida." 274 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 84-85: "He tabule quas composuimus utiles sunt ad... coequationem domorum... et omnes ductus qui sunt secundum latitudinem terre, et signa mobilia et fixa et bicorpa et recta signa et obligua et longa et curta... ". See also pp. 159-161. 275 There is nothing surprising in the fact that astrology occupied such a conspicuous part of the astrolabe book, the main reason for which being that the use of the astrolabe simplified the solution of astronomical problems closely related to the horoscope casting. This idea is concisely and plainly expressed by Ibn Ezra himself at the beginning of the chapter dealing with the arrangement of the astrological houses in Liber de rationibus tabularum. See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 160: "Nos vero in astrolabio docuimus facile distinguere domus." (italics added) 276 RESHITijOKl:lMAH, 1939, ch. i, p. vi-viii. ALMAGEST, 1984, pp. 341-399. 277 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 59a-59b.

84

PART ONE

concerned. We have already presented above, when dealing separately with each of the astrological treatises, many cases illustrating this point. But the same assertion may be corroborated by observing the interdisciplinary character of many cross-references that connect various treatises of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus. Thus, for example, from within Seier ha-Mispar, a mathematical treatise, Ibn Ezra refers the reader on two occasions to the Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lu/;lOt. 278 Also, from within the first version of Keli ha-Nel;lOshet, that is the Astrolabe Book, Ibn Ezra not only alludes implicitly to his Seier ha-Lu/;lOt,279 but also explicitly directs the reader several times to consult two still non-existent astrological treatises: Seier ha-Mishpatim, that is, the Mishpetei haMazalot, and Seier ha-Moladot. 28o In addition, from within the third version of Keli ha-Ne/;lOshet, Ibn Ezra refers to the Seier ha-Lubot, but also for the first time to the gem of his astrological encyclopedia, the Reshit /fokhmah, at this stage still a non-existing treatise. 28t On the other hand, the Keli ha-Neboshet is referred to from within several of Ibn Ezra's astrological works, such as from the first version of Seier haTe 'amim and the second version of Seier ha- 'Olam. 282 (g) The reconstruction of the scientific corpus produces an additional insight, which illustrates a remarkable feature of Ibn Ezra's works. It turns out that the above-mentioned two-part division of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus is not only a matter of distinct subject areas but also a chronological partition. From the sorting of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus

by chronological order it emerges that all of the first five scientific works that Ibn Ezra composed at the beginning of his career as a writer of scientific treatises in Italy - Seier ha-Mispar, Seier Ta 'amei haLubot, Liber de rationibus tabularum, Keli ha-Neboshet, Seier ha- 'lbbur - belong precisely to the first section, which was designed to develop mathematical and astronomical skills. Only afterwards, mainly in Provence, did Ibn Ezra tum his attention to the second section of his scientific corpus, which contained mainly seven treatises written in a concentrated effort as part of an astrological encyclopedia. (h) The same chronological feature described in the last paragraph is also highly suggestive, in a quite wider scenario, of some central traits in the process of reception of Greek-Arabic sciences in Western Europe. We may assume that the particular chronological ordering of the 278 279 280 28t 282

MtSPAR, 1895, pp. 27, 79. NEI:IOSHET A, 1845, p. 29. NEI:IOSHET A, 1845, pp. 9,14,25,29,30,31. NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fols. 59b, 60a, 65b, 66a, right col.. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 45b; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fo!. 93b.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

85

scientific corpus was due more to the need to satisfy the demand of his disciples than to Ibn Ezra's desire for gradually fulfilling a planned curriculum of studies. If this is true, the scope of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus and its chronological ordering may be envisaged as reflecting not only the priorities of the local European learned audiences, both Jewish and Christian, but also the way by which the Greek-Arabic sciences made their impact on a confused Europe. Christian and Jewish scholars, confused and perplexed after the initial impact of Greek-Arabic sciences, had at this initial stage poor tools and little knowledge for understanding astronomical and mathematical theories. Therefore, they gave precedence to understanding problems involved in the sheer practical handling of scientific tools and instruments: the astrolabe and the astronomical tables enabled simple and quick solutions to astronomical and astrological technical problems, in clear contrast with the difficulties and cumbersomeness involved in solving the same problems with purely geometric and mathematical tools. Also, they were highly interested in the practical and immediate benefits arising from astrological forecasting, for which the practical handling of astronomical tables and the astrolabe were crucially important. This assertion may be seen as corroborated by the scope and inner organization of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus, composed mainly of recurrent versions of treatises teaching the use of astronomical tables and the astrolabe, written in Hebrew as well as in Latin, and especially of an astrological encyclopedia. 283 The scientific Book ofIbn Ezra, its Aims and Special Traits If a common factor is required, reflecting the most essential aim and most representative aspects of Ibn Ezra's scientific book, a quite true answer may be that Ibn Ezra's scientific book was designed mainly as a 'textbook', planned to provide his disciples with easy access to and understanding of terms, concepts and general principles related to astrology, astronomy and mathematics, and particularly intended to teach the use of technical-theoretical tools and instruments. This assertion may be justified, inter alia, on the basis of Ibn Ezra's own explicit and relevant remarks: He is accustomed to admitting expressly that when shaping some conceptual or formal idea of his books, he is guided by the need or wish to make the study easy for students. Thus, for 283 For a discussion of the impact of Islamic astronomy on Latin scholars, and especially about the decisive influence exerted at this stage by the astrolabe and the astronomical tables, see PEDERSEN, 1978, pp. 308-314.

86

PART ONE

example, in the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim, as is usual in astrological books, the planets' astrological qualities are described by referring to the physical attributes of sub-lunar bodies (such as saying that Sun is hot, or that Saturn is cold), thereby undermining basic principles of Aristotelian physics. But Ibn Ezra is aware of the fault. Therefore, he feels obliged to apologize for such an inexact expression, and so goes on to explain that "you have to understand that all I said (about the planets) was meant to convey the idea that they (the planets) generate cold and heat, and if it was expressed in such a crude way, it was done only because of the need to facilitate the understanding of the students".284 (italics added) This approach characterized all of Ibn Ezra's scientific output, in which he was always led by didactic criteria. Thus, just before beginning the central part of Sefer ha-Moladot, which was devoted to interpreting the characteristics of the astrological houses, Ibn Ezra saw fit to add a methodological remark, and so wrote that "only in order to facilitate the learning of the students did I choose to follow the method of the astrologers, and therefore I decided to discuss the issue of the nativities by dealing (separately) with the twelve houses".285 (italics added) A central feature that characterizes Ibn Ezra's scientific books and emphasizes its didactic nature is the inclusion of 'solved exercises', which illustrate and facilitate understanding of some theoretical doctrine. Such 'solved exercises' are numerous in Ibn Ezra's scientific books. Moreover, Ibn Ezra provided these 'solved exercises' with a special external sign that make them easy to identify: He customarily began them with the words "next I will present to you an 'illustration' (dimyion)" and immediately after he goes on to present the solution of a problem which usually involves some calculations. 286 We come to the conclusion that Ibn Ezra's scientific books are mainly textbooks or reference books, chiefly aimed at conveying to the layman conventional scientific knowledge. As such, Ibn Ezra's books are naturally infused with a clear didactic character and do not make any pretension of innovation. The bulk of the included scientific material is 284 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo\' 37a. 285 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo\' 48a. The same concern may be detected in SHE'ELOT

A, BNF 1056, fo\' 63b: "and I, Abraham, say that... in order that the student should not be confused, I was obliged to divide this treatise into twelve chapters." 286 See examples of solved exercises in the following places: NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, pp. 40, 41, 42, 43; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 63a, 96a-96b; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 83b-84a; RESHIT I:IOKl:lMAI;I, 1939, ch. iii, p. xxxix; ch. vii, p. lviii; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo\' 53b; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fols. 15a, 15b, 16a, 20b, 23a, 25a.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

87

rendered, explicitly or implicitly, as paraphrases or quotations of previous sources. Thus, Ibn Ezra's treatises are an excellent means of learning about the scientific data and sources available in AI-Andalus in the twelfth century or earlier, and especially of identifying the most prominent astronomers and astrologers. 287 Nevertheless, we must do justice to the author. Although these works are mainly textbooks, we can still discern in them features that clearly reveal the unique contribution and personality of the author. We will now present these special features. (a) Even in these scientific and technical textbooks it is possible to detect Ibn Ezra's inclination to comment on and explain everything that falls into his hands, a trait that is highly reminiscent of the fact that he excelled chiefly as a biblical commentator. An unmistakable expression of this feature is that he wrote two different versions of Seier haTe 'amim, a treatise clearly aimed at explaining and commenting on the astrological terms and concepts included in Reshit /fokhmah (see above, p. 59), Ibn Ezra's chief astrological treatise. Another expression of the same predisposition is that Ibn Ezra does not content himself in some places with a merely rudimentary and basic presentation of a particular doctrine but goes on to add some rational explanation, beyond what his sources were ready to convey on the same topic. Thus, for example, in the first version of Seier ha-Moladot, Ibn Ezra paraphrases Claudius Ptolemy, who in Tetrabiblos (iv, 10) dealt with the seven ages of man, each of them allotted to a planet, and wrote that the moon takes over the first four years of infancy. But Ibn Ezra was clearly not content with this rather simple observation; hence he added the following observation: "So wrote Ptolemy, but he did not provide any reason for this division. Here is the reason: the moon takes over until the boy is weaned, so that four years will elapse over him, each year under the power of one zodiacal sign, until four zodiacal signs will be completed, each of them corresponding to each of the four natural elements."288 287 See, for example, the list of scientists provided by Ibn Ezra at the end of the introduction he prefaced to his translation of Ibn al-Muthannil's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi [HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN ALMVTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 300], which includes the following prominent scientists: Habash the Arab (al-Hasib), Yahya ibn Abi Mansiir, al-Marwadhi, Ibn alMuqaffa',al-Siifi, Ya'qub aI-Kind!, Thabit ibn Qurra, Ibrahin al-Zarqal, al-Battani, Ibn al-'Isti, Ibn al-A'lam. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 367 (V. 1.4). 288 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 52a. See other examples of the same pattern in the following places: MIVl;lARIM A, 1969, p. 9; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 14; MISHPETEI HAMAzALOT, VAT 477, fol. 68b; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fols. 90a-94a; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 84b-86b; RESHITI:IOKl;lMAH, 1939, ch. x, p.lxxv.

88

PART ONE

(b) Even though, as said above, the scientific material is brought in these textbooks as paraphrases or quotations of previous sources, Ibn Ezra avoids as much as possible a narrow and unilateral presentation of issues. Thus, in his Seier ha-Moladot, before dealing with the central and technical issues of the treatise, Ibn Ezra added the following remark: "I will next mention all that the ancient sages have tested and examined (on this subject); but because countless books dealing with astrology (bokbmat ha-mazalot) are available, and since some of them include observations which are contradicted by common sense, and in view of the fact that the astrologers are divided by divergent opinions, I was obliged in this book to present everything that is clear and all that in which there is agreement in the opinions of the old sages, and with which I myself have experimented numerous times."289 Ibn Ezra kept his promise and actually implemented in most of his scientific books the two methodological observations he mentioned in the last passage: first, to present the achievements of his predecessors; secondly, to add his own ideas and the results of his own experimentation. Consequently, Ibn Ezra tends to transform the presentation of some specific subjects into an arena where scientists and scientific schools belonging to different times, nations and religions meet together and clash on some scientific issue. The most outstanding example is that related to establishing the length of the tropical year, a debate in which Ibn Ezra brings together the best of the scientists of India, Persia, Greece and Islam. It must be borne in mind that this is an issue involving not only astronomical parameters290 but also very strong astroiogicaF91 and ritualistic or religious overtones. 292 289 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!. 47a. cf. also what Ibn Ezra wrote at the end of the first chapter of RESHIT I;IOKI:IMAH, 1939, ch. I, p. viii: "I shall mention in this book all that in which there is agreement in the opinion of the ancient Babylonians and the wise men of Persia, India, and Greece, whose chief is Ptolemy ... until my book is complete and there is no need for any other book besides it in introducing this science." 290 On this subject see, for example, LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 74-76: "Huius motus quantitas in 365 diebus et quarta parte diei perficitur, quam fraccionem diei philosophi egypci neglexerunt... Ptholomeus medium cursum solis composuit... Greci vero et ornnes qui noticiam computacionis suorum annorum a diebus Alexandri vel Christi sumunt ... Sapientes vero Indie secundum dies mundi, quos dies apellant dies de Scindehind... Sapientes vero persarum asserunt additamentum supra 4am diei esse 115m partem diei ... Philosophi sarracenorum geometrie periti discipline secundum raciones Ptholomei et per instrumenta Ptholomei multa de celestibus probaverunt." For other places in Ibn Ezra's work dealing with the same controversy, see above, note 128. 291 The problem of finding the length of the tropical year is analogous and closely related to that of finding the exact time when the sun (in a geocentric cosmos) enters

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

89

Special mention should be made of Ibn Ezra's utilization of this eclectic approach in his works related to the Jewish calendar. In this particular framework, the presentation of controversies by assembling various nations, scientific schools and scientists belonging to different times was not made merely for sheer didactic purposes. A close reading reveals that his purpose was to emphasize that scientists, both Jewish and those belonging to the Gentile nations, even though honestly questing for the scientific truth, were unable to determine universally accepted values, so that the multiple solutions proposed by scientific research are of little avail for the worshiper who needs clear-cut calendaric instructions to perform his ritual obligations. In the final analysis, Ibn Ezra was intent on arriving at the pro-Rabbanite conclusion that "we Jews ought to rely on Talmudic tradition".293 Other scientific subjects which are similarly treated as academic debates by Ibn Ezra are, inter alia, the different values of the solar declination,294 the relation between the diameter and the perimeter of the circle,29S the controversy related to the position of the spheres of the Sun, Venus and Mercury,296 the question whether the sun apogee is static or is moving,297 and the different explanations of the motion of the

the sign of Aries, a crucial parameter in universal astrology. See the following places, where Ibn Ezra deals with this issue of the length of the year, regarded as a clearly astrological problem but involving an 'international' debate: MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 59a-59b; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 81a-81b; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 37b-38a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 34-35,40,41-42. 292 The problem of finding the length of the tropical year is crucial in establishing the soli-lunar Hebrew calendar. Therefore, Ibn Ezra deals with this problem in all his three works dealing with the Jewish calendar. For Seier ha- 'Ibbur (Book of Intercalation), see above, p. 40; for Ibn Ezra's Three Responsa to David Ben Joseph of Narbonne, see above, p. 46; For 'Igeret ha-Shabbat (The Epistle on the Shabbat), see above, p. 51. Ibn Ezra also dealt with this problem in his biblical exegesis. In this regard, it is worth noting his commentary on Leviticus 25:9, which will be studied in detail in a special chapter (see below, p. 273), and his long commentary on Exodus 12:2,34:21. 293 This special approach will be studied in a special section. See below, p. 286. 294 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 81a-81b; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p~. 77, 92, 93. 95 MISPAR, 1895, p. 44; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 79,124; for a comparative examination and a discussion of this subject see SELA, 1997, pp. 3947. 296 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 43a-43b; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 9; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fol. 74b; ME'OROT, 1933, p. 7; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 120-122. 297 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 77-78; 91-92; HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 300 (Ibn Ezra's introduction); 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 91 b.

90

PART ONE

fixed stars. 298 It is in the context of these disputations that Ibn Ezra sometimes fulfills the second of the above-mentioned promises (see above, p. 88), when he presents his own personal contribution in two main ways: on the one hand, Ibn Ezra allows himself to present his own view, as part of the quasi academic debate, generally by way of compromise or by giving precedence to one of the presented opinions,299 but sometimes expressing disagreement and presenting an independent opinion as well;300 on the other hand, Ibn Ezra makes express mention of empirical experiments that he carried out in order to corroborate or refute some of the arguments referred to in his scientific treatises. 301 An additional quality that characterizes the scientific writings of Ibn Ezra is the extremely sharp criticism with which he sometimes attacks his predecessors, the most famous Greek and Arabic scientists. Thus, Ibn Ezra does not find a better way to begin the first version of Seier ha'Olam than with a harsh attack on Abu Ma'shar's Kitab al-qiranat, his main source in universal astrology. These are the first words of this treatise: "If you have by chance found the book of Abu Ma'shar on the planets' conjunctions, you would surely not like it and you should not observe its rules, since AbU Ma'shar relies on the mean motion of the planets and there is no other sage that agrees with him, for the correct motion of the planets refers to the zodiacal sphere. "302 Ibn Ezra also criticizes Mfishfi'allfih - also one of his main astrological sources - in the first version of Seier ha-Mivl;arim, by applying arguments grounded on common sense and rational explanations. 303 Ibn Ezra also criticizes Enoch (Hermes), whose work embodies several Hermetic traditions, by asserting that he was accustomed to present his ideas without reasons, that is, without rational explanations. 304 Ibn Ezra's criticism of his 298 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 78, 81-83, 94; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81b; 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOa. 299 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 9; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 49b, 53b 54b; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 77, 80, 81, 82, 93. 300 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 39a; LIBERDE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 92; RESHIT I;IOKI:lMAH, 1939, ch. VII, p. Ivii. 301 Ibn Ezra uses not only general expressions, implying loosely that he carried out some empirical experiment, but also introduces explicit assertions, where he reports the use of the astrolabe in order to undermine some argument. See, for example MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 47a-47b. See also: MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 49b; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fol. 73b; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 85b; SHE'ELOT A:l BNF 1056, fol. 63a; MIVJ:!ARlM A, 1969, pp. 12,14; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 36. 02 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 80b. See also fol. 85 vol. Nevertheless, in other places Ibn Ezra regards affirmatively the work of Abu Ma'shar. See, for example: SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 62b·, TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 36a. 303 MIVl;lARIM A, 1969, p. 12. . 304 MIVI:IARlM A, 1969, p. 14.

ABRAHAM IBN EZRA'S SCIENTIFIC CORPUS

91

colleagues sometimes turns to very sharp expressions, as for example when in Seier ha-Moladot he wrote as follows: "The sage Al Abzidag brought in his book some tables, which were called 'ovens' (tanurim) and were intended to find out the life expectancy of the newborn; but they deserve to be burned in the fire ovens (tanurei 'esh), since they are completely wrong."305 Particularly remarkable is the close association between Abraham Ibn Ezra and Claudius Ptolemy, two scientists separated by a gap of one thousand years. For one thing, Claudius Ptolemy is the sole scientific source that Ibn Ezra dared to introduce explicitly several times in his biblical commentaries in order to strengthen some arguments. 306 Ibn Ezra's intimate affinity to Ptolemy, however, is especially thrown into relief in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus, wherein the Alexandrian scientist was quoted or referred to more than any other scientist. The encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus is especially noteworthy as a reflection of the way Greek science was received by Arabic and Hebrew medieval intellectuals: together with an admiring stance which attests to the favorable and enthusiastic reception of Greek science, it is possible to notice some sharp critical notes of Ptolemy's both astronomical and astrological contributions, but never a radical position striving to express a new scientific world view. 307 In his criticism, Ibn Ezra opted for drawing a sharp distinction between Ptolemy'S astronomical and astrological contributions. Thus, he wrote the following words in the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim: "I will now give you a rule: everything that you may find of Ptolemy that deals with the spheres is excellent and nothing is available that surpasses it, but his assertions related to the judgments of astrology do not befit his wisdom. "308 But even some parts of the non-astrological and 305 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 50a. 306 In due course, three special chapters will be devoted to study three

"encounters" between Ibn Ezra and Claudius Ptolemy, which will be focused on the singular perspective obtainable by studying the direct references to Claudius Ptolemy in three of Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries. Ptolemy is explicitly mentioned and referred to in the following biblical commentaries: (a) in the commentary on Amos 5:8. See below, p. 257; (b) in the commentary on Leviticus 25:9. See below, p. 273; (c) In the long commentary on Exodus 33:21. See below, p. 288. 307 For a study concerned with the role Claudius Ptolemy played in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus, both in its astronomical and astrological parts, see below, p. 240. For a detailed study concerned with the critical stance Ibn Ezra adopted against some of Claudius Ptolemy's scientific doctrines, see below, p. 247. 308 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 39a. In another place in the same treatise, see TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 35a, Ibn Ezra dares to raise the assumption that Claudius Ptolemy was not the actual author of Tetrabiblos, asserting that this book includes

92

PART ONE

astronomical output of Claudius Ptolemy also came under Ibn Ezra's criticism. Thus, in Liber de rationibus tabularum, Claudius Ptolemy is not spared for having committed in his book Algeraphie (that is, the Arabic transliteration of Geography) some inaccuracies related to the geographic parameters of the city of Cordoba. 309 In addition, in the introduction to the translation of Ibn al-Muthannii's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwiirizm'i, Ibn Ezra wrote that Ptolemy'S astronomical tables in the Almagest are "useless and contradicted by observation", even though he goes on to explain that the errors were due in fact to his predecessors. 310

arguments which completely contradict any rational explanation and are unsupported empirical experimentation. 09 LIBER DE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 79: "et invenimus in libro Ptholomei, qui est Algeraphie, quod longitudo Cordube est 9 graduum, latitudo vero 36 graduum, muItis vero temporibus et diversis probata est eius longitudo, eclipsi solis et lune, 27 graduum, et latitudo, racione perfecta, 37 graduurn et 30 minutorum, et in fine ostendam unde error contingit, nam longitudo et latitudo terre nec augescit nec decrescit." 310 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 300301, 149-150: "The tables in the Almagest are useless and contradicted by observation, since the apogees are not fixed with respect to the constellations. Ptolemy himself did not commit these errors, which are due to his predecessors." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 366 (V.l.3). b~

PART TWO

THE CREATION OF A NEW HEBREW SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

Introduction How is a scientific vocabulary created? What are the historical forces at work in the creation of a new scientific terminology? What strategy should be adopted when this new scientific vocabulary is the result of rendering a set of foreign technical words in a language previously used almost exclusively for religious and liturgical purposes? These questions are especially relevant to the case of Abraham Ibn Ezra, the central character of this book. As previously noted, his scientific endeavors may be viewed as the very embodiment of the rise of medieval Hebrew science, a process in which Jewish scholars gradually abandoned Arabic, and adopted the holy tongue as a vehicle for expressing secular and scientific ideas. To better understand the background of this process, let us return to the introduction to the first English Treatise on the Astrolabe, in which Geoffrey Chaucer couched in extremely brief but telling terms the main stages of the history of the astrolabe up to his own days (see above, p. 1). Geoffrey Chaucer first cited the work of the Grekes in Grek 1; then the contribution of the Arabiens in Arabik2 ; next Chaucer referred to the work of the Jewes in Ebrew3; and finally he addressed the contribution of the Latyn folk in Latyn.4 Chaucer's words made it clear that the 1 The earliest extant account of the construction and use of the astrolabe dates from the sixth century and was written in Greek by Johannes Philoponus of Alexandria. In this regard, see HARTNER, 1939, p. 289. 2 Modern research has confirmed that the medieval Arabic civilization excelled in the construction and refinement of scientific tools, not least the astrolabe. The earliest known Arabic treatise on the astrolabe was presumably composed prior to 815 by Mesahalla (Miishii'lliih). The original of this treatise has never been found, and is extant only in a Latin version dating from 1276. This Latin translation, ascribed to Miishii'lliih, was Chaucer's chief source for his own English treatise on the astrolabe. In this regard, see NORTH, 1988, p. 42. For the Arabic reception of the astrolabe, see KUNITZSCH, 1981, KUNITZSCH, 1984. 3 As noted above, in all likelihood that reference points to the central character of this book, who composed for the first time a Hebrew manual teaching the use of the astrolabe, or to some later Jewish scientist who worked in the following generations under the same scientific tradition opened and handed down by Ibn Ezra. 4 That is, the contribution of those who conveyed Graeco-Arabic science, and the astrolabe in its framework, to western Latin Christendom. For the impact of Islamic

94

PART TWO

history of the astrolabe from antiquity to the end of the Middle Ages should not be interpreted, as one might expect when referring to a scientific instrument, as a series of gradual improvements in its physical configuration. 5 At least in Chaucer's historical awareness, the annals of the instrument's development are recorded in terms of the transmission of the astrolabe from one language into another. Chaucer's words clearly show that the linguistic perspective mirrors one of the most significant facets in the particular history of the astrolabe as well as in the general history of science. In short, the history of science from antiquity till the end of the Middle Ages may be epitomized as the transference of Greek science from the Greek language into Arabic, from the Arabic language into Hebrew, from Greek, Arabic and Hebrew into the Latin language, and finally into the modern European languages (as in the case of English, embodied by Chaucer). Chaucer's introduction has also the enormous advantage of focusing our attention on the work of the Jewes in Ebrew, that is, on the role the Hebrew language played in the rise of Hebrew medieval science. What were the historical foundations of the cultural and linguistic phenomenon in whose framework Jewes composed scientific works in Ebrew? We have already seen (see above, p. 3) that after the completion of the Islamic conquests in the eighth century, Jews willingly adopted the Arabic language, spoke Arabic fluently, and participated, together with Muslims, Christians and members of other congregations, in the reception and integration of the Greek world view into Arabic culture and language. This honeymoon between Jewish intellectuals and the Arabic language, however, did not outlast the dramatic changes that convulsed al-Andalus from the end of the eleventh century. The growing sway of the northern Christian kingdoms, on the one hand, and the successive invasions of the fundamentalist Berber dynasties of the Almoravides (1090) and the Almohades (1145) on the other, put an end to a period of relative tolerance and led to the compulsory emigration of the vast majority of Jewish families. As a result, Jewish intellectuals gradually severed their links with the Arabic language while creating a astronomy on Latin scholars as illustrated by the reception of the astrolabe, see PEDERSEN, 1978, pp. 308-314. 5 In fact, the astrolabe kept its physical configuration almost intact for more than one thousand years, strong evidence of its efficiency as a scientific instrument, but also a clear sign that the scientific world conception upon which it was based did not change during this long span of time. As the Greek astronomical scientific view was not seriously challenged until the times of Copernicus, it is hardly surprising that an instrument such as the astrolabe, which wholly reflected and incorporated the Greek astronomical and scientific picture, did not undergo any dramatic alteration.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

95

new linguistic vehicle for expressing their intellectual aspirations. A remarkable transition from Arabic to Hebrew ensued, a cultural tum of events which is especially noticeable in the composition of Hebrew secular works. 6 Let us emphasize that the transition from Arabic to Hebrew was actually the passage from a language which had already proved able to successfully accommodate itself to the reception of Greek science, to a language previously used almost exclusively for religious and liturgical purposes. In other words: if allowance is made for the limited terminological contribution of early Hebrew scientific literature, the transition from Arabic to Hebrew was tantamount to the creation of a new scientific Hebrew vocabulary. This endeavor, however, should by no means be considered a mere technical task involving mainly linguistic problems. The creation of a new scientific vocabulary entails principally the establishment of cultural contacts between two civilizations, and such contacts result in the transmission of a scientific view from one civilization to the other. The burden in this process is especially onerous for the civilization which receives and borrows, since it is required to adapt its cultural frame to a new set of alien cultural concepts. 7 The aforementioned analysis of the historical circumstances which brought about the rise of medieval Hebrew science makes it clear 6 This passage from Arabic to Hebrew was recently analyzed and viewed by R. Barkai (See BARKA!, 1998, pp. 6-16) as a "second renaissance" of Hebrew culture in the Middle Ages, which coincided with the revival of philosophy and science in the Latin West. Hebrew thus became the "common" written idiom for the Jewish communities, a kind of lingua franca of the Western as well as Oriental Diaspora. The inevitable question has been raised: why did the Jews of the Latin West prefer the use of Hebrew for their scientific works, given that this language lacked the comprehensiveness of Arabic, Latin or even the Romance vernaculars during the Middle Ages? R. Barkai gave a three-fold answer: (a) most of the Jews did not have linguistic access to the Latin scientific literature, which had begun to circulate in Western Europe by the end of the eleventh century; (b) Jews led a special professional life and were conferred a special legal status in medieval Europe. As a result of this underprivileged legal status, and pressed by their lack of access to the new Latin scientific literature which rapidly increased in this historical period, they were compelled to create an alternative scientific corpus written in Hebrew; (c) many of the translators and authors of Hebrew texts emphasized the cultural and even "nationalistic" aspect of their efforts. The Hebrew language served as a symbol of their cultural identity in the broadest sense of the term. In their confrontation with the extensive Arabic literature and Latin scholarship, the Jewish elite were eager to prove to the gentiles, and to themselves, that their own ancient language was not inferior, and could be as suitable and useful as Arabic and Latin. 7 Borrowing is more difficult than it seems, since it involves the introduction of disruptive elements which may put in jeopardy the integrity of a civilization. Therefore, as F. Braudel put it, a civilization can also be recognized by its refusal to borrow. For some examples, see BRAUDEL, 1996,11,764-770.

96

PART TWO

that the transition from Arabic to Hebrew was not so much a matter of choice as of necessity. Jewish intellectuals, if they could have remained physically within the orbit of Islam, would have preferred to prolong as long as possible their attachment to the Arabic language and culture, as the particular but atypical example of Maimonides may indicate (see below, p. 141). Individuals, however, not least those who play a pioneering and crucial role as intermediaries between civilizations, are given the benefit of choice, at least the choice to adopt some particular and idiosyncratic stance when they come to borrow alien notions and create a new vocabulary. This brings us to the main purpose of the second part of this book, which will be concerned with the stance adopted by Ibn Ezra in facing the colossal task of rendering in Hebrew the scientific terms and concepts that he found in Arabic. The study of Ibn Ezra's approach and terminological strategy will be performed through the following steps: First, the work and terminological approach of Abraham Bar l;Iiyya, an outstanding Jewish scientist contemporary with Ibn Ezra, will be briefly studied. That will be done, not only because Bar l;Iiyya was the true pioneer in the creation of a new Hebrew scientific terminology, but especially because a comparison between his scientific work and Ibn Ezra's will put the latter's scientific and terminological contribution within a more adequate context. Second, Ibn Ezra's view of the Hebrew language and of its resources that enabled it to serve as an adequate vehicle in expressing scientific ideas will be scrutinized. We shall analyze relevant statements made by him to learn about his view of the Hebrew language and about his general approach to the appropriate methodology for translating scientific concepts into Hebrew. Then, in the last section, Ibn Ezra's terminological strategy will be unfolded by means of eight separate studies. Each of them will deal with the creation of a single idiosyncratic scientific term, and will examine how Ibn Ezra applied it in his work and particularly how he justified its use.

Abraham Bar /fiyya and Abraham Ibn Ezra

From a purely chronological vantage point, Abraham Bar l;Iiyya (b. ca. 1065-d. ca.1140), and not Abraham Ibn Ezra, should be credited with the title of genuine pioneer in the task of creating a new Hebrew scientific vocabulary. Abraham Bar l;Iiyya produced his Hebrew literary output, including philosophical and scientific works, in the first half of

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

97

the twelfth century, so that he descended from the historical scene just when Ibn Ezra ascended. Very little is known of his biography, except that he was a scion of an important Jewish family, a fact indicated by his title ha-Nassi (that is, the Prince), and by the probability that he occupied a post at the court of Alfonso I of Aragon, as may be attested by his appellation Savasorda, a corruption of Sabib-al-Shuqa, that is, chief of the guard. The main fact that should be emphasized here about Bar I:Iiyya is that he wrote all his literary work in Hebrew, an unprecedented and innovative endeavor.8 As for his motivations and purposes, let us tum to the introductions of his Hebrew scientific works, in which Bar I:Iiyya felt himself obliged to justify and explain his undertakings. An example among others is the introduction to Yesodey ha-Tevuna u-Migdal ha- 'Em una (Foundations of Understanding and Tower of Faith), the first Hebrew scientific encyclopedia: I did not undertake this task of my own will, nor to gain glory. Rather, many among the great in my generation, whose advice I am obliged to take, have urged me to do so because there was not a single book written in Hebrew on these matters in the whole land of Sar/at [that is, France].9

This is not a solitary statement. Bar I:Iiyya reiterated almost the same justifying ideas, and employed similar wordings, in the introductions he wrote to other of his scientific Hebrew works, as in the cases of lJibbur ha-Meshiba veha-Tishboret (Treatise on Mensuration and Calculation), \0 the first Hebrew work dealing with practical geometry, Seier ha- 'Ibbur (Book of Intercalation),11 possibly the first Hebrew work on the Jewish calendar, and Seier Surat ha- 'Are$ (The Shape of the Earth),12 the first Hebrew work dealing with cosmography. In a way that is fairly representative of the starting stage in which he was involved, and of his self-conscious pioneering role, Bar I:Iiyya highlighted the following three ideas: first, he was required to satisfy a new demand for Hebrew scientific literature among the Jewish communities of Provence, Catalonia and Aragon; second, before he began his pioneering work, no Hebrew works were available dealing with the scientific branches which he undertook to develop; third, the undertaking of this innovative task was not the result of Abraham Bar I:Iiyya's own choice, but rather the

8 For his life, and his literary and scientific contribution, see STEINSCHNEIDER, 1925, pp. 327-387; VALLICROSA, 1987, I, pp. 219-262; SIRAT, 1990, pp. 97-104. 9 YESODE HA-TEVUNA, 1952, p. 10 (Hebrew part). 10 SEFERHAMESHII;IAH, 1913, pp. 2-5. 11 'IBBUR, 1851, pp. 4-5. 12 SURATHA'ARES, 1546,pp. 1-7.

98

PART TWO

result of being prompted by people who were ready to patronize his pioneering work. It is also remarkable that in those similar passages, Bar 1:Iiyya did not try to convey either a view about Hebrew as a language of science or an outline of his prospective linguistic strategy. Researches made on his Hebrew scientific vocabulary show an eclectic attitude: on the one hand, Bar 1:Iiyya coined new scientific Hebrew terms by taking words from the classical Hebrew lexicon, that is, from the Bible and the Mishnah, and by modifying their meaning. As pointed out by B.A. Sarfati, who researched Bar 1:Iiyya's mathematical vocabulary: "Thus words were obtained from Hebrew lexical material shaped in Arabic moulds, or, putting it in another way, words of 'Hebrew body and Arabic soul'." On the other hand, Abraham Bar 1:Iiyya did not feel any embarrassment in borrowing Arabic terminology and introducing Arabic words directly into the Hebrew language by way of transliteration. This is the case, for example, regarding the two following Hebrew words which will be later mentioned in relation to Ibn Ezra's terminological counterparts: (a) merkaz, meaning 'center' and stemming from the Arabic word markaz; (b) 'aqlim, meaning climate and having its origin in the Arabic 'iqlim. 13 Bar 1:Iiyya devoted his literary work neither to Hebrew biblical exegesis (with the exception of some selected verses, which he commented upon here and there) nor to Hebrew poetry, both of which were literary genres that Ibn Ezra cultivated in Hebrew and in which he excelled. And yet, the main lines of Bar 1:Iiyya's scientific work resemble to a great extent the main components of Ibn Ezra's scientific work. Before we deal with the ideological and practical expressions of Ibn Ezra's linguistic position, it would be appropriate to provide a brief study of Bar 1:Iiyya's scientific work, a description of the extent of Ibn Ezra's acquaintance with Bar 1:Iiyya's work, and a comparative scrutiny between the work of both. Such an examination may be instrumental in more accurately assessing whether and to what extent Ibn Ezra was a real trailblazer in his scientific terminological undertakings or the extent to which Ibn Ezra should be considered as indebted to his precursor. Abraham Bar 1:Iiyya's scientific work may be divided into four main parts: astronomy, mathematics, Jewish calendar, and astrology. We will now deal with each part separately. 13 For Bar l:Iiyya's mathematical vocabulary, see especially SARFATI, 1968, pp. 61129, English part, pp. x-xi. See also RABIN, 1945, pp. 158-70; EFROS, 1974, pp. 171232; 233-52

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

99

Beginning with the astronomical part, we find a pair of treatises: Surat ha- 'Are$ (The Shape of the Earth) and /feshbon Mahalakhot haKokhavim (Computation of the Motions of Stars). 14 These two treatises were presented in the introduction to Surat ha- 'Are$ not as isolated works but, together with an astrological work to be mentioned in due course, as an interwoven trilogy meant to deal with the various features of the so-called J;lOkhmat ha-kokhavim (science of the stars).15 The rationale for writing Surat ha- 'Are$ was presented as the need to deal with the "shape of the configuration in the heavens and in the earth, and the order of the motion visible in the skies and in the stars, and its path and measure in each of them, and the proofs demonstrating it". As for the purpose of /feshbon Mahalakhot ha-Kokhavim, Bar ijiyya wrote that it should deal with the "way of computing the course of these moving celestial bodies, and how you can ascertain the position of the stars in the sky at any time you may wish".16 Appended to the latter work are Bar ijiyya's famous astronomical tables, commonly known as Lu1;lOt haNasi, which were to serve to facilitate such computations.'7 Ibn Ezra was well acquainted with Bar ijiyya's astronomical work. The Book of Abraham the Prince (ha-Nassi) - that is, Bar ijiyya's /feshbon Mahalakhot ha-Kokhavim - was alluded to by Ibn Ezra in the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim, in which he directed his readers to Bar ijiyya's book in order to gather information about the astrological procedure of nihugim, as well as about the procedure for determining the ecliptical latitude of a planet. 18 Ibn Ezra undoubtedly pointed to the same book by Bar ijiyya in a passage of the first version of Sefer ha'Olam: "You should wonder- Ibn Ezra wrote - of such a great man [a most sarcastic remark] who compiled astronomical tables which in fact stem from the mean motion astronomical tables of al-Battan!, but he presumes that they come from the tables of Ptolemy."19 And yet, since 14 SURAT HA' AREs, 1546; I;IESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKOKHA VIM, 1959. 15 For this concept, see below, p. 205. 16 SURATHA'ARES, 1546,pp. 4-5. 17l;IESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKOKHA VIM, 1959, pp. 119-132. 18 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 44b-45a. The procedure to establish the nihugim is part and parcel of drawing up the horoscope and takes into consideration the horoscopic houses; it consists in 'directing' a planet from a place of life to a place of death in order to establish the life expectancy of the newborn. For Bar l;Iiyya's reference to the nihugim, see I;IESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKOKHA VIM, 1959, pp.112117 (Hebrew part). For the procedure about how to establish the ec1ipticallatitude of a p.lanet, see I;IESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKOKHAVIM, 1959, pp.72-75 (Hebrew part). 9 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81 b. Hebrew text: "nIJ:J mm, li:>nw C'NIJ nIJnm .. cn C"IJ'~:J mm, ':I 'IJ'N Nm, CNn:J 'N mwnlnterestingly enough, Millas Vallicrosa's notes in the brief introduction he wrote to the critical edition of /feshbon

'w

"'1)

100

PART TWO

Ibn Ezra's Hebrew version of Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lubot (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables) and the corresponding astronomical tables are at present lost, the extent to which Ibn Ezra drew on Bar I:Iiyya's astronomical work for his own astronomical contribution and Hebrew vocabulary cannot be easily ascertained. But Bar I:Iiyya never wrote a book on the astrolabe. So that, at least from a terminological point of view, Ibn Ezra's Sefer Keli ha-Neboshet - the first Hebrew book on the astrolabe - embodies a challenging, demanding and indeed innovative terminological enterprise. Bar I:Iiyya's mathematical oeuvre includes lJibbur ha-Meshiba vehaTishboret (Treatise on Mensuration and Calculation), which is concerned with practical geometry, and those sections of Bar I:Iiyya's encyclopedia Yesodey ha-Tevuna u-Migdal ha- 'Emuna (Foundations of Understanding and Tower of Faith) which deal with geometry and arithmetic. 2o Those works were never explicitly referred to by Ibn Ezra. A glimpse of the subject-matter of those two works shows that the mathematical topics studied by Ibn Ezra, allowance made for some points of contact, were quite different from Bar I:Iiyya's. So, for example, Ibn Ezra's Sefer ha-Mispar is an arithmetic textbook, and as such it deals with the basic operations of multiplication, division, addition, subtraction, fractions, proportions and square roots. In contrast, Bar I:Iiyya's lJibbur ha-Meshiba veha-Tishboret is a geometrical treatise whose original object was to help French Jews in the measurement of their fields, but also deals with theoretical geometrical issues, such as how to find the formula of a truncated pyramid. In addition, the attributes of numbers, upon which Ibn Ezra reflected in Sefer ha- 'Ebad, and combinatorial analysis, which Ibn Ezra applied in his biblical exegesis and elsewhere in order to unfold the secret meanings of the Tetragrammaton letters, are purely mathematical topics hardly touched upon in Bar I:Iiyya's mathematical work. 21 We reach the conclusion that

Mahalakhot ha-Kokhavim seem to confirm Ibn Ezra's sarcastic remarks. Millas Vallicrosa wrote there that al-Battani's Ziy al-$abi is the chief source of the book and that even in those places where Bar l:Iiyya affirms that he is following Ptolemy, he is in fact quoting al-Battan!. See I:IESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKoKHAVIM, 1959, pp. 14-20, esp. p. 17. 20 SEFER HAMESHIl.fAH, 1913; For an analysis of this geometrical work, see LEVY, 2001 (ii). YESODEY HA-TEVUNA, 1952, pp. 11-42 (Hebrew part); For Bar I:Iiyya's science encyclopedia, see RUBIO, 2000. Abraham Bar Hiyya briefly deals with arithmetical subjects in his scientific encyclopedia Yesodey ha-Tevuna u-Migdal ha'Emuna. See YESODEY HA-TEVUNA, 1952, pp. 20-31 (Hebrew part). 21 For an example of Ibn Ezra's theological-combinatorial concerns, see below, p. 313.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

101

just as the mathematical interests and topics were dissimilar, so the Hebrew vocabulary required to convey them had to be different. As for the Jewish calendar, Bar l;Iiyya wrote his own Seier ha- 'Ibbur, which represents in all likelihood the first Hebrew work of this type. This treatise includes, besides typical calendaric material and a strong dose of polemics, rich astronomical materials whose counterpart may be found in Bar l;Iiyya's astronomical work. 22 Bar l;Iiyya's Seier ha- 'Ibbur was well known to Ibn Ezra, who critically referred to it on two different occasions: explicitly, in Ibn Ezra's own Seier ha- 'Ibbur, in which Bar l;Iiyya's Seier ha- 'Ibbur is mentioned and its author alluded to as Abraham the Prince (ha-Nassi), the Spaniard, Bar l;Iiyya; implicitly, in the responsa composed by Ibn Ezra to answer three questions posed by a certain David Ben Joseph of Narbonne. In both cases, Ibn Ezra harshly criticized Bar l;Iiyya for having taken literally the famous midrash (telling that the moon was punished for complaining to God about its status relative to the sun), for having misinterpreted an apparent contradiction in Genesis 1: 16, and, therefore, for having provided an erroneous astronomical explanation for the whole issue (see above, p. 47). As for the astrological part, Abraham Bar l;Iiyya wrote a long, apologetic epistle addressed to Rabbi Judah Barzilai of Barcelona, justifying the study and use of a specific kind of astrology. From this epistle we infer that Bar l;Iiyya endorsed the main tenets of astrology and that he integrated astrological considerations into his tasks as a Rabbi. We know also from this letter that his astrologically orientated activities when serving as a Rabbi aroused sharp criticism and that he adopted an apologetic stance vis-a-vis his attackers. 23 Bar l;Iiyya wrote, or planned but never actually wrote, a whole astrological textbook. We know that for certain, from the introduction to Surat ha- 'Are$, in which Bar l;Iiyya spoke of the above-mentioned trilogy which was meant to deal with the various aspects of the so-called I)okhmat ha-kokhavim, and which was to include an astrological component as well. This book, however, is not extant; the possibility should not be excluded that it was never written. 24 Two further works by Bar l;Iiyya may be added which include considerable astrological material, even though they were not designed to be astrological works. The last chapters of the above-mentioned Qeshbon Mahalakhot ha-Kokhavim were devoted to the explanation of astronomical procedures which actually embody typically astrological 22 See, for example, 'IBBUR, 1851, pp. 6-8 Cf. $URATHA'ARES, 23 EPISTLE TO JUDAH BARZILAI, 1917, pp. 27-33. 24 $URATHA'ARES, 1546, p. 6.

1546,pp. 38-43.

102

PART TWO

tasks, such as the calculation of the twelve astrological houses and ofthe astrological aspects. 25 The very last sentence of this treatise includes a statement which eloquently expresses the close dependence of astrology on astronomy. Bar 1:Iiyya categorically asserted that these astronomical procedures are sorely needed to deal with nativities (moladot), that is, with setting up the horoscope for particular births, the chief task of genethlialogical astrology. He went on to tell the reader that Ptolemy the Greek, the prince of the Greek scholars, introduced and used these astronomical techniques in his book entitled 'Arb 'a Ma 'amarot, that is, Tetrabiblos, when dealing with astrology. Within this context, Bar 1:Iiyya openly acknowledged that Tetrabiblos is a reliable book and exhorted the reader to study it. 26 Substantial astrological material may be also found in Bar 1:Iiyya's Megilat ha-Megaleh (Scroll of the Revealer), an eschatological work designed to foretell the exact date of the coming of the Messiah. The fifth and last chapter, the largest of the whole work, includes a remarkable universal astrological history. It is divided into three main sections: first, it provides a detailed astrological explanation of Jewish history till the destruction of the second Temple; then, a universal history is presented from the birth of Jesus Christ till the times of the First Crusade; finally, a futuristic view of world history is presented from the beginning ofthe twelfth century, that is, from Bar 1:Iiyya's own times, till the prospective coming of the Messiah, which, according to Bar 1:Iiyya's astrological calculations, should have supervened in 1448 or 1468. All those historical speculations are based on a detailed analysis of the periodic conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, the main macroastrological technique employed by Arabic astrologers, which Bar 1:Iiyya systematically applied in his own astrological world history.27 Ibn Ezra was knowledgeable about Bar 1:Iiyya's Megilat ha-Megaleh. Even though he employed the periodic conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter in 25 ijESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKoKHAVIM, 1959, ch xviii, pp. 103-105; ch. xix, pp. 106-107; ch. xx, pp. 108-117. 26 See ijESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKOKHAVIM, 1959, p. 117. Under close scrutiny, it turns out that Abraham Bar ijiyya copied the concluding sentence of his book almost verbatim from AI-Battani's Ziy al-Slibi. In this regard, see Opus ASTRONOMICUM, 1903, p. 134: "Has quantitates praesertim cognoscere oportet in nativitatibus, ut significatores dirigantur ad sua loca; et hoc est quod Ptolemaeus in Tetrabiblo memorat, quo libra res futuras per cognitionem stellarum vaticinari docet." Interestingly enough, Ibn Ezra did not concur with Bar ijiyya and Al Battiini in their high opinion of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos. In this regard, see below, p. 253. 27 MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, pp. 111-155. For an explanation of the periodic conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, see below, p. 163.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

103

his own work, exegetical and scientific as well, Ibn Ezra disapproved of the explicit purpose of Bar ijiyya's book and its relation to astrology. This opinion was voiced in the long commentary on Daniel 11 :31, in which not only Abraham Bar ijiyya but also Shlomo Ibn Gabirol were censured for having employed the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter in order to reckon the days of the coming of the Messiah. In this biblical commentary, Ibn Ezra explicitly mentioned Bar ijiyya's eschatological book and named it as Seier ha-Ki$im (Book of the End of Days). Bar ijiyya felt no small embarrassment and misgivings when he decided to insert his astrological history into Megilat ha-Megaleh. This becomes readily apparent as soon as one's attention is drawn to the opening sentence of the fifth chapter: "This chapter consists of worthless matters and nonsensical ideas, especially if its contents are compared with the contents of the previous chapters. Whereas the preceding chapters have been based upon the sayings of the sages, the prophets, the biblical text and the divine word, this chapter relies on stories fed to gullible people and on the futile arguments of the Gentiles. "28 Bar ijiyya's apologetic tone stands in sharp contrast to the reiterated statements which Ibn Ezra issued to the effect that astrology should be considered part and parcel of the curriculum of Jewish intellectuals. 29 This apologetic tone also helps to understand why Bar ijiyya relegated the astrological component of Megilat ha-Megaleh to the fifth and last chapter. This, however, is not an isolated case. The ancillary role that astrology played in Bar ijiyya's Megilat ha-Megaleh should be seen as indicative of the part that astrology played in his whole scientific work. We have no work which Bar ijiyya devoted wholly to astrology. Bar ijiyya's astrological contribution was wrought either in the form of an apologetical epistle or in the form of an appendix or extension to works which were purposely designed as non-astrological treatises. The relatively marginal role of astrology in Bar ijiyya's scientific work pales even more when compared to the central and prominent role that astrology played in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus. Fourteen out of the thirty above-mentioned treatises by Ibn Ezra were deliberately written as evident, whole astrological works, and included in this number is the astrological encyclopedia, the gem of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus. Though a systematic, comparative study of Ibn Ezra's and Bar ijiyya's scientific terminologies is still a desideratum, even a cursory perusal of their scientific work helps to appreciate the extent to which 28 MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, 29

See above, p. 13.

p. 111.

104

PART TWO

Ibn Ezra's vocabulary diverges from Bar ijiyya's. As an illustration, witness the terminology related to the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, a central astrological topic developed by both Ibn Ezra and Bar ijiyya. 3o Although the two Abrahams were involved in the same departments of science - astronomy, mathematics, astrology and Jewish calendar - they evinced divergent foci of interest. Ibn Ezra devoted a substantial part of his scientific work to topics which were hardly touched upon by Bar ijiyya. Thus, in his pioneering work on the astrolabe, on arithmetic, on the properties of numbers, on combinatorics, and especially in the composition of the various components of his astrological encyclopedia, Abraham Ibn Ezra could hardly have relied on the work of Bar ijiyya. In all these areas, Ibn Ezra was compelled to rely on his own resources, at least as far as a Hebrew scientific vocabulary was concerned.

Ibn Ezra's View of the Hebrew Language

Ibn Ezra wrote at least five treatises dealing directly with Hebrew grammar. 31 These grammatical treatises, directly and exclusively dealing with the intricacies of the Hebrew language, are the natural place in which we should expect to find Ibn Ezra's view of the holy tongue. But for a clear statement about his view of the Hebrew language we must look elsewhere, such as in the introductions to the various versions of his 30 Ibn Ezra names the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter that occurs every 20 years ha-mabberet ha-qetanah (small conjunction), whereas Bar 1:Iiyya designates it as hadibuq ha-qaton (small conjunction); Ibn Ezra names the conjunction which happens every 240 years ha-mabberet ha-tikhonah (middle conjunction), whereas Bar 1:Iiyya names it dibuq gadol (great conjunction); for the conjunction happening every 960 years, Ibn Ezra gives the name ha-mabberet ha-gedolah (great conjunction), whereas Bar 1:Iiyya calls it dibuq rav (strong conjunction). Besides, Bar 1:Iiyya employs two additional types of conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter never used or mentioned by Ibn Ezra. Those are the dibuq 'em$ai (middle conjunction), which occurs every 60 years (in the framework of a single dibuq gado/), and the dibuq 'asum (enormous conjunction), which occurs every 2859 years. For the triangles or triplicities, which playa fundamental role in the classification of the conjunctions, Ibn Ezra gives the peculiar Hebrew name shalishut, whereas Bar 1:Iiyya employs the Greek cognate trygon, which he found in all likelihood in Baraita de-Mazalot. For all those examples, see MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, p. 117; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols.80b-8Ia. 31 These five treatises are: Sefer Moznayim (Book of Scales); Sefer ha-Yesod (Book of Fundamentals of Grammar); $abot (Purity of Language); Safah Berurah (Clear Language); Sephat Yeter (Language of Excellence). For a discussion of Ibn Ezra's contribution to the development of Hebrew grammar, see CHARLAP, 1995.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

105

Keli ha-Nehoshet (Book on the Astrolabe). 32 Why should Ibn Ezra have chosen precisely a purely scientific technical treatise describing the astrolabe and its uses as the most appropriate place to reveal his view of the Hebrew language? Ibn Ezra was the first Jewish scientist to write a manual on the use of the astrolabe, the most important tool of astronomers and astrologers in the Middle Ages, in Hebrew. A technical treatise like this was precisely where he was most likely to encounter formidable terminological and translation difficulties when writing in Hebrew. So it should not be surprising that Ibn Ezra began the second version of Keli ha-Nehoshet by noting that "it is difficult to translate from one language into another, and it is especially difficult to translate into the holy tongue, since we only know of it the part that is extant in the Bible".33 He expanded on the same subject in the introduction to the third version, in which he wrote as follows: Abraham the Spaniard, the son of Me'ir the son of Ezra, the author, said: Everyone, having an understanding of what he hears, knows that the holy tongue was the most comprehensive since it was the first among the languages of all the nations. But, since the holy people were exiled from their Holy Land, they intermingled with the other nations, learnt their languages, and so forgot their own language and were only left with the books of the prophets. But all those words which the prophets had no need for in their works, do not appear at all in Scripture. Therefore it is difficult to create new nouns, that is, to translate them from one language into another. 34

Two main issues are touched on here. On the one hand, Ibn Ezra wanted to identify the chief cause of his quandaries as a writer of a Hebrew technical manual for the astrolabe. In his opinion, the main difficulty lies in the historical fact that the Jews, the natural masters and speakers of the Hebrew language, after being exiled, abandoned their original language and were compelled to use the languages of other nations. Moreover, since the prophets did not deem it necessary to address every concept and employ the correlated words in their books, the biblical vocabulary still available has many linguistic deficiencies. On the other hand, it seems that Ibn Ezra was also pointing at a solution, albeit a partial one, for his terminological and translation problems. His opening 32 As a matter of fact, Ibn Ezra also made some brief statements about the nature of the Hebrew language in his fragmentary second commentary on Genesis 1: 11 and 11:7, and in the introduction to the grammatical treatise Safah Berurah (Clear Language). See SAFAH BERURAH, 1839, pp. 2-3. 33 NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol 34b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 339 (ILl). See also a very similar wording in NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 4. 34 NEI;IOSHET C, BNF 1054 fol. 4b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 339 (11.2).

106

PART TWO

statement that Hebrew was the first and most comprehensive of all languages hints that it was created on the basis of a divine blueprint as a perfect language, with the broadest possible semantic compass. Hence it could express every nuance of reality and included the terminology needed to deal with science in general, and with the astrolabe and its uses in particular. 35 The underlying message is that Ibn Ezra would not have encountered serious difficulties in writing about the astrolabe had the Jews not been exiled and in consequence had forgotten most of the original vocabulary of Hebrew. Moreover, Ibn Ezra seems to express the idea that since the original Hebrew language was not completely lost, he might still be able to solve his Hebrew terminological difficulties without having recourse to other languages. Even though Ibn Ezra acknowledged the fact that "all those words which the prophets had no need for in their works, do not appear at all in Scripture", the vocabulary of biblical Hebrew, a surviving remnant of the ancient Hebrew language, "the first and most comprehensive of all the languages", can still be drawn on. How should we regard Ibn Ezra's statement? Is it merely an expression of wishful thinking, just a rhetorical declaration? The main aim of the present part is to show that, on the contrary, his statement should be construed as a sincere ideological declaration of intentions: Ibn Ezra, an expert biblical commentator as well as a skilled scientist, considered himself to be highly qualified to revive the semiextinguished holy tongue, to restore an original scientific meaning that had been forgotten, a task which involved mining the biblical text to rediscover a set of original Hebrew scientific terms. In other words, we will try to demonstrate that, according to Ibn Ezra, when the translator approaches the task of conveying Arabic technical words into Hebrew, he is not always compelled to coin new words. Instead, the biblical text can provide some words endowed with the original scientific meaning. There are not many such words, but they are conspicuous and significant key words that express fundamental aspects of reality. Eight examples to support this assertion follow:

35 This opinion fits in with the interest expressed by intellectuals in antiquity and the Middle Ages about the creation of languages in general and about the essence and origin of Hebrew in particular. Note the resemblance of Ibn Ezra's words to a passage written by his friend Judah ha-Levy in BOOK OF KUZARI, II, 66. p. 109. For this passage, see below, p. 311. Ibn Ezra's ideas may be further explored in his biblical exegesis. See, for example, his short commentary on Genesis 1: 11 and 11 :7.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

107

Gevulot 'Are$- The Seven Climates

A common ancient and medieval assumption was that the inhabited area of the earth, the oikumene, was divided into precisely 'seven climates', bands of earth extended in latitude between two parallels where the same phenomena were to be found, such as a prevailing weather or the length of the longest day in summer. The concept was originally developed by Greek and Hellenistic sciences, and crystallized into the Greek word klima, a mathematical-astronomical name that designated the inclination of the plane of the local horizon to the earth's axis. Afterwards, when Greek sciences were transferred to Arabic culture, the Greek word klima was conveyed into the Arabic word 'iqlim. 36 Subsequently, with the passage of Arabic sciences to Jewish society, the Arabic word 'iqlim was transferred to Hebrew, and Jewish translators coined the new cognate Hebrew word 'aqlim. Abraham Bar l;Iiyya, for example, adopted and frequently used the new Hebrew word 'aqlim in his scientific treatises. 37 The Hebrew word 'aqlim, coupled with the concept of the oikumene and of the 'seven climates', may be traced to medieval Hebrew texts,38 and is still used in our time in modem Hebrew, with the meaning of 'climate'. Abraham Ibn Ezra, for his part, as a scientist dealing with astronomy and astrology, could not do without the concept of the 'seven climates'. However, he completely avoided the Hebrew word 'aqlim and instead employed in a rich variety of contexts the very peculiar Hebrew word gevu/, which expresses literally the concept of 'border' or 'frontier', but which in his opinion denotes the concept of one of the 'seven climates'. From among numerous occurrences, we will limit our attention here to only one example, which may be observed appearing in a similar way in all three versions of Ibn Ezra's Keli ha-Ne/;Joshet. Before we go into detail, a brief description of the astrolabe seems in order. The planispheric astrolabe was a beautiful and sophisticated instrument, usually made of bronze or brass, designed to measure the altitude of stars, moon or sun, and to determine all kinds of astronomical and 36 For the Greek stage, see ALMAGEST, 1984, pp. 123-29.320; HONIGMANN, 1929. For the Arabic stage, see MIQUEL, 1971, col. 1076-1078. 37 The Hebrew word 'aqlim may be found, inter alia, in the following works by Abraham Bar ijiyya: $URAT HA'ARES, 1546, ch. 1, pp. 40-3; 'IBBUR, 1851, pp. 6-8; ijESHBONMAHALAKHOTHAKOKHAVIM, 1959, pp. 83,97,113-15. 38 For the implantation of the concept of the oikumene and of the seven climates theory into some twelfth- and thirteenth-century medieval Hebrew texts, see FONTAINE, 2000, pp. 101-137. For a special discussion on Abraham Bar ijiyya's view, see FONTAINE, 2000, pp. 108-112.

108

PART TWO

topographical relations without cumbersome mathematical calculations. The main body of the instrument consisted, in broad outline, of a circular disk called the mater, both of whose sides, back and front, were employed for different but interrelated uses. The back was engraved with a wide variety of scales depending on where and when the astrolabe was made, and included an alidade, that is, a rotating sighting vane fastened to the mater in the center and provided with a sighting hole on each end with which the altitude of the sun or a star could be measured. The front of the astrolabe included a graphical representation of the heavens on a flat surface as seen by an imaginary observer, looking upwards, at a particular time, and especially in a particular latitude. All in all, this side was made up of two components, the one underlying the other: (a) the movable rete, which was a stereographic projection of the ecliptic and a number of the brighter fixed stars. The rete was engraved on a circular disk from which most of the metal was cut away to show the underlying component; (b) the underlying second component, deposited in the inner depressed surface of the astrolabe (the mater), was a thin plate on which was engraved a stereographic projection of the heavens for a definite geographicallatitude. 39 Not by chance, the standard number of these thin plates was seven, symbolically representing the seven climates and being associated with them. Ibn Ezra, when setting out to describe the main parts of the instrument, was compelled to deal with this central feature of the astrolabe. But, instead of using the normative word 'aqlim, he preferred a special expression derived from the word gevul, namely, gevulot 'are$, meaning borders of the earth. These are his words, for example, in the second version of Keli haNel;lOshet: The upper part of the mater (that is, the inner depressed surface of the astrolabe) is regarded as a plate; there are also three plates. So that, together with the upper part of the mater, there are three and a half plates. And shev'a gevulei ha- 'ara$ot (the seven climates of earth) are engaved on both sides [of the plates],40 because the inhabited part of the earth is extended only to the north and is divided into seven parts. 41

39 For a discussion of this and other features of the astrolabe's configuration, see the following works: HARTNER, 1939, pp. 287-311; MICHEL, 1947, pp. 31-46; NORTH, 1974,96-106; ASTROLABE, 1989, pp. 10-23; SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 217-219, 287-299, 358-359. 40 Six climates are engraved on both sides of the three plates, while the seventh climate is engraved on the upper part of the mater. 41 NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 36a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 340 (II.3).

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

109

Similar wordings, slightly differing one from the other but all of them using the same expression gevulot 'are$, may also be found in the first and third versions of Keli ha-Nehoshet. 42 It is important to point out, however, that the same Hebrew word gevul was used by Ibn Ezra in his astrological works with the completely different astrological meaning of 'terms', namely, the subdivisions of each of the twelve zodiacal constellations, which were assigned to the planets, except the moon and the sun (see below, p. 250). In the framework of a zodiacal sign, the 'terms' were the limits within which a certain planet exercises 'lordship'. In this particular case, Ibn Ezra translated into Hebrew, by loan translation, the Arabic word bad, whose literal meaning, 'border' or 'frontier', is identical to that of the Hebrew word gevul. 43 As for this astrological concept, the chain of transmission began with the Greek term oria, which was subsequently translated by loan translation into the Arabic word bad, and from the Arabic translated, in parallel, into the Hebrew word gevul and, also by loan translation, into the Latin astrological expressions of termini or fines. 44 So, we have here the interesting but confusing case of one single Hebrew word, gevul, designating two completely different concepts: the geographical concept of 'climate', on the one hand, and the astrological concept of 'term', on the other hand. The dual meaning of the word gevul may generate a curious situation: what would Ibn Ezra do if the necessity arose of expressing in the same sentence, very adjacent one to the other, the 42 NEI:IOSHET A, BNF 1061, fol. 150b. It is worth noting that this passage from the first version of Keli ha-Nehoshet includes the use by Ibn Ezra of the word 'aqlimim. The word 'aqlimim, however, appears here together with the word ' ofakim, that is, horizons, immediately after using the expression gevulei ha'ara$ot, and the wording of the passage strongly suggests that this was done with the intention of making clear the meaning of the rather strange previous expression shiv 'a gevulei ha-' ara$ot, that is, 'seven climates'. Ifit is not a later interpolation, this use of the word 'aqlimim, as far as I was able to find, is the unique instance in Ibn Ezra's whole work. See also NEI:IOSHET C, BNF 1054, fol. 5a, and the corresponding passage in the Latin version; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 64v.: "Sunt autem in plurisque astrolabiis intra matrem incluse tres tabule, qui bus suppositum est reticulum. Quarum quelibet duo continet climata. Septimum quoque in ipso matris aluo est figurata." 43 The word gevul, endowed with the astrological meaning of 'term', already appears in the Baraita de-Mazalot (See BARAITA DE-MAZALOT, I, p. 283), a work which was possibly known to Ibn Ezra. In this case the Hebrew word appears to be a loan translation of the Greek term oria. 44 For a discussion of this astrological concept, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 206-215. For some examples of the use of the Arabic word bad, meaning explicitly the aforementioned astrological concept, see ABBREVIATION OF THE INTRODUCTION TO ASTROLOGY, 1994, pp. 13, 45, 55, 59, 81; for some examples of the use by Ibn Ezra of the Hebrew word gevul, as a translation of the Arabic word bad, see, inter alia, MISHPETEI HA-MAZALOT, VAT 477, fol. 70a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 13,36,42.

110

PART TWO

geographical concept of 'climate' together with the astrological concept of 'term'? An interesting relevant case may be found in a passage of the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, where we read the following statement about the planet Venus. Venus ... exerts influence on the fifth gevul (that is, on the fifth climate), since this is the relative position of the sphere of Venus in relation to the sphere of Satum, and from among the nations, [Venus exerts influence on] the Muslims, since their zodiacal sign is Scorpio in the gevul (that is, in the term) of Venus, and (Venus) was there in the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter.45

This passage highlights the difficulties which Ibn Ezra's modem readers may encounter when trying to tackle his Hebrew scientific nomenclature: the Hebrew word gevul appears twice in one and the same sentence, the same word being endowed with completely different meanings. In the first instance, the expression 'fifth gevul' clearly denotes the 'fifth climate', which is assigned to Venus because of Venus' relative position to Saturn.46 In the second instance, the word gevul refers to the 'term' in the zodiacal sign of Scorpio over which Venus exercises lordship in the framework of a crucially important astrological-historical event: the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter which heralded the birth of Muhammad and the founding oflslam. 47 We arrive at the conclusion that Ibn Ezra opted for using one and the same word, that is, the Hebrew word gevul, to express two completely separate

concepts. By doing so, he ignored the normative word 'aqlim, whose use in this case could have avoided such a linguistic confusion. Moreover, what is particularly remarkable in this passage is that Ibn Ezra was by no means concerned about potentially misleading the reader. It is clear that Ibn Ezra had very strong reasons for clinging to this confusing approach. Thus, the question arises, what were his motives for consistently ignoring the normative word 'aqlim, or, in other words, what were his

45 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 42b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 340 (11.4). 46 The astrological link between the seven planets and the seven climates was based on the direct correlation between the position of the planet's sphere in the prevailing cosmological model and the ordinal position of the climate to which the corresponding planet is attached. Consequently, Saturn is attached to the first climate, Jupiter to the second, Mars to the third, and so on. For this astrological rule, see RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, IV, pp. 42, 44, 46-50; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 41h42a. 47 For an explanation of the periodic conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, the main astrological tools employed by Arabic astrology to analyse history and forecast future collective events, see below, p. 163.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

111

reasons for persisting in this obstinate determination to consistently use the word gevul when expressing the concept of the 'seven climates'? Ibn Ezra revealed his reasons not in a scientific treatise but in his biblical exegesis. It transpires that Psalms 74: 17 is the place from which Ibn Ezra took the name gevulot 'are$,48 the same name to which he resorted in the book of the astrolabe. When commenting on this verse, Ibn Ezra furnished gevulot 'are$ with the following explanation: ... and he mentioned that ha-shiv'ah gevulot (that is, the seven climates) stand forever, and the inhabited part of the earth will not change, and the reason for writing 'summer and winter' is because the overwhelming majority of the inhabited part of the earth is in the north and only a slight part is in the south, and the reason for mentioning this together with the gevulot 'are$ (literally, the borders of the earth) is because when in one place it is summer, in the other it is winter. 49

We notice in this biblical commentary, then, that the Hebrew biblical name gevulot 'are$ is completely identified with the concept of 'seven climates': the gevulot 'are$ are seven in number, exactly as the seven climates; they are described as stretching from the north to south and constituting the inhabited part of the earth; and they are assigned a specific weather for a specific season. Moreover, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, the seven climates are not merely a linguistic phenomenon that may be detected in the biblical vocabulary nor even an artificial parameter designed by the scientists in order to divide the inhabited area of the earth: the seven gevulot, or gevulot 'are$, will 'stand forever' because they are a physical reality created as part of the divine plan described in Genesis. 50 We come to the conclusion that Ibn Ezra completely ignored the Hebrew normative cognate 'aqlim, derived from the Arabic term 'iqlim, because, in his opinion, the vocabulary of biblical Hebrew can still be drawn on to fully convey the concept of' seven climates'. As the concept of 'seven climates' has its original and genuine expression in the biblical name gevulot 'are$, which features in Psalms 74:17, Ibn Ezra consistently employed the Hebrew biblical form and was extremely reticent about the use of other, less exact or less authentic expressions. The technical use of the word gevul can be readily traced in Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises. Let us briefly see some examples. Ibn Ezra employs the expression shiv'ah gevulot, that is, the seven climates, or 48 Psalms 74: 17: "Thou hast set all the borders of the earth (gevulot 'are$): thou hast made summer and winter." 49 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 340 (11.5). 50 See in this regard Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalms 89: 12.

112

PART TWO

kol ha-gevulim, that is, all the climates, when he wishes to refer globally to the whole inhabited part of the earth. 51 In a clearly astrological context, the biblical word gevulot is employed to present three astrological doctrines: (a) a special astrological relationship correlating each of the seven climates to each one of the twelve zodiacal signs;52 (b) a link between the seven planets and the seven climates which was based on the direct correlation between the position of the planet's sphere in the current cosmological model and the ordinal position of the climate to which the corresponding planet is attached;53 (c) that residence in a specific geographical climate has a more powerful bearing on human destiny than the ostensible outcome of the individual horoscope. 54 Ibn Ezra also employed the biblical word gevulot to lay down astronomical procedures which entail typically astrological tasks. Thus, the gevulot are one of the parameters to be taken into consideration when the astrologer sets out to calculate the dimensions of the astrological houses of the horoscope;55 also, specific climates - say, the fifth or the sixth gevul - are specified in order to explain that the amount of degrees marking the distance between two planets - say, between the sun and the moon - may change when those distances are calculated at different parts of the earth.56 It goes without saying that Ibn Ezra also inserted the biblical expression gevulot 'are$ and its cognates in his biblical commentaries and monographs. Besides usages which are essentially similar to the aforementioned, in this literary environment the biblical word gevulot served to highlight the role astrology played as a legitimate exegetical tool. 57

51 M1SHPETEI HA-MAzALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 14a; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, 35b, 44b. 52 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, II, pp. 9,14, 17,20,22,24,26,28,30,33; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 36a, 38a. 53 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, IV, pp. 42,44,46-50; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 41h42a. 54 MOLADOT, BNF 1056 fol. 46b; For this interesting passage and an explanation of it, see below, p. 158. See also MOLADOT, BNF 1056 fol. 48a. 55 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 44b; MOLADOT, BNF 1056 fol. 53b. 56 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lla. 57 See, for example, Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 33:21, in which the seven gevulot serve to emphasize the influence of the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter on human history. See also the preface to the first commentary on the Pentateuch, wherein the seven gevulot serve to describe the art of astrology. See also commentaries on Job 38:5; Psalms 74:17; 89:12; 98:3; 103:4. See also 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 61, in which the expression "seventh among gevulot ha'are$ (that is, the seventh climate)" serves Ibn Ezra to make fairly clear that the relevant events to be dealt with occurred in England.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

113

Another bizarre Hebrew word used very frequently by Ibn Ezra in his scientific treatises as well as in his biblical commentaries and monographs is mU$aq, whose literal meaning in Hebrew is 'solid', 'stable' or 'strong' .58 We can safely determine what Ibn Ezra had in mind when using this word by exploring his translation of Ibn alMuthannii's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwiirizmi. The original Arabic text of this astronomical work was lost, but three translations are still extant, one into Latin, written by Hugo Sanctallensis in the twelfth century, and the other two into Hebrew. 59 One of the two Hebrew translations, an incomplete text named the 'Parma version', was surely carried out by Abraham Ibn Ezra. As noted above (see above, p. 77), this assertion relies on the fact that Ibn Ezra attached to it an outstanding introduction, where he not only revealed his identity but also presented his own version of the transmission of Hindu and Greek astronomy to the Arabic sciences. Ibn Ezra's authorship of the 'Parma version', however, would have been not so hard to establish even had this introduction been unavailable. A clear indication revealing Ibn Ezra's authorship, but which also casts serious doubts on Ibn Ezra's authorship of the second and complete Hebrew translation, named the 'Michael version', is precisely the scientific nomenclature made use of in the 'Parma version' in general, and the use of the word mU$aq in particular. The following example, based on a passage from the chapter dealing with the apogee of a sphere, which is extant in both the 'Parma version' and the 'Michael version', is brought to illustrate the terminological differences between both versions: 'Parma version': Every planet has spheres, according to the scholars of Saba, among them the sphere of the zodiac which rotates on its sheath, whose middle or mU$aq (center) is the mU$aq (center) of the earth, and it is called the sphere of the zodiac. Another sphere is called the sphere of apogee, and its mU$aq (center) is removed from the mU$aq (center) of the earth. 60

58 For the use of this word by Ibn Ezra, see: SARFATI, 1968, pp. 145-6; GOLDSTEIN, 1996, pp. 19-20; GoMEZ ARANDA, 1995, p. 263. 59 For a critical and annotated edition of both Hebrew translations, see HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967; For the Latin translation, see LATIN TRANSLATION OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967. 60 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 154, 297. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 340 (11.6).

114

PART TWO 'Michael version': Every one of the planets has fixed spheres, according to the opinion of the Hindus, among them a sphere like the sphere of the zodiac which rotates about the merkaz (center) which is the merkaz (center) of the earth and another sphere called the sphere of apogee whose merkaz (center) is removed form the merkaz (center) of the earth. 61

A collation of both texts bring us to the conclusion that in order to designate the concept of 'center', essential when describing the different types of spheres, the 'Michael version' made use of the Hebrew word merkaz, whereas the 'Parma version', written by Abraham Ibn Ezra, employed the Hebrew word mU$aq. Why should these two Hebrew translations diverge so markedly in the translation of such a basic concept as 'center'? The etymology of the word mU$aq is extremely similar to that of the above-mentioned word gevul. The normative word established in medieval Hebrew to express the concept of 'center' was the word merkaz, which is a cognate borrowed from the Arabic word markaz. This fact, which closely resembles the above-mentioned connection between the Hebrew word 'aqlim and the Arabic word 'iqlim, illustrates the pre-eminence of the Arabic language in the process of filling the linguistic void of the Hebrew language, especially as far as scientific terminology was concerned. Thus, the new Hebrew word merkaz, translated from the Arabic word markaz, was employed by Abraham Bar I:Iiyya in his scientific treatises. 62 The word merkaz was subsequently adopted by medieval Jewish writers and translators, and is still used with the meaning of center in modem Hebrew. 63 A perusal of Abraham Ibn Ezra's whole prose literary work, however, reveals that he totally shunned the normative Hebrew word merkaz. As far as I was able to ascertain, he was the first Hebrew writer to employ the peculiar word mU$aq instead of the word merkaz. Moreover, he maintained the use of the word mU$aq with obstinate consistency throughout his entire literary work. All this emphasizes the singularity and peculiarity of Ibn Ezra's position. As in the case of the word gevul, we shall next ask: What were Ibn Ezra's reasons for ignoring the standard word merkaz, or, in other words, what was the reason for Ibn Ezra's stubborn resolution to employ the word mU$aq to express the concept of 'center'? The main clue to Ibn 61 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 28,

395. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 341 (11.7).

62 See, inter alia, the following works of Abraham Bar ijiyya: SURAT HA' ARES,

1546, p. 11; ijESHBON MAHALAKHOT HAKOKHAVIM, 1959, p. 70.

63 The word merkaz was also used in the translation from Arabic into Hebrew of Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed, produced by Samuel Ibn Tibbon approximately in 1190. See GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED, 1960, Part II (24), pp. 50-2.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

115

Ezra's mind lies in the fact that the word mU$aq appears several times in the biblical repertoire, in clear contrast with the word merkaz, which is completely absent from the biblical or the Talmudic vocabulary. Ibn Ezra's opinion about the original and genuine meaning of the word mU$aq may be detected in his biblical commentary on Job, in which the word mU$aq figures several times. In his commentary on Job 38:38,64 Ibn Ezra annotated in an extremely succinct way that "mu$aq is a point". The underlying meaning of this cryptic opinion may be found in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Job 36:16, a verse in which the word mU$aq appears linked with and in opposition to the Hebrew word rabab. In this commentary, Ibn Ezra brought into focus this related pair of words and wrote as follows: "Both words are employed allegorically, since rabab is the circle line and mU$aq is the center point. "65 The meaning of the word mU$aq was further enlarged considerably in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Job 37:10, in which our author went on to explain that "the meaning of mU$aq is the earth, which stands as a point in the middle of the spheres".66 These three commentaries manifest how the semantic field of the word mU$aq is gradually widened by Ibn Ezra. Starting from the basic notion of 'point', the word mU$aq shades into the concept of the 'geometric center of the circle'. Next, relying on this explanation and on the current prevailing geocentric model, the same word mU$aq is further viewed as a synonym for the 'earth' itself, grasped as 'the cosmic center of the spheres'. Provided with such a significant and wide semantic field, it is not surprising that the biblical word mU$aq found its place throughout Ibn Ezra's literary work, not only in his biblical commentaries 67 but also in his scientific corpus, to address both astronomical 68 and astrological 69 subjects. The following passage not 64 Job 38:38: "When the dust grows into a mass (Ia-mu$aq), and the clods cleave fast together?" 65 Job 36: 16: "He has removed thee out of distress into a broad place (raJ;wb), where there is no straitness (mu$aq)." For the Hebrew text of Ibn Ezra's commentary on this verse, see below, p. 341 (11.8). 66 Job 37:10: "By the breath of God ice is given, and the breadth of the waters is straitened (be-mu$aq)." For the Hebrew text of Ibn Ezra's commentary on this verse, see below, p. 341 (11.9). 67 See, for example, the following Ibn Ezra biblical commentaries: Ecclesiastes 1:3,3:15; long commentary on Exodus 3:15; introduction to the first commentary on the Pentateuch; Psalms 33:7; 93:2; 102:26; 104:5; 139:9. 68 See, for example, NEI:IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fols. 50a, 50b, 51b; 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 3a, 6b, 8a, 9b, lOa, lla, 11 b; '!OERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 63, 65, 68, 74; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, p. 341. 69 See REs HIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, p. v. For this passage, see below, p. 208. See also TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 42b, 43a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 9, 16, 18,23, 25;

116

PART TWO

only shows Ibn Ezra's resourceful use of the word mU$aq, but also epitomizes the wide range of meanings with which he informed this biblical word. MU$aq features in such an unexpected place as the introduction to Seier Sabot (Purity of Language), a grammar treatise, in which this word plays the role of the main cosmological point of reference defining the three Aristotelian motions: I reveal now the secret which underlies all motions, which may be divided into three classes. The first motion is from the mU$aq, which is a point in the middle of the circle, and this is the motion of air and fire, which move from below (that is, from the earth's center) upward (that is, away from the earth's center), since the earth is in the middle of the spheres and its mU$aq (center) is the mU$aq (center) of the sphere of the zodiacal signs. And the second motion is towards the mU$aq (center), and this is the motion of water and earth, that is, a motion from above (that is, from heights) downward (that is, towards the earth's center). And the third motion is around the mU$aq (center), and this is the motion of the spheres, that is, a motion which is neither upwards nor downwards. 7o

Mishpatim - Astrological Judgments

A simultaneous semantic metamorphosis affected in the Middle Ages both the Latin word iudicia and the Hebrew word mishpatim. Judgments was the original meaning attached in antiquity to these two venerable

words in their respective linguistic settings, that is, in classical Latin, on the one hand, and in biblical Hebrew, on the other. And yet, a new astrological meaning was added to both words during the twelfth century. In a technical and precise way, the Latin word iudicia and the Hebrew word mishpatim began to designate the various manifestations of astrological influence as well as the various rules by which the astrologer can discern and determine this influence.71 As regards the Latin word iudicia, the new astrological connotation was attached to it simultaneously through multiple channels in the course of the twelfth century's translations of Arabic astrological texts into Latin. Thus, for MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 51b, 56b; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 66b; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 93a, 94a; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 82a; RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, p. 52. MISHPETEIHA-MAZALOT, VAT 477, fols. 74a, 74b, 75a, 76a, 76b, 78a, 78b. 70 SAI;IOT, 1985, p. 370. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 341 (11.10). 71 In our time, the same words in the modem languages still serve to designate in a very precise way the art of astrology. Accordingly, the expression used in Italian is astrologia iudiciaria, in Spanish astrologia judiciaria, in French astrologie judiciaire and in Englishjudicial astrology.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

117

example, the Latin expression iudicia stelarum became the calque translation of the Arabic expression a/iktim al-nujum, literally meaning judgments or dictates of the stars.72 As for the semantic metamorphosis which affected the counterpart mishpatim, let us begin by noting that such a Hebrew word, invested with astrological overtones, was completely absent from early scientific Hebrew treatises, including astrological or astronomical materiaP3 We may safely assume that the new astrological semantic layer of the Hebrew word mishpatim was the result of practically the same historical circumstances which affected the Latin word iudicia. In other words, this semantic metamorphosis occurred in the first half of the twelfth century, during the historical process labeled here as the "rise of Hebrew medieval science", and as part and parcel of the creation of a new Hebrew scientific terminology. In this framework, as in the case of the Latin word iudicia, the word mishpa{im received its astrological meaning as a result of the translation from Arabic into Hebrew of the expression a/:1ktim al-nujum, literally meaning judgments or dictates of the stars. Two personalities may be assumed to have been responsible for this terminological innovation affecting the word mishpatim: Abraham Bar I;Iiyya and Abraham Ibn Ezra. Both of them were active in the "rise of Hebrew medieval science" and were engaged in astrology, and because they were very knowledgeable about Arabic astrological literature, they both knew the Arabic expression a/:1ktim al-nujum. But Abraham Bar I;Iiyya and Abraham Ibn Ezra transmitted the expression a/:1ktim 72 This occurrence may be vouched for in multiple translations of original Arabic astrological treatises into Latin. In this regard, see LEJBOWICZ, 1988, pp. 213-261; LEMAY, 1987, pp. 57-73; NALLINO, 1987, pp. 494-97. One of the main channels of transmission of the Arabic sciences to the Christian West in the twelfth century may be detected in Toledo, in the work of a Jewish translator named Avendehut Israelita, possibly the Jewish philosopher Abraham Ibn Daud. Among his translations mentioned in GIL, 1985, pp. 30-38 - we find the following astrological treatises in whose titles there clearly appears the Latin expression iudicia, bearing a stark astrological connotation: (a) Libellus Ysagogicus Abditazi, qui dicitur Alchabitus ad Magisterium judicorum astrorum, which is the translation of Kitab al-Madhal ita Sina 'at abkiim al-nujum; (b) Abohali dejudiciis nativitatibus liber unus of Abu Ali al-Hiyat, translated in 1153; (c) De consuetudinis injudiciis astrorum, ascribed to C. Ptolemy. See also in ASTROLOGICAL HISTORY OF MASHA'LLAH, 1971, p. 145, the introduction of Liber de nativitatibus de Miishii'llah: "Dixit Messeallah quod inter omnes libros astronomiae non invenitur utilior libro nativitatum neque tam bonus in iudiciis. " (italics added) 73 For this conclusion, Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer, Baraita de-Shmu 'el and especially Baraita de-Mazalot, early Hebrew scientific works roughly belonging to the period of transition from antiquity to the Middle Ages, have been examined. For these early Hebrew scientific works, see above, p. 3.

118

PART TWO

al-nujum into Hebrew using different expressions. A survey of the terminology employed by Abraham Bar l;Iiyya in his scientific works allows us to state that he never used the Hebrew word mishpatim and its cognates in any astrological context. He translated the Arabic expression abkizm al-nujum using the calque Hebrew expressions gzerot or gzerot ha-kokhavim. 74 On the other hand, a survey of Ibn Ezra's literary work evidences the following two essential points: first, the Arabic expression abkizm al-nujum was translated by him as mishpetei ha-mazalot, that is, the judgments of the zodiacal signs; second, he employed the word mishpatim in a rich variety of astrological contexts. In view of the fact that the Hebrew word mishpatim invested with clear astrological connotations will not be found in Hebrew literature prior to the twelfth century, we come to the conclusion that Ibn Ezra was the first to introduce this word into the Hebrew language with a clear astrological meaning. It is now worth pausing over the uses of the word mishpatim in Ibn Ezra's literary production. These uses may be epitomized in the three following patterns: (a) At least two of his astrological treatises were given titles bearing the word mishpatim. The first is Seier Mishpetei ha- 'Olam (Book of World Judgments), which is an alternative title given in some manuscripts to Ibn Ezra's Seier ha- 'Olam (Book of the World), a treatise concerned with macro-astrology,15 The second is Seier Mishpetei haMazalot (Book of the Judgments of the Zodiacal Signs), an astrological treatise which was probably written in Northern France, Rouen, approximately between 1153 and 1156.76 A third case in point is Seier ha-Mishpatim (Book of the Judgments), an astrological work referred to in the first version of Keli ha-Neboshet (Astrolabe Book),17 74 For uses of the Hebrew astrological expressions gzerot or gzerot ha-kokhavim in Bar ijiyya's work, see EPISTLE TO JUDAH BARZILAI, 1917, pp. 27-33; MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, pp. 112-115. 75 Ibn Ezra's macro-astrological treatise is entitled Sefer Mishpefei ha- 'O/am in several manuscripts. See, for example, 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 86b. The same name Sefer Mishpefei ha- 'O/am is vouched for in Safnat Pa'aneab by Joseph Bonfils, an important fourteenth century supercommentator of Ibn Ezra's biblical exegesis, and one who also knew his scientific work quite well. See SAFNAT PA' ANEAI;I, 1911, I pp. 75,309, vol. II p. 27. But in other passages, Joseph Bonfils named the same book as Sefr ha- 'Olam; see vol. 1,201 vol. II, p. 36. 6 The name Mishpefei ha-Maza/ot features in the very opening sentence of this astrological treatise. See MISHPETEI HA-MAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 14a. 77 In the first version of Keli ha-Ne-boshet (Astrolabe Book), written in 1146 in Lucca or Verona, Ibn Ezra promised to explain some astrological subjects, and referred the reader on five different occasions, using the future tense, to a a planned treatise that he entitled Sefer ha-Mishpafim (Book of the Judgments). See the references to Sefer ha-Mishpatim in NEI;IOSHET A, BNF 1061, fols. 157b, 158b, 159b.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

119

(b) The word mishpatim was employed by Ibn Ezra to designate in a most rigorous fashion three most important aspects of astrology: (i) the art of astrology; (ii) the practitioners of astrology; (iii) the methodology of astrology. To denote the art of astrology in such a clear-cut way as to distinguish it sharply from other related scientific activities such as astronomy, Ibn Ezra employed expressions such as mishpetei hamazalot78 (the judgments of the zodiacal signs) or /;1okhmat mishpetei ha-mazalot79 (the science of the judgments of the zodiacal signs). To better appreciate the distinctness of the expression mishpetei hamazalot, it is worth comparing it with the very close but less distinct expression /;1okhmat ha-mazalot (science of the zodiacal signs). Whereas mishpetei ha-mazalot is a clear-cut expression rendering the art of astrology clearly distinguishable from other scientific activities,80 /;1okhmat ha-mazalot embraces in Ibn Ezra's oeuvre a broad variety of activities which include astrology as well as mathematics, astronomy and calendaric regulation. 81 Astrologers are designated by Ibn Ezra as /;1akhmei mishpetei ha-mazalot82 (scholars in the judgments of the zodiacal signs), ba 'alei ha-mishpatim83 (acquainted with the astrological judgments) or /;1akhmei ha-mishpatim (scholars in the astrological judgments).84 As for the special methodology of astrology, Ibn Ezra used such expressions as derekh ha-mishpatim,85 literally, the path of the [astrological] judgments, or derekh /;1akhmei mishpetei ha-mazalot,86 literally, the path used by the scholars in the judgments of the zodiacal signs. (c) The term ha-mishpatim, that is, the astrological judgments, when used in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus with the definite article but without We have already brought the opinion (see above, p. 70) that in alllikelihood these references pointed to the above-mentioned Seier Mishpefei ha-Mazalot (Book of the Judgments of the Zodiacal Signs). However, the possibility should not be ruled out that Seier ha-Mishpafim was the name of a prospective astrological work which Ibn Ezra never carried out. 78 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 2; MISHPETEI HA-MAZALOT, BNP 1058, fol. 14a, 16a, 25b; SHE'ELOT B, VAT 477, fol. Ib; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, p. 319; 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 65, 66. 79 MISHPETEI HA-MAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 21a. 80 See, inter alia, the use of the expression in YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, p. 319; 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 6b. 81 For the scientific activities referred to by the expression bokhmat ha-mazalot, see above, p. 81. 82 MISHPETEI HA-MAZALOT, BNP 1058, fol. 16a; 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 6b. 83 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOa; TE'AMIMB, 1941, p. 13. 84 SHE'ELOTB, VAT 477, fol. Sa. :~ RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, p. v. For an analysis of this expression, see below, p. 200. 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 6b.

120

PART TWO

any other attribute, collectively denotes the manifestations of astrological influence as well as the various rules by which the astrologer can discern and determine this influence. 87 The same word mishpatim when combined with other qualifying words restricts the scope, to give detailed information about miscellaneous aspects of astrology. Thus, the word mishpatim is used in designating the specialized branches of astrology, as in the case of the expression mishpetei ha- 'olam, that is, judgments of the world, which designates macro-astrology, or in the expression mishpetei ha-moladot, that is, judgments of the nativities, which designates genthlialogy, and mishpetei ha-she 'elot, that is, judgments related to the astrological system of interrogations. 88 An additional case in point is that related to the expression koab ha-mishpatim, that is, the force of the astrological judgments, which denotes the concept of astrological influence wielding a quantifiable power. 89 Also, when the word mishpatim appears accompanied with the name of a planet, it expresses the specific astrological influence exerted by that planet, both in a general way by using such an idiosyncratic expression as mishpetei ha-meshartim (judgments of the planets),90 or by stating the name of specific planets, such as the inferior planets, the moon, or Venus. 91 In addition, when accompanied by the name of a specific astrological agent, the word mishpatim expresses the specific astrological influence exerted by that agent, as in the specific cases of the astrological aspects,92 the ductus planetae or nihug ha-kokhav,93 or the astrological terms. 94 Ibn Ezra also played a role in the semantic mutation of the Latin word iudicia, and his contribution in this regard is highly reminiscent of his part in the change of the Hebrew counterpart mishpatim. As already 87 MISHPETEI HA-MAZALOT, BNF 1058, fa!. 14a, 20b; NEI:IOSHET A, BNF 1061, fa!. 157b; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 38b; TE'AMIM B, 1941. p. 27; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fa!. 86b. 88 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol 15b; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 13; RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, p. xli. 89 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fo1.16a, TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 12, 13. For the notion of quantifiable astrological power, see below note 100. 90 See MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, 23a, ME'OROT, 1933, p. xlii. For the word meshartim as a synonym of planets, see below p. 129. 91 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fa!. 19a (for Mercury and Venus); NEI:IOSHET A9 BNF 1061, fa!. 157b (for the moon); 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fa!. 93a (for Venus). 2 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fa!. 20b, 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 86b; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fa!. 93a; ME'OROT, 1933, pp. xliv, xlvi, xlix. For an explanation of the astrological aspects, see above, p. 28. 93 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fa!. 25b; NEI:IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 48a; MOLAOOT, BNF 1056, fa!. 53a. For an explanation of the nihug hakokhav, see above, p. 34. 94 ME'OROT, 1933, p. xlix; For an explanation of the astrological terms, see below, p. 250.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

121

noted, even though the bulk of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus is composed of Hebrew works, it also includes two Latin scientific treatises: Liber de rationibus tabularum and the Latin Book of the Astrolabe. Little wonder, then, that the Latin word iudicia, invested with astrological meanings, features there in expressing some of the astrological aspects included in these Latin works. We will now show the main characteristics of these uses: (a) The word iudicia is assigned in Ibn Ezra's Latin Book of the Astrolabe a clear astrological meaning, just as the word mishpatim is given in the Hebrew versions of Ibn Ezra's Keli ha-Nel;lOshet. A remarkable example is that the special chapter dealing with the astrological uses of the astrolabe is labeled in the Latin Book of the Astrolabe by the sub-title de his quae ad iudicia pertinent, that is, "regarding the subjects pertaining to astrology", thereby revealing the new astrological meaning given to the old Latin word. 95 (b) The Latin word iudicia serves to rigorously designate the art of astrology, the practitioner of astrology, as well as the methodology of astrology, just as in the case of the uses of the Hebrew word mishpatim. Thus, to denote the art of astrology, on the one hand, the word iudicia may feature alone, but, on the other hand, it may also appear in some combined expressions such as iudicia astronomica or ars iudiciorum. 96 Besides, the astrologers receive various names such as doc to res iudiciorum, magistri iudiciorum or auctores iudiciorum. 97 In addition, the special methodology of astrology is designated as probatio iudiciorum, thereby emphasizing its experimental character as well as the perception that the art is based not so much on rational thinking as on experience. 98 (c) The same word iudicia, when combined with additional qualifying words, details miscellaneous aspects of astrology. Thus, the expression iudicia mundi, the same as its Hebrew exact match mishpetei ha- 'olam (judgments of the world), designates macro-astrology.99 In addition, the expression virtus iudiciorum, like the Hebrew counterpart koab hamishpatim (the force of the astrological judgments), expresses the 95 ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 67v.

96 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 73, 79, 87, 89; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 67V. 97 ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 67 r; LIBERDE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p.

74,94,98,

98 LIBER

DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM,

analysis of it, see below, p. 246. 99 LIBERDE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM,

1947, pp. 83-4. For this passage and an

1947, pp. 93, 95.

122

PART TWO

concept of quantifiable astrological power. 1OO Besides, when accompanied by the name of a specific astrological agent, the word iudicia expresses the specific astrological influence exerted by that agent, as in the specific cases of the expression iudiciis in ductu lune ad gradum cognitum, which refers to the astrological doctrine of ductus planetae when concerned with the moon. IOI In clear contrast to the above-mentioned gevulot 'are$ and mU$aq, both of which are biblical expressions, mishpatim had a clear Arabic etymology. Although we may be reasonably certain that Ibn Ezra was acquainted with Arabic scientific terminology in general and with the Arabic etymological associations of the astrological word mishpatim in particular, in his opinion the ultimate genuine origin of the word will not be found in Arabic but in biblical Hebrew. Ibn Ezra frequently employed Arabic words in his biblical commentaries to find the etymology and morphology of problematic biblical Hebrew words. 102 He did that, however, not only because the two languages are linguistically related but especially because, in his opinion, Arabic is a derivative language largely built upon linguistic patterns of the holy tongue. 103 Therefore, employing Arabic is an efficient way for gaining acquaintance with the lost, original Hebrew language. As in the cases of the previously studied gevulot 'are$ and mU$aq, Ibn Ezra revealed what in his opinion was the genuine etymological source and the true meaning of the word mishpatim in his biblical commentaries. Our author did so in his commentary on Psalms 19:10, a verse in which the word mishpatim appears explicitly under the expression judgments of the Lord, upon which he commented in the following manner: 100 ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 67 r: "Et tertiam uirtutis iudiciorum secundum gradus equales respectibus attribuunt et duas tertias respectibus alterius generis qui sunt secundum latitudinem cuiusque terre." This passage is concerned with two different systems to compute the astrological houses of the horoscope. Interestingly enough, Ibn Ezra couched the same concept in very similar terms in MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 15b, in which the Latin expression virtus iudiciorum was rendered by him in Hebrew as koab be-mishpetei ha-mazalot (power in the judgments of the zodiacal signs). For more details about those two systems to compute the astrological houses of the horoscope and about the notion of quantifiable astrological power, see below, p. 160, note 39. 101 LIBERDERATIONIBusTABULARUM, 1947,p.104. 102 See examples in his commentary on Genesis 1:1, 1:2, 30:11, 30:14; second fragmentary commentary on Genesis 2:6; long commentary on Exodus 2:3, 15:2; commentary on Ecclesiastes 12:12, commentary on Daniel 11:6; commentary on Amos 5:26. 103 Ibn Ezra clearly expressed this idea in his commentary on Genesis 1:1, when commenting on the word shamayim (heavens), and in his Epistle on the Shabbat. See 'IGERETHASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 74.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

123

Mishpetei ha-shem Uudgments of the Lord) - It is known that mishpefei l;1okhmat ha-mazalot (the judgments of the science of the zodiacal signs) are arranged according to the relation of the planets towards the sun; since some mishpafim (astrological judgments) are brought in contradiction to other judgments, it sometimes happens that the astrologers go astray and make mistakes. Therefore it is written that the 'mishpefei ha-shem Uudgments of the Lord) are true and righteous altogether' (Psalms 19:10).104

It follows that Ibn Ezra was interested in drawing a contrast between two kinds of judgments (mishpatim). On the one hand, relying on Psalms 19:10, the judgments of the Lord (mishpetei ha-shem) are considered as true and righteous altogether. On the other, the judgments of the science of the zodiacal signs (mishpetei bokhmat ha-mazalot), namely, the judgments of astrology, are characterized by Ibn Ezra as occasionally self-contradictory and therefore bound to lead the astrologer into serious errors. Notwithstanding the apparent inferiority of the judgments of astrology to the judgments of the Lord,105 Ibn Ezra brought the two kinds of judgments together in the same context because both are intended to fulfill a similar function - to pronounce the verdict of human fate, though with varying degrees of success. Out of these words emerges the reason why Ibn Ezra favored the word mishpatim in the astrological context in his works: the word mishpatim is part of the biblical text and functions in it to express the concept of astrological manifestation and astrological influence in its theological aspect, that is, in its more exact and pure expression. 106 104 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 342 (11.11). It is worth noting that at the very beginning of Liber de rationibus tabularum, the Latin astronomical treatise ascribed to Ibn Ezra, in a chapter dealing with the astrological and astronomical characteristics of the sun, there is a remark which shows, by the use of the word iudicia, some resemblance to the analogous reference in the commentary on Psalms 19:10. LIBER DE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 73-4: "Item omnia iudicia astronomica secundum proportionem aliarum planetarum ad solem fiunt, secundum quod sunt orientales vel occidentales et secundum respectus eoram ad ipsum ... Item omnes doctores iudiciorum in hoc consentiunt quod ipse magister est vite, fidei, regni." (italics added) A similar reference to the astrological influence of the planets as related to the sun may be found in TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 27. 105 As will be shown in due course, this particular view of astrology may also be detected in other parts of Ibn Ezra's work. A case in point is the opening sentence of the introduction to Seier haMoladot, (MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 46b), a passage of which will be studied on p. 145. In the final analysis, this kind of references to astrology, openly declaring its inferiority in comparison to other types of intellectual wisdom, should be attributed to the epistemological inferiority usually ascribed to astrology in antiquity and the Middle Ages when compared with other sciences, such as astronomy or mathematics. In this regard, see below, p. 207. 106 For other examples, illustrating the use of the word mishpafim in an exegetical environment, see the following commentaries: Esther 3:7; Psalms 82,1, 147:19; long

124

PART TWO

Nabash Bariab- The Head oJthe Dragon and its Tail Ibn Ezra took the biblical expression nabash bariab, meaning literally 'the slant serpent', from Job 26: 13 and Isaiah 27: 1. When elucidating this compound expression, he did not find any difficulty with the meaning of the word nabash, that is, serpent. On the other hand, Ibn Ezra solved the much more complicated problem created by the word bariab by invoking Exodus 26:28, a verse in which this word is explicitly expressed. Therefore, in both his commentaries, on Job 26: 13 and Isaiah 27: 1, he wrote that the serpent is called bariab because it "runs from end to end" (Exodus 26:28), thereby hinting at two opposite points. Besides, in both his commentaries, he provided a generic solution to the problem by quite concisely equating the expression nabash bariab with tely, a post-biblical Hebrew word meaning 'dragon'. He drew a clearer picture of this issue in his theological monograph SeJer ha-Shem, in a chapter in which he referred to the meaning of the word shamayim, that is, heavens, as related to the astronomical technical concept of the nodes: For this reason, the sphere is called shamayim (heavens), hinting at the two places that are at rest and upon which the motion of the sphere takes place. They are as two points at the extremity 'running from end to end' (Exodus 25:28) ... And perhaps [the word] shamayim (heavens) hints at the two points of intersection between the two superior spheres, which are called rosh ha-tely u-zenavo, (that is, the head of the dragon and its tail), and the proof for that is: By his wind, the shamayim (heavens) were made fair, his hand slew the nabash bariab (Job 26: 13).107

The word shamayim, that is, heavens, which stands at the center of this passage, will be discussed in the next section. As for our current discussion, four main points are especially relevant: first, the word tely, that is, dragon, which was equated above with nabash bariab, is brought here in the framework of the compound expression rash ha-tely uzenavo, that is, the head of the dragon and its tail; second, the expression rash ha-tely u-zenavo is explicitly explained by our author as "the two points of intersection between the two superior spheres"; third, the same biblical text presented by Ibn Ezra to account for the word bariab, that is Exodus 25:28 ('running from end to end'), is brought here again to justify the assertion that the heavens are "two places that are at rest and upon which the motion of the sphere takes place"; and last but not least, and short commentary on Exodus 28:30. See also the use of the expression mishpefei ha-mazalot in YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, p. 319. 107 HASHEM, 1985, pp. 419-420. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 342 (11.12).

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

125

to Ibn Ezra's mind the equation of rosh ha-tely u-zenavo with the two nodes is totally accounted for by Job 26:13, a verse in which the naQash bariaQ features. Ras wa dhanav al-tinnin in Arabic, rosh ha-teli u-zenavo in Hebrew, and caput draconis et cauda in Latin, are a trio of parallel expressions which recall the cosmological fate of Tiamat, a mythological dragon slain by Marduk, a solar god, thus shaping the heavens with its head and its tail, in the Babylonian epic of creation. lOS Arabic astronomers and astrologers employed this myth to give color to some celestial phenomena: the caput draconis, that is, the head of the dragon, was equated with the point where the moon passes the ecliptic from south to north, and the cauda draconis, that is, the tail of the dragon, was equated with the other point where the moon passes the ecliptic from north to south.109 Ibn Ezra, for his part, read about the cosmological connotations of the word tely in Seier Ye$irah, a book well known to him.llo But regarding the precise astronomical connotations of the word tely and its close connection to the expression naQash bariaQ, Ibn Ezra was in all likelihood indebted to Baraita de-Shmu 'el. In this early cosmologicalastrological Hebrew work, the tely is not only metaphorically made a king, just as in Seier Ye$irah, but is also presented in the framework of the expressions rosh ha-tely or zanav ha-tely with the meaning of the two nodes, and, the same as in the already noted opinion by Ibn Ezra, the tely is made equivalent to naQash bariaQ. III Regarding the astronomical concept of nodes, however, Ibn Ezra did not behave as consistently as in the cases of the words gevul, mU$aq or mishpatim. In fact, in the overwhelming majority of the cases in which the need arose for expressing the astronomical concept of the nodes, Ibn Ezra employed in his Hebrew works the Hebrew expression rosh ha-tely u-zenavo or in short, ha-tely,112 while the Latin analogous expression lOS In this Babylonian myth, Marduk, a solar god afterwards equated with Jupiter, slew the dragon Tiamat, which represented the salt waters of the ocean. After being divided lengthwise stretching across the heavens, the dragon shaped the heavens with its head and its tail, which were at opposite ends of the equator. For this myth, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 40, 97; TESTER, 1987, pp. 120-1. 109 In this regard, see HARTNER, 1968, p. 272. For some applications in Arabic astrology, see, for example, Abu Ma'shar's ABBREVIATION OF THE INTRODUCTION TO ASTROLOGY, 1994, I (21), p. 17; II (10), p. 35, IV (17), p. 57 et passim. For Ibn Ezra's ambiguous approach to this astrological concept, see below, p. 124. 110 SEFER YESIRAH, 1989, xlii, p. 118: "tely in the world is like a king in his throne". III See BARAITA DE-SHMU'EL, 1901, ch. I, pp. 9-12. 112 For some examples, see, for example, 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 71; 'EI;IAD, 1985, p. 403; RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, p. viii; MISHPETEI HAMAzALOT, BNF

126

PART TWO

caput et cauda draconis was employed in the Latin Liber de Rationibus Tabularum.lI3 But at least in one remarkable place in his scientific corpus, Ibn Ezra employed the expression nabash bariab in such a peculiar manner that it revealed his thinking. We will now study this particular case. Ibn Ezra employed the expression nabash bariab in his Hebrew translation of Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi. The striking feature in this regard is not the mere fact that he employed this biblical expression, but the extraordinary way by which Ibn Ezra justified its use in the translation. In a special chapter dealing with the question "what is the node and what is the meaning of this word", Ibn al-Muthanna went on to remind his readers that this astronomical term is called in Persian kazohar, and refers to the two points of intersection between the two superior spheres, the sphere of the zodiac and the sphere of inclination. Next, Ibn al-Muthanna proceeded to provide two alternative Arabic translations for the Persian name, first, al-jawzahar, which Ibn Ezra applied in his translation as it is without any change, and secondly, Ras wa dhanav al-tinnin, which Ibn Ezra conveyed by the Hebrew expression rosh ha-tanin u-zenavo, that is, the head and tail of the dragon. But the sequel renders it crystal clear that this particular calque Hebrew translation from the Arabic was utterly unsatisfactory for him. So, Ibn Ezra abruptly interrupted the thread of the translation, forgot about his role of translator, burst into the text, and added his own gloss: "Abraham said: and this (that is, the head and tail of the dragon) is called in the holy tongue nabash bariab".114 Shamayim - Heavens

Without ignoring its generally accepted definition as the expanse of space surrounding the earth, Ibn Ezra provided the Hebrew word shamayim with a very special meaning. On the one hand, he drew a sharp distinction between the Hebrew word raqi 'a, meaning roughly firmament, and the word shamayim, that is, heavens, a pair having a similar semantic field and appearing in the biblical text in very close 105S, fol 14b; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 60b; NEI:IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 50b; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 82a; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 91a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 12; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 3Sb; long commentary on Exodus 3:15, 26:1. 1I3 LIBERDE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 101, 102, 104, lOS et passim. 114 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 296. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 346 (II. IS).

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

127

connection (as may be observed in the text of Genesis 1: 14, 1: 15, 1: 17 and 1:20). Thus, whereas in Ibn Ezra's opinion the word raqi 'a refers to the most external layer of the sublunary domain, the word shamayim applies to the superlunary abode where the stars and its spheres dwell. I 15 On the other hand, Ibn Ezra was not content with this quite restricted scope for the word shamayim, but took a further step to limit even more the meaning of the word and to provide it with a more precise definition. He revealed his intention in three different places, and in all three, Ibn Ezra began his account by advancing his main thesis, namely, that the word shamayim should be associated with "two celestial places". These three alternative but complementary explanations, however, differ one from the other as to where in the superlunary abode those "two celestial places" should be located. Thus, in his long commentary on Exodus 12:6, Ibn Ezra explained the word shamayim as being "the two poles, which are like two affixed nails, on which rest the supports of the sphere". In all likelihood, our author drew his inspiration for these words from the physical form of the armillary sphere or the spherical astrolabe, an instrument with which he was acquainted, as may be learnt by reading a passage of his calendaric monograph Epistle on the Shabbat. 116 In his theological monograph, Seier ha-Shem, Ibn Ezra held that "perhaps shamayim hints at the two points of intersection between the two superior spheres, which are called rosh ha-tely u-zenavo", that is, the head of the dragon and its tail (see above, p. 124). The most multifaceted definition of the word shamayim was made by Ibn Ezra in his second commentary on the first verse of Genesis. At this special 115 In his two commentaries on Genesis 1:6, Ibn Ezra wrote that "raqi 'a is the air". In addition, in his second commentary on Genesis 1: 14, Ibn Ezra vigorously dissented from "a great Spaniard scholar", a fellow commentator who held that the word raqi 'a should be seen as tantamount to the eight spheres, that is, with the superlunary world. For this commentary, see below, p. 333. Perhaps the most instructive example to learn about the distinction between raqi 'a and shamayim is Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalms 19:2, in which he wrote, on the one hand, that "shamayim is the abode of the stars", and, on the other hand, that "raqi'a is the air". This distinction may be well appreciated in Ibn Ezra's two commentaries on Genesis I: 14, in which he took full advantage of the manner in which this pair of related words appear in this verse, in order to demonstrate that the biblical account of the genesis of the stars does not refer to the physical generation of the superlunary abode but to a visual phenomenon in which the stars and the luminaries were made visible and seen from the sublunary world for the first time. For a brief discussion on these two commentaries see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 240-43. 116 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 67: "And he who is acquainted with the form of the sphere will see it with his own eyes ... Likewise anyone may see the analogy [of the sphere] with the assistance of the circular rim of the astrolabe, both the spherical astrolabe or the planispheric astrolabe." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 342 (11.13).

128

PART TWO

opportunity he gave three alternative explanations: first, he repeated his opinion expressed in Seier ha-Shem, and equated shamayim with ''the two points of intersection between the two superior spheres, which are called rosh ha-tely u-zenavo, (that is, the head of the dragon and its tail)"; second, Ibn Ezra assimilated the supposed binary pattern of shamayim to the astronomically observable fact that "always half of the skies are above the earth and half of them are below the earth"; and third, he reiterated his opinion as presented in his commentary on Exodus 12:6, and equated the word shamayim with the two poles. In all likelihood, to direct these three alternative solutions to the problem of finding "two celestial places", Ibn Ezra derived inspiration from astronomical treatises based on the introduction to the Almagest, or directly from this book, in which Claudius Ptolemy mentioned these three concepts to explain that "the earth is in the middle of the heavens" and that "there are two different primary motions in the heavens".ll7 But we are still left with the main question of this issue: why should the word shamayim in Ibn Ezra's opinion not be understood as embracing the superlunary world all together, but should be limited to and defined precisely as "a pair of celestial places"? However cryptic and puzzling Ibn Ezra was in some of his statements, in this particular issue he provided a transparent and straightforward answer, so that there is no necessity to find a solution in some theological or mythological arguments not referred to by our author. I 18 He presented his solution in a similar manner in all the above-mentioned three places in which he dealt with the meaning of shamayim. In his opinion, the Hebrew word shamayim should be associated with "a pair of celestial places" because this word was formed in the Hebrew language as a dual word, that is, by using a grammatical number category which refers to two items. Therefore, as a direct result of this morphological characteristic, the Hebrew word shamayim ought to refer not to the complete superlunary abode but only to "a pair of celestial places" in it. Subsequently, after taking into serious consideration this basic characteristic of the Hebrew language, Ibn Ezra looked for pairs of celestial places fitting this grammatical-morphological rule. As said above, he found them in several places which were completely congruent with his scientific world view. We arrive then at the conclusion that, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, in some special cases, not only the meaning but also the morphological structure of the biblical vocabulary, such as in the case of shamayim, 117 ALMAGEST, 1984, I (5), pp. 41-2; I (8), pp. 45-7. 118 For a different opinion, see LANGERMAN, 1993, pp.

61-65.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

129

provide the researcher with crucial clues about pivotal aspects of the physical world. Meshartim - Planets

A further remarkable case is that related to the biblical word meshartim, that is, literally, attendants. The scientific meaning of this word, which Ibn Ezra believed to be restoring into use, becomes apparent when a collation is made of the wording of Psalms 103:21 with the commentary Ibn Ezra wrote on this verse: Psalms 103 :21: Bless the Lord, all his hosts, you attendants of his (meshartav), who do his pleasure. Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalms 103 :21: Bless, his hosts - these are the host of the higher heavens, and his attendants (meshartav) are the seven which are in seven spheres. 119

The fact that the attendants (meshartim) mentioned in this biblical commentary are seven, and that they are arrayed in seven spheres, dispels any doubt that Ibn Ezra construed the 'seven meshartim' as being synonymous with the 'seven planets'. Equipped with this meaning, Ibn Ezra profusely employed the word meshartim as a technical word to designate the seven planets in all his literary work, scientific and nonscientific as well. We should not be far from the truth if we state that, statistically, the use of the word meshartim in his oeuvre was the most frequent among all the scientific words reviewed in this part. As in all the cases studied above, the manner in which Ibn Ezra justified the use of the word meshartim is also very helpful in learning about Ibn Ezra's special strategy in the creation of a scientific Hebrew terminology. The case of the word meshartim, however, is also highly instructive in revealing Ibn Ezra's opinion about the strong theological message woven into the astrological function of the planets. The Hebrew word meshartim means literally 'attendants', hence the seven planets considered from an astrological standpoint as the chief agents exerting their influence over the sublunary region - are by no means deemed by Ibn Ezra as self-reliant, but as working as attendants of God to do his pleasure [Psalms 103:21]. The uses and the contexts in which Ibn Ezra employed the word meshartim as a synonym for planets are numerous. To confine the 119

For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 343 (11.14).

130

PART TWO

examples to a single work, the most illustrative are in Sefer Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, in whose framework the word meshartim features dozens of times in various astronomical and astrological contexts. \20. To begin with the astronomical domain, Ibn Ezra mentions galgalei ha-shiv'ah meshartim (fo1. 14a), that is, the spheres of the seven planets; hameshartim ha- 'elionin (fo1. 17b), that is, the upper planets (referring to Saturn, Jupiter and Mars); ha-mesharet ha-shafel (fo1. 23a), that is, the lower planet (referring to Mercury, Venus or the moon); mabberet mesharet 'im mesharet (fo1. 20a), that is, the conjunction of two planets. 121 As for the astrological domain, we find the following expressions: mishpetei ha-meshartim (fo1. 23a),122 that is, the astrological judgments of the planets; kobot ha-meshartim (fols. 17b, 22b), that is, the astrological influence of the planets wielding a quantifiable power;123 batei ha-meshartim (fo1. 24b), that is, the astrological houses of the planets, mesharet ba 'al ha-bayit (fo1. 15a), that is, the planet exercising lordship over some astrological house, mesharet ba 'al ha-sha 'ah (fo1. 15a), that is, the planet exercising lordship over some hour of the day; mabat ha-meshartim (fo1. 25a), that is, the astrological aspects of the planets; 124 ni$o$ ha-meshartim (fo1. 25a), that is, the rays of the planets;125 toledet ha-meshartim (fo1. 19b, 21a), that is, the natural constitution of the planets. 126 Toledet - Nature Toledet is another idiosyncratic scientific term noticeable in Ibn Ezra's entire oeuvre. Toledet (in the singular) was derived from the biblical word toledot (in the plural), which appears for the first time in Genesis 2:4. Commenting on this verse, and within the specific context of the biblical narrative of the creation, Ibn Ezra construed the word toledot as carrying the basic meaning of 'birth' or 'generation'.l27 This sense, 120 All the following bibliographical references point to MISHPETEI IiAMAzALOT,

BNF 1058.

121 For the concept of the conjunctions of the seven planets, see below, p. 313. 122 See above, p. 119.

123 For the notion of quantifiable astrological power, see above, note 100. 124 For the concept of maba/im, that is, astrological aspects, see above, p. 28. 125 For this astrological concept, see Abu Mashar's ABBREVIATION OF THE INTRODUCTION TO ASTROLOGY, 1994, pp. 39 (11:31), 53 (IV:4). 126 For an explanation of this particular concept, see below, pp. 208,255. 127 A similar account is given in both commentaries Ibn Ezra wrote on Genesis 2:4, when referring straightforwardly to the word toledot, which appears in this verse. Note, however, that in Genesis 5:1, 6:9,10:1,10:32,11:1,11:27 etpassim, the word

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

131

which is very similar to that attached to the Latin word natura,128 was transferred to the scientific term to ledet, which in Ibn Ezra's work conveys the general notion of 'nature'. Two explicit definitions of the word to ledet, within two quite different contexts, were provided by Ibn Ezra in his first commentary on Genesis 1: 11 and in the exegetical excursus which he included in the long commentary of Exodus 23:25. The first is particularly remarkable because, besides referring to the biblical account of the third day of Genesis, Ibn Ezra directly addressed the word toledot in Genesis 2:4. On this particular occasion, Ibn Ezra plainly defined the Hebrew word toledet as the "power (koal)) placed in the earth and in the water to bring forth at God's command".129 The same notion of power was employed in the other definition, but covering the more restricted scope of the bodily configuration of man. On this second occasion, Ibn Ezra defined toledet as "the power (koal)) preserving the body which man receives from the heavens". 130 Ibn Ezra profusely employed the word to ledet, or toledot, in his complete work, not only in his scientific corpus but especially in his biblical commentaries. The very conspicuousness of this word in Ibn Ezra's oeuvre, however, is in sharp contrast with the complete absence of the stock Hebrew word tev' a, a cognate word borrowed from the Arabic tiva 'a. The Hebrew word tev'a (which is normatively used in toledot may be readily understood as conveying the notion of chronological account. 128 The Latin word natura was employed in Liber de rationibus tabularum, that is, the Latin version of Sefer Ta 'amei haLu.bot (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables) ascribed to Abraham Ibn Ezra. Even though the analysis of those uses exceeds the limits of this section, it is worth noting that in some cases they are closely related to the uses of the Hebrew word toledet by Ibn Ezra. In this re~ard, see below, notes 151, 163. 9 First commentary on Genesis 1:11. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 343 (ILlS). A similar idea may be found in the second (fragmentary) commentary on Genesis 1:11. In this commentary, however, Ibn Ezra omitted any direct reference to the word toledet. 130 For this definition, see below, p. 136. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 344 (II.l6.2). This power, however, was not seen by Ibn Ezra as static or unchanging. Quite the opposite, in his opinion the power of toledet may be weakened or strengthened. Thus, in the same long commentary on Exodus 23:25, precisely in the sequel to the above-mentioned definition, Ibn Ezra asserted that "there is a curse that decreases the power of toledet", and then he emphasized "that all illnesses come from the food that enters the body". On the other hand, a few lines ahead in the same commentary, when referring to the fact that an arrangement of the planets may cause a person to be barren, Ibn Ezra asserted that "if this person truly cleaves to God, the revered God will strengthen the power of toledet of his kidneys and see to it that his sperm functions properly, so that he will be able to have children". The same idea is couched in very similar terms in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 6:3.

132

PART TWO

modem Hebrew) was employed by Ibn Ezra's contemporaries, such as Abraham Bar l;Iiyya,13I Maimonides, \32 Judah Ibn Tibbon 133 and Samuel Ibn Tibbon l34 to express the same concept of nature in their Hebrew scientific treatises and translation. The strong impression is thus conveyed that Ibn Ezra consciously shunned the standard word lev' a and deliberately superseded it with the biblical word toledet. Besides the two above-mentioned explicit definitions of the word toledet, a cursory analysis of its numerous occurrences in Ibn Ezra's work brings us to the conclusion that he construed toledet as a synonym for nature and natural phenomena. A closer and detailed scrutiny of these uses, however, yields the conclusion that Ibn Ezra invested this word with a very wide range of related meanings. Starting from the basic notion of 'nature', the word shades into the concept of 'natural configuration', and then it is further expanded into the notion of 'natural power'. We will now deal with these cases separately. (a) As for its basic meaning of nature, Ibn Ezra employed the word toledet to designate natural science, the scientists engaged in this field, and their special methodology, just as in the above-mentioned case of the Hebrew word mishpatim and its Latin counterpart iudicia (see above, pp. 119, 121). Thus, natural science is called by Ibn Ezra in multiple places bokhmat ha-toledet or bokhmat ha-toladot, that is, wisdom of nature; 135 those engaged in this field are labeled bakhmei ha-toledet or ba 'alei ha-toledet, that is, scholars or specialists of nature; 136 the natural scientists are described as knowledgeable about sod ha-toladot, that is, the secrets of nature.137 Their methodology is typified as based on re 'ayiot bokhmat ha-toledet, that is, on evidence stemming from natural science,138 or characterized as dvar ha-toledet, that is, relying on natural phenomena,139 or identified as used kefi ha-toladot,140 that is, according 131 SURATHA'ARES, 1546,pp. 123, 136, 139. \32

Yesodei ha-Torah IV, 2; De'ot 1,2; RO$eab we-shmirat nefesh VI, 11.

133 See Judah Ibn Tibbon's translation of Bahya Ibn Paquda's /fovot haLevavot VI,

5,6.

134 See Samuel Ibn Tibbon's translation of Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed, I, 53) 71,72; II, 4, 7, 17, 19 et passim. I 5 SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 62b; MISPAR, 1895, p. 45; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, pp. 318, 320, 328, 331; commentary on Psalms 19:7, 148:8; long commentary on Exodus 9:1, 23:25, 31:3, short commentary on Exodus 23:20; 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 9a. 136 Commentary on Daniel 1:12, 2:2; commentary on Genesis 41:8; long commentary on Exodus 18:13, 25:40; 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 68; commentary on Daniel 1: 12, 1: 15; commentary on Psalms 46:3, 139:3. 137 Long commentary on Exodus 7:11, commentary on Daniel 10:21. 138 Commentary on Psalms 19:7,95:5,148:8; long commentary on Exodus 8:18. 139 SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 62b; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 34b. 140 SHE'ELOT B, BNF 1058, fol. 8a, long commentary on Exodus 20:2.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

133

to [the laws of] nature. In addition, phenomena that are in harmony with the laws of nature are described by Ibn Ezra as proceeding derekh hatoledet, that is, along the path of nature,141 which in his opinion was wisely created by divine blueprint. 142 On the other hand, phenomena incompatible with the laws of nature, as for example miracles, are characterized as being hefekh ha-toledet,143 that is, contra natura, or QU$ ha-toledet, that is, outside nature. l44 (b) Toledet is used to envisage the natural constitution of the sub lunar world in general,145 or to describe the natural environment which provokes the fury of the elements on earth.146 But toledet frequently refers to the natural configuration of particular sublunary objects. In this regard, Ibn Ezra labeled the four basic sublunary elements - fire, air, water and earth - as 'arb 'a toladot,147 that is, the four natures, or ascribed toledet separately to them,148 or employed the word toledet to describe their natural behavior, as in the case of fire, which always moves away from the earth's center. 149 Toledet was employed to describe the natural properties of light and sound,150 of diverse periods of cyclical time,151 of metals,152 of plants such as rice and millet,153 of 141 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 40b; long commentary on Exodus 4:3; 12:2; commentary on Psalms 23:4, 24:1, 139:3; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 32; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 60b 142 Commentary on Psalms 25:4. 143 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 2; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 37a; long commentary on Exodus 9:23, 9:24; 23:26. commentary on Psalms 97:5. YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, p. 327. 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOa. 144 RESHIT l;IOKHMAH, 1939, p. xlviii; short commentary on Exodus 20:2; long commentary on Exodus 7:11. For an interesting vision of the science of medicine as based on empirical experience but whose achievements are hefekh ha-toledet, that is, incompatible with the laws of nature, see below, p. 201. 145 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 35b; long commentary on Exodus 6:3, 23:26; commentary on Deuteronomy 5:25; commentary on Isaiah 47:13. 146 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 46b. For a detailed explanation of this concept, see below, p. 130. 147 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 42; long commentary on Exodus 33:21; RESHIT l;IOKHMAH, 1939, p. vii; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 52a 148 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 35a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 7; HASHEM, 1985, p. 402; long commentary on Exodus 9:23; short commentary on Exodus 9:23, 9:24; commentary on Psalms 104,5; commentary on Isaiah 26:19, 28:24; RESHIT l;IOKHMAH, 1939, pp. vii, xli; OLAM B, VAT 477, fo1. 86b; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 48a~ SHE'ELOTB, BNF 1058, fo1. lb. 14 Long commentary on Exodus 9:23. ISO TE'AMIMA, BNF 1056, fo1. 35b, commentary on Psalms 29:4. lSI TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 35b, 38a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 21. REsHITl;IoKHMAH, 1939, p. viii. OLAM B, VAT 477, fo1. 91a; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 48a. Interestingly enough, in Liber de rationibus tabu/arum mention is made of a natural month (mens naturalis: LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 98), and of a natural year (annus natural is: LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 99).

134

PART TWO

aphrodisiacs such as the mandrake,154 and of animals. 155 The word toledet was employed by Ibn Ezra to describe the natural properties of the members of the human body,156 to convey the Galenic notion of 'temperament', that is, of the human body as composed of four basic body humours (blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile), 157 as well as to characterize natural instinctive or unconscious human behavior. 158 On the other hand, Ibn Ezra ascribed toledet to the superlunary realm in general,159 as well as to the Aristotelian fifth element in particular, which was labeled by him as toledet /;Jam ish it, 160 that is, fifth nature. In a similar vein, Ibn Ezra profusely ascribed toledet to the natural properties of celestial bodies such as stars,161 zodiacal constellations,162 or planets. 163 152 Short commentary on Exodus 25:3 (gold). 153 Long commentary on Daniel 1:15. 154 Commentary on Genesis 30:14. Ibn Ezra, however, relying on the cold toledet

of mandrake, in this commentary casts doubts on its aphrodisiac powers. 155 Commentary on Job 5:7 (birds); commentary on Genesis 32:15; 156 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!' 48a; long commentary on Exodus 8:18 (heart), 20:2; 23:25 (womb, kidney), commentary on Psalms 139: 17 (eye, ear, heart), 16:7 (kidney); commentary on Isaiah 3:9. 157 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!' 47a; long commentary on Exodus 23:25; commentary on Psalms 22:16, 78:39,102,5; commentary on Isaiah 38:17; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, p. 331. See also long commentary on Exodus 23:26, in which Ibn Ezra employs the peculiar expressions leba toladit, that is, natural humor, or toledet ha-Ieba, that is, the natural configuration of the humors. For an explanation of the concept of healthiness as tantamount to the notion of maintaining balance in the natural setting ofthe body (toledet gufo), see below, p. 182. 158 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fo!' 16b; long commentary on Exodus 31:6; commentary on Psalms 101:4, 103:14, 145:17; commentary on Job 5:5; 5:7; long commentary on Daniel 1:4; commentary on Isaiah 49:15; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, pp. 329, 330; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 35b, 42a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 23; RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, p. xli. 159 Commentary on Psalms 19:7, 135:7. YESODMoR'AH, 1985, p. 318. 160 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!. 35a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 3. 161 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fo!' 16b, 20b; short commentary on Exodus 23:20; HASHEM, 1985, p. 402; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 35a, 38b; SHE'ELOT B, BNF 1058, fo!' 2a. 162 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fo!. 15b; commentary on Psalms 104:19. HASHEM, 1985, p. 400; RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, p. vii; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 35a' OLAMB, VAT 477, fo!. 87b. 163 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fo!' 16b (Mars), 19a, 21a, 21b-22a (Jupiter); long commentary on Exodus 20:13 (Venus); RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, p. viii; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 35b. MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!' 47b; ME'OROT, 1933, p. xliv; MIVI;IARIM B, BNF 1058, fo!' 9b. For the expression toledet ha-meshartim, see below, p. 255. As for the moon, in both versions of Sefer ha-Te'amim, (see TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, 35a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 22-3) Ibn Ezra, openly referring to the Tetrabiblos of Claudius Ptolemy (c£ TETRABIBLOS, 1980, pp. 35, 45 et passim), made mention of its cold and humid nature as well as the effect of its phases. Interestingly enough, we find in Liber de rationibus tabularum a very similar

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

135

(c) As mentioned above, Ibn Ezra explicitly defined toledet twice as tantamount to a power (koab). Little wonder then that both words were combined by him in the word group koab ha-toledet, that is, the power of nature, an expression which was especially employed to describe the natural self-preserving make-up of the human body.l64 Thus, in this particular framework, Ibn Ezra assigned koab ha-toledet to the vegetative or appetitive soul, which is a component of the tripartite soul. 165 On the other hand, the concept of "power in nature" (koab batoledet) was conceived by Ibn Ezra as residing in inanimate objects, such as stones, and endowing them with quasi-magical powers. A case in point is the akhlamah (amethyst), a stone which induces or reveals dreams. 166 In addition, Ibn Ezra asserted in his long commentary on Exodus 28:9 that a special power (koab) resides in the toledet of every stone, as in the case of the lodestone which has the power of attracting iron, or of other kinds of stone which are provided with the power of stopping bleeding, being repelled by vinegar, emitting sounds, or forming a triangle when they are broken. 167 In a similar vein, Ibn Ezra ascribed toledet to various components of the horoscope which exert a specific astrological influence on the new-born. Horoscopic parameters assigned with toledet by Ibn Ezra are the ascendant,168 the astrological houses,169 the astrological aspects,170 the ninths,171 the head of the dragon and his tail playing some role in the horoscope,172 or the celestial places where the stars are placed. 173 In addition, in his astrological reference to the natural properties of the moon. See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 97: "Primurn ergo de natura eius, quam astronomici asserunt humidam et frigidam, dicemus, et Phtolomeus dicit in Iibro 4 capitulorurn quod ab adunatione solis et lune eius natura est calida et humida usque distiterit a sole per quadrantem integrum, et ab eo quadrante usque ad oppositum calida et sicca; ab opposito vero usque ad quadratum a sole frigida et sicca; a quadrato usque ad adunationem frigida et humida." 164 Commentary on Psalms 16:7,78:31,139:15,139:17. MISHPETEI HAMAzALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 21a; RESHIT UOKHMAH, 1939, p. I; commentary on Psalms 29:4, 38:11, 73:4; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol.62b. See also long commentary on Exodus 26:1, in which Ibn Ezra referred to the matkonet toledet ha-mekabel, that is, the "pattern of nature which one receives [from above]". 165 Commentary on Psalms 73:26. On the tripartite soul, see below, p. 174. 166 Short commentary on Exodus 28:30, long commentary on Exodus 28:9. 167 Long commentary on Exodus 28:9; short commentary on Exodus 7:11. 168 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 38; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 48a. 169 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 39a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 21; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 63a, 65b. 170 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 15; OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 91b. 171 TE'AMIMA, BNF 1056, fol. 37b. 172 REsHIT UOKHMAH, 1939, p. Iii. 173 OLAMB, VAT 477, fol. 89b; MOLADOT,BNF 1056, fol. 55a.

PART TWO

136

encyclopedia, Ibn Ezra assigned toledet to stars, not only when grasped as astronomical celestial objects but when construed as chief protagonists of the horoscope, as in the case of planets which play the role of the ruler of some astrological house,174 or function as the ruler of a certain hour of the day,175 or the planets which play some specific role in the horoscope,176 or the zodiacal constellations. 177 Let us summarize the ideas brought in this section by presenting some excerpts from the exegetical excursus which Ibn Ezra introduced in his long commentary of Exodus 23:25. In this remarkable commentary we find Ibn Ezra's view about the scope of scientific branches such as natural science, medicine and astrology, his singular opinion about how the decrees of the stars may be circumvented, as well as a definition of the term toledet, with several examples showing the diverse connotations with which Ibn Ezra admirably endowed the word

toledet: Abraham the author said: There are some great scholars who are very learned in the two laws (that is, the written Torah and the oral Torah) but have not busied themselves with bokhmat ha-toledet (that is, natural science) ... We know from the teaching of bokhmat ha-toledet (that is, natural science) that any person whose toledet (that is, temperament) is overcome by red bile will be angry, for this is the toledet (that is, the natural property) of fire and red bile is like fire ... When the soul is strong then the power which preserves the body grows in might, and this [power] is known as toledet (that is, nature) ... For there is a curse that weakens the koab ha-toledet (that is, the power of nature), as in 'Thou shalt eat, but not be satisfied' (Micah 6:14). Observe that all illnesses come from the food that enters the body... If the horoscope of a woman determines that she will not be able to carry her children to their term, then it will be the toledet (that is, the natural property) of her womb to abort the children in it. The same is true if the horoscope determines that the woman will be barren and will not have children. Consider the case of a person who cleaves to God and was born under a horoscope which determined that he will have such a toledet (that is, physical make-up) that is unable to beget children. Then, if he truly cleaves to God, the revered God will strengthen the koab ha-toledet (that is, the natural power) of this man's kidneys and see to it that his sperm functions properly so that he will be able to have children ... For I (that is, God) will overcome toledet (that is, nature). But 174 SHE'ELOT B, BNF 1058, fol. Ib; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 48a, 56a; SHE'ELOT A, 1056, fol. 63a; SHE'ELOT B, BNF 1058, fol. 4a. 175 SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 65b; SHE'ELOT B, BNF 1058, fol. 4a. 176 TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 11,36; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 19a, 21a; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 82a; SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 63a. 177 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 13; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 15b; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 86b. BNF

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

137

this is not a victory over the configuration of the stars, for they were not created to do good or ill to the lower world. On the contrary, they always go and do the service of God. 178

/feshev ha- 'afudah - The Zodiac of the Astrolabe

As said above (see p. 108), the movable part of the front of the astrolabe, that is, the rete, was a stereographic projection of the ecliptic, the sun's annual path in the sky, and of a number of the brighter fixed stars. As was customary in such a type of technical literature, the first part in all the versions of Ibn Ezra's Book on the Astrolabe was devoted to a detailed description of the various parts of the instrument, and in this framework the rete too was included and described. This is Ibn Ezra's description of the rete in his third version of Sefer Keli ha-NelIoshet: The rete: it is also called shabaka (that is, net in Arabic) and it has a circle which is divided into two unequal parts. The smaller part [of the circle] is reserved for the northern zodiacal constellations, which are Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo and Virgo; while the bigger part includes the southern zodiacal constellations, which are Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius and Pisces. The mentioned circle is named beshev 'afudat galgal ha-mazalot (that is, literally, the girdle of the dress of the zodiacal sphere), and outside the beshev ha- 'afudah (the girdle of the dress) are the southern known stars ... while inside the beshev ha- 'afudah (the girdle of the dress) are the northern stars. 179

Where does the Hebrew name lIeshev 'afudat galgal ha-mazalot, which designates in this passage the ecliptical component of the astrolabe's rete, come from? Ibn Ezra took this name from Exodus 28:8, in which it speaks of the girdle of the ceremonial dress of Aaron, the brother of Moses and head of the Jewish priesthood. 18o A reading of his biblical commentaries on this verse renders clear that Ibn Ezra believed that the ceremonial dress of the high priest included some celestial graphical representation, and that to understand it is so complex that it requires a 178 Long commentary on Exodus 23:25. To better appreciate Ibn Ezra's special linguistic expressions and ideas, the reader is referred to the complete Hebrew text and its corresponding English translation. See below, p. 343 (11.16). For an analysis of the main ideas of Ibn Ezra's exegetical excursus in the long commentary on Exodus 23:25, especially his reference to the science of the soul, natural science, medicine and astrology, see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 173-194. 179 NEaOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 59a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 346 (11.17). 180 The exact name appearing in Exodus 28:8 is beshev'afudato.

138

PART TWO

thorough acquaintance with geometry and astrology. On the other hand, Ibn Ezra's cryptic language renders it extremely difficult to comprehend the exact meaning of his words. In his long commentary on this verse, Ibn Ezra suggested that "there is a very deep secret behind the ceremonial dress (' efod) of the high priest". He enigmatically explained the name beshev ha- 'efod as being the "the middle of the plane", and brought to a close his obscure statement by remarking that "only one who has studied works on geometry (sefer ha-midot) and the secret of astrology (sod mel'ekhet ha-shamayim)181 can understand the secret behind the ceremonial dress ('efod)". Similar expressions may be found in the parallel short commentary on Exodus 28:8 and in Yesod Mor'ah. 182 Ibn Ezra's fourteenth century super-commentators, for their part, perceived his cryptic words, not least his reference to the two wreathen chains and to the band of the ceremonial dress of the high priest, as pointing to a graphical representation of the celestial equator and the ecliptic, and even as a reference to the astrolabe. 183 Be that as it may, I)eshev ha- 'afudah was employed numerous times in Ibn Ezra's scientific work as a sheer astronomical scientific name. A noteworthy example is the third version of Sefer Keli ha-Neboshet, in which beshev ha- 'afudah appears numerous times as a technical name referring to the uses in which the zodiac in the rete of the astrolabe plays a central role. Such is the case, for example, regarding the procedure in finding the ascendant, how many degrees every zodiacal sign will ascend in a different part of the earth, the exact age of the astrolabe, the ascendant and the time at night, the longitude and latitude of a fixed star, 181 The expression melekhet ha-shamayim, meaning literally 'heavenly art', was taken from Jeremiah 44:19, and is Ibn Ezra's alternative biblical name designating astrology and its practical aspects. More precisely, the expression implies that astrology is an 'art' (melakha), and therefore it indicates the practical aspects of astrology. On the other hand, one of those practical aspects is construed by Ibn Ezra as something close to 'star worship'. In this regard, see especially Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 33:21: "Hence the stars cannot benefit or harm. Thus they cannot help one who bows down to melekhet hashamayim (heavenly art), for what was decreed for him in accordance with the arrangements of the stars at the time of his birth shall befall him." See also commentary on Psalms 19:2, 19,5; commentary on Ecclesiastes 7: 13; long commentary on Exodus 31 :3. 182 Whereas in the long commentary on Exodus 28:8, Ibn Ezra said that the beshev ha- 'efod is ''the middle of the plane, hence six names were inscribed on the stone which was on the other shoulder; now these things can only be grasped by the mind", in his short commentary on Exodus 28:8, he wrote that the beshev is ''the straight line, and six names are in the north whose division can only be grasped by the mind, and the same applies to the south". See also YESOD MOR' AH, 1985, p. 336. 183 See $AFNAT PA'ANEAI;I, 1911, I, pp. 286-7 and SHLOMO FRANCO, Ms COLOMBIA, fol. 19-20, in which an explicit reference to the astrolabe is made.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

139

the location of an upper planet, such as Saturn, Jupiter and Mars, the equation of the astrological houses of the horoscope, or in performing the astrological procedure of nihugim or ducere gradus, etc. 184 The expression beshev ha- 'afudah, or beshev 'afudat hagalgal, meaning literally the 'girdle of the dress of the sphere', was frequently used by Ibn Ezra in his astrological encyclopedia, written in Provence in 1148. In all those places, however, beshev 'afudat hagalgal does not mean the above-mentioned component of the astrolabe, but conveys the astronomical meaning of zodiac, or, put more precisely, the belt around the heavens extending 9° on either side of the ecliptic, in which the orbits of the sun, the moon and of the planets also lie. Thus, beshev 'afudat hagalgal appears frequently in Reshit Qokhmah,185 in the first version of Sefer ha-Te'amim,186 in the first version of Sefer haMoladot,187 in the first version of Sefer ha-She 'elot l88 and in the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam. 189 But a scrutiny of Ibn Ezra's entire scientific corpus strongly suggests that beshev ha- 'afudah as an astronomical name is a linguistic phenomenon restricted to the period of his sojourn in Provence in 1148. Let us recall that the third version of Sefer Keli ha-Neboshet is the first scientific work written by Ibn Ezra in France, at the same time or just before he began the composition of his astrological encyclopedia. In contrast with the third version of Sefer Keli ha-Neboshet, a different picture is formed from the other two versions of the astrolabe book, written earlier in northern Italy. In the first version, and not least in the second version of Sefer Keli ha-Neboshet, Ibn Ezra made use, for the same purpose, of the more abbreviated expression 'afudat ha-galgal, that is, the girdle of the sphere. l90 The same holds true for Seier Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, composed in Rouen a few years after Ibn Ezra completed his astrological encyclopedia. In this astrological treatise the expression beshev ha- 'afudah is completely non-existent. 191 184 For these procedures, see NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fols. 61a, 63a, 64b, 65a, 66a. For the procedure designed to calculate the exact age of the astrolabe, see below, p. 223. For the astrological procedure of nihugim or ducere gradus, see above, p. 34. 185 RESHITijOKHMAH,1939,pp. viii, xxxvii, xviii, xxxix,liv,lxxv. 186 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 34b, 39b, 43a. 187 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 48b, 50b, 56b. 188 SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fols. 65a, 66b, 69a. 189 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 82a, 82b, 190 See NEI;IOSHET A, BNF 1061, fols. 164a. NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fols. 37a, 40a, 40b!43b,47a, 47b,48a, 48b. 19 Only one set of manuscripts presents the expression 'afudat ha-galgal at the opening paragraph of the treatise. See Abraham Ibn Ezra, Seier Mishpe(ei ha-

140

PART TWO

Conclusion

The use of all the above-mentioned terms, and particularly the manner in which their use was justified, leads us now to the conclusion that in all these cases Ibn Ezra was motivated by the same prevailing ideological incentive: he preferred biblical words over other common and more normative expressions, because in his opinion the available biblical vocabulary occasionally holds some original and authentic scientific terms that represent some of the most central concepts of nature and reality. Ibn Ezra considered these scientific words to be a relic of the original Hebrew language - "the most comprehensive and the first among the languages of all the nations". To restore into use those forgotten words was the quintessence of his terminological strategy. Peculiar as Ibn Ezra's linguistic strategy may seem, it is worth emphasizing that Ibn Ezra's approach should be considered as part and parcel of the intellectual climate and historical circumstances from which he sprang up. His penchant for avoiding Arabic scientific vocabulary may be read as his idiosyncratic response to the challenge posed by the forced separation from Arabic culture and language that he and his generation were forced to meet. Ibn Ezra's attitude, however, was by no means commonplace. Other intellectuals contemporaneous with him reacted to the same historical situation in a rather different manner. Let us see two cases in point. Judah Ibn Tibbon' slife (ca. 112O-ca. 1190) epitomizes the fate of Ibn Ezra's generation, which was expelled from al-Andalus and was thus compulsorily detached from the Arabic language. He was born in Granada, approximately in 1120, but was forced to abandon al-Andalus as a consequence of the invasion of the Almohades in 1145. He immigrated to Lunel, in southern France, where he practiced medicine and won his fame as a translator. Indeed, Judah Ibn Tibbon was known to following generations as the "father of translators" for his pioneering task in the field of translation from Arabic into Hebrew. And yet, notwithstanding the fact that he bequeathed to succeeding generations a remarkable list of Hebrew translations,192 he did not conceal his Mazalot, MS Cambridge 1517, fol. 39b. Otherwise, this expression too is completely non-existent in Sefer Mishpetei ha-Mazalot. 192 He rendered from Arabic into Hebrew the following translations: Bebyah Ibn Paquda's /fovot haLevavot; Judah ha-Levy's Kuzari; Saadiah's Emunot we-De'ot; and Jonah Ibn Janah's grammar and lexicon, Sefer ha-Rikmah and Sefer haShorashim; Solomon Ibn Gabirol's Tikkun Middot ha-Nefesh and, perhaps, his Miv/.1ar ha-Peninnim.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

141

admiration and yearning for the superseded Arabic language. In the introduction which he composed for his translation from Arabic into Hebrew of Seier lfovot ha-Levavot by Bebyah Ibn Paquda, he wrote that Jews in Islamic lands were compelled, due to their interest in secular studies, to cultivate Arabic instead of Hebrew, because of its richness and lucidity. As far as his present task of translator from Arabic into Hebrew was concerned, he did not feel any embarrassment in highlighting the inferiority of the holy tongue as a vehicle for expressing scientific ideas. Accordingly, he wrote that Arabic "is in fact a most comprehensive language, full of resources concerning every subject. It satisfies the necessities of all those who speak or write this language. Its expressions are exact and clear, and it reaches to the heart of all questions, much more than is possible in Hebrew. For what has remained of the Hebrew language is not more than the biblical books, and these are not sufficient for our needs ... " .193 Maimonides (1135-1204) presents an additional significant model. His historical fate was similar to Ibn Ezra's and Judah Ibn Tibbon's in that, like them, he was compelled to abandon al-Andalus in the forties of the twelfth century (1148) as result of the invasion of the Almohades. Maimonides, however, took up residence in Fustat, the Old City of Cairo. Therefore, unlike Ibn Ezra and Judah Ibn Tibbon, he remained under the sway of the Arabic language. Maimonides was not only an outstanding author of rabbinical literature, but also a philosopher of imposing stature, an eminent physician and a competent writer on astronomical subjects. An overall scrutiny of his writings, however, reveals an outstanding dichotomous linguistic stance. By and large, Hebrew was the language of his religious and halakhic work, whereas Arabic was the linguistic vehicle he adopted in writing his works dealing with the 'external sciences'. In this regard, after allowance is made for an extraordinary case,194 the Maimonidean linguistic model may be seen as embodying the tendency to preserve as long as possible the attachment to the Arabic language in accordance with what had long been customary. In fact, Maimonides' stance may be seen as fitting into the pattern of those intellectuals of Jewish descent who, in the previous 193 Introduction to his Hebrew translation of Behyah Ibn Paquda's Sefer lJovot haLevavot, Zifroni edition, Jerusalem, 1969, p. 2. 194 A hybrid and problematic case is Maimonides' Laws Concerning the Sanctification of the New Month. On the one hand, this work is part and parcel of Mishneh Torah, a clearly halakhic work; on the other hand, it may be seen as a treatise devoted to the study of central aspects of the Jewish calendar and including substantial astronomical contents.

142

PART TWO

generations, fell under the general attraction of Arabic culture, and whose scientific output was not basically different from the work composed by Muslims or members of other religious communities. By contrast, Ibn Ezra's terminological strategy of restoring into use forgotten biblical words should not be interpreted as the bizarre intellectual product of a maverick. Quite the opposite; Ibn Ezra's stance should be construed as a highly representative expression of the propensity of his generation to revert to what they deemed as the ultimate sources of Judaism. As will be seen in due course (see below, p. 305), twelfth-century Andalusian Jewish intellectuals who were involved in the development of science did not regard themselves as Jewish pioneers in the pursuit of science. Far from that, they quite vehemently believed that in bygone times Jews were already intensively engaged in scientific activities, which brought them into close contact with the scientific achievements of the Gentile nations, and especially with Greek science. They regarded the 'external sciences' with which they were currently involved as highly congruent with those Jewish sources, and therefore saw in their scientific work an attempt to restore those sources to pristine splendor. However immersed Ibn Ezra was in the cultural climate of his times, it is necessary to concede that his strategy in the creation of Hebrew scientific terminology was significantly original and idiosyncratic. In vain will we seek in the Hebrew work of other contemporaneous Andalusian Jewish intellectuals the approach, couched in explicit and conscious terms, that the biblical text preserves the scientific terminology. In vain will we find in their work the practical implementation of this approach, as embodied in the factual creation of a Hebrew scientific terminology based on the biblical text to the extent that Ibn Ezra followed this rule in practice. Did Ibn Ezra succeed in implanting his idiosyncratic scientific vocabulary? Although Ibn Ezra's scientific and non-scientific work continued to circulate broadly after his death, the following generations were quite reluctant to adopt Ibn Ezra's peculiar scientific terminology. Bizarre words such as gevul, mU$aq, nal)ash barial), meshartim, toledet and l)eshev ha- 'afudah were short-lived and were generally ignored by subsequent Hebrew writers and translators. 195 Perhaps the chief reason for the oblivion into which those words sank was that they were neither 195 Judah Alharizi, however, adopted in his translation of Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed Ibn Ezra's mU$aq as a translation into Hebrew for the concept of center. See SARFATI, 1968, p. 185.

THE CREATION OF A SCIENTIFIC VOCABULARY

143

cognates of Arabic words nor loan translations of Arabic words. Therefore, these bizarre words failed to reflect the basic fact that the new scientific Hebrew vocabulary was, in actuality, an offspring of the Arabic scientific lexicon. On the other hand, very different was the fortune of the word mishpatim, which took root and inserted itself firmly in medieval Hebrew language, as did the word iudicia in the Latin languages. Moreover, an examination of the application of this word in the years following Ibn Ezra's death reveals that its insertion in the Hebrew language was done in many cases with the explicit reminder that the word mishpatim originated in Ibn Ezra's literary work. 196

196 For a review of several such cases, dated after Ibn Ezra's death and showing the insertion of both the Hebrew word mishpatim and the word iudicia with a patent astrological meaning, see SELA, 1999 (ii), pp. 186-192.

PART THREE

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

Introduction

Did Abraham Ibn Ezra develop any original ideas in his astrological treatises? Did he content himself with the mere presentation or repetition of standard astrological information that he borrowed from his sources - or did he forge ahead? These questions, which are relevant regarding any medieval writer dealing with astrology, are of utmost interest in the case of Ibn Ezra, as they stand in sharp relief against one chief characteristic detectable in his scientific corpus. Ibn Ezra did not, on the whole, entertain any pretension of innovation. His scientific books, not least his astrological treatises, were designed as textbooks or reference books, aimed chiefly at conveying to the layman conventional scientific knowledge. This accounts for the fact that the bulk of the included material related to astronomy, astrology and mathematics was brought by him as paraphrases or quotations from his sources. Nonetheless, our main purpose in this and the next part will be to maintain that a number of creative ideas are discernible in specific parts ofIbn Ezra's astrological work. More precisely, we will try to show that those idiosyncratic ideas were not so much related to the development of original astrological doctrines or new technical data as to a singular integration of stock astrological and astronomical ideas with religious, philosophical and cultural concepts. We therefore propose to focus attention on a specific part of Ibn Ezra's work, that is, the introductions to some of his astrological treatises. However narrow its range, we believe that this methodology will be extremely effective in revealing some of Ibn Ezra's genuine and distinctive ideas, for, in clear contrast with the technical, didactic and non-innovative character of his scientific treatises, Ibn Ezra introduced his treatises with distinctively idiosyncratic preambles. These introductions, written in a brilliant, incisive and extremely concise Hebrew, were not only meant to arouse the reader's interest in the book, but also presented his singular and personal view about the astrological subject to be dealt with, and even beyond that.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

145

Our detailed textual analysis will focus on the introduction Ibn Ezra wrote to the first version of Sefer ha-Moladot (Book of Nativities). 1 We have divided the text of the introduction into several passages, which in our opinion reflect its main components and basic ideas. These passages will be unfolded step by step, and the main sections of this chapter will be devoted to a discussion and analysis of these main parts.

The Double Rhythm of Human History Abraham the Spaniard said: Every scholar learning the science of the judgments of the zodiacal signs (.(Jokhmat mi$hpefei ha-mazalot)2 who is not acquainted with the superior science (bokhmah 'elyionah) will sometimes be found to have made erroneous astrological judgments. For he has not been wary of matters that call for caution. And I will make an important statement: universal [astrological] judgments override particular [astrological] judgments, with respect to which I now present eight rules: 3 (italics added)

Sefer ha-Moladot is not a general astrological textbook but a specialized treatise concerned with genethlialogical astrology (nativities), a specific branch of astrology whose main purpose is to determine the life history of individuals based upon a detailed study of the horoscope drawn at the exact moment of their birth. Accordingly, before Ibn Ezra pursued the main issues of his book, the opening lines were devoted to an admonition in which the prospective student of genethlialogical astrology is warned that he is liable to commit serious errors if he does not take certain precautions. Three main questions arise from the opening passage of the introduction: What did Ibn Ezra mean by the 'science ofthe judgments ofthe zodiacal signs', on the one hand, and by the 'superior science', on the other hand? Why did Ibn Ezra assert that learning the 'superior science' is so necessary to reduce the risk of producing erroneous astrological judgments, and why did he not put the same emphasis on learning the 'science of the judgments of the zodiacal signs'? What is the significance of the statement: "universal judgments override particular judgments"? 1 See

above, p. 62. This expession appears in many of the manuscripts holding Ibn Ezra's Seier haMoladot. See, for example, Mss. Cambridge. Classmark ADD 1186, for. 52v; Mss. Cambridge. Classmark ADD 1517, fol. 22v. In MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 46b, however, appears the shorter expression bokhmat ha-mazalot. 3 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 347 (III. I. I). 2

146

PART THREE

We have already dealt with the 'science of the judgments of the zodiacal signs' (bokhmat mi$hpefei ha-mazalot) when studying Ibn Ezra's Hebrew terminological strategy. Let us recall that Ibn Ezra quite frequently employed this term to denote the art of astrology in such a strict way as to distinguish it sharply from other related scientific activities such as astronomy (see above, p. 119). On the other hand, 'superior science' (bokhmah 'elyionah) is a peculiar and extremely rare term. In fact, a thorough exploration of Ibn Ezra's whole literary work reveals that the term 'superior science' stems from his biblical commentaries, and from there it was transferred to Seier ha-Moladot, in which one finds the only occurrence of the term in Ibn Ezra's whole scientific corpus. Let us, then, tum to Ibn Ezra's biblical exegesis to clarify it. In his long commentary on Daniel 2:2, Ibn Ezra stated that king Nevukhadnezzar, worried about the significance of his strange dream, made a distinction between two groups of scholars. On the one hand, Ibn Ezra mentioned those whom the king accepted as fit to decipher his dream: doctors, scholars in natural sciences, astronomers, astrologers and magicians. On the other hand, Ibn Ezra enumerated those who were not summoned by the king because of their inability to interpret his dream: the sages proficient in geometry, arithmetic, proportions between numerical values, psychology, and, finally, those acquainted with the 'superior science'.4 In his commentary on Ecclesiastes 7:3, Ibn Ezra differentiated between the 'corporeal sciences' and the 'superior sciences', and, in the introduction to the same commentary, he ascribed the merit of coping with good and evil in the world to the 'superior science'. A significant statement may be found in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Ecclesiastes 12: 1, where he asserted that the aim of the 'superior science' is to elucidate "with what intention the world was created and why it was shaped in this specific manner".5 In light of these commentaries, it seems that the 'superior science' was understood by Ibn Ezra to be a comprehensive science intended to grasp the most general, fundamental and profound laws of nature. Such wisdom makes it possible for man to understand the natural world in a broader, general way, one which is wider in scope than the partial knowledge provided by specific branches of science. By contrast, the 4 COMMENTARY ON DANIEL, 1525, 2:2. 5 See COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES 7:3, introduction and 12: 1. See also the long commentary on Exodus 9:15, where Ibn Ezra credited the 'superior science' with a major role in explaining why the Tetragrammaton does not appear in Ecclesiastes.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

147

'science of the judgments of the zodiacal signs' represents a specific branch of science amongst many others, one that affords only partial and restricted knowledge. It follows, therefore, that Ibn Ezra begins his introduction by urging the reader to significantly enlarge the scope of his study and be acquainted with the comprehensive 'superior science', and not to rely solely on the 'science of the judgments of the zodiacal signs', that is, on the specific department of science dealing with astrology. Put simply, only an acquaintance with a comprehensive science can prevent the astrologer from making erroneous astrological judgments. Only thus will the student of astrology be able to transcend the limited bounds of genethlialogical astrology (which is the subject-matter of Sefer ha-Moladot) and apprehend one of the most profound and general laws governing human destiny: "universal judgments override particular judgments". In other words: the macro-astrological judgments concerned with general human affairs have the power to override and annul the micro-astrological judgments which are limited in scope to the individual's life. Actually, behind this general law, Ibn Ezra was presenting his overall vision of history, formulated in a clearly astrological milieu and couched in astrological terms, those with which he was best acquainted. In his opinion, human history is determined by astrological decrees which have a dual character. On the one hand, human history is shaped discretely, affecting the lives of separate human beings in a particular and specific way; on the other hand, the astrological decrees influence humankind collectively, affecting broad classes of people as well as their natural environment. However modem the flavor of this dual pattern of human history,6 Abraham Ibn Ezra was not entirely a trailblazer. He was emulating Claudius Ptolemy, both in adopting this dual pattern of human history and in the way he organized his astrological work. A virtually identical dual stance regarding history and astrology is noticeable in Ptolemy'S Tetrabiblos: Since prognostication by astronomical means is divided into two great and principal parts, and since the first and more universal is that which relates to whole, races, countries and cities, which is called general (6 Ka90Au::oV), and the second and more specific is that which relate~ to individual men, which is called genethlialogical (6 YEvE9AlaAoY1KoV), 6 The 'particular astrological judgments' bear a resemblance, to take only one modem example, to Femand Braudel's invocation of 'histoire evenementielle', while Ibn Ezra's 'universal astrological judgments' are highly reminiscent of Braudel's 'history of groups and groupings'. See BRAUDEL, 1996, I, pp. 20-1.

PART THREE

148

we believe it fitting to treat first of the general division, because such matters are naturally swayed by greater and more powerful causes than are particular events. 7 Just as this dual view of human history informed the inner structure of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, so it pervaded the inner organization of Ibn Ezra's astrological encyclopedia. Tetrabiblos consists of four parts. The first, besides beginning with a general introduction dealing with the main characteristics and boons of astrology, presents the astrological attributes and powers of planets and zodiacal signs. The second part is wholly devoted to universal astrology, while the last two parts deal with genethlialogical astrology (nativities). Ibn Ezra's astrological work on the whole mirrors this structure. In addition to the first group of general reference books, designed to describe, teach and explain the fundamentals of astrology (Reshit /fokhmah, Seier ha- Te 'amim, Mishpetei ha-Mazalot), Ibn Ezra composed two central astrological treatises treating separately both aspects of the dual view of human history: Seier ha- 'Olam (Book of the Wodd), dealing with universal astrology, and Seier ha-Moladot, addressing genethlialogical astrology. An examination of the trustworthiness of this dual vision of human history is the gist of the introduction to Seier ha-Moladot. However, it is in the ways employed to demonstrate the trustworthiness of this dual vision that we should find Ibn Ezra's original and distinctive contribution. So, after stating the main thesis, Ibn Ezra proceeded to introduce in detail eight macro-astrological rules which illustrate and corroborate the main idea presented in the first lines of the introduction: "universal judgments override particular judgments".

Medieval Nationality The first macro-astrological rule, although it includes typically medieval astrological material, provides a vivid account of what may be called somewhat anachronistically 'medieval nationality'. We learn from the following passage that Ibn Ezra regarded national affiliation as a crucial collective trait which has the power to set aside the particular fate of individuals: The first rule states that [the astrologer] should know to which nation the new-born (that is, the subject for whom a horoscope has been cast) belongs. Given the case that the new-born is an Israelite and that the stars' 7TETRABIBLOS,

1980,11, l,pp.117-119.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

149

configuration of his horoscope detenmne that he will become a king, it is not appropriate that [the astrologer] should pronounce the judgment that this Israelite will be crowned king. For it has already been made clear that the great conjunction, that is the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, has decreed that the nation of Israelites should remain in exile. Thus this individual power cannot abrogate the more general force. Hence it is fitting that in this case [the astrologer] should pronounce the following judgment: the new-born will be close to kings, he will mingle with kings and run affairs with them, but he himself will not become a king. 8

Since Seier ha-Moladot is addressed to Jewish students of astrology, little wonder that it is an Israelite who features in the special scenario conceived by Ibn Ezra to present the national affiliation as a macroastrological rule. The Israelite is presented as being subject to the influence of two conflicting astrological agents. The first is actuated by the powerful sway of 'the great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter', the main astrological tool employed by Arabic astrology to analyze history and forecast future collective events (see below, p. 163). As if to emphasize their great impact, the 'great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter' is assigned the enormous power of causing the continuous exile of the Jewish nation. In other words: to illustrate the power of national affiliation to set aside the particular fate of individuals, the 'great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter' is shown by Ibn Ezra as determining the main feature of Jewish history as he himself knew it in his own tirnes. 9 But the 'great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter' is not the sole factor illustrating the force of national affiliation as a macro-astrological rule. Ibn Ezra was intent on offering a particular example illustrating the general pattern which we have called above 'the double rhythm of human history'. Hence, in marked contrast with the 'great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter', he introduced the horoscope of the above-mentioned Israelite. Within this twofold framework, Ibn Ezra took the liberty of 1056, fol. 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 347 (III. 1.2). Ibn Ezra also referred to the astrological influence of the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter on Jewish history in his biblical exegesis, when scrutinizing the events surrounding the departure of the Israelites from Egypt under Moses and when dealing with other episodes related in the Bible. See, for example, the long commentary on Exodus 33:21: "When a conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter occurs and the sign of Aquarius is in an evil configuration of the stars, it results in a calamity befalling Israel, and those acquainted with the science of the zodiacal signs will acknowledge that. Now a configuration of heavens involving a conjunction (of Saturn and Jupiter) decreed that Israel should remain in exile in Egypt for many more years, but God delivered them because they cried out unto the Lord and turned to Him." See also long commentary on Exodus 6:7. 8 MOLADOT, BNF

9

150

PART THREE

placing his Israelite in a seemingly unexpected situation: even though he was obviously not born in the purple, the Israelite has been destined by his personal horoscope to be crowned a king. A tension is thus created between two opposite trends. On the one hand, it is utterly inconceivable that an Israelite should become a king, since all Israelites belong to a nation without territory or selfgovernment, decreed by the 'great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter' to remain permanently in exile. On the other hand, the Jew, like any other individual human being, may be destined to be crowned a king as the result of a special configuration of the stars at the moment of his birth. In this bizarre state of affairs, Ibn Ezra strives to assert that, powerful as the macro-astrological sway of the 'great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter' may appear, the personal astrological influence still continues to playa considerable role in concrete human history. He illustrated the latter idea by again addressing Jewish history and by presenting a sui generis compromise which brings into harmony the two opposite astrological trends: Indeed, the Jew will not be a king himself; however, he will be a courtier, that is, as an attendant of kings the Jew will be close to them, will mingle and manage affairs with them. The figure of the Jewish courtier is not a figment of imagination or literary fancy. By providing this peculiar explanation, Abraham Ibn Ezra, a twelfth-century Jewish Andalusian astrologer, was in all likelihood deriving inspiration from a real historical phenomenon, of which concrete and famous Andalusian examples may be invoked, such as that of l;Iasdai Ibn Shaprut in Cordoba (d. ca.975) and Samuel b. Naghrillah ha-Nagid (d. 1055/6) in Granada. Moreover, it is plausible to maintain that Ibn Ezra's reference to the Jewish courtier in his Seier haMoladot is nothing more than a reflection of his own biography: when residing in Italy, a few years before he wrote Seier ha-Moladot, Ibn Ezra possibly gave astrological services to an important Christian personage of Pisa. In all likelihood, it was to meet a request made by this Pisan magnate that Ibn Ezra wrote Liber de rationibus tabularum, that is, the Latin version of his Seier Ta 'amei ha-Lubot (Book of the Reasons Behind Astronomical Tables). 10

10 We have already brought evidence in proof of Ibn Ezra's stay in the city of Pis a, in which he perfonned macro-astrological calculations and observations (see above, p. 26). Within this context, it is plausible to assume that Ibn Ezra perfonned these macro-astrological observations at the instance of a Christian student, in all likelihood a member of the city's aristocracy or a high-rank ecclesiastical officer concerned with the political future of Pisa.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

151

Saturn and the Jews

While still on the subject of the first rule, in which the national affiliation is considered to be a crucial macro-astrological rule, Ibn Ezra dealt with a further aspect, presenting a second personal horoscope which affected the fate of the same Israelite: Likewise, if in the natal horoscope of an Israelite we find that the planet Saturn is in the ninth horoscopic house, that circumstance will not signity that his religious belief will be wrong, but if the [same] natal horoscope applies to the births of Ishmaelites, that will be the case. I I

To fully understand the meaning of this brief passage, it seems useful to address the following questions. (i) Why did Ibn Ezra stress, among the multiple elements of the horoscope, precisely the ninth horoscopic house? (ii) Why did Ibn Ezra think it fit to create a link between the Israelite and the planet Saturn? (iii) Why did Ibn Ezra construe the statement as a comparison between a Jew and a Muslim, and why did he pay attention to the special bearing that Saturn has on the religious belief of the new-born? We refer now to these questions separately. (i) Ibn Ezra explores in this passage the influence that the planets exert on the religious belief of an Israelite and a Muslim. He therefore concentrates his attention on the ninth house of the horoscope. An acknowledged astrological feature, amply documented in Greek and Arabic sources, is that the ninth horoscopic house fills a crucial role in shaping religious faith. As early as in Tetrabiblos, we find that Claudius Ptolemy named the place of the natal chart which corresponds to the ninth horoscopic house as the "House the God".12 As for Arabic astrological sources, in the epitome Ibn Hibinta wrote of Masha'llah's Fi al-qircmat wa 'l-adycm wa 'I-milal (On Conjunctions and Peoples and Religions), the ninth house is labeled "the house of prophecy", in close connection with the founding of Christian and Muslim religions. 13 AbU Ma'shar, for his part, named the ninth horoscopic house as "the place of faith".14 The same astrological feature was fully acknowledged by Ibn II MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!. 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 347 (III. 1.3).

12 TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III, 10, pp. 272-3. 13 ASTROLOGICAL HISTORY OF MAsHA'LLAH, 1971, pp. 45, 49. ON THE GREAT

CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, II, p. 23: "Dicamusque quando mutant coniunctiones a triplicitate in triplicitate et fuit aliquis planetarum trium superiorum in nono velin tercio ab ascendente eiusem coniunctionis significantis apparitione eorum maxime Saturnus significabit hoc nativitates prophetarum." For Ibn Ezra's and Bar J:Iiyya's endorsement of this doctrine, see 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo!. 81a; MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924,p. 135. 14 See, for example, ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I, pp. 44-5.

152

PART THREE

Ezra. So, for example, in Reshit /fokhmah, he described the ninth horoscopic house as the place which indicates ''the religious belief and the way to worship God", and in the second version of Sefer haTe 'amim he wrote that "the ninth is the astrological house of the religious beliefs" .IS (ii) A customary feature of medieval astrological handbooks was to provide separate descriptions of the planets' general astrological characteristics, and, in that particular framework, the planets were seen as having a special astrological influence over specific nations. Thus, AI-Bin1ni (973-1048), in his Book of Instruction in the Elements of the Art of Astrology, ascribed the Jews to Saturn, the Christians to Jupiter and Islam to Venus. 16 Ibn Ezra, too, presented in Reshit /fokhmah and in the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim lists of planets and their links to nations: Saturn governs the Jews, the Christians are under the influence of the Sun, and Venus governs the Arabs and all those who believe in the Mohammedan religion. 17 The association between the planet Saturn and the Jews is already present in Roman and early Christian literature. Both Tacitus (56-120), probably the greatest Roman historian,18 and St. Augustine (354--430), bishop of Hippo in Roman Africa and the greatest thinker of Christian antiquity,19 acknowledged that a special link connects Saturn to the Jews. The first stages of the reception of this idea within Jewish society are shrouded in mystery. However, the special name given to Saturn in the post-biblical Hebrew language attests to the fact that Jewish society of late antiquity was aware of some association between Saturn and the Jews: Saturn was called Shabtay in the Babylonian Talmud. That is to say, Saturn was designated as the star of Shabbat, the most sacred day of IS

RESHITijOKHMAH, 1939, p. xlii; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 15.

16 ART OF ASTROLOGY, 1934, p. 253 (par. 433-4). 17 See RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, pp. xlii-xlviii. The scope is significantly enlarged

in TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 41a-42b. For this passage, see below, p. 292. Ig Cornelii Taciti Historiarum Libri, Oxford 1967, Historiae Y, 4: "septimo die, otium placuisse ferunt, quia is finem laborum tulerit. .. alii honorem eum Saturno haberi, seu principia religionis tradentibus ldaeis, quos cum Satumo pulsos et conditores gentis accepimus, seu quod de septem sideribus, quis mortales reguntur, altissimo orbe et praecipua potentia stella Saturni feratur, se pleraque caelestium viam suam et cursus septenos per numeros commeare." 19 De Consensu Evangelistarum, S. Augustini, Migne J.-P., ed., Patrologiae Latinae, Tomus 32, Tumhout 1969, lib. I, caput xxi-xxii, col. 1055: "Rogo respondeant: quis est Deus iste, qui omnes Deos Gentium sic persequitur, qui omnia eorum sacra sic prodit, sic exstinguit? ... Aliii dicunt, Saturnus est: credo propter sabbati sanctificationem, quia isti cum diem Saturno tribuerunt ... Sed sive qui Saturnum, sive qui Jovem Deum Judaeorum putant, dicant quando Saturnus prohibere ausus est coli alterum Deum."

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

153

the week for the Jews. 20 Abraham Ibn Ezra was the first Jewish thinker, as far as we know, to be concerned with the astrological elements of the Saturn-Jews myth and to make a significant contribution towards its further development and absorption within medieval Jewish society. Afterwards, Ibn Ezra's super-commentators played a central role in the further transmission of the Saturn-Jews association. 21 The idea of Saturn as the planet of the Jews pervaded the intellectual climate of Muslim22 and Christian23 society during the Middle Ages till the beginning of the Modem Era. 24 The astrological characteristics of the planet Saturn had ominous implications for the Jews. Greek and Arabic astrology considered Saturn the most malignant among the seven planets. Thus, we read in Tetrabiblos by Claudius Ptolemy that "Saturn, when he gains sole dominance, is in general the cause of destruction by cold, and in particular, when the event concerns men, causes long illness, consumptions, withering, disturbances caused by fluids, rheumatisms, and quartan fevers, exile, poverty, imprisonment, mourning, fears, and deaths, especially among those advanced in age".25 Similar statements may be readily found in works by medieval Arabic astrologers. 26 20 See Shabbat, 156 a. 21 Fourteenth-century Jewish thinkers looked for

andfound the presence of Saturn in some of Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries, not least in places where Ibn Ezra never referred explicitly to the malefic planet. They interpreted some of Ibn Ezra's vague and obscure exegetical passages as references allegedly reflecting Ibn Ezra's opinion about the link between Saturn and the Jews and also about the link between astrology and theology. In this regard, see SCHWARTZ, 1996 (ii), p. 218, and pp. 223270. 22 See ART OF ASTROLOGY, 1934, p. 253 (par. 433-4); ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I, pp. 44-5; MEMORIAS DE 'ABo ALLAH, 1980, p. 315. 23 For a late medieval statement pronounced by Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464), cardinal, mathematician, scholar, experimental scientist, and influential philosopher, about the link between planets and the monotheistic religions in general, and of the link between Saturn and the Jews in particular, see CUSANUS, 1456: "Some who treat of religious sects say that these could have been foreseen from the important and rare conjunctions of the planets, especially of Saturn and Jupiter ... they say the sect of the Jews belongs to Saturn, of the Arabs to Venus and of the Christians to Mercury." For other references, see below, note 29. 24 For the impact of the Saturn-Jews myth on iconographic and literary sources from the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Modern Era, see SCHRECKENBERG, 1996, pp. 330-331; ZAFRAN, 1979, pp. 16-27; KLIBANSKY PANOFSKY, 1964. For a new approach that considers the link between Saturn (that is, Shabtay) and the Jews as a possible explanation for Shabtay Tzvi's movement, see IOEL, 1997,pp. 161-184. 25 TETRABIBLOS, 1980, 11,8, pp. 179-180. 26 For Saturn in Arabic astrology, see, AbU Ma'shar's Kitiib al-madbal al-kab!r ila simi 'at abkiim al-nujum. KITt\B AL-MAoI;IAL, 1996, V, p. 311: "Saturni igitur natura est frigida sicca, melancolica, tenebrosa, gravis asperitatis. Et fortassis erit frigida

154

PART THREE

Drawing on these astrological sources, Ibn Ezra described the planet Saturn as possessing the most negative and gloomy attributes. In Reshit IJokhmah he wrote that "its nature is very pernicious; it denotes destruction, ruin, death, affliction, weeping, grief, complaint, and ancient things". In the first version of Sejer ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra went on to assert that Saturn "is cold and dry, and since death is mainly coldness mixed with dryness, Saturn denotes death, sadness and suffering". 27 The natural inference to be made was that the Jews, too, who were considered astrologically connected to and governed by Saturn, ought to be contaminated by the malignant and wicked nature of Saturn. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that this problematic connection between Saturn and the Jews expanded the arsenal of anti-Semitism and served in the hands of hostile elements in society to harass the Jews and to emphasize some particularly negative attributes. That may be attested by evidence close to Ibn Ezra's times, such as in the memoirs of 'Abd 'Allah, the last king of the Zirid dynasty of Granada (1012-1090), who depicted the main traits of the Jews as "avarice, meanness, stinginess, deception and treachery" because their character is molded by the planet Saturn.28 The same feature is also exhibited in literary and iconographic sources from the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Modem Era, in which the Jew, after the model of Cronus, is identified with Saturn and depicted swallowing his own children. 29 (iii) The comparison between a Jew and a Muslim (and in other cases between a Jew, a Muslim and a Christian) enabled Ibn Ezra to convey in a most dramatic fashion the idea that the planets perform a double function regarding the religious faith of human beings. Let us first trace the sources on which Ibn Ezra drew. It is plausible to assume that Ibn Ezra was following in the footsteps of AbU Ma'shar. In a remarkable chapter of his Kitiib al-qiriiniit (De magnis coniunctionibus), Abu Ma'shar stated that differences of faiths may be ascertained by looking humida, fetidi odoris, et ipse est multe comestionis et vere dilectionis." See also ABBREVIATION OF THE INTRODUCTION TO ASTROLOGY, 1994, p. 61: "Saturn is a malefic, and its nature is cold and dry, black bile, dark; it is ill-smelling." 27 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, p. xlii; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 41a. See also MISHPETEIHAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fo1. 21b. 28 See MEMORIAS DE 'ABo ALLAH, 1980, p. 315, in which 'Abd 'Allah, the last Zirid king of Granada overthrown by the Almoravids in 1090, ascribes to the Jews collectively the properties of the planet Saturn: "l.No dicen los judios que son 'saturnianos'? La cosa es indudable, pues, de hecho, l.no hac en fiesta el sabado, que es e1 dia de Saturno, y no esta su caracter del todo acomodado a las cualidades de que es indicio Saturno, 0 sea, avaricia, sordidez, ruindad, engafio y traici6n?" 29 See especially SCHRECKENBERG, 1996, pp. 330-331; ZAFRAN, 1979, pp. 16-27; KLIBANSKY - PANOFSKY, 1964.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

155

at the mixtures of Jupiter (which is an indicator of faith) with another planet predominating over the place of faith (that is, over the ninth horoscopic house). He therefore made the following statement: If it (Jupiter) is mixed with Saturn, it indicates that the faith of the people of that religion is Judaism, which is similar to the essence of Saturn, since the [other] planets apply to it, and it does not apply to any planet among them. Similarly, the people of all other faiths confess Judaism, but it does not confess them [their faiths]. Most of them will do what is similar to this religion or the like. If the mixer with it is Mars, it indicates the worship of fire and the faith of Mazdaism. If the mixer with it is the Sun, it indicates the worship of the planets, idols and the marvellous. If the mixer with it is Venus, it indicates revealed religion, and monotheism, like Islam and the like. If the mixer with it is Mercury, it indicates Christianity and every faith containing antipathy, doubt and trouble. If the mixer with it is the Moon, it indicates doubts, confusion, denying God all attributes, apostasy and distrust in the faith. 30

Although Ibn Ezra was obviously indebted to Abu Ma'shar or other Arabic astrologers for his basic ideas, he was at the same time fairly original in the ways he applied his ideas in the context of a Hebrew astrology. AbU Ma'shar had not performed a comparison between religions, but had brought them separately to show their links to separate planets. Ibn Ezra, by contrast, drew a comparison between a Jew and a Muslim in order to emphasize that Saturn performs a double function as regards the religious faith of human beings. On the one hand, Saturn plays its regular, unfavorable role in the private horoscope of the Muslim and behaves as the most malignant planet. But, on the other hand, Saturn is a star which exerts a special collective influence over nations and religions, and it is regarding this special quality that Saturn is considered as the planet of the Jews. That is to say, while Saturn damages the Muslim as a mere individual, Saturn favors the Jew as a member of a nation or religion. Accordingly, as Saturn is not the planet of the Muslims, the malefic planet behaves towards them in a regularly damaging way, and causes harm to their religious belief. But since Saturn is the planet of the Jews, the malefic planet does not exert on the Jews its typical, adverse influence, and does not molest them in the observance of their religious belief. At this stage, it will be enlightening to enlarge the scope of the discussion and present an additional statement by Ibn Ezra, extant in the Latin translation of the second version of Seier ha-Moladot:

30 ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS,

2000, I, pp. 44-5.

156

PART THREE

If Saturn is in the ninth horoscopic house of a Jew, his religious faith will be strengthened, but if Saturn is in the ninth horoscopic house of a Christian or of a Muslim, their religious faith will be weakened. If the Sun is in the ninth horoscopic house of a Christian, his religious faith will be made stronger, but if the Sun is in the ninth horoscopic house of a Jew or of a Muslim, their religious faith will became weaker. If Mars is in the ninth horoscopic house of a Muslim, his religious faith will be strengthened, but if Mars is in the ninth horoscopic house of a Christian or ofa Jew, their religious faith will be weakened. 3l

An additional significant idea is rendered clear by the Latin passage. However loaded the subject of the link: between astrological influence and the religious faith of the three monotheistic communities, Ibn Ezra's approach may be quite surely regarded as free from any inclination to engage in religious polemics. At most, one may perceive in his statements an apologetic stance taken to account for and justify the embarrassing connection of the Jews with Saturn. This is done, in this particular case, not by elevating the Jew to ahigher exclusive rank vis-avis the planets, but by placing him on the same footing as the members of the other monotheistic religions. The Latin passage renders this idea clear by expanding the discussion onto a much broader canvas, so that the Sun and Mars are presented besides Saturn, and a Muslim together with a Christian feature besides the customary Jew. The members of all three monotheistic religions are gathered by Ibn Ezra in order to note that the religious faith of all of them, without exception, is bound to meet a similar collective fate as decreed by astrology. Each monotheistic religion has been ascribed a special planet which behaves leniently and favors the members of its favorite religious congregation. The same planet, however, bodes ill for the members of the other religions. Ibn Ezra neither tried to blur the uneasy connection between Saturn and the Jews nor intended to cover up the extremely unfavorable attributes of Saturn. Instead, he removed the sting of this embarrassing connection by stressing, on the one hand, that Saturn favors the religious faith of the Jew, and, on the other hand, by making the collective fate of the Jews vis-a-vis the planets similar to that of the other monotheistic religions. It emerges that Saturn exerts a twofold astrological influence, which is a felicitous illustration of the dual view of human history in 3l LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484, p. e l r : "Saturnus in nona nativitate iudei suam fidem constant ostendit, christianus nativitate suam fidem neglucturus iudicat, sarracenus quod nascentis idem fidem infirmat. Sol in nona fidem christiani nascentis condolidat, iudei et sarraceni fide nascentis negligenda ostendit. Mars in nona sarraceni fidem servanda docet, christiani vero et iudei nascentis fidem in irritum ducit."

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

157

general, and of the way in which national affiliation sets aside the fate of individuals in particular. On the one hand, Saturn, as classical and medieval astrology bears witness, plays a regularly unfavorable role in the private horoscope of human beings in general. On the other hand, Saturn is a star which exerts a special collective influence over the Jews as a nation or religion. Saturn is considered the planet of the Jews, and therefore the malefic planet does not exert on them its typical adverse influence. In the above quoted passage Ibn Ezra did not fmd a more telling manner to illustrate the twofold astrological influence of Saturn than to bring it to bear on the religious belief of a Jew and a Muslim. Since Saturn has no "national" connection to the Muslims, the malefic planet behaves towards them in a regularly damaging way, and causes harm to their religious belief. But, as Saturn is the planet of the Jews, the malefic planet exerts on their religious belief a favorable influence. 32 However anachronistic the term 'nationality' may seem when unqualifiedly applied in connection with a twelfth-century text, it should also be conceded that Ibn Ezra employed this concept in a very special manner befitting his own times. By means of the Hebrew word 'am, meaning 'nation', he construed national affiliation as a macroastrological rule, and ascribed to it quite definite properties. Focusing on these properties, we thus have a golden opportunity to ascertain how a twelfth-century intellectual such as Ibn Ezra understood the concept of 'nationality'. Three characteristics stand out: (a) First of all, the concept of 'nationality' which emerges from Ibn Ezra's ideas is chiefly synonymous with the notion of 'religion'. Ibn Ezra does not merely refer to a Jew vis-it-vis a Muslim but deals directly with the 'religious belief' of a Jew vis-it-vis the 'religious belief' of a Muslim.

32 However, it should be also conceded that Ibn Ezra was ready to provide in his astrological treatises only a very limited explanation for the problematic link between Saturn and the Jews. Indeed, if the planet Saturn is the star of the Jews, then it is only natural to admit that it has the power of collectively shaping the religious belief of the Jewish nation. But how precisely could it come about that the same planet which harms the members of all the other religions favors the members of its favorite religious congregation? Interestingly enough, the missing link of the astrological mechanism may be found in Ibn Ezra's biblical exegesis. According to Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 20:13, the favorable influence of Saturn on the Jews is achieved on condition that the Jews keep the fourth commandment ("Remember the Shabbat day, to keep it holy") and abstain from occupying themselves with everyday matters on Saturday, the day in which Saturn is specially harmful. For a complete account of the treatment Ibn Ezra gave to the Saturn-Jews connection, see SELA, 1999 (i),pp. 123-146.

158

PART THREE

(b) Ibn Ezra endows the concept of 'nationality' with a cosmic and supra-terrestrial dimension. As seen by medieval astrologers such as Abraham Ibn Ezra, individuals belonging to separate 'nations' are in one way or another collectively recognized by definite planets. How is it possible that Saturn should recognize a Jew, so that if this planet is in the Jew's ninth horoscopic house, that will not signify that the Jew's religious belief will be wrong? (c) The macro-astrological rule presented by Ibn Ezra draws man out of his isolated privacy and includes him in large sociological units characterized by three main traits. First, the concept of 'nationality' is qualified by the notion of territoriality, or, conversely, by the lack of territory. This is the case of the Jews, about whom it is stated that "the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter has decreed that they should remain in exile". Second, individual members of a nation have a common history which is determined by macro-astrological agents. This is also the case of the nation of Israelites, about which Ibn Ezra stated that a powerful conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter [presumably in the sign of Aquarius] decreed that it should remain in exile. Third, individuals belonging to separate 'nations' are also defined by a definite and limited socioeconomic domain in which they are allowed to fit. Again, this characteristic is typified by the Jew who, even if destined to be crowned a king by his personal horoscope, will at best "mingle with kings and run affairs with them, but he himself will not become a king". Geographical Environment

Next, while developing the same main thesis, Ibn Ezra shifted to a new aspect, the geographical environment: The second rule is related to the [seven] climates (ha-gevulim). For if the subject for whom a horoscope has been cast is born in Ethiopia and in the ascendant33 of his horoscope we find Venus together with the Moon, we will not maintain that the outcome of his horoscope will be similar to [the outcome of similar horoscopes belonging to] people who reside in other climates. Accordingly, only in the case of people dwelling in the same climate will we consider a similar outcome for [horoscopes based on] similar configurations of the stars. Thus, if the ruler of the horoscope is the planet Mercury, we will not maintain [unconditionally] that the new33 The ascendant applies to the degree of zodiac arising on the eastern horizon. This degree was originally called the horoscopos in Greek astr.oiogy, from which the modem word 'horoscope' was derived.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

159

born (that is, the subject for whom a horoscope has been cast) will be wise in any sort of sciences, since it is impossible that a wise person will be born in Ethiopia, because of the increased heat of the sun there. Therefore, even though the temperament (toledet)34 of this Ethiopian will not be as balanced as should be, we will judge that he will be cleverer and wiser than his fellow-countrymen (that is, than the people dwelling in his own climate).35

It is not the complete geographical setting so much as the seven climates with which the second macro-astrological rule is concerned. The 'seven climates', as seen in antiquity and in the Middle Ages, were seven bands of earth extended in latitude between two parallels, where the same phenomena were to be found, such as a prevailing weather or a certain length of longest daylight, and which demarcated and divided the oekumene, that is, the limited inhabited area of the earth. In a departure from the regular use, Ibn Ezra did not employ in this passage, nor in his entire work, the common Hebrew word 'aqlim to name the seven climates. As already seen (see above, p. 107), he employed the Hebrew term gevul, which he extracted from Psalms 74:17. Much in the same manner as in the case of national affiliation, the second macroastrological rule postulates that dwelling in a specific geographical climate has a more powerful bearing on human destiny than the outcome of the individual horoscope. In other words, Ibn Ezra's main intent in this macro-astrological rule was to state that human beings having similar horoscopes will meet a different fate because they live in different climates. Ibn Ezra borrowed the general idea as well as the particular example related to the Ethiopian from a special chapter in Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos devoted to the study of the "characteristics of the inhabitants of the general climes".36 Ibn Ezra set forth the main details of this doctrine in several of his astrological treatises. In Reshit lJokhmah, Ibn Ezra referred to a special 34 For the meaning of the term toledet, see below, note 87. 35 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!. 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 348 (III.1.4). 36 See TETRABIBLOS, 1980, pp. 120-123: "the people who live under the more southern parallels ... since they have the sun over their heads and they are burned by it. .. are sanguine of nature, and in habits are for the most part savage because their homes are continually oppressed by heat; we call them by the general name Ethiopians". Similar arguments and examples may also be detected in the "Book of Mdshd'alldh on Eclipses of the Moon and the Conjunctions of the Planets, and the Tequfot of Years", whose translation into Hebrew has been ascribed to Abraham Ibn Ezra. See BOOK ON ECLIPSES, BNF 1045, fo!' 181a; BOOK ON ECLIPSES, 1964, p. 209: "Miishii'IHih said: Know the influence of the stars depends on the climates. You will find some stars are good for one climate, but bad for another. Therefore, you must know about the climates. For example, the climate of the Ethiopians is hot in every season ... ".

160

PART THREE

astrological relationship correlating each of the seven climates, on the one hand, with each of the twelve zodiacal signs and with each of the seven planets, on the other. In his Seier ha-Te'amim, which is a commentary on Reshit IJokhmah, this special astrological relationship was couched in terms of a sympathetic link connecting the physical characteristics of a particular zodiacal constellation to the weather and to other natural characteristics of a certain climate. So, for example, Aries, a zodiacal sign generating mild temperature, neither cold nor hot, was associated by Ibn Ezra with the third climate, which is characterized by a mild and pleasant weather.37 As for the seven planets, the link between them and the seven climates was based on the direct correlation between the position of the planet's sphere in the current cosmological model and the geographical position of the climate to which the corresponding planet was attached. Consequently, Saturn was associated with the first climate, Jupiter with the second, Mars with the third, and so on. 38 Besides, like other medieval Islamic astrologers and astronomers, in Ibn Ezra's opinion the seven climates have a critical bearing on the calculation of the twelve houses of the horoscope and affect the quality and accuracy which astrologers attribute to the astrological judgment based on it. 39

37 RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, chapter II, p. 9; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, foJ. 36a. For the other associations between the remaining climates and zodiacal signs, see RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, II, pp. 9,14,17,20,22,24,26,28,30,33; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, foJ. 38a. 38 See RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, IV, pp. 42, 44, 46-50; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 41b-42a. 39 Ibn Ezra noted that astrologers commonly choose between two different systems to compute the horoscopic houses. The first system, named by him as the 'plain division' (l;Jiluq ha-mishor), does not take into account the climate where the newborn was delivered, and simply divides the zodiac into twelve equal horoscopic houses measured in equinoctial degrees. The astrological judgments pronounced which employ this simplistic method have only "one third of one astrological power". Conversely, the second system, named 'the rising times division' (l;Jiluq hami$adim), is based on the computation of the rising times, that is, how many degrees of the equator cross the horizon of a given locality simultaneously with the consecutive zodiacal signs. As the size of the twelve horoscopic houses change in direct correlation to the latitude or horizon of the new-born's location, this system gives full expression to the geographical location, or the climate, of the new-born. This second method is much more difficult to compute (even though the use of the astrolabe renders it relatively easier to do) but rewards the astrologer with much more accurate astrological precision: according to Ibn Ezra, the astrological judgments which employ this method have "two thirds of one astrological power" (shne shlishiot ha-koal;J). For an account of these two systems see especially: MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fols. 15b-16a; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, foJ. 44b. See also KENNEDY, 1996, pp. 535-578.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

161

The substance of the astrological doctrine of the seven climates and its impact on Ibn Ezra's thought should also be assessed by studying how he wove it into his biblical commentaries. Relying on his account of world creation, we learn that Ibn Ezra regarded the 'seven climates' not so much as a contrived geographical parameter, artificially created by scientists to map the oekumene, but as a real and natural property created by God and embedded in the earth as an integral part of the divine plan of world creation.4O Employing the geographical characteristics of the seven climates and their distribution over the earth's surface, Ibn Ezra took the liberty of repeatedly emphasizing that Jerusalem is located at the very center of oekumene. 41 Moreover, being located just in the middle of the seven climates, Jerusalem is regarded as the most suitable location for the Temple, since an extremely strong divine presence may be felt therein. 42 Likewise, Ibn Ezra postulated that Jerusalem, because of its particular location at the middle of the seven climates, is a place bound to receive a particularly favorable astrological influence. Accordingly, he stated in his commentary on Ecclesiastes 1: 12 that Jerusalem is a "city located in a place specially apt to receive wisdom. For it is known that the inhabited part of the earth is divided into seven parts and it is impossible that upright people, capable of receiving wisdom, should be found anywhere except in the middle three sections. For in the first and last pairs of sections, excessive heat or cold prevents [the formation of] a sound human temperament. And it is known that the latitude of Jerusalem is 33°, that is, the middle of oekumene." It turns out that the inhabitants of Jerusalem, however handicapped with an unfavorable individual horoscope, are fit to receive wisdom 40 See Ibn Ezra's commentaries on Psalms 89:12 and Job 38:5; see also SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 248-9. 'II See, for example, Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Daniel 8:9: "The latitude of Jerusalem is 33°, therefore it is located at the center of the inhabited part of the earth, for the oekumene stretches from the equator as far as 66 degrees, and the circle of zodiacal signs has a declination of 24 degrees in relation to the equatorial circle." See also Ibn Ezra's commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:12 and long commentary on Exodus 8:18. Accordingly, the latitude and longitude of Jerusalem, taken separately as well as together, ilre regarded as a starting point from which all other geographical locations should be measured. For the latitude of Jerusalem, see Ibn Ezra's second commentary on Genesis 11 :2, long commentary on Daniel 8:9, commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:12 and long commentary on Exodus 8:18; for the longitude of Jerusalem, see long commentary on Exodus 1:12; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, chap. I, p. 317; 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lla; 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 71; for both parameters together see Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalms 50:2; 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 8b, 9a; first commentary on Genesis 33:10. 42 See Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalms 50:2, 87:5, 102:14; first commentary on Genesis 33:20; long commentary on Exodus 8:18; 15:17; 26:1.

162

PART THREE

because they dwell in the middle of the seven climates. But the Ethiopians, however favored by the planet Mercury in their personal horoscope,43 will not be wise in any sort of sciences, because they are born in one of the most extreme climates. However antithetical, both statements are based on the second macro-astrological rule formulated in the introduction of Sefer ha-Moladot, namely, that human beings having similar horoscopes will nonetheless meet a different fate because they dwell in different climates. And yet, even though Ibn Ezra stated that "universal judgments override particular judgments", it turns out that to his mind the individual horoscope is an astrological criterion still to be reckoned with and given serious consideration by the astrologer. We have already noticed this approach of compromise in the first macroastrological rule, wherein the Israelite, prefigured by his personal horoscope to be crowned a king, will not be a king but will be close to kings. A similar feature is now noticeable in the second macroastrological rule, in which Ibn Ezra proposes to reconcile the overriding power of the climates with the particular outcome of the Ethiopian's particular horoscope. Accordingly, even though it is not likely that Ethiopians will be wise in any field of science, if some Ethiopian has been fortunate enough to be born when the benign Mercury has a special favorable bearing on his personal horoscope, it turns out that he will be cleverer and wiser than his fellow-countrymen. Astrological Analysis of History

Next, Ibn Ezra turns back to the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter: The third rule stems from the great conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] which holds its sway over cities. Thus, if the power of the conjunction determines that a certain city will be plunged into war, all the inhabitants born in that city which is destined to go to war will be killed, even though their personal horoscopes do not indicate that they will be put to the sword. The fourth rule refers to the power of the revolution of the worldyear (tequfat ha- 'olam). The revolution of the world-year has the power to bring illness to a certain city, even though the personal horoscopes of its inhabitants do not determine that any of them will develop a disease that

43 For the favorable influence of Mercury in predictions where the quality of the soul and mind is involved, see TETRABIBLOS, 1980, pp. 358-361. Ibn Ezra, for his part, stated that Mercury's influence in the personal horoscope will cause the newborn to be endowed with a 'superior soul' (TE'AMIM B, 1941: 30-31) or with a 'wise soul' (MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 49a). See below, p. 175.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

163

year. This is because the astrological judgments affecting particulars have no power to annul universal astrologicaljudgments. 44

The 'great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter' already appeared in the first macro-astrological rule (see above, p. 149), as an illustrative tool demonstrating the macro-astrological power of national affiliation. Now the same astrological agent appears once again at the very core of the third macro-astrological rule, not as an illustration, but as a major macro-astrological rule in its own right. Thereafter, in the framework of the following fourth macro-astrological rule, Ibn Ezra discussed the revolution of the world-year (tequfat ha- 'olam), that is, a special horoscope to forecast world affairs cast annually when the sun (in a geocentric system) enters the head of the zodiacal sign of Aries. We may quite safely assume, as will be presently shown, that Ibn Ezra was led by two main considerations when he coupled the great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter with the revolution of the world-year and chose this particular order of presentation. First, because amongst the diverse and multiple astrological agents introduced by him in his introduction, these two were the most representative and most typical techniques employed in macro-astrology. Second, because both astrological agents are mentioned in Ibn Ezra's astrological sources in the same order and in close connection one to the other. The specific area chosen by Ibn Ezra to illustrate the powerful effect of both astrological agents is a medieval city, convulsed by war and disease. In both cases the outcome is tragic and fatal: the personal horoscope of the city's inhabitants is completely overridden by the general dominance of both macro-astrological agents, bringing collective death as a final outcome, either in war or by disease. In view of the devastating and powerful influence attributed to both macroastrological agents, little wonder that after presenting them, Ibn Ezra did not refrain from repeating for a second time the main thesis of his introduction: "The astrological judgments working on particulars have no power to annul universal astrological judgments." The conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter and the revolution of the world-year were considered by Arabic medieval astrology, following Sassanian sources, as chief astrological tools in analyzing history and forecasting future collective events. 45 Ibn Ezra himself devoted close 44 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo!. 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 348 (III. 1.5). 45 See KENNEDY, 1958, pp. 246-262; KENNEDY-VAN DER WAERDEN, 1963, pp. 315-327; PINGREE, 1963, pp. 229-246; ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I, pp.

582-587.

164

PART THREE

attention to those astrological agents in both versions of his Seier ha'Olam (Book of the World), a treatise dealing with diverse aspects of universal astrology. Both versions of Seier ha- 'Olam describe at the outset, closely following Abu Ma'shar's Kitab al-qiranat, the periodic conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, which are divided into three main types: (a) Saturn and Jupiter meet in conjunction approximately every 20 years, and these recurrent conjunctions are named 'lesser conjunctions' (ha-mabberet ha-qetanah); (b) taking in account the mean rate of progress of the planets, the next conjunction will take place in the 9th sign from that in which it last occurred, and thus the situations of consecutive conjunctions proceed in the same triplicity46 for 12 times, after which Saturn and Jupiter meet in another triplicity. The change from triplicity to triplicity occurs in approximately 240 years and is known as the 'middle conjunction' (ha-mabberet ha-tikhonah); (c) as there are four triplicities, it takes Saturn and Jupiter about 960 years to get back to their conjunction in Aries, and this is called the 'great conjunction' (ha-mabberet ha-gedolah).47 Next and in close connection to the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, even though in the distinct framework of the fourth macroastrological rule, Ibn Ezra presents the revolution of the world-year, cast annually when the sun enters the head of the zodiacal sign of Aries. Why should a special world horoscope be cast when the sun, traveling in its annual path, enters precisely the head of the zodiacal sign of Aries? According to Hindu cosmological theories, as Ibn Ezra relates in some of his scientific works, the world undergoes long and recurrent cycles of creation and destruction; creation, however, occurs when all the planets meet in conjunction in the head of Aries. 48 Thus, in a similar manner to 46 Triplicity, or trigon, is a term used to denote a group of three zodiacal signs linked with the same element amongst the four basic elements known in antiquity and in the Middle Ages, and thus regarded as having an identical nature. The first triplicity, formed by Aries, Leo and Sagittarius, is of a fiery nature. The second triplicity, composed of Taurus, Virgo and Capricorn, is earthy. The third triplicity is formed by Gemini, Libra and Aquarius, and is airy in nature. The fourth triplicity of Cancer, Scorpius and Pisces is watery. 47 See 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 80b-81a; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fols. 86b-87a. Cf. DE MAGNIS CONJUNCTIONIBUS, 1489, fol. 3ar • Ibn Ezra also gave a very similar and minute account of the threefold classification of these conjunctions in such an unexpected place as in his long commentary on Exodus 33:21. For a comparative analysis, see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 85-97. 48 See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 88: "et medius cursus omnium planetarum secundum indos sumptus est a diebus Acintdeindi, qui dixerunt Dominum omnes planetas in capite Arietis creasse et dies mundi dixerunt esse 1000000000000 et adhuc 77000000000 et adhuc 215000000 et adhuc 450000, et secundum eos omnis planeta revertitur ad punctum sui loci sine fraccionis

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

165

the personal horoscope (cast at the date of the yearly recurrence of the day of human birth and thought to have a special bearing on particular human affairs), a world horoscope deemed to have a special bearing on collective affairs was cast when the sun arrived at the vernal-equinox, that is, at the annual anniversary of the world's birth or creation. Ibn Ezra referred fairly frequently to vernal-equinox horoscopes in his astrological works, where we read about their influence over the life and longevity of kings, over wars, and over sudden and unexpected rising prices. 49 Even though the revolution of the world-year seems to have a distinct and different nature from the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, both are mentioned in medieval astrological sources in close connection one to the other. Two main Arabic sources dealing with this subject should be mentioned here, since they were well known to Ibn Ezra. The first is Masha'llah (762-ca.815), a Jewish convert to Islam from Ba~ra, who introduced Sassanian astrology to the Arabs and to the 'Abbasid court. 50 Most interesting for the historian of astrology and astronomy is Masha'llah's Fi al-qiranat wa 'I-adyan wa 'I-milal (On Conjunctions and Peoples and Religions) surviving in an epitome by Ibn Hibintii, a work which attempted to fit world history into the framework of a series of conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter and revolutions of the world-year, and explained the vicissitudes of world history by the special characteristics of these two astrological agents. 51 The second is AbU superadictione." A very similar statement may be located in Ibn Ezra's Hebrew translation of Ibn al-Muthannti's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of alKhwarizmi. See HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 152, 299: "God created the seven planets, their apogees and nodes in the first part of Aries and commanded them to go around, giving each of them a fixed motion until they come together again where God created them. When they return there, God will do what he wishes with them. (The Hindus) said that the time from the beginning of their motion until their return to the point where they began is 1,577,916,450,000 days." For a similar account in Arabic sources, see KENNEDYVANDER WAERDEN, 1963, pp. 316-317. This is an idea briefly acknowledged by Ibn Ezra in his introduction to Mishpetei haMazalot (MISHPETEI HAMAzALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 14a.), where he wrote that "the true vernal-equinox occurs when the sun enters the head of Aries, and then the world is renewed". (italics added) 49 See, for example, SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 67a; MISHPETEI HAMAzALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 21a; RESHITijOKHMAH, 1939,pp.lxii-Ixiii; 'OLAMA, BNF 1056, fol. 84a. 50 PINGREE, 1974, pp. 159-162. 51 For the aims of this treatise, see the introduction of Ibn Hibinta's epitome in ASTROLOGICAL HISTORY OF MASHA'LLAH, 1971, p. 39: "We mention in this part what Masha'llah arranged concerning the times of conjunctions occurring between Saturn and Jupiter, and their transfer among the triplicities .... and what Hermes and others mentioned concerning judgments based on conjunctions and world vernal-equinox horoscopes ... ".

166

PART THREE

Ma'shar' (787-886), who attained a reputation as the leading astrologer of the Muslim world. He was born in Khurasan and made his career in Baghdad in the 'Abbasid court, bequeathing more than thirty astrological treatises. 52 One of his main works is Kitiib al-qiriiniit (De magnis conjunctionibus annorum revolutionibus ac eorum profectionibus), employing horoscopes cast at the recurring conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter and at revolutions of the world-year, as an explanation for the appearance of prophets and their laws, as well as for the rise of dynasties and kings.53 Ibn Ezra referred directly to this treatise, employing the name Sefer Abu Mashar ba-ma1;1barot, that is, Abu Ma'shar's Book on Conjunctions, but did so very critically, in the introduction to the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam. 54 Moreover, we are told that the horoscope cast on the occasion of a conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter is to be merged with the revolution of the world-year of the year in which the conjunction occurs. Ibn Ezra explained the reasons behind the combination of the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter and the vernalequinox in the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam, in which he described an interesting chain of data-transmission: "Doronius the King (that is, Dorotheus of Sidon, of the first century A.D.) said that he found in the Book of Secrets by Enoch (who represents Hermetic traditions) that at the vernal-equinox of those years in which there occurs a great, a middle or a lesser conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, man is commanded to always observe the places of the planets at the time when the Sun enters the sign of Aries. "55 52 See KITAB AL-MADI;IAL, 1996, vo!. I, pp. 3-19; PINGREE, 1970, pp. 29-32. 53 See DE MAGNIS CONJUNCTIONIBUS, 1489; ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I,

pp. 10-1.: "Since the things from which to deduce advanced knowledge of the occurrences of general [types of events] and their particular instances in future times are gained from six elements, [here they are:] The first is from the celestial bodies' positions in the horoscopes of the revolutions of the years in which the conjunction of the two superior planets [Saturn and Jupiter] occurs in the spring tropical sign, happening every 960 solar years. The second is from the celestial bodies' positions in the horoscopes of the revolutions of the years in which their conjunctions occur when they shift from one triplicity to another, occurring every 240 solar years ... The fourth is from the celestial bodies' positions in the horoscopes of the revolutions of the years in which their conjunctions occur in each sign, happening every 20 solar years." 54 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo!. 80b. 55 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 82b. See also 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fo!' 87a. Hence, a current formula in Ibn Ezra's treatises is (as, for example, in 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 82b), "look at the revolution of the world-year in the year of a conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter". For an example in AbU Ma'shar's Kitab al-qiranat, see above, note 53. In another passage of the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam (,OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 81a), Ibn Ezra stated that due to technical difficulties in determining the exact timing

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

167

As seen above, the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter were classified according to the place and time of occurrence, two clearly astronomical parameters which might seem to be hardly concerned with astrological prognostication. 56 Time and place of conjunction, however, have a crucial bearing on astrological universal judgments. Consider, for example, the following passage quoted from the second version of Seier

ha-'Olam: Universal precepts: When you inquire about universal affairs you should take heed of every great, middle or lesser conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] as well as of the revolutions of the world-year. You should, however, distinguish between them. Good or evil stemming from a great conjunction is universal, and will persist until another great conjunction occurs which brings about a new system that will do away with the influence of the previous one. Great conjunctions determine general affairs concerning nations and peoples. Middle conjunctions hold sway over the kings of nations and peoples. Lesser conjunctions have the power to add or lessen in affairs of state or kingdom, and after twenty years the power of this conjunction vanishes. The revolution of the world-year has power over eventualities happening as it were by chance, but rapidly loses its influence as soon as the power of a new revolution of the world-year is felt. 57 It turns out that the periods of the three types of conjunctions as well as of the revolution of the world-year mark the rhythm of human history, at almost all its levels. These periods (960, 240, 20 and 1 year) are the intervals of time in which the dominance of each of those astrological agents still continues to be felt. In addition, the length of these periods is directly proportional to the historical significance of the macroastrological influence exerted by each of those astrological agents. Longterm periods cause epoch-making events, whereas short-term periods bring about eventualities of little consequence. In view of the wide scope of events covered in the last passage - the rise of nations and religions, the change of dynasties, the fate of noble families and kings, as well as of conjunctions, the horoscope related to the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter was commonly cast at the time ofthe syzygy (that is, the time of full moon or new moon) preceding the vernal-equinox of the year of the relevant conjunction. 56 Accordingly, Abu'l-Rayl;tiin AI-BWnl, in his Book ofInstruction in the Elements of the Art of Astrology, classified the conjunctions in exactly the same categories as did Abu Ma'shar', using only time and space parameters. Thus, the chapter dedicated to the conjunctions is included in the astronomical part of the treatise, amid other eminently astronomical topics, such as transit in conjunctions, conjunction and opposition of moon, the moon's phases, and paralaxis, deserving a purely astronomical treatment deprived of any astrological connotation. See ART OF ASTROLOGY, 1934, pp. 150-152, 151-161. 57 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 88a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 350 (III.2).

PART THREE

168

annual minor political affairs - it is easy to understand why and how these astrological techniques were so extensively employed by medieval astrologers to give a comprehensive explanation of the fluctuations in' human history as well as prognostications of future collective events.

Social Rank and Political Power

Next Ibn Ezra focused attention upon two apparently non-astrological factors: The fifth rule is concerned with the [power arising from the social rank of the] family. If two children are born at one and the same time and in the same city, one of them the son of a member of the royalty and the other the son of a servant, and the horoscope of both of them predicts that they will ascend to high social rank and assume supreme power, then the son of a member of the royalty will become a king and the son of the servant will become a merchant. And the sixth rule is concerned with the [power of the] king, since his authority stands for a universal power. Thus, if the personal horoscope of a king determines that he will make war, then he will drag into war a multitude of people whose horoscopes do not determine at all that any of them will change their location. 58

These two rules provide an opportunity to catch a glimpse of the mentality and socio-political awareness of a twelfth-century astrologer such as Abraham Ibn Ezra. Social status arising from family standing and political power behind a royal house are not viewed by him as sociological factors created by a combination of structural and anonymous characteristics of society, or as personal factors, determined by the free will of particulars. In clear correspondence with the general purport of the introduction, social rank and political power are presented as universal macro-astrological patterns or rules holding sway over human history. Therefore, in the conflicting interaction between universals and particulars, both factors are provided with the power to override the astrological judgments emanating from the particular horoscope. As for kings, family status and political power have a common denominator: kingship is seen as a product of dynastic birth producing compelling power. We notice in Ibn Ezra's treatment of the effects of the power of the family the same approach of compromise detected in the first macroastrological rule - the Israelite will not be a king but will be close to kings; as well as in the second macro-astrological rule - the Ethiopian 58 MOLADOT, BNF

1056, [01. 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 348 (111.1.6).

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

169

born with a propitious horoscope will be cleverer and wiser than his fellow-countrymen. In the present case, a prince with a favorable horoscope will of course attain kingship, but the son of a servant born with a similarly propitious horoscope will not become a prince but will be a 'merchant'. Now, this particular presentation provides us with a further opportunity to explore Ibn Ezra's social mentality. It appears that to become a 'merchant', in Ibn Ezra's mind, is the embodiment of the successful career of a prosperous commoner, who attains high social rank and assumes supreme power even though he was not born in the purple. No doubt, in this view, as in the case of the Jewish courtier, Ibn Ezra is mirroring a picture of fairly extensive social mobility borne out by the actual, historical merchants emerging from the various documents of the Cairo Genizah. 59 Relying on our passage, however, one clearly receives the impression that this social mobility is accounted for not so much from a socioeconomic as from an astrological vantage point. The career of the servant's son who becomes a prosperous merchant is explained as the outcome of a particularly favorable and propitious horoscope and not as the product of successful mercantile activities by a gifted individual. In this regard, Ibn Ezra reiterated in various astrological treatises that Jupiter is a propitious star for successful monetary operations,60 that Mercury has a special sway over merchants 61 , and that if the ruler star of the second horoscopic house is in the ascendant of the horoscope, the subject for whom a horoscope has been cast will meet monetary and mercantile success without effort. 62 The astrological judgments emanating from a favorable horoscope, however, are neither infallible nor wholly fulfilled. Because of the conflicting interaction between universals and particulars, social mobility indicated by astrological means is not at all unlimited. It is qualified, one may even say thwarted, by the prevailing socioeconomic infrastructures, or, as Ibn Ezra will put it, by the power derived from the social status of the family, which, in its tum, is grasped as a macroastrological pattern. It follows that the astrologer should be extremely 59 This documentary hoard, as was expounded by S.D. Goitein in his A Mediterranean Society (See, for example, GOITEIN, 1967, I, pp. 75-80, 149-161), gives a picture of fairly extensive social mobility, enabling commoners to attain economic wealth and political power in their communities by way of successful mercantile activities. 60 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1s. 40b, 44a; SHE'ELOTB, VAT 477,fol. 2b. 61 RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, IV, pp. xlix. 62 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 52a.

PART THREE

170

cautious in cases when a favorable personal horoscope announces 'revolutionary' social variations or innovations. Therefore, when an extraordinary horoscope foretells that a Jew or a commoner will attain kingship, the prudent astrologer will not take this statement at its facevalue and will not allow the Jew or the commoner to cross the barrier of royal rank and power. The Fury of the Elements

After addressing two sociological patterns, Ibn Ezra turned his attention to the natural environment: And the seventh rule is concerned with natural power (ha-toledet). If somebody embarks on a ship in the cold season and the sea becomes tempestuous, he will not survive, even though he took the precaution of assuring that in the ascendant [of the horoscope] there be Jupiter and Venus, which are favorable stars. For natural power is a universal power, and the particular [configuration of the stars] that he selected will be of no avail for him. The same holds for a thousand people embarking together in a ship - they will all die when the sea becomes stormy even though the particular horoscope of each of them determines that they will survive this year. Yet, [the astrologer] may find in the horoscope of each of them that the life-ruler (paqid ha-bayim) reached a dangerous place (maqom mesukan). But if some of them happened not to be on the sea, which is a perilous place, then he will only incur a lesser harm and will survive. 63

With the aid of the significant key-word toledet, reviewed elsewhere (see above, p. 13 Off), attention is focused on the fury of the elements when placed in a clearly Mediterranean scenario, that is, when the winter season makes any sailing an extremely hazardous and dangerous venture. As in the fifth rule, where attention has been given to obvious non-astrological factors such as social rank and political power, Ibn Ezra transformed the natural environment into a general macro-astrological pattern. The fury of the elements is grasped and placed in a plain astrological context by contrasting their might with the incapacity of the personal horoscope to forecast disaster in cases where the natural environment is involved. In a quite dramatic way, Ibn Ezra accorded the fury of the elements the power to override the personal horoscope of one thousand persons, whose fate is collectively doomed to death despite having been reassured by their personal horoscopes that they will survive the year. 63 MOLADOT, BNF

1056, fo1. 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 349 (IlL I. 7).

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

171

More precisely, Ibn Ezra was addressing in this passage the impotence of a specific astrological technique specially pertinent in such affairs. This is the astrological technique called katarkhai in Greek, ikhtiyiiriit in Arabic, mivbarim in Hebrew, and electiones in Latin, designed for choosing the most auspicious moment for beginning or accomplishing such and such an act by making this moment dependent on the favorable outcome of a horoscope specially cast for this occasion.64 Ibn Ezra plainly illustrated this situation by stating that the precaution had been taken of placing two favorable planets, Jupiter and Venus, in the ascendant of such an ad-hoc horoscope. This preventive measure notwithstanding, Ibn Ezra says, nobody will survive if one embarks on a ship in the cold season, when the sea becomes tempestuous. This is an additional case which dramatically demonstrates that "universal astrological judgments override particular astrological judgments". Despite the utterly fatalistic air of the first part of the seventh macroastrological rule, the closing part of the passage is reassuring and somewhat optimistic. Man may indeed be saved to some extent from the decrees of the stars, not by canceling the decrees of the stars or by declaring them null and void, but by circumventing them. In this particular case, astrology itself is instrumental in avoiding the astrological decrees of the stars. Reference is made to an astrological doctrine which consists in directing the course of a star, and is called by Ibn Ezra nihug ha-kokhav in Hebrew and ductus planetae in Latin. In this procedure, explained in Tetrabiblos (III, 10 and IV, 10) by Ptolemy, a certain planet - called paqid ha-bayim in Hebrew in our passage, apheta in Greek, indicator in Latin - is directed from one of the five places of life to one of the five places of death - called maqom mesukan in our passage. This means computing the angular distance between two celestial places, that is, between a place of life and a dangerous place, being the resulting number of degrees converted subsequently into a number of years. Thus the life expectancy of the subject for whom a horoscope has been cast, or the date of some especially dangerous event in his life, may be calculated beforehand.65 64 Regarding this astrological technique, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 458486; TESTER, 1987,pp.88-92.PrNGREE, 1973,pp. 123-124. 65 Ibn Ezra explained diverse aspects of this technique in several of his astrological works. See for example: MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 50a-50b; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fols. 25a-25b; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 45a-45b; RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, CHAP. X, p. lxxv. For the parallel Latin usage, see ASTROLABIO, VESP A II, fol. 40r; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 68r; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS

172

PART THREE

In this case, too, we note the same approach of compromise towards the decrees of the stars as detected in other places in the same introduction (see above, pp. 150, 162, 169). It emerges that despite the outright detenninistic character of the first part of the seventh rule, the fury of the elements may be predicted and avoided to some extent. By employing the astrological technique of nihug ha-kokhav or ductus planetae, anybody who intends to embark on a maritime journey in the dangerous season, may know of threatening deadly perils on sea at some specific time, and, by applying this infonnation, may save his life and evade the decrees of the stars if he desists from putting out to sea. However, the desire to evade the decrees of the stars cannot be fulfilled entirely. By not going out to sea at a dangerous date, one may indeed be saved from disaster - but not completely, since he will, as Ibn Ezra put it, "incur a lesser hann". By this remark, Ibn Ezra meant that even if adversity may be prognosticated and averted to some extent, man must admit that the decrees of the stars should be provided with some outlet for making manifest, even partly, their deterministic hannful trend. The Wise Soul

The problem of salvation from the decrees of the stars, fundamental in the thought of an astrologer not limited to mere technicalities but also preoccupied with philosophical and theological concerns, is further refined and developed in the eighth rule. 66 The treatment of this rule encompasses a rich range of ideas, so that the ensuing discussion will require substantially enlarging the scope in order to trace these ideas in Ibn Ezra's thought and work: The eighth rule is concerned with the power of the wise soul (literally, the power of the soul whose power is wisdom). Consider the case of a scholar in the science of the zodiacal signs who observes in [the horoscope of] his anniversary nativity (tequfat ha-shanah) that he is bound to come down with fever at a certain time when Mars enters in the degree of the ascendant. If he takes precautions before the illness comes, abstaining from any hot food and drinking beverages in order to cool one's body, then he will maintain balance in the temperament of his body when Mars TABULARUM, 1947, p. 85. Regarding this procedure, see TETRABIBLOS, 1980, Book III, ch. 10, pp. 271-307. BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 411-419. 66 Salvation from the stars is a main concern in Ibn Ezra's astrological and philosophical conception, noticeable in several parts of his literary output, especially when presented in a theological or historical context. In this regard, see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 98-122, 189-194.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

173

enters in the degree of the ascendant. Likewise, he who trusts in God with all his heart, God - 'by Him actions are weighed' (Samuel A 2:3) will, for him, bring about the proper causes to save him from any harm prognosticated in his horoscope. Therefore, there is no doubt that the righteous person is more protected than the scholar regarding the judgments coming from the stars, since sometimes the scholar's acuteness of judgment will be faulty, as Scripture says (Isaiah 44:25), 'and makes diviners mad'. See now, fortunate is he whose heart is wholly with his God. 67

At least one point stands out clearly in this passage: the eighth rule is focused on the power of the wise soul, (ha-neshamah ha-bakhamah); therefore, as in the cases of national affiliation, residence in one of the seven climates, the great conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, the revolution of the world-year, social rank, political power and the fury of the elements, the wise soul too is considered by Ibn Ezra as a macroastrological power capable of overriding the astrological judgments emanating from the particular horoscope. And yet, whereas all the previous seven rules embodied natural or sociological factors while viewing man as part of anonymous and collective whole units, the eighth rule is ostensibly related to an individual human quality. Let us first ask, then, how did it occur to Ibn Ezra that the wise soul may function as a macro-astrological power? Whereas for all the seven previous rules he relied on Arabic and Greek astrological sources, Ibn Ezra drew on Jewish astrological sources for setting the scene of the eighth rule in general, and for setting forth the wise soul at the very core of the eighth rule in particular. In all likelihood, Ibn Ezra turned to a responsum in which Sherira Ga' on (d. 1006) and l:Iai Ga'on (d. 1038) divided i$lagninut (the talmudic term for astrology)68 according to a dual approach, and made a distinction between two different schools. On the one hand, Sherira Ga'on and l:Iai Ga'on recognized a hard version of astrology which makes everything dependent on the stars and does not afford man any possibility of being saved from the decrees of the stars. On the other, they allowed for a soft version of astrology, which was again divided by them into two subgroups according to the following lines: And the second type [of astrologers] says that man by means of his wisdom can do things which are not determined by the stars, and man may even purposefully change what has been determined by the stars. And those [who belong to the second type] are divided into two further types. 67 MOLADOT, BNF

1056, fo!' 46b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 349 (III. 1.8).

68 For this term, see below, p. 206.

174

PART THREE There are those who make things dependent on the human soul, and they say that the spirit of man and his soul hold a higher rank, that the soul is the fundamental quality of man, that the essence of the soul is above the stars and zodiacal signs, and that with the help of the power of the soul, man can change things that have been determined by the stars. But there are others [belonging to the second type] who judge that things are dependent on Almighty God, and they say that God created in man the ability to change what has been determined by the stars. In any case, both types maintain that the hurts stemming from the stars may be averted. Consider a case in which the stars provoke fever at a certain time. While those [belonging to the first type] say that man should drink cold beverages in order to cool his body, the others [belonging to the second type] maintain that God will avert the calamity.69

We see, then, in this passage, four main building blocks of Ibn Ezra's eighth macro-astrological rule: (a) wisdom and the human soul are seen as tools which enable man to be saved from the decrees of the stars; (b) a rationalistic approach, which relies on the power of the human soul, is set against a fideistic approach, which relies entirely on God; (c) a specific example is given in which the stars provoke fever at a certain time; (d) the cure to fever is presented as drinking cold beverages in order to cool the body. In this regard, Ibn Ezra's eighth rule may well be construed as an amplification of and a commentary on the responsum of the Ge'onim. Let us now analyze his own position in depth and first ask what Ibn Ezra meant by the term 'wise soul'. An overall scrutiny of Ibn Ezra's literary work reveals that the wise soul is the highest component of the tripartite soul, a pattern whose sources may be traced back to Plato and Aristotle, a fact of which Ibn Ezra was well aware.7° This doctrine divides the whole human psyche into three distinct parts: the vegetative or appetitive soul; the animal or locomotive soul; the wise or rational soul. The doctrine of the tripartite soul was acknowledged by Jewish intellectuals slightly prior to Ibn Ezra, 69 RESPONSA OF THE GE'ONIM, 1887, p. 207. That this responsum was known in Provence may be proved by the fact that it was quoted in a letter written by a group of Rabbis of Southem France and sent in 1194 to Maimonides. Interestingly enough, following the quotation of the responsum of the Ge'onim, the Rabbis embedded in their letter to Maimonides fragments of Ibn Ezra's Seier ha-Moladot, including parts of the introduction which is studied in this section. In this regard, see SELA, 1999 (ii), pp. 189-191; MAIMONIDES' LETTER ON ASTROLOGY, 1926, pp. 37-43, esp. 37-8. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 351 (III.3). 70 TIMAEUS 69 A, 69 D, 79 D; DE ANIMA 413a, 413b, 414a, 414b. In the first version of Seier ha-Te'amim (TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 41b), Ibn Ezra referred directly to De Anima by Aristotle as a source on which he drew to learn about some astrological aspects of the animal soul. See also the second version of Seier haTe'amim (TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 21), in which Ibn Ezra referred to Aristotle as the "wise Greek". Cf. also RESHITijOKHMAH, 1939, VII, p. xlvii.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

175

such as Isaac Yisraeli (850-932)11 and Sa'adiah Ga'on72 (b. 882, Dilaz, in al-Fayyum, Egypt-d. September 942, Sura, Babylonia), as well as by contemporary fellow intellectuals, such as Abraham Bar ijiyya,73 Judah ha-Levy,74 Abraham Ibn Daud75 and Maimonides.76 Ibn Ezra too, in his tum, fully adopted this doctrine which was considered by him from a linguistic, a physical and an astrological perspective. As in the cases of other significant scientific terms, such as the 'seven climates' (gevulim) or the concept of 'nature' (toledet), Ibn Ezra maintained that the three souls too may be recognized in the holy tongue. Thus, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, the biblical vocabulary reserved three special words for each one of the three components of the composite soul: rual) for the vegetative soul, nefesh for the animal soul and neshamah for the wise soul. 77 As in Plato's Timaeus (69 A, 69 D, 79 D), the three souls are provided by Ibn Ezra with a physical seat in certain human organs: the vegetative soul resides in the liver, the animal soul in the heart, while the wise or rational soul has its seat in the brain. 78 The astrological aspect of the three souls doctrine plays a crucial role in Ibn Ezra's thought. He thus points out how the complex human psyche is integrally shaped by the astrological influence of the planets. Accordingly, in several of his astrological treatises he stated that the vegetative soul is under the control of Jupiter, Venus is appointed over the animal soul, and Mercury is in charge of the wise souU9 These astrological references are helpful in putting the wise soul within an astrological context. As they are brought by Ibn Ezra in treatises chiefly concerned with genethlialogical astrology, the inference to be made is that these associations between planets and the tripartite 71 See fragments of Isaac Yisraeli's Book of Spirit and Soul addressing the three souls in SIRAT, 1990, p. 61. 72 'EMUNOTVEDE'OT, 1970, VI, p. 201; COMMENTARY ON JOB, 1973, p. 27. 73 MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, pp. 55, 58,73; YESODE HATEVUNA, 1952, pp. 4-6. 74 BOOK OF KUZARJ, 1946, II, 26, pp. 89-93. 75 See fragments of Ibn Daud's 'Emunah Ramah addressing the three souls in SIRAT, 1990, p. 147. 76 GUIDE DES EGARES, 1856, vol. I, p. 72; vol. II, p. 10. 77 See long commentary on Exodus 23:25; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, VII, p. 330. For this particular idea, Ibn Ezra seems to have been indebted to Sa'adiah Ga'on. See 'EMUNOTVEDE'OT, 1970, VI, p. 201. 78 See Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 23:25; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, VII, p. 330 79 About Mercury's sway over the wise soul, see TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 30-31; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 49a; For Jupiter and the vegetative soul, see MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 48a; RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, VII, p. xliv; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 27. For Venus' control over the animal soul, see TE'AMIM A, bnf 1056, fol. 42a; RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, VII, p.xlviii.

176

PART THREE

soul play a role in the individual horoscope with the effect of prognosticating the prospective psychological structure of the new-born. So, as the eighth rule is concerned with a collective trait and a macroastrological power, whereas the wise soul is a component of the psychological structure of individuals, the question arises how could it be that the wise soul was seen by Ibn Ezra as a macro-astrological agent strong enough to override the judgments of the individual horoscope. For clues to this problem we tum now to Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries, to which the most striking and imaginative uses of the three souls doctrine may be traced. In his commentary on Ecclesiastes, Abraham Ibn Ezra addressed a Talmudic tradition (Shabbat 30b) according to which the book of Ecclesiastes was in danger of being censored and banned from use because of its serious internal inconsistencies. With the help of the varied and somewhat conflicting qualities of the three souls, Ibn Ezra defended the integrity of Ecclesiastes and construed its inconsistencies not as logical contradictions but as instances of the power-plays in which the three different components of the human soul are entangled when trying to overcome each other. 80 An additional application of the three souls doctrine, especially relevant to our present discussion, may be found in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 23:25: Man's body belongs with the lowest world, the superior soul is connected to the body, and there are intermediaries between the body and the soul. These are two powers which are referred to in the main in the holy tongue as ruab (that is, animal soul) and nefesh (that is, vegetative soul). For the wise soul (neshamah bakhamah) has its place in the brain of man and from it comes the power of all emotions and the desire to move. The animal soul is situated in the heart and life depends on it. The animal soul desires to dominate, that is, it seeks to overcome all opposition. It is the source of anger. Solomon similarly said, 'Be not hasty in thy spirit (rubacha) to be angry' (Ecclesiastes 7:9), and 'A fool spendeth all his spirit (ruba)' (Proverbs 29: 11). The seat to the vegetative soul is in the liver. It is the vegetative soul that desires to eat. It is thus written, 'because thy soul (nafshecha) desires' (Deuteronomy 12:20). The vegetative soul is the source of sexual desire. Now some people are generated in such a way that these three souls are strong. In others these three souls are weak. In other instances, one soul is strong, another weak, or neither weak nor strong. Accordingly, people may fall into twenty-seven different categories. God gave the Torah to strengthen, to intensify, and to increase the power of the superior soul. When this happens, the body does not rule

80

See COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES 7:3.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

177

over it. However, if the Torah is not observed, then the body overpowers the soul. 81

We notice almost all afore-mentioned traits of the three souls remarkably employed in this passage. The three souls are named in this commentary, in Ibn Ezra's view, after their original Hebrew terms and the special seats of the three souls in the human body are mentioned. What makes this passage helpful in our quest is that Ibn Ezra introduced the tripartite soul in the context of a doctrine of neo-platonic origin, according to which the soul may be emancipated from its corporeal imprisonment and attain a sublime intellectual and spiritual status. Indeed, the concept of the tripartite soul tallies rather well with the doctrine of soul emancipation: The vegetative soul and animal soul suitably reflect the bodily stage of the journey of the human soul, when man is pervaded by worldly instincts and appetites and thereby tied to the lowest world, whereas the wise soul, in its turn, serves as a fitting stepping-stone, enabling the emancipation of the human soul from its corporal prison. Two preliminary observations are in order before we consider this passage in connection with the introduction to Seier haMoladot. First, the third constituent of the tripartite soul was endowed by Ibn Ezra with a dual nature. On the one hand, he plainly maintained that the wise soul, much in the same manner as the other two souls, is connected to the body. This being so, he contemplated twenty-seven different types of mental patterns, which are all the potential combinations in which the human psyche may be integrally shaped by three different souls, each of them having either a weak or a strong constitution. On the other hand, despite this fatalistic state of affairs, Ibn Ezra named the 'wise soul' as the 'superior soul', thereby asserting that it is linked to the superior world as well. In this fashion, Ibn Ezra implied that the wise soul may serve as a vehicle for the liberation of man's soul from its lowest world prison. Second, Ibn Ezra maintained that man may participate in his own process of soul liberation. This may take place if he supports his wise soul in its drive to overcome the power of the other two lower components of his complex soul. In this regard, Ibn Ezra clearly pointed to the 'Torah' as instrumental in invigorating his wise soul and, at the same time, in debilitating the power of the other two souls. 81 Long commentary on Exodus 23:25. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 343 (11.16.1). A very similar statement is made by Ibn Ezra in YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, VII, p. 330.

178

PART THREE

Undoubtedly, by using the word Torah, a practicing Rabbanite Jew such as Abraham Ibn Ezra means the Torah of Moses, the Pentateuch, and the Talmudic scholarship derived from it in the course of generations. But the contents of the aforementioned biblical commentary exceed the bounds of a narrow ritualistic meaning and are focused on the interplay between body and soul, not least in the possibility of soul emancipation. Therefore, we may plausibly assume that in this special context, the term 'Torah', as used by Ibn Ezra, points to a superior epistemological status which enables soul emancipation by means of some significant spiritual and intellectual amelioration. The dual nature of the wise soul in the long commentary on Exodus 23 :25 may now be put forward to explain why the eighth rule of the introduction to Seier ha-Moladot was concerned with the power of the wise soul. When the wise soul is "connected to the body" and is merely one among the three components of the human soul, then "the body overpowers the soul", that is, the vegetative soul is under the control of Jupiter, the animal soul under Venus, and the wise soul under Mercury. In this standard situation, the configuration of the human psyche may be prognosticated by the individual horoscope because it is integrally molded by the astrological influence of the planets. However, when the power of the superior soul is enhanced, then the wise soul may serve as a vehicle for the liberation of man's soul from its lowest world prison. In this situation, "the body does not rule over the soul", that is, the wise soul is converted into a macro-astrological power capable of overriding the particular astrological judgments emanating from the individual horoscope. Then the wise soul is no longer "connected to the body" and is considered the superior soul. In other words, the wise soul may then be considered as an element linked to the superior world and takes part in a universal soul. This process, however, is neither spontaneous nor automatic. Man must participate in his own process of soul liberation. In the long commentary on Exodus 23:25, in quite a vague fashion, Ibn Ezra pointed to the 'Torah' as instrumental in invigorating the wise soul.

The Scholar vis-a-vis the Righteous Person

In contrast with his long commentary on Exodus 23:25, and following in the footsteps of Sherira Ga'on and l;Iai Ga'on, Ibn Ezra presented in the introduction to Seier ha-Moladot not one but two significantly different ways by which the wise soul may overcome the bodily harms indicated

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

179

by the individual horoscope. The first way is epitomized by 'a scholar in the science of the zodiacal signs' (bakham be-bokhmat ha-mazalot) who is able to remedy some physical hurts inflicted upon him by the stars, by successfully combining astrology and medicine. The second way is personified by the righteous person (ha-$adiq), who is described by Ibn Ezra as being completely saved by God's intervention from the harms preordained in his personal horoscope. Let us put these two models within a wider context by considering a peculiar dual outlook on medicine as related to astrology developed by Ibn Ezra in his entire work. In Ibn Ezra's opinion, medicine should not be considered as a monolithic but as a dual art consisting of a 'hard' and a 'soft' version. Strong astrological connotations underlie these two versions of medicine. Whereas the 'hard' version of medicine is under the sway of Mars (a maleficent planet associated with war and bloodshed), uses surgical tools and pierces the human body in order to treat the internal organs, the 'soft' version of medicine is under the power of Venus (a beneficent planet associated with sensuality and sexual passion), only touches the external surface of human body, employs natural materials such as perfumes and ointments, and heals particularly by regulating the use of food. 82 To be sure, Ibn Ezra drew on his astrological sources, specifically on Abu Ma'sar, to envisage this dual vision of medicine. 83 However, a special feature is noticeable in the way he transferred this outlook from his astrological sources to his exegetical work and monographs. According to this special view, as a reward for the devotion of the believers, God becomes an extremely effective arch-doctor, reigning supreme over the 'hard' version of medicine, and relegating mortal physicians to a partial and limited role in the 'soft' version of medicine. Thus, in Ibn Ezra's mind, surgical and internal medicine lies exclusively in God's province. God's total medical superiority emerges supreme in the 'hard' version of medicine, since this special branch of medicine is in Ibn Ezra's opinion an exclusive divine prerogative where there is no 82 In TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 6, 29, Ibn Ezra wrote that "Mars and Venus work in partnership regarding the wisdom of medicine, for Mars reckons with wounds while Venus deals with medicines which have an agreeable odour." See a similar assessment in MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fols 79a-79b, where he wrote that "Mars is appointed over cuppers and over the doctors who deal with wounds ... Venus is the star of the doctors ... and of those who handle perfumes and trees." For an enlargement of this topic, see also, MIVI:IARlM A, 1969, p. 10, RESH!T I:IOKHMAH, 1939, VII, pp. xlii-I. 83 One of his sources was Abu Ma'shar's Kitfib al-madbal al-kabir ita sinfi 'at abkfim al-nujum. See K!TAB AL-MADI:IAL, 1996, VII, pp. 314-315; VIII, pp. 145-146.

180

PART THREE

room at all for human meddling. 84 Even though the righteous person is not described as being involved in any surgical operation, the farreaching, devotional and passive nature of his accomplishments invites a comparison with the 'hard' version of medicine. First, he is described as "he who trusts God with all his heart", or, as he whose "heart is wholly with his God"; then, the righteous person is characterized as he whom God, as a reward for his devotion, comes to his rescue and saves from "from any harm prognosticated in his horoscope". In contrast with the eminently passive character of the 'hard' version of medicine, flesh and blood doctors are permitted by Ibn Ezra to practice the 'soft' and external version of medicine, not least by successfully employing and prescribing standard 'soft' medical methods, especially dietetic materials, in order to cure human illness. 85 The performance of the 'scholar in the science of the zodiacal signs', as described in the introduction to Sefer ha-Moladot, is highly reminiscent of the methods of the 'soft' version of medicine. The 'scholar' is presented as being assisted in his intention by the 'science of the zodiacal signs', which in this particular context entails a combination of astrology and medicine, but also as employing 'soft' methods, as will be presently shown. Ibn Ezra views the scholar as proceeding through two main stages. In the first stage, the scholar casts a horoscope and prognosticates the future astrological event which will in due course cause him a physical hurt. By combining astrological prognostication with medical diagnosis, the scholar arrives at two important results. First, the conclusion that "he was bound to come down with fever"; second, he was able to determine the exact time when this unfortunate event would happen, namely, "when Mars enters in the degree of the ascendant". Ibn Ezra took pains to describe in detail the performance of his scholar, not least by putting emphasis on the fact that his chief prognosticative tool is an 'anniversary nativity' (tequfat ha-shanah), that is, a special type of horoscope drawn up when the sun arrives at the same point in the zodiac where it was at the subject's birth, and to whose elucidation Ibn Ezra devoted a whole explanatory chapter in Sefer ha-Moladot. 86 84 This idea is fitly expressed in his long commentary on Exodus 21:19, where he writes that "pennission has been granted to physicians to heal blows and wounds that are visible on the surface. However, it is in God's hand to heal any illness which strikes inside of the body." See also Ibn Ezra's Long commentary on Exodus 15:26; commentary on Psalms 6:10; 16:9; YESODMoR'AH, 1985, VII, p. 330. 85 See especially Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalm 103:5 and 145:17. 86 See MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 59a-61b. For this astrological technique, see

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

181

In all likelihood Ibn Ezra's main motivation for introducing this specific astrological technique in this particular scenario was his intention to point to the anniversary nativity (tequfat ha-shanah) as the counterpart of the revolution of the world-year (tequfat ha- 'olam), thus presenting them as a pair of fairly similar astrological techniques, whose range of action extends from the restricted area of individual fate to the wide domain of collective destiny and history. While the anniversary nativity (presented in the eighth rule) concerns individuals and is a horoscope cast when the sun arrives at the same point in the zodiac where it was at one's birth, the revolution of the world-year (presented in the fourth rule, see above, p. 162) bears a special influence on collective affairs, and is cast when the sun arrives at the vernal-equinox, that is, at the date considered by the astrologers as the annual anniversary of world creation. Witness the relative parallelism provided by Ibn Ezra to both the annual horoscope and the vernal-equinox horoscope when he indicated that both techniques are connected to physical injuries inflicted by the stars, but on different ranges of action. Regarding the revolution of the world-year, Ibn Ezra emphasized in the fourth rule that, thanks to this astrological technique, it is possible to prognosticate "illness inflicted upon a certain city". Conversely, concerning the anniversary nativity, Ibn Ezra significantly restricted the scope to the case of an individual who is "bound to come down with fever". In the second stage, Ibn Ezra describes certain preventive measures which will enable the scholar to escape the physical hurt by neutralizing the harmful effects of the stars' influence. As the outcome of his treatment, Ibn Ezra says, the scholar "will maintain balance in the temperament (toledet) of his body".87 By this expression Ibn Ezra implied that his scholar was applying the theory of the four humors. More precisely, he stated that Mars harms by causing an excess of one of the four humors, so that the way for health's restitution is to restore the balance between the four humors. In our passage, sheer astrological TESTER, 1987, pp. 169-172; NALLINO, 1987, p. 496; ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I, p. 576. 87 Here Ibn Ezra employed once again the Hebrew word toledet - used by him in the seventh rule to point to the natural setting of the earth (see above, p. 130) - to point this time to the Galenic notion of "temperament", that is, of the human body as composed of four basic body humours, that is, blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile. Ibn Ezra employed the Hebrew word toledet with the same meaning in the second rule, where we read that "even though the temperament of this Ethiopian will not be as balanced as should be, we will judge that he will be cleverer and wiser than his fellow-countrymen". See above, p. 159.

182

PART THREE

considerations underlie those preventive therapeutic measures. Since hot and dry are the two main natural qualities of Mars, it is necessary to act upon the yellow bile, which is under the sway of Mars.88 Accordingly, the scholar prescribed abstention from eating any hot food, and recommended drinking suitable beverages in order "to cool one's body". Not only these preventive measures but also their timing are determined by astrological considerations. In this regard, Ibn Ezra wrote that "he will maintain balance in the natural setting of his body when Mars enters in the degree of the ascendant", and by this expression he meant that the neutralizing measures should be put into effect precisely at the time when the harmful effects of Mars are about to come into effect, a timing which was predicted by the anniversary nativity horoscope. 89 It is evident that by presenting the scholar vis-a-vis the righteous person, Ibn Ezra was intent on drawing a comparison between two archetypes, with respect to which three main points were thrown into relief. First, while the scholar's performance characterizes a rational and active approach relying on a manifest scientific methodology, the righteous person seems to embody a religious and passive stance trusting exclusively in God to attain salvation. Second, both the scholar and the righteous person are presented, each in his own domain, as successful models in their attempt to overcome the harmful effects of the stars' influence. Whereas the scholar casts a horoscope which prognosticates a physical hurt and undertakes efficient measures which neutralize the harmful effects of the stars' influence, the righteous person, thanks to his devotion to God, is saved "from any harm prognosticated in his horoscope". Third, despite successful performance by both, the scholar is placed at a decided disadvantage as compared to the righteous person. Two comparisons are made in this regard. On the one hand, Ibn Ezra writes that "the righteous person is more protected than the scholar regarding the judgments coming from the stars". On the other, it is stated 88 About Mars being hot and dry, see RESHIT I:lOKHMAH, 1939, ch. II, p. 8; ch. IV, p. 46; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 35a. About the yellow bile being under the sway of Mars, see RESHIT I:lOKHMAH, 1939, ch. IV, p. 47; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 29; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 21b. 89 It is worth noting that the above-quoted passage of the long commentary on Exodus 23:25 (see above, p. 176) is only the beginning of a longer exegetical excursus, which exhibits striking similarities with the essential features of the eighth rule. In this excursus, Ibn Ezra showed how one may cure an excess of yellow bile (marah 'adumah), engendering heat and causing anger and choleric behavior. The task, in this case, is performed by the integrated working of astrology, medicine and natural sciences, all of them under the leadership of the 'wise soul', which is invigorated by the observance of the Torah. For a discussion about this excursus, see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 173-194.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

183

that "sometimes the scholar's acuteness of judgment will be faulty". Again, on the one hand, the successful performance of the scholar is related to a fairly restricted case in which "he is bound to come down with fever at a certain time when Mars enters in the degree of the ascendant". On the other, regarding the righteous person, Ibn Ezra writes that "God will bring about the proper causes to save him from any harm prognosticated in his horoscope". Undoubtedly, there is a genuine tension between the characteristics attributed by Ibn Ezra to the scholar and the righteous person. But, what is the real nature of the contradiction, if any, between the scholar and the righteous person? Is it an irreconcilable conflict between faith and reason, one in which the former gains the upper hand over the latter? At first sight, it seems that this is indeed the case. What else would be the purpose of giving such an advantageous and privileged position to "he whose heart is wholly with his God" in relation to the 'scholar in the science of the zodiacal signs'? Such a stance, however, seems hardly tenable. Praising blind, irrational and simplistic religious faith and lowering to such a great extent the reader's expectations from the scientific methodology of the astrologer, seems ultimately highly incompatible or irrelevant within an astrological treatise in general or in the context of the eighth macro-astrological rule in particular. Another major point to be taken into consideration is that, by and large, the scholar as well as the righteous person personify two different ways by which the wise soul, grasped as a macro-astrological power, may overcome the bodily harms predetermined by the private horoscope. Can the wise soul be made compatible with blind, irrational and simplistic religious faith? As said above, the wise or superior soul represents the highest rational part of the tripartite human psyche, a link which connects the upper to the lower world, the component of the composite human soul which after intellectual amelioration is converted into a vehicle for the liberation of man's soul from its lowest world prison. It is within such a context that we suggested that the wise soul should be viewed as a macro-astrological agent with the power of overriding the astrological judgments emanating from the particular horoscope. Are the two alternatives represented by the scholar and the righteous person mutually incompatible? As the way of the righteous person is much more effective than that of the scholar, the righteous person may be considered as providing a fuller expression of the power of the wise soul, or, in other words, as attaining a much higher degree of intellectual

184

PART THREE

development than that achieved by the scholar. We should also contemplate the possibility that the righteous person is, in Ibn Ezra's thinking, a figure of blended nature that not only epitomizes sublime godly devotion but also, by surpassing the scholar, harmoniously integrates some of the scholar's characteristics. In all this, it would have been highly desirable to find in Ibn Ezra's work the answers to such questions. Our author, however, provided only extremely limited and vague clues to these questions, not least when trying to explain the source of the inferiority of the scholar to the righteous person and, vice versa, the source of die righteous person's superiority over the scholar. It seems that at this stage we have exhausted all the relevant material included in the introduction to Sefer ha-Moladot. We have been left, however, with unsatisfactory answers to the questions posed above. Therefore, it is now desirable to enlarge the scope and tum to other parts ofIbn Ezra's work to look for additional clues.

Wisdom, Salvation from the Stars and Religious Devotion

Three main questions will be asked in this section: First, we would like to know, exploring Ibn Ezra's work, what he meant by the label "the righteous person". Then we will be concerned with the relationship between wisdom, the improvement of the wise soul and salvation from the stars, and we will try to ascertain whether Ibn Ezra envisaged any significant relationship between these three factors. Finally, to better understand the true nature of the righteous person and his connection to the scholar, we will ask: what was Ibn Ezra's outlook on religious devotion and its connection with reason and science? Fortunately, besides the allusion to the righteous person in the introduction to Sefer ha-Moladot, our author made some references in his biblical commentaries which will next be reviewed. To begin with, outstanding biblical figures, such as Moses,90 JOb 91 and the sages of the Talmud,92 are characterized by Ibn Ezra as 'the righteous person'. The biblical Enoch, however, merited a special treatment. On the one hand, Enoch was frequently treated by Ibn Ezra in his scientific treatises as a prominent scientist who excelled in the fields of astrology, astronomy, medicine and magic. This Enoch, who mirrors the mythical Hermes and 90 Long commentary on Exodus 34:7. 91 Commentary on Job 42:17. 92 Introduction to the second commentary to the Pentateuch; see also 'lBBUR, 1874, p. 6b.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

185

Hermetic traditions, is depicted by Ibn Ezra as having a three-fold personality, being the biblical Enoch only in the first and earliest of these three personalities. 93 On the other hand, Ibn Ezra referred to this primordial Enoch in his biblical commentaries, as for example in his second commentary on Genesis 5:29, wherein we are told that Enoch not only foretold the deluge but also wrote many books dealing with many and varied sciences. But if Ibn Ezra decided to label Enoch as "the righteous person", it is precisely because of what is written about him in Genesis 5:24: "And Enoch walked with God: and he was not: for God took him." Directly referring to this dramatic event, Ibn Ezra wrote in his commentary on Psalms 73:24 that the meaning of the taking of Enoch by God is nothing less than the 'Joining of the righteous person's soul with superior beings that have no body and will never perish".94 This is a recurrent idea in Ibn Ezra's thought revealing his general opinion about the righteous person. Although occasionally appearing as being saved by God from worldly misfortunes,95 the righteous person was usually depicted by Ibn Ezra as detaching himself from the materiality of the lower world, in transit from the lower to the upper world or residing in the upper world forever. Actually, it is only in the upper world where the righteous person receives his reward and where his spiritual qualities achieve their fullest expression.96 Ibn Ezra dwelled upon the reward received by the righteous person in his commentary on Psalms 16:11, in which he wrote that after the death of his body, the righteous person will ascend to heaven to meet the superior angels; there, after being released from the affairs of the lower world, the righteous person will enjoy the divine splendor, will be delighted with the divine presence and will attain the knowledge of the ultimate truth. As for the ultimate truth with which the righteous person busies himself, Ibn Ezra was briefly concerned with this subject in the eighth chapter of Seier ha-Shem (Book of the Divine Name), which deals with the unfolding of the secret meanings of the Tetragrammaton letters, in which 93 For an account of Enoch's or Hermes' triple personality, see 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 83b, 85a; see also TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, pp. 19, 36. For an account of Enoch's scientific activities, see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 341-348; see also IOEL, 1988, p~. 62-66. 4 Commentary on Psalms 73:24. See also first commentary on Genesis 5:24. 95 Ibn Ezra writes in the commentary to Psalms 32: II: "Happy is the righteous person who did not sin; no illness will befall him since God is his physician, and He guards him and removes any ailment resulting from what he eats." A very similar statement referring directly to the righteous person may be found in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalms 139:5. 96 See also long commentary on Exodus 20:2; commentary on Psalms 1:6; 16:11; 73:17.

186

PART THREE

he wrote, paraphrasing Psalms 118:20: "On the meaning of the letters of the [divine] Name. This is the gate (that is, chapter) of the Lord, into which the righteous will enter".97 In his allegorical commentary on Psalms 1:3, Ibn Ezra illustrated the meaning of the dictum "the memory of the righteous person is blessed" (Proverbs 10:7) by referring explicitly to the properties of the wise soul: "And in my opinion his fruit (Psalms 1:3) is the wise soul. But the wise soul should be filled with the Torah of God, and should know his eternally permanent deeds and should be suitably attached to the upper world after its separation from the body ... this is the meaning of 'the memory of the righteous person is blessed "'.98 What is remarkable in the latter statement is the close relationship which Ibn Ezra conceived between the righteous person and the wise soul, depicted as detached from the materiality of the lower world and envisaged as knowing the eternally immutable deeds of God, the latter being a stock expression employed by Ibn Ezra to reflect the highest aspiration of sciences.99 This point leads us now to an exploration ofIbn Ezra's view of the direct relationship between the acquisition of wisdom, seen as the earnest desire of the wise soul or the superior soul, and salvation from the stars. This will be, in other words, a discussion of Ibn Ezra's view about the extent to which the acquisition of wisdom facilitates salvation from the sway of the stars. Various statements about this subject will be examined: first, in a notable theological excursus embedded in Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries; and finally, in the introductions he wrote to some of his astrological treatises. Exhibiting contrastive positions, though couched in very general terms, is the statement Ibn Ezra made in the theological excursus he embedded in his long commentary on Exodus 3:15. At the very outset, he adopted an extremely deterministic stance and admitted that man's soul "receives superior power in accordance to the configuration of the planets, that is, in accordance with the way each of the planets is arranged vis-a-vis the stars of the zodiac at the time of birth". After endowing the horoscope with such enormous power, Ibn Ezra dramatically altered the picture and wrote that "if the soul grows wise, 97 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 351 (I1I.4). See a similar statement in the commentary on Malachi 3:16. 98 Commentary on Psalms 1:3. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 351 (IIL5). These characteristics reminds us of the "observance of the Torah", presented by Ibn Ezra in the long commentary on Exodus 23:25 as an efficient tool to strengthen the wise soul and weaken the remaining two inferior souls (see above, p. 176). 99 For and example, see below, p. 189.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

187

then it will discover the secret of the angels and it will be able to receive a power which is stronger than the superior power that the soul received from the light of the angels. Man will then cleave to God the glorious (davek ba-shem ha-nekhbad)."lOo Taking into consideration that Ibn Ezra espoused the doctrine of the tripartite soul, one gets the strong impression that, in his opinion, only after a process of intellectual improvement, that is, after the "soul grows wise", can man entertain any hope of being saved from the stars. Additional pertinent statements were made by Ibn Ezra in the introductions to his astrological treatises. In the introduction to the first version of Seier ha-Mivbarim, as in the introduction to Seier haMoladot, Ibn Ezra referred to the conflicting interaction between universals and particulars. In this particular context, he conceded that "the superior soul of man has the power to somewhat avert the particulars and to augment or reduce all that which is indicated by the stars, but it has not any power to annul the universals (that is, the astrological judgments concerning collective matters)".IOI Likewise, in the introduction to the second version of his Seier ha-Mivbarim, Ibn Ezra endowed the "human soul which has been created from a place higher than the stars" with the capacity of slightly reducing the pernicious sway of the stars. 102 He reiterated a somewhat similar statement in the introduction to the first version of his Seier ha-She'elot, where he wrote that "since the human soul is the superior soul, man can be protected, that is, he can augment or reduce the sway of the stars". 103 Perhaps the most revealing statement may be found in the opening sentence of the introduction to Reshit l;lokhmah. As this introduction

will be studied in detail in the next part, only the following point is briefly mentioned here. We read in the opening sentence of the introduction a statement holding that the marriage of faith with wisdom is altogether viable, and has the power of bringing about man's salvation from the pernicious influence of the stars (see below, p. 196). Ibn Ezra wrote as follows: "'The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom' (Psalms Ill: 10); that is the foundation, for when man refrains from following his eyes and his heart in their tendency to satisfy his desires, then 'wisdom comes to rest in his heart' (Proverbs 14:33); furthermore, 100 Long commentary on Exodus 3:15. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 352 (IlI.6). For a discussion of this and other relevant commentaries, see SELA, 1999 (i), p~. 162-173. 01 MIVI:IARIM A, 1969, p. 9. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 352 (IIl.7). 102 MIVI:\ARIM B, BNF 1058, fol. 9a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 352 (IIl.8). 103 SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056, fol. 52b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 352 (IIl.9).

188

PART THREE

'the fear of the Lord' (Psalms 111:10) protects him from the 'ordinances of heaven and their dominion on the earth' (Job 38:33) all the days of his life, and after the soul vacates his body, he will 'inherit substance' (Proverbs 8:21) and will 'live forever' (Genesis 3:22)."104 Although the righteous person is not explicitly mentioned in the opening lines of Reshit /fokhmah, the implicit presence of the righteous person may be extrapolated from Ibn Ezra's requirement that wisdom ought to be accompanied by and dependent on withdrawal from worldly affairs as long as man remains alive. Moreover, salvation from the stars, grasped as a consequence of the fruitful combination between wisdom and godly devotion, is not only achieved as long as man remains alive but especially "after the soul abandons his body". We now focus attention on Ibn Ezra's outlook on religious devotion and its interaction with reason and science. As said above, Ibn Ezra held that if "the righteous person is more protected than the scholar", that happens because the righteous person "trusts God with all his heart", or rather because his "heart is wholly with his God". Extremely vague, however, are the expressions Ibn Ezra employed to indicate the nature of the righteous person's godly devotion as well as the nature of his salvation from the stars' control. There are various ways to "trust God with all the heart" or to have the "heart wholly with God" and, in sharp contrast with the relatively detailed account of the scholar's performance, the means by which the righteous person is saved are shrouded in mystery. It is only said that God will "bring about the proper causes to save him", quite a hazy expression which leaves virtually unspecified the way salvation is carried out. Despite the superficial impression one gets from the introduction to Seier ha-Moladot, leading perhaps the reader to believe that Ibn Ezra supported a simplistic type of religious faith,105 a closer reading reveals that he sustained a deep contempt for the shallow and perfunctory religious faith of the masses and a great admiration for the rationalistic religious devotion of the intellectuals. The above mentioned statements about the link between wisdom, faith and salvation from the stars bear clear witness to that. But it is now desirable to complete the picture by trying to find some statement made independently of any astrological context and intended to express straightforwardly Ibn Ezra's opinion about the nature of religious faith.

104 RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, p. v. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 354 (IV. 1. 1). \05 In this regard, see LANGERMAN, 1993, pp. 51-2, 58, 61.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

189

Such a statement may be found in the theological excursus in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 20:2, where our author argued with his old friend Judah ha-Levy about some theological subject underlying this verse. 106 It is in this particular framework that Ibn Ezra revealingly presented his vision of religious faith. He began by stating that human beings are by no means equal regarding their religious faith. They are divided into three hierarchically well-discerned categories. At the lowest stage are the ignorant masses who "believe what they have heard because their masters have told them so". Above them Ibn Ezra placed those whose religious faith is based on perfunctory observation and weak understanding of the religious precepts. Their religious faith is so flimsy that they "will remain silent if a heretic were to come along and argue that God does not exist, for they do not possess the means to answer". At the third and highest level, Ibn Ezra brought the intellectually educated believer. It is worthwhile to turn directly to Ibn Ezra's own words in order to better appreciate his opinion about this privileged and exclusive group of believers among whom, no doubt, he included himself: [And in the third category of religious faith is included he] whose heart has moved him to study the sciences, which are the steps that lead to the place of his desire. He will see God's works in the metals, in the plants and living creatures, and in the human body itself. He will know the makeup of each organ according to its particular nature. He will similarly know the reason why it was shaped according to this particular pattern. His heart will then aspire to learn the science of the spheres that are the Lord's works in the middle world, which is everlasting. He will learn when the sun or moon is eclipsed and how much of the sun is eclipsed by the moon. He will know why the moon is eclipsed and what brings about its eclipse. He will know all these things by incontrovertible proofs which are beyond a shadow of a doubt. Thus, by learning the ways of God the scholar will come to know God. 107 (italics added)

We may sum up the aforesaid and state that the righteous person and the scholar were by no means depicted by Ibn Ezra as dwelling at two opposite poles regarding their approach to reason, science or the 106 Ibn Ezra is here concerned with a question which Judah ha-Levy once posed before him and which is still recorded in Kuzari I, 25. Ibn Ezra formulates the question as follows: "Why did God say, I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, rather than, I am the Lord thy God who made heaven and earth and created you?". In other words, the question is why God chose to present himself in the somewhat restricted area of local Jewish history and not as a universal God referring to all of the cosmological structure. 101 Long commentary on Exodus 20:2. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 353

(III.10).

190

PART THREE

employment of their intellectual faculties. In their endeavor to be saved from the pernicious influence exerted by the stars, both of them are driven by the wise soul, the highest component of the tripartite soul, considered by Ibn Ezra as a macro-astrological pattern having the power to override the designs of the stars. Three main interrelated differences, however, separate the righteous person from the scholar. First, even when both ofthem are able to avert the pernicious sway of the stars, they achieve that goal with different degrees of success. Indeed, the scholar is capable not only of prognosticating the happening of an unfortunate event but also of taking preventive measures in order to avoid the harm called for by the stars. And yet, he attains this goal with uneven success, since sometimes his acuteness of judgment proves faulty. The righteous person, on the other hand, is able to avoid any harm preordained in his horoscope. Second, the sting of the latter extreme statement is quite removed when we appreciate that the scholar and the righteous person are described as operating within different ranges of activities. While the scholar is clearly a common flesh and blood earthly dweller, the righteous person is commonly regarded by Ibn Ezra as in transit from the lower to the upper world or residing in the upper world forever. Therefore, if the righteous person is depicted as being protected from any harm, this occurs, in all likelihood, following Ibn Ezra's ideas in the introduction to Reshit /fokhmah and elsewhere, not so much when the righteous person is alive as after his wise soul abandons his body. We appreciate, then, that far from being two exclusively incompatible figures, the righteous person and the scholar represent two successive complementary stages: while the scholar represents the paradigm showing how the wise soul may be employed during the earthly phase, the righteous person reflects the parallel best example in afterlife. Third, the righteous person is set apart from the scholar because he implements in a significantly different way the power of the wise soul. The scholar makes use of his wise soul in what we may today call an eminently secular manner, that is, by studying the different branches of the sciences, such as astronomy, astrology and medicine, and applying them when the need arises. The righteous person, on the other hand, intends to refine and improve his wise soul by "trusting God with all his heart", a venture which he fulfils, inter alia, by contemplating the "eternally permanent deeds of God" and by becoming acquainted with the secret meanings of the Tetragrammaton letters.

EIGHT MACRO-ASTROLOGICAL RULES

191

This effort, however, ought by no means to be considered as antagonistic towards the study of sciences. Witness Ibn Ezra's harmonic approach in his Yesod Mor 'ah (The Fundament of Fear). \08 In the opening chapter of this monograph, Ibn Ezra exhorted the Jewish intellectual to combine and integrate all available human scientific knowledge - the Jewish disciplines as well as the external sciences or foreign sciences (l)okhmot l)i$oniyot or l)okhmot nokhriyot). Then he offered his readers a concise curriculum in which not only the pertinent scientific branches are of crucial importance but also the order in which they are presented: natural sciences (l)okhmat ha-toladot); logic (l)okhmat ha-mivt'a); astronomy and astrology (l)okhmat ha-mazalot); arithmetic, geometry and the theory of proportions (l)okhmat hal)eshbon, l)okhmat ha-midot we-l)okhmat ha- 'arachim). And regarding the last and final stage, Ibn Ezra wrote: "Only then will you be able to elevate yourself to learn the secrets of the soul, the secrets of the superior angels and of the world to come."109

108 resod Mor'ah, that is The Fundament of Fear, is the last and most brilliant of his monographs, written in England in 1161 to explain the mtional fundamentals underlying the commandments of the Jewish religion. Concerning this monograph see: 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 189415, pp. 47-60; FLEISCHER, 1931, pp. 69-76, 107-111, 129-133, 160-168, 189-203. \09 YESOD MOR' AH, 1985, p. 320.

PART FOUR

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

Astrological-Cosmological Exegesis

A feature which can be readily traced in Abraham Ibn Ezra's full work is his inclination, or rather his obsession, to explain and comment on almost every text that fell into his hands. While this propensity might be seen as natural and even desirable in his biblical commentaries, it is surprising to observe the same penchant for exegesis in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus as well. One manifestation of this trend is to be found in the fact that Ibn Ezra did not content himself with a merely rudimentary presentation of some astrological doctrine but went on in some places to add a rational explanation, beyond what his sources were ready to convey on the same topic. l Another distinct expression of this feature, one with which we will be chiefly concerned in this part, is that he designed two of his astrological works as commentaries upon another astrological treatise of his own writing. Such was the case with the two versions of Seier ha- Te 'amim, which were designed to provide the reasons and clarifications accounting for the unrefined astrological terms and concepts that Ibn Ezra included in Reshit ljokhmah, his chief astrological treatise. Here we will not, of course, dwell upon the entire text of these three works, an endeavour which would require at least a volume on its own. Instead, we will content ourselves with dealing with a comparative study of two introductions, namely, on the one hand, the introduction to Reshit ljokhmah (hereafter abbreviated as JRH) and, on the other, the introduction to the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim (hereafter abbreviated as JSVS1). Several considerations led to this selection. First, this part has been designed to employ the same methodology as the previous one, that is, to focus attention on Ibn Ezra's introductions to his astrological treatises. As said above, we regard the subject-matter of these introductions as an excellent substratum through which Ibn Ezra's genuine and original views may be revealed. Second, although Reshit ljokhmah and both versions of Seier ha- Te 'amim are not the lesser 1 For

an example, see above, p. 87.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

193

known amongst Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises,2 their introductions have never been analyzed or commented upon, neither separately nor comparatively. Third, we selected precisely these two introductions because we consider them closely related, so that the combined examination of both might provide an excellent opportunity to disclose Ibn Ezra's views on the subjects treated therein. A preliminary question arises: why has the first version of Seier haTe 'amim been disassociated from this study? The circumstances under which Reshit ljokhmah and the two versions of Seier ha-Te'amim were written provide an answer. Reshit ljokhmah, the first component of Ibn Ezra's astrological encyclopedia, was not regarded by its author as a self-contained work (see below, p. 200). Consequently, he decided to compile an additional work meant to comment on the basic astrological concepts presented in Reshit ljokhmah, and accomplished this task in two substantially different versions. The first version of Seier haTe 'amim is dovetailed with Reshit ljokhmah in its organization and contents: it strictly keeps the division into 10 chapters adopted in Reshit ljokhmah and explains the reasons for astrological concepts in precisely the order in which the same concepts appear in Reshit ljokhmah. Moreover, and this is especially pertinent to our quest, Ibn Ezra was so absorbed in his exegetic task that he omitted writing an introduction to the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim altogether, and began this treatise directly with a discussion of the first item appearing in the first chapter of Reshit ljokhmah, which is, the question of why the sphere is divided into 360 degrees. 3 Substantially different were the circumstances under which the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim was written. As said elsewhere (see above, p. 61), this version was written after 1148, following the completion of the first version of Seier ha- 'Olam, one of the last components ofIbn Ezra's astrological encyclopedia. The reader gets the impression that a manuscript of Reshit ljokhmah was not within Ibn Ezra's reach when he wrote the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim and that he relied chiefly on his memory: even though the author deals in the 2 These three works have already merited printed editions and even translations. See RESHITI:IOKHMAH, 1939; TE'AMIMB, 1941; TE'AMIMA. 3 On the one hand, the first chapter of Reshit /fokhmah commenced with the following words CRESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, I p. vi): "Chapter I: The sphere is divided into 360 even parts, called degrees." On the other hand, the opening words of the first version of Seier ha-Te'amim are as follows CTE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, foJ. 34b): "Chapter I: The sphere was divided into 360 degrees because no other smaller number was found which contains all the fractions except the seventh."

194

PART FOUR

second version with concepts and topics that may be found in Reshit Qokhmah, the division into 10 chapters as well as the order of the topics as adopted in Reshit Qokhmah disappear completely. The absence of such a clear correspondence as that found between the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim and Reshit Qokhmah might also be explained by the assumption that the period which elapsed after Ibn Ezra finished his Reshit Qokhmah and before he began the second version of Seier haTe 'amim was not a short one. This chronological gap might also account for the fact that, in sharp contrast with the first version, Ibn Ezra thought fit to commence the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim with a preface which sets out to comment on Reshit Qokhmah, not with a discussion of the first item appearing in the first chapter of Reshit Qokhmah, but from its very introduction. These and other considerations induced some researchers to call into question the very connection between Reshit Qokhmah and the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim. A case in point is that related in the last century to Moritz Schteinschneider, who noted the existence of the socalled second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim and conjectured that it was connected, not to Reshit Qokhmah, but to Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, another astrological textbook by Ibn Ezra. 4 All the above-mentioned circumstantial evidence, coupled with the fact that the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim was written in the form of a glossary explaining concepts and ideas that might be located in Reshit l;lokhmah, leads us to consider the so-called second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim as a commentary on Reshit Qokhmah. The analysis of this part, showing close connections between the introductions to these two astrological treatises, brings to the surface new evidence pointing in the same direction. This part of the book, as the previous one, was organized as a textual commentary on these two introductions. Therefore, the text of both introductions will be gradually unfolded and the main sections of this part will be devoted to a detailed discussion and analysis of their contents. The bulk of both introductions was devoted to a discussion of the cosmological structure of the universe, a typical introductory subject in medieval astrological treatises which merited a singular treatment by Ibn Ezra, as will be seen in due course. Prior to that, two minor subjects will be dealt with: the first is a brief reference to the possibility of salvation from the sway of the stars; the second is a methodological 4 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1870, pp. 341-342. Later in this century, J. L. Fleischer followed suit. See TE'AMIM A, 1951, pp. 19-22.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

195

discussion about the reciprocal relationship between astronomy and astrology. The sequential order of the sections of this part, dealing with the three aforementioned subjects, reflects the sequential order in which these subjects are treated in IRH, exception made for the table of contents of Reshit 8okhmah, which is part of the introduction but will not be studied here. The various parts of ISVST, however, will not be introduced according to their original sequential order but according to their correspondence to the parts of the introduction to Reshit 8okhmah. The reader interested in reading the complete text of IRH and the text of ISVST in its original order would do well to tum to p. 354 (IV.!) and p. 355 (lV.2), where both Hebrew texts, accompanied by their English translations, will be presented. 5

Salvation from the Stars

A clear antagonism may be seen as emerging between the postulates of astrology, on the one hand, and the premises of theology and the religious faith of the monotheistic creeds in general, on the other. From the point of view of theology, God's providence and omnipotence may be seen as being seriously challenged and questioned by the alleged claim that the celestial bodies autonomously shape the earth and determine the fate of its natural environment and its creatures. From the vantage point of religion, astrology may be seen as canceling out the rewards coming from the observance of religious prescriptions, since if individual or collective fate is determined by the stars, and not in the least by human deeds, it is hard to see how one could maintain an assumption of reward and punishment which would justify the observance of religious commandments. The opponents of astrology were indeed those who, with a vested interest in denigrating astrology, highlighted these tensions. Their basic supposition was that their adversaries, the astrologers, upheld an extreme doctrine which afforded absolutely no opportunity for salvation from the influence of the stars. Notwithstanding this claim, we will search in vain for any astrologer in antiquity or in the Middle Ages who maintained such an extremely deterministic and fatalistic outlook based on astrology. On the contrary, 5 Both introductions have been divided there into three parts headed by numbers which indicate the relative correspondence between their contents. The same number at the beginning of two fragments means that the indicated fragment in ISVST is a commentary on the correlated fragment in IRH.

196

PART FOUR

in their thought and work we will commonly find some attempt to somewhat soften the deterministic and fatalistic character of astral influence by offering some prospect for salvation from its harmful sway. This is the case with Abraham Ibn Ezra too. Such a compromising stance may be traced in several places throughout his literary work, both in his biblical commentaries and in his astrological treatises, so that it is hardly surprising that he devoted the first lines of IRH to a brief articulation of his views on such a central subject. 6 In this particular case, the significance of this reference to salvation from astral influence lies not only in the strategic and conspicuous place where it was presented, that is, at the very opening of Ibn Ezra's chief astrological work, but also in the manner in which it was conveyed and in its specific contents: 'The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom' (Psalms 111: 10); that is, the foundation, for when man refrains from following his eyes and his heart in their tendency to satisfy his desires, then 'wisdom comes to rest in his heart' (Proverbs 14:33); furthermore, 'the fear of the Lord' (Psalms 111: 10) protects him from the 'ordinances of heaven and their dominion on the earth' (Job 38:33) all the days of his life, and after the soul takes leave of his body, he will 'inherit substance' (Proverbs 8:21) and will 'live forever' (Genesis 3:22).7

It follows that Ibn Ezra clearly dissociated himself from an extreme,

deterministic version of astrology and supported the possibility that man might be protected from the 'ordinances of heaven and their dominion on the earth' (Job 38:33). This is achieved, in Ibn Ezra's view, by virtue of a singular marriage between faith and wisdom, or, as he put it, employing biblical terms, when man 'fears the Lord' (Psalms 111:10), on the one hand, and, when 'wisdom comes to rest in his heart' (Proverbs 14:33), on the other. A further remarkable feature of Ibn Ezra's vision, one that draws on clearly neo-Platonic traditions, is that salvation from the stars is not exclusively restricted to the earthbound stage of man's life. Indeed, salvation occurs when the wise soul of man, after a process of intellectual betterment, departs from his body and ascends to the upper world where it 'inherits substance' (Proverbs 8:21) and 'lives forever' (Genesis 3:22). 6 We have already dealt with this subject in the previous chapter, when discussing the seventh and the eighth macro-astrological rules which Ibn Ezra incorporated in the introduction to Seier ha-Moladot. See above, pp. 171, 186) For a discussion of Ibn Ezra's outlook on salvation from the sway of the stars, see also the following works: SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 70, 99, 102, 120, 147-160, 161-200; LANGERMAN, 1993, p~. 49-61. RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, p. v. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 354 (IV. 1. 1).

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

197

We have already referred to some aspects of this fragment in close connection with 'the righteous person', an archetype presented in the introduction to Seier ha-Moladot as embodying a way of salvation from the stars which is seemingly diametrically opposed to another way personified by 'the scholar in the sciences of the zodiacal signs'. It was suggested there (see above, p. 188) that even if this archetype is not explicitly alluded to in IRH, Ibn Ezra pondered over the idea of 'the righteous person' when he wrote the opening lines of the introduction to Reshit lJokhmah. We particularly recognize 'the righteous person' in IRH, when Ibn Ezra asserts that salvation from the stars is achieved not only as long as man remains alive but especially after his soul leaves his body, a stage in which he will 'inherit substance' (Proverbs 8:21) and 'live forever' (Genesis 3:22). We tum now to the parallel passage in the second version to Seier haTe'amim. Behold now, 1 have taken upon myself to lay the foundations of the Book of the Beginning of Wisdom (Sefer Reshit I;lokhmah). And 1 certainly knew that all [intelligent] creatures will take pains in learning the secret of 'the Glorious and Awe-Inspiring Fearful Name' (Deuteronomy 28:58), as Agur son ofYaqe said: 'I have not learned wisdom; that I should desire to have the knowledge of the holy' (Proverbs 30:3), who are the angels. Therefore, he asked: 'Who has ascended up into heaven, and come down again?' (Proverbs 30:4); And the meaning of that is: we should never have knowledge as complete as that of the heavenly angels. For, who has ascended there and when corning down communicated to man the truth? And God, the Blessed, asked Job: 'Knowst thou the ordinances of heaven?' (Job 38:33). The wise in heart, however, sought [this knowledge] generation after generation, and their souls ascended into heaven by the ladder of geometry, they also conducted experiments and were successful in their intent. 8

The chief purpose of the opening passage in ISVST, interspersed with excerpts of biblical quotations much in the same manner as in the opening lines of IRH, was not so much to further develop the idea of salvation from the stars as to expand on some ideas which might be traced to the opening lines of IRH. Consider the following four interconnecting lines between both passages: (a) Nothing demonstrates more clearly the direct, open relationship between Reshit lJokhmah and the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim than the opening words of ISVST, where Ibn Ezra gave the readers his pledge "to lay the foundations of the Book of the Beginning of 8 TE'AMIM B,

1941, p. 1. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 356 (IV.2.1).

198

PART FOUR

Wisdom", that is, to convert the ensuing book into a commentary upon Reshit /fokhmah. Such a straightforward, explicit statement does not appear in the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim because, as said above,

the latter does not include any introduction at all. (b) In order to sharpen the understanding of the key opening words of IRH - 'The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom' (Psalms 111: 10) - (words which serve as the building blocks after which the treatise itself was named), Ibn Ezra quoted in ISVSTfrom Proverbs 30:3, in which Agur son of Yaqe is presented as stating that 'I have not learned wisdom; that I should desire to have the knowledge of the holy'. In the same context, Ibn Ezra required the educated reader to learn the secret of 'the Glorious and Awe-Inspiring Name' (Deuteronomy 28:58). (c) In IRH, Ibn Ezra posited astral influence as equal to the 'ordinances of heaven and their dominion on the earth', an eloquent expression which he constructed using key words extracted from Job 38:33. In ISVST Ibn Ezra insisted on the same point and returned to Job 38:33, but at this opportunity he directly quoted the question posed in this verse: 'Knowst thou the ordinances of heaven?' (Job 38:33). In ISVST, however, the idea behind the expression is significantly extended by widening the range of meanings ascribed to this verse, as we shall see in the next point. (d) In ISVST, the question posed to Job - 'Knowst thou the ordinances of heaven?' - is quoted not so much to give a biblical veneer to the concept of astral influence (as in IRH) as to illustrate the conditions which enable the attainment of wisdom, which in its tum makes salvation from the stars possible. The biblical expression 'ordinances of heaven', employed by Ibn Ezra throughout his whole work, was instrumental in expressing not only the general idea of astrology, as in the introduction to the second version of Sefer haMiv/;Jarim,9 but also the idea of astronomical law determining the working of the heavens, as in 'Igeret ha-Shabbat (The Epistle on the Shabbat).lo 9 See MIVJ:IARIM B, BNF 1058, fol. lOa, wherein King Solomon was portrayed as an astrologer concerned with the 'ordinances of heaven'. See also the introduction to the second commentary on the Pentateuch (SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, p. 139). 10 See '!GERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 63, (For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 336 (1.2)) where the "scholars of the ordinances of heaven" appear as concurring in the theory of the two primary motions of the heavens. See also COMMENTARY ON JOB, 1525, 38:33 and YESOD MOR' AH, 1985, III, p. 331, where the expression 'ordinances of heaven' is presented with the meaning of "astronomic laws establishing a delicate cosmic equilibrium". For the theory of the two primary motions of the heavens, see

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

199

To summarize, Ibn Ezra quoted in ISVST the question posed in Job 38:33 to suggest that the attainment of wisdom, which in its turn clears the path to salvation from the stars, calls for the learning of those branches of science which are involved in "knowing the ordinances of heaven" (lada 'at l;Juqot shamayyim). These branches are mainly astrology, also astronomy, and, together with this pair, also mathematics. Witness the three points presented by Ibn Ezra, which were stated afterwards: first, that "the wise in heart sought this knowledge, generation after generation", namely, that astrologers rely on cumulative knowledge transmitted generation after generation from antiquity; second, that "their souls ascended into heaven by the ladder of geometry", that is, that scholarly astrology includes also a deep acquaintance with mathematics and astronomy; II and third, that "they also often conducted experiments and were successful in their intent", namely, that astrology relies more on empirical experience than on logical inference. 12 Little wonder that Ibn Ezra picked precisely these three characteristics, as all three were addressed by him in IRH, not least being the reliance of astrologers on cumulative knowledge and experience. Astrology versus Astronomy

After proposing his particular vision of salvation from the influence of the stars, Ibn Ezra turned to a description in IRH of the main aims of his book:

below, p. 233. II The figure of the ascension via a ladder, taken from Genesis 28:12, has been frequently seized upon by Ibn Ezra to describe the gradual ascension in the attainment of wisdom, a process in which the acquisition of the various scientific branches is involved in order to achieve a state of sheer union with God. The best example may be found in the introduction and first chapter ofYESOD MOR'AH, 1985, pp. 315-318; See also COMMENTARY ON HOSEA, 1989, 6:3; Introduction to the COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES, 1994, and FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, 28:12. For the use of the figure in Ibn Ezra's poetry see LEVIN, 1992, pp. 41-86. See also the commentary on Ibn Ezra's poem Grasp the Ladder of Wisdom in LEVIN, 1992, pp. 41-86. 12 Ibn Ezra frequently employed the same formulation in his astrological treatises in order to recall his own astrological empirical experiences or those carried out by other astrologers. See examples in the following places: MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 47b, 49a, 51a; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, 91a; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 36a, 36b, 41a, 41b; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 31.

200

PART FOUR

Now I shall begin to explain the ordinances of heaven (Job 38:33), employing the method of astrology (derekh ha-mishpatim) as the ancients have experimented generation after generation. When this book is finished, I shall write a treatise explaining the [astrological] reasons. And may the Lord assist me, Amen. 13 (italics added)

It follows that the chief goal in Reshit /fokhmah was, as couched by Ibn

Ezra in biblical terms, to explain the 'ordinances of heaven'. As we know that Reshit /fokhmah was undoubtedly an astrological textbook, Ibn Ezra's explicit declaration of intentions confirms our assumption that the biblical expression 'ordinances of heaven' should be understood before anything else as a synonym for astrology. At the end of this brief paragraph we read that Reshit /fokhmah was purposefully designed not to be an independent and isolated book. From the outset, Ibn Ezra planned an additional work designed to serve as a companion book to Reshit /fokhmah, one whose chief aim would be to provide explanations and reasons to account for the crude astrological definitions making up the subject matter of Reshit /fokhmah. Together with the main object of his book, Ibn Ezra pointed out on this occasion some characteristics of the astrological praxis. Thus, the expression "as the ancient generations have experimented generation after generation" suggested the two following points: first, that at the core of astrology stands a body of cumulative knowledge transmitted generation after generation; and second, that astrologers credit empirical experience more than logical inference. We have already met Ibn Ezra referring to these two same characteristics in the analysis of the first paragraph of the ISVST (see above, p. 199) and we realize now that this reference in ISVST is nothing less than a parallel allusion to the current passage of IRH. Another connection between both introductions is the peculiar Hebrew expression derekh ha-mishpatim, meaning literally 'path of the judgments', by which Ibn Ezra referred to astrological methodology. Ibn Ezra's pioneer role in transposing the Hebrew biblical word mishpatim (Psalms 19:10) into astrological terms has already been studied (see above, p. 116). Let us recall that, in the work of Ibn Ezra, the Hebrew word mishpatim designates, in a technical and precise way, the diverse manifestations of astrological influence, as well as the various rules by which the astrologer can discern and determine the nature of this influence. Hence, it was not by mere chance that our author chose the

13 RESHIT ijOKHMAH,

1939, p. v. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 354 (IV. 1.2).

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

201

curious expression derekh ha-mishpa/im, in which the Hebrew keyword mishpa/im (judgments) figures, to designate astrological methodology. These brief linguistic observations lead us now to ISVST, where Ibn Ezra employed once again the Hebrew word mishpatim to refer to astrology, not least to comment on the methodological observations we found above in IRH: And we know that man's reason has conclusive proofs concerning [the existence of] the planets, their dimensions, the dimensions of their epicycles, their distance from the earth, their apogees and perigees. Regarding the judgments of the zodiacal signs (mishpe(ei ha-mazalot), however, there are no complete proofs, but rather only [proofs] which are the product of analogies (dimyonot). And some proofs derive from experimental evidence (nissyonot), just as there are things opposed to nature (hefekh ha-toledet) in the science of medicine (l;okhmat harefu 'ot). And in the science of the zodiacal signs (l;okhmat ha-mazalot) there are proofs and observations, as when the sphere of the zodiacal signs is divided into 360 degrees, because this number has plenty of submultiples. 14

In clear reference to the expression derekh ha-mishpatim (path of the judgments), employed in IRH to designate astrological methodology, Ibn Ezra now applied the parallel expression mishpetei ha-mazalot (judgments of the zodiacal signs), whose import in Ibn Ezra's mind might be assessed by the fact that it served him in naming one of his astrological treatises: Seier Mishpetei ha-Mazalot (Book of Astrological Judgments). By means of this expression, Ibn Ezra was able to develop a discussion about the pros and the cons of astrological methodology, a subject hardly alluded to in IRH. His purpose was to present astrology vis-a-vis astronomy, above all by attempting to draw a comparison between them from an epistemological and methodological vantage point. Astronomy is very favorably appraised in this paragraph, even though no definite appellation is employed to label it. From this passage we learn that astronomy is an eminently rational human activity founded on conclusive proofs which are the basis for a series of highly respectable scientific tasks: to prove the existence of the planets, to measure their dimensions, the dimensions of their epicycles, their distance from the earth, their apogees and perigees. Even though Ibn Ezra did not spell out specifically what these conclusive proofs are, his intentions were clarified when he sharply confronted the 'conclusive proofs' of astronomy with the 'incomplete proofs' of the 'judgments of the 14 TE'AMIM B,

1941, p. 2. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 357 (IV.2.2).

202

PART FOUR

zodiacal signs', that is, with the incomplete proofs which characterize astrological methodology. And it is precisely regarding the latter point that Ibn Ezra was ready to expand, adding the following details: (a) "The proofs of astrology are the product of analogies (dimyonot) and of experimental evidence (nissyonot)". A main pitfall which this sentence presents for the translator lies in trying to determine the appropriate meaning of the Hebrew word dimyonot. Taking into account this special context, we opted for the meaning of 'analogies', and set aside the equally acceptable meaning of 'imaginations' or 'illustrations'. In keeping with this translation, it would seem that Ibn Ezra's main aim is to state that astrological methodology relies not so much on logical conclusions as on two interrelated empirical tools: reaching conclusions by performing empirical comparisons between similar objects, and relying on cumulative empirical experience. (b) "There are things opposed to nature in the science of medicine." Why did Ibn Ezra cite medicine in this particular context? It would appear that this was done in order to draw a more balanced comparison between astronomy and astrology. Astronomy is to astrology, what astrology is to medicine. In other words: in the first stage, the eminently rational methods of astronomy are contrasted with the methods of astrology; afterwards, astrology, which relies on analogies and experimental evidence, is compared with the irrational methods of medicine, which go to the extremes of working contra natura (hefekh ha-toledet). What did Ibn Ezra have at the back of his mind when he wrote that "there are things opposed to nature in the science of medicine"? This assertion may be explained in two ways. First, the possibility should not be discounted that Ibn Ezra alluded to magical activities on the part of medieval physicians. But the reliability of this argument is weakened by the fact that no similar references can be traced in Ibn Ezra's work, unless we attribute to Ibn Ezra the extremely doubtful authorship of Seier ha-Nissyonot (The Book of Experiences).ls Second, the same reference may be also interpreted as a reflection of Ibn Ezra's outlook on medicine as a dual art made up of a 'hard' and a 'soft' version (see above, p. 179). According to this argument, by claiming that the work of medicine is based not only on empirical experience but also on activities which are opposed to nature, Ibn Ezra possibly referred to the therapeutic results attained by God when employing His arch-magical phenomenal medical skills in the 'hard' version of medicine. IS See SEFERHANISSYONOT, 1981, p. 11; BARKAI, 1998, p. 15, n. 23.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

203

(c) "There are proofs and observations in the science of the zodiacal signs." This methodological disquisition ends with a final reference to the methodology of the 'science of the zodiacal signs' (bokhmat hamaza!ot), a term which in Ibn Ezra's work embraces a broad variety of activities belonging to four main scientific branches: astrology, astronomy, mathematics and regulation of the calendar (see above, p. 81). The term 'proofs' (re 'ayot), brought here without any qualification to describe the 'science of the zodiacal signs', commonly refers in Ibn Ezra's work to the postulates of geometric-mathematical astronomy.16 The term 'observations' (mivbanim) points in all likelihood to the experimental aspects of astronomy. That may be learnt from the fact that an alternative name given by Ibn Ezra to the astrolabe is keli ha-mivban in Hebrew and instrumentum probationis in Latin, that is, tool of observation. In addition, Ibn Ezra employed the words mivban in Hebrew and probatio in Latin to refer to specific astronomical observations made by Hipparchus, Claudius Ptolemy and other distinguished Arabic astronomersP Now, as an example of what may be gained with the help of those 'proofs' and 'observations', that is, by the cooperation between astronomy and astrology, Ibn Ezra mentioned that the sphere of the zodiacal signs was divided into 360 degrees "because this number has plenty of submultiples". In the final analysis, in spite of the assertion that astronomy and astrology occasionally work together, the reader realizes that whereas astronomy relies on 'conclusive proofs', astrology is borne out by 'incomplete proofs', by 'analogies' and by 'experimental evidence'. This is, to all intents and purposes, a remarkable and astounding statement. For why did Ibn Ezra, the astrologer, choose the introduction to one of his astrological treatises as the place to demote astrology to an inferior status in comparison with astronomy, while, in the same breath, referring to the close collaboration between astrology and astronomy? The sting of this perplexing and curious situation, however, may be considerably reduced if attention is paid to the dividing lines between astronomy and astrology as mirrored in ancient and medieval sources, most notably in those sources which were close to Ibn Ezra's time and

16 See, for example, the following places referred to in this book: TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 35a; commentary on Amos 5:8; HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN ALMUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 149,301. 17 See HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MuTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 149-150, 300-301; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 82, 91, 92, 95 et passim.

204

PART FOUR

cultural climate. We tum now to briefly explore this dual and contradictory trend. 18 It is almost commonplace, especially after the rise of Greek science, to refer to the close collaboration between astronomy and astrology. Since the practical uses of learned astrology depended heavily on the mapping of the movements and relative positions of the heavenly bodies, it is clear, on the one hand, that horoscopic astrology could develop only after the growth of mathematical astronomy, and, on the other hand, that astrology provided a constant stimulus to mathematical astronomy to continue to refine its toolS. 19 In addition, the fact that some prominent scientists grouped astronomy together with astrology in their works highlights their interdependence. Here Claudius Ptolemy is the best example. Whereas his Almagest is the culmination of the Greek contribution to mathematical astronomy, his Tetrabiblos epitomizes Greek astrology. The main indication of the fuzzy borders between astronomy and astrology, however, comes from semantics. The terms astronomia and astrologia were practically indistinguishable both in Greek and in Latin, and either could be applied to the two pertinent fields of activity. 20 Another remarkable tendency is to conflate astronomy and astrology and subsume both under a single name. This is perceptible in the work of such an important Arabic medieval philosopher as Al-Farabl (ca.870ca.950) who, in his 'Ihsa al- 'ulum (Classification of the Sciences), divided 'ilm al-nujum (the science of stars) in a two-fold manner. According to the twelfth century translation into Latin made by Domincus Gundisalvi, Al-Farabl divided the scientia de stellis (science of the stars) into two parts: on the one hand, scientia de stellarum significatione ... dicitur astronomia, which corresponds to the modem concept of astrology; on the other, scientia de stellis doctrinalis vocatur astr%gia, which corresponds to the modem concept of 18 The following is based on ideas presented in depth in my article SELA, 2001 (i). 19 There is a large bibliography dealing with this subject. See, inter alia, BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, p. 3, note 2; BARON, 1958, vol. viii, pp. 175-184; PINES, 1964, pp. 343-349; NEUGEBAUER, 1969, pp. 168-177; LLOYD, 1973, p. 130; PEDERSEN, 1978, pp. 304-305; LOUIS, 1983, pp. 1-5; TESTER, 1987, pp. 11, 18-20, 55-57,61,91,96-97,102-104; LINDBERG, 1992, pp. 17,263; LLOYD, 1993, pp. 180181. 20 Thus, the oldest extant astrological treatise in the ancient world was entitled Astronomicon by its author, Marcus Manilius (ASTRONOMICA, 1977, p. 4), but in his Tetrabiblos, Ptolemy commonly referred to astrology under the name astronomia (TETRABIBLOS, 1980, pp. 2-5, 116-117). For the source of confusion between the words astrologia, astrologus, astronomia and astronomus, see LAISTNER, 1941, p. 267, note 52.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

205

astronomy.21 The same tendency is particularly noticeable in the work of Ibn Ezra and of other Jewish intellectuals contemporaneous with him. Thus, Abraham Bar l;Iiyya, the true pioneer in the rise of Hebrew medieval science, coined the term bokhmat ha-kokhavim (that is, the science of the stars) to label an integrated body of knowledge related to the study of the stars which has two main parts: bokhmat ha-bizzayion (literally, science of observation), which represents astronomy, and bokhmat ha-nissayion (literally, 'science based on experience'), a term referring directly to astrology. As he explains in the introduction to his Seier Surat ha- 'Are$= And I say that 1,1Okhmat ha-kokhavim (literally, science of the stars) is divided by man into two main parts. One part deals with the form of the heavens and of the earth, with the motion of the sphere turning about the earth, with the motion of the stars fixed in the heavens, and with the order and measure of these motions and an explanation of their reckoning. This part is essential to all scientific knowledge and rational thinking, and all its proofs and statements are entirely correct beyond any doubt. This part is held in high esteem by all scholars, and it is called bokhmat habizzayion (literally, science of observation). And the second part of bokhmat ha-kokhavim depends on the first and follows upon it. This part deals with the occurrence of events on the earth which are heralded and caused by the stellar motions. [This part explains] how man can foretell future events on the basis of evidence provided by the scholars of this art, taking into account the events of their own times and the experimental evidence transmitted to them by the ancients. But this part does not belong to truly scientific knowledge; it should be called mel'ekhet ha-nissayion (art based on experience) and must not be called bokhmat ha-bizzayion (science of observation). But the overwhelming majority of mankind think that mel'ekhet ha-nissayion follows from bokhmat ha-bizzayion and that it constitutes the benefit provided by the latter in this world. The scholars who rely on scientific wisdom, however, do not credit it with this dignity, for its proofs are not [entirely] true, and they all derive from suppositions and experimental evidence. 22

21 A similar nomenclature was employed in the translation made by Gerard de Cremone. See in this regard DRUART, 1978, pp. 44-5. 22 $URAT HA' ARES, 1546, pp. 4-6. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 358 (IV.3). A very similar statement is made by Abraham Bar l;Iiyya in his epistle to Rabbi Judah Barzilai of Barcelona (EPISTLE TO JUDAH BARZILAI, 1917, pp. 29-30): "The first part of J.lOkhmat ha-kokhavim consists of the investigation of the form of earth and the heavens; ... it investigates the stars and calculates their motions ... The second part is dependent upon the first, and it consists of the knowledge of the sway and the power granted to the stars ... and [of the knowledge of] how this power changes when the stars change their motions ... And our forefathers, may their memory be blessed, praised both parts, and they dealt with their investigation and busied themselves with them."

206

PART FOUR

Most interesting is the ambiguous manner in which Maimonides employed the talmudic term i$tagninin. 23 On the one hand, this term was employed by him to denote astrologers, with a view to deprecating their activities. 24 But he used the same term i$ tagninin to acknowledge the contribution of a group of Jewish astronomers, and regarded their reckoning methods as the astronomical paradigm endorsed in Talmudic times for the regulation of the Jewish calendar.25 We see, then, that Maimonides' i$tagninut26 and Bar I:Iiyya's l;lOkhmat ha-kokhavim fit into the same semantic field as Ibn Ezra's bokhmat ha-mazalot. In all three cases, a single term serves to denote both astrology and astronomy, thereby blurring the borders between them. On the other hand, there is a tendency to draw a clear-cut distinction between astronomy and astrology. This distinguishing trend draws on substantial differences between the subject-matter of astronomy and astrology. In this regard, a good example is provided by the Etymologiae of Isidore of Seville (seventh century). In a passage of this work dealing with de differentia astronomiae et astrologiae, Isidore of Seville makes a clear distinction between astronomia, which, he says, is the domain of the mathematici, and astrologia superstitiosa, which, he says, deals with the twelve astrological houses, and with the influence of the stars over personal horoscopes and human destiny.27 This differentiation attributes 23 In Nedarim 32a, Shabbat 156a, Yoma 28b, Bava Batra 16b it is said that Abraham's sterility was caused by his i$fagninut, that is, by the astrological influence of the stars. In the same context it is stated that if, in spite of his infertility, Abraham finally begot Isaac, it was because he was able to overcome the control of the stars, since Israel as a nation has a special astrological status ('ein mazal leYisra'el). In Berakhot 4a, Yoma 12b, 13b, 36b, Sanhedrin 101b the designation i${.agninin is applied to Pharaoh's magicians who tried to match Moses' feats. 4 MAIMONIDES' LETTER ON ASTROLOGY, 1963, p. 234: "The position of the i$ fagninin is given the lie by reason, for correct reasoning has already refuted, by means of lucid proofs, all those follies that they have maintained. It also is regarded as a falsehood by us because of religious tradition." See also Mishneh Torah, Avodah Zarah XI, 9-10. 25 See SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 1:6, p. 4: "In the same way as the i$/agninin, who discern the positions and motions of the stars, engage in calculations, so the Jewish court, too, used to study and investigate and perform mathematical operations, in order to find out whether or not it would be possible for the new crescent to be visible in its 'proper time', which is the night of the thirtieth day." See also SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967,2:4, p. 7; 6:1, p. 27; 10:6, p. 41; 11:7, p. 44. 26 For an explanation of the puzzling use of the term i$fagninin by Maimonides, see SELA, 2001 (i), pp. 67-80 27 ETYMOLOGIAE, 1969, III, 27. For a discussion of the distinction between astronomy and astrology in the Etymologiae written by Isidore of Seville (560-636), and in Liber de tempororum ratione written by Bede Venerabilis (672-735), see LEJBOWICZ, 1985, pp. 1-41; LAISTNER, 1941,pp. 267-8.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

207

clear epistemological superiority to astronomy over astrology. This is demonstrated by the first chapter of Tetrabiblos, where Claudius Ptolemy, the astrologer, describes astrology as a "less self-sufficient method" than astronomy, and immediately advises the reader not to compare the perceptions of astrology with the certainty of astronomy, which he describes as "unvarying science".28 This tendency, too, is noticeable in the times of Ibn Ezra among Jewish intellectuals contemporaneous with him. Whereas astronomy is deemed by Abraham Bar I.Iiyya to be "part and parcel of scientific knowledge and rational thinking", astrology is considered to be merely an art based on experience (mel'ekhet ha-nissayion) that "does not belong to truly scientific knowledge".29 Maimonides, as may be expected from a staunch opponent of astrology, considers astronomy an "exceedingly glorious science", whereas astrology is an art whose "assertions are far from being scientific".30 As for Ibn Ezra, we have already seen that, in his opinion, astronomy relies on 'conclusive proofs', whereas astrology is borne out by 'incomplete proofs', by 'analogies' and by 'experimental evidence' .31 In this situation, it is precisely the position of Bar I.Iiyya and Ibn Ezra that is puzzling: why should these two astrologers advocate a position that openly declares, without inhibitions or embarrassment, the inferiority of their art in comparison to astronomy? The main reason, it seems, is that their stance was commonplace among astrologers. Astrology was born with a 'congenital defect', an 'inferiority complex' vis-a-vis astronomy. In the Aristotelian tradition, knowledge acquired by 28 TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I, 1, pp. 2-5. 29 SURAT HA' AREs, 1546, pp. 4-6. 30 MAIMONIDES' LETTER ON ASTROLOGY, 1926, pp. 45-46. For a discussion of

Maimonides' stance on astrology, see BARKAI, 1987, pp. 323-48; LANGERMAN, 1991, pp. 123-58; FREUDENTHAL, 1993 (ii), pp. 77-90; KREISEL, 1994, pp. 25-32; SCHWARTZ, 1999, pp. 92-110; SELA, 2001 (i), pp. 63-80. 31 A similar position may be perceived in a fragment of Liber de rationibus tabularum (UBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 83-4), in which Ibn Ezra presents two methods for dividing the zodiac into twelve parts. The first method, which is ascribed to Ptolemy, works secundum cogitation em, that is, 'relying on reason', whereas the second method, which is ascribed to the Hindu sages and the ancients, works secundum sensum visus, that is, 'relying on the senses'. According to Ibn Ezra, both methods are true and necessary for practical uses, but while Ptolemy's method stands on its own, the second method depends on the first one. The reason for this dependence is that Ptholemy's method is based on scientia et ratio, that is, 'scientific and rational thinking', while the other method relies on probatio iudiciorum, that is, 'the experience of the astrological judgments'. See also TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 38a, 43b and Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 28:8. For a reference to these passages, see below, p. 246.

208

PART FOUR

experience, with no basis in theory, is demoted to the inferior degree of an art, the knowledge of practical rules resting on general principles, which occupies a lower level than science, the pure knowledge of universal causes devoid of any practical end. 32 Thus, as already mentioned, astrology is depicted as a "less self-sufficient method" in the first chapter of Tetrabiblos, the bedside book of astrologers, while astronomy is described there as an "unvarying science".33 Similar statements can be found in medieval Arabic astrological sources. 34 The above-mentioned statements by Bar I:Iiyya, who calls astrology mel 'ekhet ha-nissayion, that is, art based on experience, and by Ibn Ezra, who states that experience is one of the main tools of astrology, corroborate this assertion. Heavens and Earth

Let us return to [RH. After presenting the main purpose of his book, its methodology and the table of contents of its ten chapters, Ibn Ezra turned to his educated readers and in his usual, concise style gave an extremely compact account of the universe: he began with a brief description of the heavenly region and went on to the sublunary region. Finally, he presented his readers with a syllabus of the subjects required to become acquainted with astronomy and astrology. Each ofthese three topics will now merit a separate discussion headed by the relevant text. The Heavenly Region Any scholar who investigates this science will observe the motions of the seven planets (meshartim) which are hasty in their motions when they move around the degrees of the superior sphere, and their motions in their own spheres when they face the uppermost stars which are in the sphere of

32 See Aristotle, Metaphysics, I (A), 980"25-981 b l. For a study of the transmission of the Aristotelian tradition of the classification of sciences to the thought of medieval Arabic and especially Jewish intellectuals, see WOLFSON, 1973, pp. 493560. 33 TETRABIBLOS, 1980, 1,1, pp. 2-5. 34 We may detect an echo of Ptolemy's words, as well as Bar l;Iiyya's and Ibn Ezra's assessments, in a fragment of AI-Qanun ai-Mas 'udi, translated by S. Pines, where al-Biriini (d. 1048 or a few years later) deals with the relationship between astronomy and astrology. See PINES, 1964, pp. 348-349. See also ART OF ASTROLOGY, 1934, p. 210 (par. 346). For similar ideas in the work of Al-Farabi, see DRUART, 1978, pp. 43-47.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

209

the zodiacal signs, and all these motions which take place around the center (mu$aq) which is the earth, which is just like a point in the middle of the circle. 35

At the core of this brief reference to the heavenly region stand the seven planets and one of their most remarkable features, according to Ibn Ezra, stems from the Hebrew name he gave to them in this passage: meshartim, that is, literally, attendants. As mentioned earlier (see above, p. 116), Ibn Ezra found that word in Psalms 103:21, and in his commentary on this verse he interpreted the word meshartim as being synonymous with the notion of the seven planets. Yet in this brief passage of [RH, the seven planets are not so much regarded from an astrological standpoint, as is usual when Ibn Ezra employs the word meshartim, as from a clearly astronomical perspective. In fact, Ibn Ezra referred to two different celestial motions in which the planets are involved. The first is the motion of the planets "around the degrees of the superior sphere"; here, Ibn Ezra does not take pains to explain what precisely is this 'superior sphere' around the degrees of which this particular motion is measured. In this same context, Ibn Ezra makes the additional remark that the planets are "hasty in their motion", but, again, does not account for the relation between the relative high speed of the planets and their motion "around the degrees of the superior sphere". The second is the motion of the planets that is observed "in their own spheres". In this regard, Ibn Ezra was ready to declare without any additional explanation that this second motion is observed when the planets "face the uppermost stars which are in the sphere of the zodiacal signs". Regarding both motions, Ibn Ezra made the important remark that "all the motions take place around the center (mu$aq), which is the earth, which is just like the point in the middle of the circle". In order to express the notion of center, Ibn Ezra employed in this sentence the special Hebrew word mU$aq, which, as explained above, is one of the most idiosyncratic products of Ibn Ezra linguistic work in the creation of a Hebrew scientific terminology.36 MU$aq plays two interrelated crucial functions in this passage. First, by interpreting and using this word as 'center', Ibn Ezra constructed an outspoken endorsement of the geocentric cosmological outlook. Second, the same word highlights a 35 RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, p. v. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 355 (IV.I.3).

36 He extracted the word from Job 36:16, 37:10 and 38:38, and claimed that its

import as 'center' is by no means a contrivance but an integral part of the biblical text. For a more complete assessment of Ibn Ezra's stance towards the word mU$aq and how he employed it in his entire work, see p. 113.

210

PART FOUR

unifying principle which combines the two different above-mentioned motions, for, whatever the particular details of these motions may be, both of them take place "around the mU$aq which is the earth, which is just like the point in the middle of the circle". The reader of this passage, however, especially if not equipped with the necessary astronomical information, gets the feeling that he is left with several unanswered questions: What precisely is this 'superior sphere', around the degrees of which one of the two motions of the planets may be measured? Is there any relation between the high speed of the planets and their motion "around the degrees of the superior sphere"? What are those 'spheres of the planets' on which their second motion may be observed? Why should the motion of the planets "in their own spheres" be observed precisely when the planets face the fixed stars of the zodiac? Why did Ibn Ezra focus his attention not on one but on precisely two motions? Since both motions are applied to the planets, are they to be considered as separated or related one to the other? It was precisely upon these questions that Ibn Ezra dwelled in the corresponding part of ISVST, as will be shown in due course. The Sublunary Region Then he (that is, the scholar) will fully realize that the aforesaid motions [of the planets], even though they proceed evenly and straight, vary their effect according to the [seven] climates (gevulim).37

What captures our attention in this passage is the sharp contrast between the heavenly and the sublunary region. Concerning the motions of the planets, we read that they "proceed evenly and straight". On the other hand, the effect of those motions over the sublunary region is by no means uniform but characterized by variations. Therefore, it would seem that our author seeks to describe a paradoxical scenario wherein what is even and straight in the heavenly region engenders variations in the sublunary region. Now, in order to clarify how these variations become apparent in the sublunary world, the seven climates are introduced. The notion of the 'seven climates', however, is not expressed in this passage by the commonplace Hebrew word 'aqlimim, but by means of the special Hebrew word gevulim (see above, p. 107).

37 RESHIT I;IOKHMAH,

(IV. 1.3).

1939, pp. v-vi. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 355

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

211

As noted above (see p. 158), these seven bands dividing the inhabited area of the earth were viewed by Ibn Ezra in the introduction to Sefer haMoladot as a mighty macro-astrological pattern overriding the ostensible outcome of the private horoscope. In IRH, however, Ibn Ezra introduced another aspect of the same astrological phenomenon, namely, the notion that the motions of the planets, even though they "proceed evenly and straight", do not have a uniform influence on the surface of the earth, but vary their effect according to the seven climates. Ibn Ezra dwelled upon the technical details of this singular type of astrological influence in some of his astrological treatises, when dealing with the natural and physical properties of the planets. Further on in the fourth chapter of Reshit lJokhmah, he described a special relationship conferring astrological power upon each of the seven of the planets over each of the seven climates. In Sefer ha- Te 'amim, this special astrological relationship was accounted for in terms of a direct correlation between the position of the planet's sphere in the reigning cosmological model and the ordinal position of the climate to which the corresponding planet is attached. Thus Saturn was attached to the first climate, Jupiter to the second, Mars to third, and so on. 38 A Cluster ofSciences [The scholar] will know these things by being acquainted with the number of degrees of the sphere, by [recognizing] the northern and southern constellations of the [eighth] sphere, by being cognizant of the seven planets (meshartim) and their natural constitution (toledet), by becoming knowledgeable about the universals and the particulars and all their actions. 39

Ibn Ezra concluded IRH by presenting to his readers and students an encyclopedic programme of studies encompassing the fundamental topics with which they should be familiar in order to learn astrology.4o 38 See RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, IV, pp. 42, 44, 46-50; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 41b-42a. As for the astrological sources of the seven climates doctrine, see TETRABIBLOS, 1980, pp. 124-125,312-315. For the Arabic sources, in all likelihood known by Ibn Ezra, see especially KITAB AL-MADJ.iAL, 1996, III (Arabic text), pp. 389-393, V (Jean de Seville's translation), pp. 235-239; VIII (Hennann de Carinthie's translation), pp. 107-109. For the applications Ibn Ezra made of the astrological aspects of the seven climates doctrine in his work, see SELA, 1999 (i), p~.65,85, 107,223-226,261,327,328. 9 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, p. vi. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 355 (IV. 1.3). 40 For Ibn Ezra's encyclopedic approach to the acquisition of sciences see SELA, 2000, pp. 154-170.

212

PART FOUR

First, the student of astrology should learn geometry and mathematics in order to measure celestial space by the number of the degrees of the sphere. Second, he should be acquainted with astronomy to the point of being capable of differentiating between the various constellations into which the fixed stars are ordinarily divided; more precisely, between the "northern and southern constellations of the sphere". The expression "northern and southern constellations of the sphere" points to two vast groups of constellations which are characterized by the main quality of being located either to the north or to the south of the zodiac belt of fixed stars. The 'northern' constellations of fixed stars are 21 in number, whereas the 'southern' include 15 additional constellations. All of these 36 constellations together with the 12 zodiacal constellations comprise the 48 constellations of fixed stars appearing in Ptolemy's star catalogue at Almagest VII, 5. 41 That these two topics - the number of degrees of the sphere, as well as the description of the northern and southern constellations of the sphere -were important for Ibn Ezra may be deduced from the fact that these were precisely the two subjects with which he opened the first chapter of Reshit lJokhmah. At the very beginning of Reshit lJokhmah, Ibn Ezra described several geometricalastronomical methods by which the sphere may be divided,42 whereupon he devoted the major part of the first chapter to a detailed account and description of the 48 above-mentioned constellations of fixed stars, including the 21 'northern constellations' , the 15 'southern constellations' and the 12 constellations of the zodiac, including a list of the main stars of which they are comprised. 43 Together with mathematics and astronomy, those interested in "knowing the ordinances of heaven employing the method of astrology" ought obviously to learn astrology, not only in a general and theoretical manner but also by becoming familiar with its specialized branches. In 41 See also note 43. 42 RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, I, p. 153, vi: "The sphere is divided into 360 even

parts, called degrees; and on that point there is unanimity among the ancients and their successors, because that number is divisible by all integers up to 10 with the exception of 7. It is also divided into 12 parts and they are called signs; and each sign has 30 normal degrees; and in each degree there are 60 minutes, and in each minute 60 seconds, and so on until the tenths." 43 RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, I, p. 153, vi: "These [zodiacal signs] are in the superior sphere, which is the eighth one, together with the northern and southern constellations, and they form a total of 48 constellations, and the number of their stars is 1022, in the opinion of all the ancients including Ptolemy. Of them, there are in the constellations of the zodiacal signs 346 stars ... The southern constellations number 15 and they have 316 stars ... The northern constellations number 21, and they have 360 stars ... ". Cf. Almagest (1984), book VII, ch. v, pp. 341-399.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

213

this regard, Ibn Ezra specified three main subjects. He began by requiring the student of astrology to learn the rather theoretical subject of the "seven planets and their natural constitution", that is, the natural and physical properties of the planets.44 Of course, with these words he did not refer to the physical properties of the planets qua celestial bodies, but to the natural and physical properties of their astrological influence as those properties are brought to bear upon the sublunary world. This is a major topic, to which Ibn Ezra devoted four out of the ten chapters making up Reshit l;!okhmah and a considerable part of both versions of Seier ha- Te 'amim. 45 And yet, Ibn Ezra was very much aware of and worried about the dangerous implications of attributing to the supralunar seven planets natural and physical properties which, according to the Aristotelian cosmological outlook, strictly belong to sublunary bodies. This was precisely the first topic upon which Ibn Ezra dwelled in his second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, immediately after the introduction, when dealing with the loaded term 'fiery' zodiacal signs,46 but he obsessively returned to it in both his scientific and nonscientific work, notably in his biblical commentaries.47 Together with this theoretical subject, and in the framework of the same cluster of sciences, the student of astrology would be expected to gain expertise in two major branches of astrology. Ibn Ezra introduced them by employing two key words: 'universals' and 'particulars'. Both key words played a crucial role in the introduction to the first version of Seier ha-Moladot, analyzed in the previous part (see above, p. 145). Let us, then, briefly summarize two things. The first key word, 'universals', points to general astrology, which is the branch of astrology concerned with the collective fate of all mankind by means of astrological longrange and short-range forecasts, as well as astrological analysis of past 44 Ibn Ezra employed here once again the special Hebrew word toledet, which he frequently employed throughout his work to refer to the natural properties of a wide variety of objects, not only in the sublunary but in the heavenly region as well. For this Hebrew word, see above, p. 134. 45 See RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, IV, pp. xiii-Ii; V, pp. li-liii; VI, pp. liii-Ivi; VII, pp. Ivi-Ixii; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, IV, fols. 40b-42b; V, fols 42b-43a; VI, fo1. 43a; VII, fo1. 43b; TE'AMIMB, 1941, pp. 17-32. 46 See TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 3: "Fiery zodiacal signs: the astronomers put forward evidence to demonstrate that the zodiacal signs are not made out of four sublunar elements but ofa fifth element...". 47 See the following places: TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 35a; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, 103; FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1999, 1:1; SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, 1:1; COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES, 1994, 1:4; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, I, p. 319; COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 1525, 148; loNG CoMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976,33:21. Fora discussion of this subject, see below,p. 255.

214

PART FOUR

history. Ibn Ezra himself devoted close attention to this branch of astrology in both versions of his Sefer ha- 'Olam (Book of the World). The second key word, 'particulars', points to genethlialogical astrology, concerned with the fate of individuals and resting on the principle that the destiny of the subject for whom a horoscope has been cast is determined by the configuration of the celestial sphere at the instant of his birth. Directly concerned with genethlialogical astrology, Ibn Ezra wrote the two versions of his Sefer haMoladot.

A Demonstration of the Cosmic Structure

Ibn Ezra reserved the larger and central part of ISVST to address the astronomical part of IRH, just reviewed in the last section. His intention was to expand upon and provide a full explanation of the following four topics cursorily mentioned in IRH: (I) The seven spheres of the seven planets; (2) the slow motion of the 'host of heaven'; (3) the superior sphere; (4) the two primary motions of the heavens. A separate discussion will now be devoted to these four topics, each headed by its corresponding relevant passage in ISVST. These four passages, despite their being presented in separate sections, together form in ISVST a sequential text devoted en bloc to a construction of the cosmic structure. The Seven Spheres of the Seven Planets And behold, we have seen that seven are the spheres, because there are seven planets and each of them is in its sphere, and the sphere which completes its motion in a few days is beneath the sphere whose motion takes more days for completion. For when one circle is inside another circle, always the uppermost circle is the bigger. Moreover, we have seen that whenever one of the planets is in conjunction with another planet, the lower planet hides the uppermost planet, and the planets, in their tum, hide the stars of the zodiacal signs. 48

Ibn Ezra began by advancing a sweeping thesis: "seven are the spheres, because there are seven planets and each of them is in its sphere". In saying that, he was clearly referring to the passage in IRH where the planets were depicted as moving in their "own spheres" (see above, p. 208). Yet in clear contrast with IRH, where this astronomical datum was rather fleetingly mentioned, in ISVST Ibn Ezra regarded this statement as 48 TE'AMIM B,

1941, pp. 2. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 356 (lV.2.3).

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

215

a main thesis meriting a full demonstration. Consequently, in the sequel, he presented two interrelated arguments to prove that the cosmic area where the planets dwell is structured in the form of seven concentric spheres which carry the seven planets. Before setting forth these arguments, a brief comment ought to be made. In the above-mentioned passage, Ibn Ezra ignored altogether the eccentric and epicyclical spheres of the planets, and took into account only their primary spheres. This schematic and oversimplified approach is commonplace in cosmological passages in medieval non-astronomical works, mainly astrological, cosmographical or philosophical treatises, intended for educated laymen desirous of acquiring conventional and superficial astronomical knowledge. Examples mirroring this approach may be readily found both in the astrological work of Arabic intellectuals such as AI-Birilni and AbU Ma'shar49 as well as in the work of Jewish intellectuals contemporaneous with Ibn Ezra, such as Abraham Bar ijiyya, Judah ha-Levy and Maimonides. 5o Ibn Ezra followed suit and applied the same simplified model of eight spheres in his biblical commentaries51 and his monographs 52 , as well as in his astrological treatises. 53 In a specialized astronomical work such as Liber de rationibus tabularum, however, Ibn Ezra did not hesitate to make use of the eccentric or epicyclical spheres of the planets in order to give a full account for their erratic motions. 54 When obligated some lines later in ISVST to illustrate the conclusive proofs provided by astronomy in contrast to the non-complete proofs of astrology (see above, p. 201), Ibn Ezra made a virtue of necessity and referred in a distinct cosmological49 For some examples of this schematic and oversimplified approach in Arabic astrological treatises, see Al-BirUni's ART OF ASTROLOGY, 1934, pp. 43-5, par. 120-2 and Abu Ma 'shar's ABBREVIATION OF THE INTRODUCTION TO AsTROLOGY, 1994, V, p. 6l. 50 See the following four examples, close to Ibn Ezra in time, space and cultural environment. First, in Abraham Bar l;Iiyya's cosmographical work SURAT HA'ARE$, 1546, pp. 60-64; second, in a law code such as Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, Hi/khat Yesodei Torah, 3, 1; third, in a philosophical treatise such as Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed, II, 9-10; fourth, in a philosophical treatise such as Judah ha-Levy's HAKUZARI, 1972, IV, 25. 51 Second (fragmentary) commentary on Genesis 1:6; first and second (fragmentary) commentary on Genesis 1:14; commentary on Psalms 103:2l. 52 See, for example, YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, XI, p. 340; 'EI;lAD, 1985, p. 402. 53 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 34b. 54 See, just as one example among many others, in LIBER DE RATlONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 109, the account that the author of Liber de rationibus tabularum gave for the motion of Saturn, employing four different spheres: (1) circulus jirmamenti, that is, a sphere which moves in the plane of the zodiac; (2) circulus dec/inationis, that is, a sphere inclined at a certain angle in relation to the plane of the zodiac; (3) circulus excentricus, that is, a sphere whose center is not the earth; (4) circulus brevis, that is, an epicyclical sphere.

216

PART FOUR

astrological context to the "dimensions of their epicycles, their distance from the earth, their apogees and perigees". He even went to the extreme of introducing the eccentric or epicyclical spheres into his biblical commentaries, when an exegetical argument could not, in his opinion, be fully developed without resort to such a type of astronomical data. 55 Let us return to ISVST. The first argument set forth to demonstrate that "there are seven planets and each of them is in its sphere" is based on evidence easily confirmed by astronomical observation. Ibn Ezra affirmed that the different planets have different cycles, and in all likelihood he was postulating this statement with such common items of astronomical data in mind as the point that the cycle of the moon has approximately 29 Y2 days or that the sun's cycle has approximately 365 Y.! days. Relying on astronomical data of that kind, as well as on general geometrical postulates such as that "always the uppermost circle is the bigger", Ibn Ezra demonstrated that the higher the sphere, the slower the cycle of the planet carried by this sphere. In the second argument, Ibn Ezra had a clearly negative aim, namely, he strove to refute, as patently absurd, the assumed thesis that the cosmos has been structured as one single sphere. Ibn Ezra's argument rests on the central idea that if all celestial bodies were embedded in a single sphere, then all celestial bodies should necessarily move at the same speed. But observational evidence shows that at times one planet passes in front of another, thus hiding the other from view, that is, they are in conjunction one with the other. This proves categorically, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, that the planets move at different speeds, which, in its turn, demonstrates that the planets are by no means embedded in a single sphere but are necessarily placed in different spheres having different heights and completing their cycles in different periods of time. Why did Ibn Ezra not content himself with putting forward the first argument alone, which successfully demonstrates the existence of a 55 See the following passage extracted from the introduction to the first commentary which Ibn Ezra wrote on the Pentateuch, in which he dealt with the problem of establishing the new month, and referred to four different spheres that account for the moon's motion. FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, pp. 3-4: "Furthermore, even if the Bible explicitly said, 'let the moon be as a sign for God's holy seasons', a very important aspect of the problem remains to be solved: Does a new moon start when the moon completes circling the sphere of the zodiac, i.e., every 27 days plus a few hours, or when it completes the apogee of the eccentric sphere whose center is far from the center of the earth, or when it completes circling the sphere of the dragon according to the calculation of wise men, since its epicyclica/ sphere turns in the opposite direction?". (italics added) For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 359 (lV.4).

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

217

multi-sphere cosmos? Why did he deem it necessary to go on and criticize such an unrefined idea as the assumption of a single-sphere cosmos? We suggest that by presenting this critique, Ibn Ezra was directly addressing his students and the readers of the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim - a prospective reading public which, taking into account general cultural conditions in western Europe in the middle of the twelfth century, may be considered as desirous of enlarging their knowledge but not familiar with sophisticated scientific data and arguments. One of such ideas, which presumably Ibn Ezra was intent on eradicating from the mind of his readers, was that of a single-sphere cosmos, one which may all too easily be deduced by uncritical, crude astronomical observation. It is worth noting here that Ibn Ezra exploited exactly the same argument in such a strategic but utterly different place as his second commentary on Genesis I: 14, where he was required to provide an account of the genesis of the heavenly bodies. In this commentary, written in northern France, Ibn Ezra confronted a simplistic commentator who stated that "all the seven planets dwell in a single sphere", that is, one who claimed that the heavens were created as a single sphere in which all the seven planets were placed together. 56 Against the claim of this unsophisticated commentator, Ibn Ezra raised precisely the same argument that he presented in ISVST to challenge a similar thesis: No one can refute that there are seven spheres for seven planets, and we know that [feature] by means of incontrovertible proofs which only the geometricians can thoroughly understand. And now I will mention the clearest [proof] of all: if [we assume that] all the seven planets were in a single sphere, then it would be utterly impossible for one planet to be hidden behind another planet when one planet is in conjunction with another planet in longitude or in latitude, since in this case all the planets should move with identical speed. 57

The similarity between the arguments brought forward in those two contrasting citations gives the strong impression that in both places Ibn Ezra addressed a similar audience. The same point also suggests that the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim and the second commentary on the

56 For a comparison between the first and second commentary on Genesis 1:14, see above, p. 332. 57 Second (fragmentary) commentary on Genesis 1:14. SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, p. 151. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 386 (VIA). For a discussion of both commentaries, see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 240-243.

218

PART FOUR

Pentateuch were written at the same time and in the same place, that is, between 1153-1156, in Rouen, the capital of Normandy. 58 The Slow Motion ofthe Host ofHeaven Therefore, we knew that the host of heaven (Genesis 2:1; Deuteronomy 4:19, et passim), that is, the immense multitude [of stars] which has been divided by the scholars in the science of the zodiacal signs into forty-eight constellations, is above the spheres of the planets, and we found that it moves from west to east [at a rate of] one degree in seventy years. 59 (italics added)

In the final section of the previous passage, Ibn Ezra referred to two different kinds of occultation. In the first, "the lower planet hides the uppermost planet", and in the second, "the planets hide the stars of the zodiacal signs". The reference to the first kind of occultation is completely understandable and to be expected in the framework of this passage where the planets and their spheres are being discussed. But why did Ibn Ezra decide to refer in the sequel to a second type of occultation, one in which, besides the restricted realm of the seven planets' spheres, the stars of the zodiacal signs appear as well? For one thing, Ibn Ezra did not merely intend to provide a descriptive account, but strove to gradually put together the cosmological structure from a series of demonstrable statements. Hence, Ibn Ezra incorporated the second kind of occultation in order to demonstrate the existence of the next significant layer in the cosmological structure. He dispelled any doubt about his intention when he stated that "the planets, in their turn, hide the stars of the zodiacal signs. Therefore, we knew that the host of heaven ... is above the spheres of the planets." (italics added) On this score, it is not only the method of demonstration that captures our attention but also the name by which the fixed stars of the eighth sphere were called: $va ha-shamayim, that is, 'the host of heaven'. Ibn Ezra gleaned the expression from the biblical text (Genesis 2:1; Deuteronomy 4:19, et passim), read it as the immense multitude of stars which make up the eighth sphere, extensively referred to it in his biblical commentaries60, but also employed it, though to a lesser extent, in his theological monographs61 and in his scientific work as wel1. 62 58 For this chronology see GOLB, 1976, pp. 45-66; GOLB, 1998, pp. 3-5, 264-267; but see also FLEISCHER, 1932, pp. 87-98. 59 TE'AMIMB, 1941, pp. 2. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 356 (lV.2.3). 60 See, for example, commentary on Psalms 8:4; 19:2; 82:1; 89:8; 103:21; 136:4;

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

219

Besides demonstrating its existence, Ibn Ezra displayed two main astronomical features of the host of heaven. First, he identified the host of heaven with the forty-eight constellations which the scholars in the science of the zodiacal signs (bakhmei ha-mazalot) - an expression which in this particular context means astronomers - employed to divide "the immense multitude of stars". This identification makes it clear that the biblical expression 'the host of heaven', in Ibn Ezra's opinion, points collectively to all the stars of the eighth sphere. These are the forty-eight constellations catalogued in Ptolemy'S Almagest VII,S and mentioned by Ibn Ezra himself in the first chapter of Reshit /fokhmah. 63 Even though the second version of Seier ha-Te'amim is the only place where 'the host of heaven' is explicitly posited as equal to the forty-eight Ptolemaic constellations,64 this figure is a central and pervasive leitmotif easily traceable throughout Ibn Ezra's entire oeuvre, both in his scientific treatises65 as well as in his biblical commentaries. 66 There is a surprise in store for the readers of Ibn Ezra's account of 'the host of heaven'. Ibn Ezra explicitly noted that, like the seven spheres of the seven planets, the host of heaven too moves from west to east. But, in clear contrast to the planets, whose cycles span from one month to thirty years and are therefore relatively easy to discern within a human lifetime, the host of heaven moves at the leisurely rate of one degree in seventy years, that is, an exceptionally slow motion indeed which completes its cycle in 25,200 years. Even Methuselah would have run into serious difficulties had he tried to measure in his own life span the slow motion of the host of heaven. Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises were not addressed to expert astronomers, but to a readership of educated laymen mainly interested in the basic tenets of astrology and 146:6; 148:2; long Commentary on Exodus 3:15; 20:13; 33:21; second commentary on Genesis 1:14; 1:16; 2:1; commentary on Deuteronomy 4:19; commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:13; 1: 19; commentary on Hosea 2:1; commentary on Daniel 7:14. 61 See, for example, SEFERHASHEM p. 428. 62 See, for example, MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 14a; ME'OROT p. xlii. 63 See above, notes 41 and 43. 64 In his biblical commentaries, Ibn Ezra usually employed circumlocutions pointing in the same direction, as for example, by stating that the 'host of heaven' includes all the stars except the seven planets. See, for example, long commentary on Exodus 20:13, but see also Ibn Ezra's commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:13, where the forty-eight constellations are mentioned in close connection with the host of heaven. 65 See, for example, Introduction to HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN ALMUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 301; RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, p. vi; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 34b; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 14a. 66 See, inter alia, the following examples: Long commentary on Exodus 33,21; commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:13; commentary on Deuteronomy 4:19.

220

PART FOUR

not especially inclined to astronomical subtleties. If so, why bother his readers with such an impalpable and quite imperceptible celestial motion? What impelled Ibn Ezra to introduce into the introduction to Sefer ha- Te 'amim, but not in the introduction to Reshit lfokhmah, such a refined, sophisticated and hardly observable theory? In order to provide an answer to this question, but also to put the question (and its answer) within a wider context, it is worthwhile to learn a bit more about this theory, and especially about Ibn Ezra's approach to it. Ibn Ezra, to be sure, was by no means introducing a new idea in ISVST, but only invoking a theory as old as the times of Hipparchus and Claudius Ptolemy.67 Since it was so extremely slow and thus virtually impossible to observe, no wonder that astronomers in antiquity and in the Middle Ages adopted two opposing attitudes regarding the slow motion of the fixed stars. On the one hand, since it was so difficult to recognize, it was possible to ignore this motion altogether,68 and this approach might be readily traced to Ibn Ezra's work. 69 On the other hand, astronomers were so fascinated and intrigued by this scarcely observable motion that they developed alternative theories to account for it. This second stance might also be traced in some places in Ibn Ezra's work, where he explicitly referred to the slow motion of the fixed stars. These references are not many, and their relative paucity suggests that in these cases Ibn Ezra was motivated by very cogent reasons, or that he was intent on fulfilling some important purpose. A complete and exhaustive review of these applications exceeds the limited bounds of this part, so that we will limit ourselves to two illustrations, each of them reflecting a specific aspect ofIbn Ezra's thought and work. The first illustration is related to Ibn Ezra's penchant for illuminating moot questions by presenting earlier scientists' contributions and 67 Claudius ptolemy referred in his Almagest to the slow motion of the fixed stars as a theory already developed by his predecessor Hipparchus. See ALMAGEST, 1984, Book III, I, p. 131: "Hence Hipparchus comes to the idea that the sphere of the fixed stars too has a very slow motion, which, just like that of the planets, is towards the rear with respect to the revolution producing the first daily motion, which is that of a great circle drawn through the poles of both equator and ecliptic." See also Book VII, I, p. 321; II, pp. 328-333. 68 As did, for example, Abraham Bar I:Iiyya, who, in the first section of his cosmological work Surat ha- 'Are$, ascribed to the eighth sphere the daily motion alone. See SURA T HA' ARES, 1546, I, pp. 25-27. But in the second chapter of the same treatise (see II, pp. 60-61), relying on "wise philosophers who investigated the genesis of heavens", Abraham Bar I:Iiyya ascribed the daily motion to the ninth sphere, thereby implying that the eighth sphere has its own slow motion. Regarding this point, see next section, p. 225. 69 As will be seen in the next section, Ibn Ezra explicitly or implicitly deprived the eighth sphere of the slow eastward motion.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

221

schools of thought, a feature noticeable throughout his work. Various versions of the steady, slow, eastward stellar motion are referred to in Liber de rationibus tabularum, in which Ibn Ezra mentioned not only the work of the ancients, and of Ptolemy amongst them, but also of Arabic astronomers such as al-Battani and al-Sufi.7° In another passage of the same Latin astronomical treatise, however, Ibn Ezra ascribed to antiqui omnes et Hermes et indi et doctores ymaginun the alternative 'trepidation theory'71, which was couched in the following two versions: whereas one version propounded an oscillatory motion of the equinoxes, the other version proposed another oscillatory motion that makes the poles of the eighth sphere move back and forth.72 The same debate may be traced to Ibn Ezra's Seier ha- 'Ibbur, a treatise designed to explain the Jewish calendar, in which our author incorporated a reference to the trepidation theory, which represents a literal Hebrew translation of the aforementioned Latin passage from Liber de rationibus tabularum.7 3 Similar accounts, alluding to the controversy of the ancients and 70 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 78: "In motu vero fixarum discordaverunt, nam magistri ymaginum dicunt eas motu carere nisi accidentali qui est in ascendendo et descendendo; anti qui vero et Ptholomeus dicunt quod 100 annis unum gradum pretereunt Albateni vero probavit quod 66 annis uno gradu moventur; Azofi vero 70 annis uno gradu." See also pp. 81, 82, 83, 94. C£ Sefer 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, foi. 81b. 71 See DREYER, 1953, pp. 204, 276. 72 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 77: "Antiqui omnes et Hermes et indi et doctores ymaginun omnes in hoc consentiunt, quod in circulo firmamenti duo motus sunt, ascendendi in septentrionem et descendendi in austrum; inter hos tamen est aliqua discordia, nam magistri ymaginum dicunt eos motus esse polorum, indi vero duorum circulorum qui sunt in capite arietis et libre; omnes tamen in proximo dicti in hoc consentiunt quod gradus horum motuum sunt 8, Azarchel vero asseruit 10 gradus et duas tertias gradus. Sed Ptholomeus et omnes magistri probationum sententias predictorum de motibus deriderunt supradictis, preter solum Abencine." See also pp. 80, 81. 73 'IBBUR, 1874, p. lOa. For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 359 (lV.6). In both Liber de rationibus tabularum and Seier ha- 'Ibbur reference is made in very similar terms to two opposing groups of astronomers who explain the slow motion of the fixed stars in the two following diverging ways: (a) the poles of the eighth sphere ascend and descend, or, there is a small wheel at the equinoxes that alternately moves northwards and southwards; (b) there is a steady eastward slow stellar motion. As for those who maintain the first position, in Liber de rationibus tabularum they are called doctores ymaginun or magistri ymaginum, whereas in Seier ha- 'Ibbur Ibn Ezra names them as 'scholars of the zodiacal signs who rely on [astrological] judgments and images' (bakhmei ha-mazalot b'alei ha-mishpatim weha-$urot), or 'those who trust on images' ('anshei $urot). As for those who maintain the second position, among whom Ptholomeus or Ptolemy the King is counted, in Liber de rationibus tabu/arum they are called magistri probationum, whereas the same group is named in Seier ha- 'Ibbur as 'scholars of the zodiacal signs who rely on proofs' (bakhmei ha-mazalot b 'alei ha-re 'ayiot).

222

PART FOUR

mentioning the steady, slow, eastward stellar motion hand in hand with various versions of the trepidation theory, may be located in the first version of Sefer ha-Te'amim,74 and in Ibn Ezra's astronomical monograph 'Igeret ha-Shabbat.15 The second illustration is related to the handling and teaching of scientific tools and instruments, a central aspect of Ibn Ezra's scientific work. In all three versions of Keli ha-Nel;lOshet (The Book on the Astrolabe) as well as in the Latin Astrolabe Book dictated by Ibn Ezra to a disciple, the reader finds a method of teaching the user of the astrolabe how to find out the exact age of his astrolabe. The method is based on the assumption that the fixed stars move slowly eastwards at a rate of one degree in seventy years. Ibn Ezra's explanation of the method rests also on the use of two parallel lists of stars to ascertain the actual place of a fixed star. Learning about the function that these two lists fulfill is indispensable for understanding the role that the slow motion of the fixed stars played in the method of determining the exact age of an astrolabe. One list was engraved in the actual body of the astrolabe. A typical medieval astrolabe was equipped with a pierced disk made of brass (rete) with pointers which gave the position of a selected group of fixed stars (see above, p. 108). These physical pointers represented the places of these stars as they were calculated and engraved in the astrolabe body at the date when the astrolabe was created. However, as the fixed stars move slowly eastwards at a rate of one degree in seventy years, these pointers did not generally provide the actual position of the selected group of fixed stars. Therefore, in order to correct this inaccuracy and ascertain the actual position of a star, a second list was commonly provided in treatises on the astrolabe. This second list gave an additional set of stellar positions, including longitude and latitude in an ecliptic system, updated to the date of issue of the treatise on the astrolabe. The three versions of Ibn Ezra's Keli ha-Neboshet are a perfect example of this usage: the first two versions include two similar lists of 36 stars updated to 1146 A.D., while the third version includes a list of 23 stars updated to 1148 A.D.76 Since the fixed stars go on with their slow and steady eastward motion between the date of delivery of the astrolabe and the date of issue of the treatise on the astrolabe, it is clear 74 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 37b-38a. For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 360 (IV.7). 75 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 65 .For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 360 (lV.8). 76 For a study and description of these lists, see GOLDSTEIN, i985 (ii), pp. 192-199.

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

223

that the position of a single star as engraved in the rete and as written in a treatise on the astrolabe would significantly differ. Little wonder, then, that in all three versions of Keli ha-Nel;lOshet, the date of issue was not given as a mere chronological remark but explicitly provided as a parameter to be used together with the list of stars in order to calculate the actual place of a star. 77 All this having been said, it will be wise to turn now to the third version of Ibn Ezra's Keli ha-Nel;lOshet, to read the following procedure, which teaches the user of the astrolabe how to determine the exact age of his astrolabe, giving eloquent expression to the applicative potentiality of the slow motion of the host of heaven: If you wish to know how many years have elapsed since your astrolabe was built [you should proceed as follows:] (a) observe the place of some uppermost star by placing the pointer [of some star in the rete] over the midheaven [of the astrolabe] and look at the corresponding zodiacal degree in the ecliptic of the rete (beshev ha- 'afuda);78 then you will know at which degree and in which zodiacal sign the uppermost star is; (b) look at the place of the same star that I wrote to you [in the list of stars attached to this manual]; (c) calculate the difference in degrees between both measurements, and you should know that the star moves at the rate of one degree in seventy years".19 (italics added)

Let us now return to ISVST and once again ask: what motivated Ibn Ezra to insert into this preface such an astronomical subtleness as the slow motion of the host of heaven? In clear contrast with the first illustration, where that peculiar motion was referred to as the focus of a central scientific controversy, and in contrast to the second illustration, in which the slow motion of the fixed stars was grasped as a cosmic clock which enables one to establish the age of sublunary and supralunar objects,80 in ISVST the motion of the host of heaven was employed with a clearly demonstrational aim. Having already established the existence of eight 77 NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 31; NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 39b; NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 67b, right col.. 78 For an explanation of the technical term beshev ha- 'afuda, see above, p. 137. 79 NEI;IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol 64a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 360 (IV.9). For the same procedure in the other versions of the Astrolabe Book, see NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, P 31; NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol 39a; ASTROLABIO, ARUNDEL 377, fol. 36r: "Hac arte potes scire an astrolabium sit uetus an novum. Vide quoto signi gradu sit stella secundum astrolabium quotoque secundum rationem tabularum, quo tempore queris, et si discordant pro quolibet gradu differentie 70 annos computa." 80 Another remarkable case in which Ibn Ezra employed the slow motion of the fixed stars as a cosmic clock may be found in his commentary on Amos 5:8, whose main thesis is that the biblical stars Kesil and Khima were created at each of both equinoxes. For a full account ofthis commentary, see below, p. 257.

224

PART FOUR

consecutive spheres, Ibn Ezra earnestly needed the slow motion of the eighth sphere in order to prove the existence of the next cosmological layer, as will be shown in the following section. By contrast, the slow motion of the fixed stars was not introduced into IRH because, in its brief and essentially descriptive cosmological account, Ibn Ezra did not have any need for such a demonstrative piece of evidence. The Superior Sphere

After presenting the motion of the host of heaven as the main corroborating evidence for the next cosmological layer, Ibn Ezra propounded the existence of the 'superior sphere', a particularly problematic cosmological concept which he had left unexplained in IRH: And since we have observed that every day the sphere of the zodiacal signs and the spheres of the planets move from east to west in a direction which is the opposite of their [own] movement, we know that there is some semblance of a superior sphere over all the other [spheres], and all [the spheres] are driven by its motion. 81

Ibn Ezra had compelling reasons for making such a preliminary, explanatory effort to prove the existence of the superior ninth sphere. It was essential to face two interrelated dilemma in order to give a satisfactory answer to the question as to which sphere should deserve the significant title of 'the superior sphere': firstly, should the slow motion

of the host of heaven be taken into account or be ignored altogether; and secondly, which of the spheres accounts for the daily motion? To accept, as Ibn Ezra did in ISVST, that the eighth sphere "moves from west to east at a rate of one degree in seventy years" amounted to robbing the eighth sphere of the daily motion customarily assigned to it. On the other hand, to ignore the slow motion of the fixed stars was tantamount to accepting a cosmos of eight spheres only, or making the ninth sphere completely irrelevant. For in these circumstances, eight spheres were sufficient to provide a general account of the celestial machinery: seven planets were moved by seven spheres, as Ibn Ezra explained in ISVST, and an eighth sphere accounted for the daily motion which propelled the fixed stars as well as the planets. But as soon as cosmologists, philosophers and astronomers became determined to take into account the extremely slow motion of the fixed stars, it became necessary to "save the phenomena" and adjust the old cosmological model to new 81 TE'AMIM B,

1941, p. 2. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 356 (IV.2.3).

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

225

astronomical data. Henceforth, since it was acknowledged that the eighth sphere has its own extremely slow motion, it was mandatory to assume that an additional sphere performs the daily motion which had been previously assigned to the eighth sphere. The ninth sphere was ascribed this special task, and since this additional sphere was placed above the eighth sphere thereby becoming the highest sphere in the cosmological reigning structure - Ibn Ezra labeled it in Hebrew hagalgal ha- 'elyion, that is, the superior sphere, and circulus altissimus in Latin. 82 However, being the product of logical necessity rather than of astronomical observation, postulating the existence of the ninth sphere could be easily belittled as a rather contrived conception straining credulity to the limit. Being bare of any star, it could be considered a rather bizarre sphere lacking the most basic raison d' etre that justified the existence of any other sphere. Being ascribed the daily motion, which is the quickest among all the celestial motions, the ninth sphere flagrantly contradicted the rule postulated by Ibn Ezra in ISVST, namely, that "the sphere which completes its motion in a few days is beneath the sphere whose motion takes more days for completion". Under these circumstances, it was to be expected that Ibn Ezra would cautiously postulate the ninth sphere in ISVST with a definite degree of unease and uncertainty: instead of referring to it as a plain unvarnished reality, he chose to describe it as "some semblance of a superior sphere". Little wonder, too, that Jewish intellectuals contemporaneous with Ibn Ezra were deliberately ambiguous regarding the very existence of the superior ninth sphere. Abraham Bar I;Iiyya (d. ca.1140) informed the readers of his cosmological work Surat ha- 'Are$ about two conflicting opinions: while the philosophers accept the construct of a nine-sphere system, the astronomers reject it on the grounds that there is no observational astronomical evidence to confirm the existence of the ninth sphere. 83 As 82 LIBERDERATIONIBUsTABULARUM, 1947, p. 74. 83 SURAT HA'ARE~, 1546, II, pp. 60-62: "You should know that the scholars

acquainted with philosophy who conduct research about the essentials of the creation of the heavens and the creatures of the world asserted, regarding the number of the celestial spheres, that they are nine: seven spheres are assigned to the seven planets, the eighth is the sphere of the zodiacal constellations and the fixed stars, and the ninth is the sphere which propels all from east to west around the two poles which are in the north and in the south. This sphere has no star, but God the Almighty set it to encompass all the other spheres and to set them all in motion from east to west. This is the opinion of the philosophers ... But the astronomers did not take into consideration the ninth sphere, not to mention a tenth [sphere], since no ocular proof

226

PART FOUR

for his own opinion, Abraham Bar l;Iiyya seems to have endorsed the position of the astronomers, that is, the notion of a restricted eightsphere universe. This may be learnt by the way in which he gave a complete picture of the universe in $urat ha- 'Are$ and in his Sefer ha'Ibbur (Book of Intercalation).84 Still in an Andalusian milieu, we notice a similar position in the paraphrase which Averroes (1129-1198) wrote of the Metaphysics by Aristotle. Relying on the mathematical science of astronomy then in vogue in al-Andalus, Averroes avowed the eighth sphere as 'the all-embracing sphere', and rejected the assumption of a ninth sphere. 8s Three fairly different approaches to the question of a ninth sphere may be traced in the work of Maimonides (1135-1204) regarding the ninth sphere. In Mishneh Torah, Book of Knowledge, III, Maimonides fully endorsed the existence of the ninth sphere. The Maimonidean ninth sphere, however, besides moving daily from east to west and encompassing all the other spheres, bears a certain resemblance to the eighth sphere. It incorporates a virtual image of the twelve constellations of the zodiac which does not match the real star-filled zodiac of the eighth sphere. Whereas the virtual image of the twelve zodiacal constellations in the ninth sphere remains fixed in the same position in which it was at the time of creation, the twelve real zodiacal constellations of the eighth sphere relentlessly move as a result of being swept along by the slow motion of the eighth sphere. 86 In Guide of the is available for that. In the pursuit of their science they rely on what is observable to them by dint of astronomical observation and logical conclusion. They count in the heavens only eight spheres, the highest being the sphere of the zodiacal constellation, which propels all the other spheres from east to west." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 363 (IV.21). 84 $URATHA'ARES, 1546, I, pp. 25-27, 'IBBUR, 1851, 1(6), p. 16. 8S "As for the number of motions, it must be received from the mathematical science of astronomy. Let us lay down what is most widely held regarding them here [in al-Andalus] and in our own time ... And we therefore say: that the motions agreed upon for the heavenly bodies are thirty-eight: five for each of the three superior planets - Saturn, Jupiter and Mars, five for the moon, eight for Mercury, seven for Venus, one for the sun ... and onefor the all-embracing sphere. i.e.• the sphere of the fIXed stars." (italics added) Thereafter Averroes briefly discussed and rejected the assumption of a ninth sphere as a debatable and doubtful doctrine. For this quotation and a discussion about it, see SABRA, 1984, pp. 139-40, 149-50. 86 MISHNEH TORAH, 1927, pp. 132-5: "The ninth sphere which encircles them all, the ancient scholars divided into twelve segments ... They are the Zodiac: Aries, Taurus, Gemini ... The ninth sphere itself is not segmental and not of a form resembling any forms of these, and not a star ... These twelve forms were not set directly opposite those segments save only during the ante-diluvian period, when these names were invented for them; but in these times they have long ago reclined a little, because all the stars in the eighth sphere revolve similarly to the revolution of

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

227

Perplexed, 11:9, although he acknowledged the nine-sphere system, Maimonides gave the ninth sphere a distinctive status, by sharply distinguishing between the ninth sphere and the other eight spheres. With biblical and talmudic assistance, he divided the nine-sphere system into two parts: on the one hand, one globe including the eight spheres in which there are stars; on the other, the all-encompassing sphere in which there are no stars. 87 In Guide of the Perplexed II: 10, however, Maimonides took the liberty of dispensing with the ninth sphere altogether, and presented a novel four-globe scheme which represents nothing less than a redistribution of the customary eight spheres in which there are stars. 88 A similarly ambiguous attitude, recorded by Abraham Bar ijiyya, resembling the above mentioned division of opinion between philosophers and astronomers, but much more refined in details, may be extensively traced back to the work of Ibn Ezra. The 'superior sphere', as employed by Ibn Ezra, was a flexible term accommodating its meaning to the specific context in which it was applied. In some places, he emphatically posited the existence of the ninth sphere, in others he ignored its existence altogether. To get some insights into this pendulum-like approach, we must study the uses of the term in Ibn Ezra's work, but also focus attention on the context in which the term was employed. A vigorous stance ardently propounding the existence of the ninth sphere may be noticed not so much in an astronomical or astrological milieu as in a theological-exegetical one. The reason for this positive attitude may be readily grasped: not only that a complete description of the universe, regarded as the ultimate and all-encompassing physical product of divine blueprint, is highly desirable in a theological milieu, the sun and the moon, only they revolve heavily; and the distance covered by the sun and the moon in one day, it will take each star of them to cover almost seventy years." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 364 (IV.22). 87 GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED, 1963, II, 9, p. 268: "You should not regard as blameworthy the dictum of some of the Sages, may their memory be blessed: There are two jirmaments (/fagigah, 12b); for it is said: Behold, unto the Lord thy God belongeth the heaven, and the heaven of heavens (Deuteronomy 10: 14). For he who says this counts the whole globe of the stars - I mean the spheres in which there are stars - as one globe, and again counts the globe of the all-encompassing sphere in which there is no star as the second globe. Consequently, he says, There are two jirmaments." (italics added) 88 GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED, 1963, II, 10, p. 271: "It is likewise possible that the arrangement of the universe should be as follows. The spheres are four; the elements moved by spheres are four, and the forces proceeding from the spheres into that which exists in general are four, as we have made clear."

228

PART FOUR

but also because special attention should be centered on the outermost layer of the cosmos, since it represents the border and link between the physical world and the divine domain. In his commentary on Psalms 8:4 - 'When I behold thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou has ordained' - Ibn Ezra was intent on explaining the relationship between 'thy heavens' and 'thy fingers'. Therefore, he provided the following picture of the universe: It is known that seven spheres are for the luminaries and for the five

planets, and the eighth is for the sphere of the zodiacal signs where the great host dwells, and the ninth is for the superior sphere (galgal ha'elyion) which moves from east to west, and the tenth is for the Throne of Glory. 89

Curiously enough, the ninth sphere is still labeled by Ibn Ezra in this biblical commentary as the superior sphere, thereby implying that its status as the outermost physical and astronomical boundary of the universe is left intact, even though it is surrounded by the so-called tenth sphere. We thus infer that the sphere of the Throne of Glory, although identified as number ten, is furnished with a supernal and metaphysical actuality.90 An even more vivid picture emerges from the exegetical excursus included in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 20:13, wherein he referred with unusual fervor to the superior sphere as the ninth sphere and portrayed its two main astronomical characteristics. In this excursus, Ibn Ezra strove to find some correspondence between nine of the ten commandments, the nine spheres in vogue and the first nine primordial numbers. In this framework, Ibn Ezra presented the superior sphere, the outermost layer of the cosmological structure, and correlated it with the second commandment: Now the second commandment, which is 'Thou shalt have no other gods beside me' (Exodus 20:3), corresponds to the superior sphere (galgal ha'elyion), which propels all the spheres from east to west, which is the opposite of their own movement, in twenty-four hours. It is in reference to this sphere that Scripture states, 'other gods' (Exodus 20:3). It says this to let us know that the spheres run by the power of God. Many considered this sphere to be the creator, because it is incorporeal. 91 In short, we notice that the two main astronomical characteristics of the ninth sphere have a bearing in this biblical commentary as a result of 89 Commentary on Psalms 8:4. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 361 (lV.10). 90 Regarding the differences between the ninth and the tenth spheres, see TENENBAUM,

1996.

91 Long commentary on Exodus, 20: 13. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 361

(IV. 11).

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

229

strictly theological considerations. The superior sphere's incorporeality (it is a sphere in which there is no star) is mentioned in order to address the other gods of the biblical text, and to account for the confusion which caused many to consider the superior sphere to be the creator. The superior sphere's peculiar motion was cited to "let us know that the spheres run by the power of God". In the final analysis, the reader gets the strong impression that Ibn Ezra was intent on converting the superior sphere into the focus of a fervent monotheistic manifesto. On the other hand, an overall survey of Ibn Ezra's astrological, astronomical and even exegetical work shows that in some cases he argued for a restricted cosmos made up of eight spheres alone. Ibn Ezra still employed the same term superior sphere (galgal ha- 'elyion), but he pointed to the sphere of the fixed stars, thereby proposing the eighth sphere as the outermost cosmic layer. From an astrological vantage point, this characteristic presumably stems from the fact that the ninth sphere has hardly any bearing on the astrological praxis. Whereas astrology assigns crucial importance to the seven spheres of the seven planets, which are the major astrological agents, and to the eighth sphere of the fixed stars, which serve as a point of reference to locate the position of the planets and to assess their astrological influence, the slow motion of the fixed stars, which presupposes the ninth sphere, does not have any significant relevance to a stark astrological framework. As for astronomy, serious attention should be given to Bar ijiyya's remark that the astronomers rejected the ninth sphere on the grounds that there is no observational, astronomical evidence to confirm its existence. This assumption may be seen as strengthened by the reiterative statement Ibn Ezra made about the inability of medieval astronomical instruments, such as the astrolabe and the gnomon, to attain accurate results.92 As for Ibn Ezra's astrological work, this attitude may be noticed, for example, in the opening chapter of Reshit l;Iokhmah, wherein we read the following remark about the twelve zodiacal signs of the eighth sphere: The zodiac is divided into .. twelve parts ... which are in the superior sphere (ba-galgal ha- 'elyion), that is, the eighth sphere, and [the twelve zodiacal signs] together with the northern and southern constellations, they comprise the forty-eight constellations".93

92 See in this regard: 'IGERETHASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp 65, 72; LIBERDE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 79, 81, 83, 88-89, 92, 93; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 81a. 93 RESHITijOKHMAH, 1939, I,p. vi. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 361 (IV.12).

230

PART FOUR

This is not a solitary case. A similar stance may be discerned in other astrological sources, as for example in the first version to Seier haTe 'amim, in Seier ha-Me 'orot, in the second version of Seier ha'Olam,94 and in the first version of Seier ha- 'Olam, where we read that "Ptolemy, too, said that the motion ofthe stars which are in the superior sphere (ba-galgal ha- 'elyion) is of one degree in one hundred years".95 This quote, precisely because it includes a glaring contradiction, is an eloquent expression of the manner in which Ibn Ezra turns a blind eye to the ninth sphere in an astrological milieu: by attributing a slow motion to the fixed stars, Ibn Ezra implicitly posits the existence of a ninth sphere above the sphere of the fixed stars; but he names the sphere of the fixed stars the superior sphere, thereby assuming that the eighth sphere is the outermost cosmic layer. The same holds true for the third version of Keli ha-Nel;lOshet, a work in which serious consideration of astronomical matters is to be expected. In the introduction to the chapter in which a list of fixed stars is given, Ibn Ezra wrote that "the superior sphere (ha-galgal ha- 'elyion), where the zodiacal signs are, was divided by the astronomers (bakhmei hamazalot) into forty-eight constellations . . . and the geometricians (be 'aley ha-midot) recognized in the superior sphere (ha-galgal ha'elyion) one thousand and twenty-two stars".96 A similar pattern, showing the use of the term 'superior sphere' as referring to the eighth sphere, may be traced to biblical commentaries which Ibn Ezra wrote on verses in which direct reference is made to fixed stars. Thus, in his commentary on Psalms 147:4 - 'He counts the number of the stars; He calls them all by their names' - Ibn Ezra wrote that "the superior sphere is scattered with stars", thereby substantially departing from what he wrote in his commentary on Psalms 8:4 (see above, p. 228) and ascribing to the superior sphere the properties of the eighth sphere. The same feature may be noticed in his commentaries on Joel 4: 11 97 and on Ecclesiastes 1: 13.98 94 TE'AMIMA,BNF

1056, fol. 34b; ME'OROT, 1933, p. xliv;

'OLAMB, VAT 477,

fol. 86b.

95 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81 b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 362 (IV.16). 96 NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 63a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 362

(IV.l3).

97 COMMENTARY ON JOEL, 1989,4:11: " ... the Bear (Job 9:9, 34:32) comprises seven stars which never come apart because they are in the superior sphere, and they are visible on earth both in the summer and the winter". (italics added) For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 362 (IV.l4). 98 COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES, 1994 1:13: "And it might be that the words 'under the heaven', as in the case of 'under the sun', hint at the superior sphere where the host of heaven is, and the wisdom concerning the secret of the zodiacal

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

231

Two additional cases should be mentioned in which the term superior sphere is employed to refer to the ninth sphere. What makes these two cases special and fairly unexpected is that, in contrast with the abovementioned examples, the ninth sphere features in them in a clearly astronomical or astrological environment. The first case is that related to the two primary motions of the heavens, a topic which will be dealt with in the next section (see below, p. 233). Consider, for example, the following passage from Liber de Rationibus Tabularum: Ptolemy set forth reasons to demonstrate that there are two primary motions. One of the motions is from east to west, and this is the motion of the superior sphere (circulus altissimus) which is also called the upright sphere (circulus rectus) and propels all the other spheres ... The other motion is from west to east, and it is carried out around the two poles, and this is the motion of the sphere of the zodiacal signs which is the sphere of the firmament. 99 The second case is related to the use of 'equal degrees' (ma 'alot yesharot or ma 'alot shavot), that is, degrees which were measured along the celestial equator. In those technical instances, side by side with the term superior sphere, Ibn Ezra employed the term upright sphere, which he rendered into Hebrew by means of the expression galgal ha-yosher, and into Latin by the use of the cognate expression circulus rectus. The concept of upright sphere (known in medieval Latin as sphaera recta) was taken by Greek astronomers from the use of celestial globes, and referred to the phenomena which occur when the celestial equator is perpendicular to the local horizon. 100 Thus, by making the upright sphere equal to the superior sphere, Ibn Ezra presupposed that the plane of motion of the superior sphere is the plane of the celestial equator. A clear inference from this correspondence is that the superior sphere in this context should by no means be confused with the eighth sphere, whose plane of motion is inclined at an approximate angle of 23120 in relation to the plane of the celestial equator. signs relies on the forty-eight figures of the sphere." (italics added) For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 362 (IV.IS). 99 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 74: "Rationibus demonstravit Ptholomeus motuum maximos duos esse, quorum alter est ab oriente in occidentem. Hic est motus circuli altissimi qui circulus rectus dicitur, cuius circuli rotatu omnes alii circuli moventur ... Motus vero secundus ab occidente in orientem fit super alios duos polos, et hic est motus circuli signorum qui circulus est fmnamenti." (italics added) When referring to the two primary motions of the heavens it was to be expected to refer to a nine-sphere system, because these two primary motions were habitually illustrated by referring to the graphical picture of the superior or ninth srhere intersecting the eighth sphere of the zodiacal signs. 100 See ALMAGEST, 1984, pp. 18-19,71-74.

232

PART FOUR

We have already met the term 'superior sphere' in this sense in IRH, wherein Ibn Ezra referred to "the motions of the seven planets which are hasty when they move around the degrees of the superior sphere" (see above, p. 208). Another case may be seen in the third version of Keli ha-Ne/:1oshet, in the heading of a procedure to the effect that the astrolabe is helpful in finding "how many equal degrees (rna 'alot yesharot) will each zodiacal sign rise in the upright sphere (galgal ha-yosher), which is the superior sphere (ha-galgal ha- 'elyion)".101 Consider also the following remarkable example from the ninth chapter of Reshit lfokhrnah, illustrating how astronomical considerations may have brought Ibn Ezra to acknowledge the existence of the ninth sphere in an evident astrological milieu: The lots 102 are calculated employing equal degrees because the planets move along the sphere of the zodiacal signs. For when someone says that such and such a star is in such and such a zodiacal sign in such and such a degree, or when it is said that the ascendant is in such and such a zodiacal sign, in all these cases reference is made to equal degrees. Therefore, the lots are calculated employing equal degrees, by contrast with the degrees of the ascensions (mi$ 'adim), 103 which are degrees of the superior sphere which is above the sphere of the zodiacal signs. 104 Interestingly enough, a firm stance supporting the existence of the ninth sphere may be observed in both mathematical treatises of Ibn Ezra. In this particular case, however, this attitude stemmed not so much from an astronomical or theological rationale as from mathematicalcosmological considerations. In both Seier ha-Mispar lO5 and Seier ha'E/:1ad, 106 Ibn Ezra posited that the role which the digit nine plays in the 101 NE1:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 62b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 362 (IV.I7). 102 For this astrological tenn, see below, p. 251. 103 The tenn mis 'adim or oblique ascension designates the arc of the equator which crosses the horizon together with a given arc of the ecliptic, for example, the arc of a zodiacal sign. 104 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, chap. IX, pp. Ixxvi-Ixxv. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 362 (IV.l8). 105 MISPAR, 1895, p. 1: "Since the Sublime Name created alone the superior world, nine grand spheres go round the earth, which is the lower world. And the author of Seier Ye$irah said that the paths of wisdom lie on seier and slar and sipur. And slar is nine numbers since nine is the end of any reckoning." (italics added) For a possible explanation of the enigmatic tenns "seier and slar and sipur", see WOLFSON, 1973, pp. 505-509. See also MISPAR, 1895, pp. 79-80: "You should know that nine are the true numbers which stand vis-a-vis nine spheres, and all the ensuing numbers are assimilated to them." For the Hebrew texts, see below, p. 363 (IV. 19). 106 SEFER HA'E1:IAD, 1985, p. 422: "[The digit] nine is the end of the first system .. ,

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

233

decimal positional system is commensurate to the role that the ninth sphere plays in the cosmological system. In other words, just as the digit nine marks the numerical boundary of the decimal positional system, which comprises a "void" symbol for 0 as a placeholder and symbols for 1 to 9, so the ninth sphere is the superior sphere setting the physical and astronomical boundary of the universe. The Two Primary Motions of the Heavens And [the superior sphere] intersects the sphere of the zodiacal signs in two places, that is, the head of Aries and the head of Libra, and then the length of the day is equal to the length of the night. And from the head of Aries the sun always moves inclined to the north in relation to the upright sphere, that is, the superior sphere, for the path of the sun is along the line of the zodiacal signs. Therefore, some of the zodiacal signs are called northern, and others, southern. 107

These are the closing lines of the cosmological chapter in ISVST, in which Ibn Ezra presents the two different primary motions in the heavens, a theory which had a significant impact on his thought and work. The dual celestial motion was incorporated by Ibn Ezra in strategically important places. 108 However, the theory did not generally stand on its own feet, but was adduced as a central component of an argument intended to demonstrate something else. 109 This theory, which may be recognized in gestation in Plato's Timaeus (36 C-D) and

and we consider that two spheres are against the superior [spheres], one of them eastern and the other western. And we also state that the ninth [sphere] revolves around the caput draconis, and one of the spheres moves to one side and the other [moves] to the other side." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 363 (IV.20). 107 TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 2. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 356 (IV.2.3). 108 The theory was placed, for example, at the very beginning of 'Jgeret haShabbat (,IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 63) as the most adequate means to lay the astronomical foundation for the subsequent determination of the appropriate beginnings of the year, the month and day. For this passage, see below, p. 336 (1.2). The theory figures also in the first chapter of Liber de rationibus tabu/arum (LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 74), precisely in the opening sentence of a long discussion designed to present the views of scientists and scientific schools belonging to different times, nations and religions meeting together and disputing about the determination of the length of the solar year. For this passage, see above, p. 231. 109 Ibn Ezra fairly often employed the dual celestial motion in his biblical exegesis to comment on the literal sense of some biblical words and expressions, or to elucidate some exegetical problems of consequence. For some examples, see second fragmentary commentary on GENESIS, 1976, 1:1; commentaries on Ecclesiastes 1:5, Psalms 19:7, 19:9, Amos 5:8.

234

PART FOUR

crystallized in Ptolemy's Almagest,110 postulates only two primary motions in the heavens, thereby performing a remarkable reduction in the number of the heavenly motions and a simplification of their complexity. The first is the daily motion which is carried out from east to west along the plane of the celestial equator. In a nine-sphere system, such as that proposed in ISVST, all celestial bodies without any exception, wandering stars as well as fixed stars, share in this motion. The daily motion per se, however, belongs to the ninth sphere, which functions as a primum mobile and transfers its intrinsic motion to all the other spheres. The second motion takes place from west to east, and is inclined at an approximate angle of 23!t2° in relation to the plane of the first motion. Again, in a nine-sphere system such as that proposed in ISVST, all the celestial bodies also participate in the second motion, but differ in their cycles. The fixed stars move from west to east in an extremely slow motion of approximately one degree in seventy years, whereas each of the planets also moves eastwards, but in special motions whose cycles are determined by the rule (formulated above, on p. 214) that "the sphere which completes its motion in a few days is beneath the sphere whose motion takes more days for completion". Up to this point, Ibn Ezra gradually shaped the cosmological structure. This process came to an end in the previous section with the presentation of the ninth sphere, the outermost cosmological layer. Why, then, did Ibn Ezra think it fit to carry on its explanation one step further and complete the cosmological chapter in ISVST precisely with the presentation of the two different primary motions in the heavens? It turns out that Ibn Ezra did so because the theory underlies the cosmological chapter of IRH. In IRH (see p. 208ft), Ibn Ezra communicated the basic idea that the planets have two different motions, but his brief and vague words left the reader quite confused about the meaning of some concepts of great importance. The various sections of the cosmological chapter in ISVST, not least the section about the two primary motions of the heavens (see p. 233), were designed by Ibn Ezra to refer to these important concepts, which were crudely brought in IRH. In ISVST the two primary motions in the heavens were advanced only at the end of a demonstration and complete description of the universe,

110 ALMAGEST, 1984, I, 8, pp. 45-47: "That there are two different primary motions in the heavens... One of them is that which carries everything from east to west... The other motion is that by which the spheres of the stars perform movements in the opposite sense to the first motion."

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

235

because it is only when put within this context that the theory becomes understandable and its significance may be fully appreciated. We now tum to see how the double heavenly motion was referred to in IRH, and how these brief references were explained and expanded in ISVST. In IRH Ibn Ezra ascribed two main characteristics to the first motion of the planets, which takes place from west to east and is inclined at an approximate angle of 23 Y2 0 in relation to the plane of the other motion. First, when referring in IRH to "the motions of the seven planets" (see p. 208), he cursorily touched on "their motion in their own spheres". As for this motion of the planets, he stated in ISVST that "we have seen that seven are the spheres, because there are seven planets and each of them is in its sphere" (see p. 214). Afterwards, Ibn Ezra briefly stated in IRH that this motion should be observed when the planets "face the uppermost stars which are in the sphere of the zodiacal signs" (see p. 208). In direct connection with that, Ibn Ezra advised the reader in ISVST (see p. 233) to observe the path of the sun, which is nothing less than the customary medieval manner of illustrating one of the two primary heavenly motions. Concerning the path of the sun, our author noted two observable characteristics: first, that the path of the sun takes place "along the line of the zodiacal signs", that is, exactly on the same line where the first motion of the planets should be observed; and, second, that the path of the sun is "inclined in relation to the upright sphere, that is, the superior sphere", which is one of the main properties of the theory of the two primary celestial motions. III Two main characteristics, too, were ascribed in IRH to the second motion of the heavens, which is carried out from east to west along the plane of the celestial equator and draws, in a daily routine, all the celestial bodies. First we were tersely told in IRH that when moving in this special motion, the planets "are hasty in their motion" (see p. 208). Ibn Ezra referred to the "hastiness" of the planets in ISVST (see p. 224) where he wrote that "seeing that every day the sphere of the zodiacal 111 More precisely, reference is made to the fact that even though each of the planets is endowed with a special cycle (for moving "in its own sphere"), and in spite of their motions being chiefly erratic (first a fast movement, then a stop in the sky, and then a tum-around in their course), in the final analysis all of them move eastward and their path may be seen against the background of a definite celestial strip defined by the zodiac. This observable phenomenon is accounted for by the fact that the common motion of the planets, in a manner similar to the sun's motion, is inclined at an approximate angle of 23~o in relation to the plane of the celestial equator, or, as Ibn Ezra put it, "in relation to the 'upright sphere', that is, the 'superior sphere' ".

236

PART FOUR

signs and the spheres of the planets move from east to west in a direction which is the opposite of their motion". Thus, it emerges that "the planets are hasty in the motion" because the daily motion is completed in only twenty-four hours, which is the shortest and quickest amongst all the periods in which the planets are involved. Thereupon, Ibn Ezra expanded a little in IRH about this same, second motion of the planets and added that this occurs "when they move around the degrees of the superior sphere". The reference to the "degrees of the superior sphere", as seen above (see p. 231), points to the celestial equator, which is the plane of the second motion of the heavens. Ibn Ezra created considerable confusion in IRH by leaving the superior sphere, a key concept, completely unaccounted for. In ISVST (see p. 224), however, our author did not merely construe the term as equal to the ninth sphere, but also demonstrated its astronomical existence and logical necessity, and dwelled upon its main characteristics. What captures the attention of a modem reader about the cosmological chapter of ISVST is not just that it was converted into a glossary of IRH, but that Ibn Ezra shaped it into a brilliant presentation of the reigning cosmological model and that he proceeded in his intent concisely, but not in a simplistic manner. In this account, didactically written for and aimed at curious but scientifically unprepared readers and students, Ibn Ezra did not limit himself to the presentation of unrefined bits of data. He performed a careful selection with the clear intention of presenting only those elements which in his mind were strictly necessary to demonstrate the reliability of the proposed cosmological structure. At the outset of his cosmic journey, Ibn Ezra gave special attention to the diverse motions of the planets "in their own spheres", and showed that to the degree that one of the seven spheres is higher, so the cycle of the planet carried by this sphere is slower. In the second stage he not only demonstrated that the 'host of heaven' dwells in a separate eighth sphere, but also remarked that the "immense multitude of stars" swings at the extremely slow rate of one degree in seventy years. Next, and as a sequel to the slow motion of the 'host of heaven', Ibn Ezra demonstrated the existence of the problematic ninth sphere. This sphere is precisely the 'superior sphere', the outermost cosmic frontier which remained unaccounted for in IRH. But having completed the presentation of the cosmic structure, Ibn Ezra thought it fit to take yet one step further, and presented the two primary motions of the heavens. To all appearances, two considerations stood behind this decision. For one thing, a presentation and demonstration of the cosmic

IBN EZRA'S UNIVERSE

237

structure would not be deemed complete before this remarkably succinct theory is invoked to provide a comprehensive account for the heavenly machinery. For another, the cosmological chapter of ISVST was designed to account for the cosmological chapter of IRH, which was, in its tum, based on the two primary motions of the heavens.

PART FIVE

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

Introduction

Abraham Ibn Ezra's treatises are an excellent means of learning about scientific sources available in al-Andalus in the twelfth century and earlier. Consider, for example, Liber de rationibus tabularum, that is, the Latin version of Sefer Ta 'amei ha-Lu1;lot (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables), from which an impressive list of Greek, Arabic and Andalusian scientists may be compiled. l Another instructive example is the introduction our author prefaced to his translation of Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of alKhwarizmi, which includes the following reference to the astronomical research carried out on the sun's apogee: But many scholars have observed that the sun's apogee moves just as the apogees of the five planets do; and its position today, in the year 1160 of the Christian Era, is Gemini 27°. These are the Arab scholars who observed the apogee of the sun, and all of them did not live at one time. The first was l;Iabash the Arab (al-l;Iasib), and Yabya b. Abi Man~iir, alMarwadhi, Ibn al-Muqaffa', al-Siifi, Ya'qub al-Kindi, Thiibit b. Qurra, the Hindu sage, Theon the Alexandrian, Ibriihin al-Zarqal the Spaniard, alBattani, Ibn al-'Isti, Ibn al-A'lam. 2

I This list includes celebrated names such as Abracaz or Abracax (Hipparchus): LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 75, 77, 80, 91, 105; Ptholomeus (Claudius Ptolemy): pp. 74-82, 89, 93,130-131,143,155,160; Doronius (Dorotheus of Sidon): p. 160; Hermes: pp. 77, 160; Elcaurezmus (AI-Khwiirizmi): pp. 74, 75, 105, 109, 110, 126, 127, 144, 155, 160, 164, 166, 167; Albateni (AI-Battiini): pp. 78, 80, 83, 86; Azofi (al-Siifi): pp. 78, 86, 87, 98; Abencine (Ibn Sinal: pp. 76, 77, 79, 81, 82, 95; Tebith ben Core (Thabit b. Qurra): pp. 76, 79, 81, 82, 83; Anarizi (AINayrizi): pp. 76; Abeniunuz (Ibn Yiinus): pp. 83, 86; fratres Beni Saquir (Banii Siikir): pp. 81, 83; Mescella (Miishii'alliih): pp. 75, 160; Albumasar (AbU Ma'shar): pp. 75, 160; Abenmucenne (Ibn al-Muthannii): pp. 110, 130, 147, 153, 154, 155, 158, 160, 161, 163, 166; Mezlame (Maslama): pp. 75; Abnezafar (Ibn al-Saffar): pp.75; Acerchel or Azarchiel Hispanus (Azarchiel): pp. 76, 77, 79, 80, 83, 86, 87, 93,95. 2 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 150. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 367 (V.1.4). In addition, Ibn Ezra mentions in the same introduction Meton and Euctemon, Claudius Ptolemy, Muhammad b. Miisa alKhwarizmi, Jacob b. Sarah, Kanka the Hindu scholar and al-Farghani.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

239

Those numerous references are an excellent medium for learning about Ibn Ezra's scientific connections and acquaintance with the sciences of his own times, but if we desire to gain some clear insight into his relationship with Greek sciences, or, more precisely, into the attitude he adopted towards the absorption of Greek science as molded by Arabic science, the best way is to follow his association with Claudius Ptolemy. If we regard the complete contribution of Ibn Ezra as a single oeuvre, Claudius Ptolemy clearly emerges as his chief scientific source, as Ibn Ezra referred in his scientific work to the Alexandrian scientist more than to any other scientist. At the same time, Ibn Ezra's intimate closeness to Claudius Ptolemy's teachings is particularly noticeable in Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries. Note that Ibn Ezra did not refrain from explicitly mentioning Claudius Ptolemy in his biblical commentaries despite the sharp contrast between his corpus of scientific treatises and his corpus of biblical exegesis, two distinctly different literary genres focused on divergent thematic points ofinterest. 3 This association between Abraham Ibn Ezra and Claudius Ptolemy, two scientists separated by a gap of one thousand years, will be explored in this part by means of four encounters between them. The first encounter will be concerned with the role Claudius Ptolemy played in Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus, both in its astronomical and in its astrological part. All three remaining encounters will be concerned with the singular perspective obtainable upon studying the direct references to Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries. The first encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's biblical exegesis will be focused on the latter's commentary on Amos 5:8. In this commentary, construed as a gradual and systematic inquiry, Ibn Ezra not only included clearly astronomical data but also an explicit reference to Claudius Ptolemy's astronomical work in order to defend his final exegetical thesis. The second exegetical encounter will take place in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Leviticus 25:9 and will display Claudius Ptolemy's closeness to ancient Jewish science in the framework of two controversies: the ritualistic controversy that divided Karaites and 3 That this sharp contrast was something significant and substantial in Ibn Ezra's mind may be confinned by observing the acute tension which Ibn Ezra himself described in his Seier Yesod Mor'ah between the classical Jewish sciences (that is, mainly the study of Jewish law as expounded in the Talmud, the study of the Hebrew language and of the Holy Scripture), and the secular sciences, known as bokhmot bi$oniyot or bokhmot nokhriyot, that is, 'external sciences' or 'foreign sciences', suggestive names which reveal the resistance and reluctance of conservative circles to adopt them. See YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, pp. 315-319.

240

PART FIVE

Rabbanites regarding the determination of the Jewish calendar, and the scientific debate dividing several astronomical schools, Claudius Ptolemy amongst them, regarding the length of the solar year. The last exegetical encounter will deal with the analysis of a passage from the exegetical excursus which Ibn Ezra introduced in his long commentary on Exodus 33:21. This brief passage will be further divided into three fragments, in order to focus on three singular aspects of Ibn Ezra's acquaintance with the work of Claudius Ptolemy, namely, with the astronomer Claudius Ptolemy, with King Ptolemy, seen as a thief who intended to steal astrological secrets, and with Claudius Ptolemy as a mathematician and cosmologist. 1. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's Scientific Work One of the main indicators of that affinity between Abraham Ibn Ezra and Claudius Ptolemy is the acquaintance of the former with the scientific treatises of the latter. In Liber de rationibus tabularum, Ibn Ezra ascribed to Ptolemy a treatise entitled Algeraphie, that is, Ptolemy's Geography rendered into Arabic and transliterated into Latin.4 But the two works by Ptolemy which predominantly took hold of Ibn Ezra's attention were Tetrabiblos and Almagest, the two treatises which the Alexandrian scientist wrote as a comprehensive summary of Greek astrology and astronomy. Ibn Ezra employed various names in several parts of his scientific corpus to explicitly refer to Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, the bedside book of astrologers. In the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim and in the first version of Sefer ha-Moladot, he designated Tetrabiblos as Sefer ha- 'Arba 'ah She 'arim (Book of the Four Gates),5 whereas in Liber de rationibus tabularum and in the Latin version of the Book on the Astrolabe the same astrological treatise was labeled Liber 4 capitulorum. 6 On the other hand, in the second version of Sefer haTe 'amim and in the second version of Sefer ha- 'Olam the same treatise was entitled Sefer ha- 'Arba 'ah Rashim (Book of the Four Heads).7 The fact that Ibn Ezra resorted to various names in labeling Tetrabiblos shows that the manner of phrasing the title of this work in Hebrew had 4 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS T ABULARUM, 1947, p. 79: "et invenimus in libro Ptholomei, qui est Aigeraphie, quod longitudo Cordube est 9 graduum, latitudo vero 36 graduum." 5 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 35a, 44b; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fols. 47a, 54b. 6 LIBERDE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 97; ASTROLABIO, 1940, p. 23. 7 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 29; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol88a.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

241

not yet become crystallized in Ibn Ezra's mind, and that, in turn, strongly suggests that our author drew on an Arabic translation of Plolemy's astrological treatise. As for Ptolemy's astronomical summa, Ibn Ezra frequently referred to Almagest in Liber de rationibus tabularum, alluding to a wide range of astronomical subjects.s Ibn Ezra also explicitly mentioned the Almagest and expressed a very high opinion of it in the introduction he composed for the Hebrew translation he made of Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables ofal-Khwarizmi. 9 Mirroring not only Ibn Ezra's acquaintance with Ptolemy's work but also with Ptolemy's image as it was envisaged in the Arabic cultural climate is the fact that, besides the clearly authentic work of the Alexandrian scientist, Ibn Ezra referred in his work to two additional treatises ascribed in the Middle Ages to Ptolemy in the framework of Islamic culture but now considered by recent research to be apocryphal treatises. The first is ha-Qosem ha-Qatan (the Little Wizard), an otherwise unknown book by Ptolemy which Ibn Ezra briefly mentions in his Sefer ha-Moladot. IO The second is a famous work, written in fact by A1;unad b. Yusuf al-Mi~ri and ascribed by him to Ptolemy, called Kitab ai-Tamara in the Arabic culture and language, and afterwards known as Centiloquium or Liber Fructus in the Latin civilization. Ibn Ezra introduced this treatise into medieval Jewish educated circles employing Hebrew names such as Sefer ha- 'Ilan (Book of the Tree) or Sefer haPeri (Book of the Fruit) in his Sefer ha-Moladot and Reshit l;/okhmah. l1 We will have more to say about this pseudo-Ptolemaic astrological treatise in a later chapter (see below, p. 321). The explicit references to Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's scientific work are legion and they encompass an extremely wide range of aspects. Commonly, Ibn Ezra confined himself to reporting on some specific 8 See, inter alia, the following examples in Ibn Ezra's Liber de rationibus tabularum, where references may be found to the following topics discussed in Ptolemy's Almagest. For a discussion of various trigonometric subjects, see LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 126-127; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, Book I, X, p. 48; for a reference to astronomical tables dealing with the moon's motion, see LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 100, 108; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, Book V, IX, p. 238; for a discussion about the solar annual motion, see LmER DE RATiONmUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 80; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, Book III, I, pp. 131-141. 9 See HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 149,300-301. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 365 (V.1.2). \0 See MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 47a. II See MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 49a; RESHIT l;IoKHMAH, 1939, X, p. lxxvi. For the real author of Kitab ai-Tamara, see LEMAY, 1987, pp. 58-59, n,l; pp. 70-71; PLESSNER, 1960, pp. 1100-1102.

242

PART FIVE

characteristic of Ptolemy's scientific work without any personal expression or relying on some aspect of his work without any special remark. Thus, to limit this discussion to only a few examples, Ibn Ezra mentioned and employed Ptolemy's astronomical work regarding such central topics as the rearward movement of the sphere of the fixed stars,12 the two primary motions of the heavens,13 and the angle of inclination of the ecliptic to the equator. 14 In the field of mathematics, Ibn Ezra drew on Ptolemy concerning the calculation of arches and cords,15 and employed the values obtained by Ptolemy to solve such a fascinating problem (for Ibn Ezra) as the calculation of the ratio between the perimeter of the circle and its diameter. 16 As for astrology, Ibn Ezra emulated Claudius Ptolemy's general astrological outlook, both in adopting Ptolemy'S view that universal astrological judgements override particular astrological judgments, and in endowing his astrological work with a dual structure which makes a clear differentiation between universal astrology and individual astrology (see above, p. 147). As for Ibn Ezra's macro-astrology, even though he drew heavily on the original post-Ptolemaic contributions of Arabic astrology in this field, especially in the first version of Seier ha'Olam, Ibn Ezra referred to and even commented on some of Ptolemy's macro-astrological doctrines, notably the choosing of Full Moons and New Moons in which one of the luminaries eclipses the other, and the "New Moon of the year", that is, the New Moon previous to the vernal equinox, as the most adequate times to perform universal prognostications,17 Concerning micro-astrology, Ibn Ezra in his Seier ha-Moladot drew heavily on the third and fourth parts of Ptolemy'S Tetrabiblos to develop and discuss, for example, the three following topics: the claims of astrologers that the time of conception should be 12 See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 82; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81b; TE'AMIMA, BNF 1056, fols. 34b, 38 a; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, VII (2) pp. 327-329 13 See LmER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 74; 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 63; MISHPETElHAMAzALOT, VAT 477, fol. 14a; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, I (8), p. 45-47. For a discussion of this topic, see above, p. 233. 14 See 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 81a-81b; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 77; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, I (12), pp. 60-63. 15 See in Liber de rationibus tabu/arum the chapter entitled ''Nunc audiat lector verba ipsius Ptholomei in Almagesi de arcu et corda habita", LmER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 127-129; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, 1(10), pp. 48-56. 16 See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 125; MISPAR, 1895, p. 45; HASHEM, 1985, p. 424 cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, I (10), p. 48, VI (7), p. 302. For Ibn Ezra's special handling of this mathematical issue, see SELA, 1997, pp. 39-47. 17 See 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81a-82b; cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, II (4) pp. 160-3; II (10) pp. 194-201. See also 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fois. 87b-88a.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

243

treated as more decisive than the time of birth in the calculation of the natal chart;18 the determination of the horoscopic point;19 and the quality of the soupo Besides presenting a scientific topic without any personal assessment, Ibn Ezra usually opted for bringing Ptolemy's ideas in the context of a debate involving various and disparate scientists and scientific schools. In some instances, however, it is possible to detect a definite bias in favor of Ptolemy's views, as in the cases where Ptolemy emerges as the only scientist whose name is explicitly mentioned together with some aspect of his work, while other scientific opinions and schools are anonymously referred to in the framework of the discussion. This feature is especially noticeable in Liber de rationibus tabularum, wherein Ptolemy is frequently set against the indi, a generic name representing Hindu science, but also where Ptolemy is presented as concurring or disagreeing with the magistri probationum sarracenorum or philosophi sarracenorum or sapientes sarracenorum, a set of collective names referring to scientists who worked in the orbit of Islam, or with the philosophi persarum, philosophi egypci, greci or hebrei, that is, generic abbreviations standing for Persian, Egyptian, Greek and Jewish scientists. 21 In Ibn Ezra's Hebrew scientific treatises, Ptolemy is acclaimed as the chief of the Greek scholars22 or the chief of the ancients (qadmonim),23 and as such Ptolemy commonly appears in confrontation with anonymous groups of scholars representing Hindu, Persian, Babylonian, Muslim or Jewish science. 24

18 See MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 47a; cf. TETRABffiLOS, 1980, III, I, pp. 222-225 19 See MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 47a-48a; cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (2) pp. 228-

235. 20 See MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 49a; cf. TETRABffiLOS, 1980, III (13) pp. 332-363. 21 In this regard see, inter alia, the following places in LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947 (the subject of the controversy is noted in parentheses): p. 78 (the apogee of the sun); p. 101 (moon motion); 102 (relationship between the motion of the sun and of the moon); p. 109 (the excentric sphere of Satum); p. 107 (the apogee of the moon) ; p. 111 (the epicycle of Saturn). 22 See RESHIT l;IoKHMAH, 1939, p. viii: "I shall mention in this book all that in which there is agreement in the opinion of the ancient Babylonians and the wise men of Persia, India, and Greece, whose chief is Ptolemy." See also 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a. 23 RESHIT l;IoKHMAH, 1939, p. vi; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 54a; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056. fol. 38a. But see also TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056. fol. 38a (19), where Ptolemy is presented as opposed to the ancients. 24 See TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056. fol. 37b; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 12; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81a-81b. MISHPETElHAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fol. 80b. 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a.

244

PART FIVE

Admiration and Approval

In other cases an even more idiosyncratic and personal attitude may be detected. Thus, for example, in Liber de rationibus tabularum, Ibn Ezra expressed explicit admiration for Ptolemy's findings related to the apogee of the sun. 25 An even more laudatory expression towards Ptolemy's astronomical work is recorded by Joseph Bonfils in $afnat Pa 'aneal; - a supercommentary on Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch written at the end of the fourteenth century - in which we read that the above-mentioned Ptolemy "was a great scholar in the science of the stars and the zodiacal constellations. No one to this very day has been able to surpass him, as R. Abraham Ibn Ezra wrote in the introduction to his Book on Astronomical Tables."26 Also, in an astronomically-oriented text such as the introduction to the Hebrew translation of Ibn al-Muthanna IS Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi, Ibn Ezra wrote about Ptolemy's Almagest that "this book is perfect and there is none superior to it in the science of astronomy ... All the proofs which Ptolemy ... brought forth in his great book called the Almagest are complete. No scholar can contradict his proofs for they are taken from the science of measurement called geometry in Greek. "27 Besides those references in which Ptolemy's work is merely alluded to, Ibn Ezra left others in which he explicitly recorded his own agreement or disagreement with some of Ptolemy's ideas. Let us begin with the presentation of some examples of Ibn Ezra's concurrence with some of Ptolemy's genuine or purported astrological doctrines. An interesting point of agreement between Ibn Ezra and Ptolemy is related to the astrological status ascribed to "the head of the dragon and his tail", an astronomical concept known in Arabic civilization by the name ras wa dhanab al-tinnin, subsequently received by Jewish intellectuals with the name rosh ha-teli u-zenavo or rosh ha-tannin u-zenavo, and transferred to Latin civilization with the Latin name caput draconis et cauda. Although shrouded in Babylonian mythology (see above, p. 125), from a technical, astronomical vantage point the caput draconis was 25 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 91: "et ammiratione dignum est quod ait Ptholomeus se locum altum solis invenisse in 5 gradibus et 30 minutis geminorum ... Ornnes quoque magistri probationum invenerunt motum loci alti solis concitatiorem esse motu fixarum, et hoc secundum probationem Ptholomei." 26 SAFNAT PA'ANEA1;I, 1911, I, 84. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 380 (V.26). 27 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 149, 300-301. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 365 (V.l.2).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

245

equated with the point where the moon passes the ecliptic from south to north, whereas the cauda draconis was equated with the other point, where the moon passes the ecliptic from north to south. Hindu science took a step further and ascribed to those two points a definite astrological status, and this was a doctrine which Ibn Ezra could not tolerate. In three different places in Seier Mishpetei ha-Mazalot and in the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra strongly opposed various Hindu-related doctrines, such as ascribing to caput draconis et cauda the status of planets, or stating that Gemini 4° is the exaltation of caput draconis and the depression of cauda draconis, and that Sagittarius is the exaltation of cauda draconis. 28 In all that, we may perceive the constraint and inhibition of Ibn Ezra - an astronomer who, in his astronomical work, repeatedly employs the caput draconis et cauda as an eminently astronomical notion - about going to the extreme of ascribing to two cosmic places physical, planetary actuality as well as astrological qualities. Having said that, it is hardly surprising that Ibn Ezra was not content with voicing his own opposition to these doctrines. He cleansed the notion of caput draconis et cauda of any astrological connotation with the assistance of Claudius Ptolemy, a fellow astronomer involved like him in astrological activities. It is noteworthy that in all three above-mentioned references to the caput draconis et cauda, Claudius Ptolemy is brought in confrontation with the Hindu and the ancient sages, with Ibn Ezra siding with the former against the latter. Curiously enough, in order to clinch his argument, Ibn Ezra repeatedly stressed that Ptolemy did not merely oppose that Hindu doctrine but also "ridiculed and laughed at it". He did that, however, despite the fact that Ptolemy in his Tetrabiblos did not dwell upon any Hindu astrological doctrine and hardly referred to the concept of caput draconis et cauda in an astrological context. 29 Another issue in whose framework the Hindu sages and the' ancients' were confronted by Ibn Ezra with Ptolemy'S theories is related to the way in which the ecliptic should be divided into the twelve zodiacal signs. This is a clearly technical issue which not only involves 28 See TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 38b: "The Hindu scholars said that Gemini 4° is the exaltation of caput draconis and the depression of cauda draconis, but Ptolemy laughs at them since the caput draconis is not by any means a star, and he is completely right." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 367 (Y.2). See also MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. l4b; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 43a. 29 But see TETRABIBLOS, 1980, pp. III (12), pp. 324-325, where Ptolemy claims that if a maleficent planet moves towards the luminaries when the moon is at the nodes (that is, at caput draconis et cauda), there come about deformations of the body such as hunchback, crookedness, lameness or paralysis.

246

PART FIVE

significant methodological considerations about the borders between astronomy and astrology but also reveals Ibn Ezra's high opinion of Ptolemy. Let us turn our attention to a fragment of Liber de rationibus tabularum, in which the author presents these two methods used by him to compile astronomical tables and divide the zodiac: It should be known that the division of the celestial circle into twelve parts was made according to two methods. The first is secundum cogitation em (that is, following reason), the second is secundum sensum visus (that is, following sense). The first is the method adopted by Ptolemy, the second is the method adopted by the ancients and by the Hindu sages. Both methods are true and necessary for practical purposes. But while Ptolemy's method stands on its own, the second method depends on the first one, the reason being that Ptolemy's method is based on scientia et ratio (that is, scientific and rational thinking) but the other method relies on probatio iudiciorum (that is, the experience of the astrological judgments).30 (italics added)

Ibn Ezra exhibited very similar ideas too in another passage of the first version of his Sefer ha- Te 'amim,31 as well as in his long commentary on Exodus 28:6, in a reference to the 'efod and the breastplate of the ceremonial dress of Aaron, the brother of Moses and head of the Jewish priesthood. 32

30 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 83-4: "Sciendum est ergo quod partitio circuli finnamenti per 12 secundum duas sententias facta est, altera secundum cogitation em, altera secundum sensum visus est sententia; ea quidem que secundum cogitationem sententia est ea Ptholomei sententia est, que vero secundum visum est antiquorum et indorum est, et utraque harum vera est et ad artem tota admodum necessaria. Sed ea que Ptholomei est stare potest per se, altera vero sine illa nequaquam, nam sententia Ptholomei est scientia et ratio altera vero probatio iudiciorum. " 31 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 38a: "These things require a long explanation and the rule is that the Hindu sages divided in equal parts the zodiacal signs by relying on their senses, that is, by taking in consideration their fonns. Ptolemy and his companions, however, [divided the zodiacal signs] as it is appropriate by employing the method of the [mathematical] proofs." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 367 (V.3). See also very similar ideas in TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 43b. 32 Long commentary on Exodus 28:6 (COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1996, pp. 595-8): "There is a very deep secret behind the 'efod and the breastplate. I will refer only to a part of this secret ... Now these things can only be grasped by the mind. Hence six names were inscribed in one stone ... six names were similarly inscribed on the second stone. On the other hand, the names on the breastplate were not divided in the same manner that they are grasped by the mind. They were divided in a way that could be perceived by the rye ... Now if I wanted to even begin to reveal this secret it would take up more space than the entire commentary which I composed on this book. For only an individual who has studied works on geometry and the secret of the way the sky works can understand the secret of the 'efod." (italics added) For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 368 (VA).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

247

Besides endorsing Ptolemy's astronomical methodology, Ibn Ezra accepted some astrological opinions held by Ptolemy in his Tetrabiblos, in some cases stressing that this agreement is based on and corroborated by his own empirical experimentation. So, in Seier Mishpetei haMazalot and in Seier ha-Moladot, Ibn Ezra concurred with Ptolemy about various aspects related to the determination of the five aphetic houses (meqomot serarah we-memshalah) and the relative astrological power to be ascribed to the planets in these places. 33 In Seier ha-Me'orot (Book of Luminaries) and Reshit lJokhmah, Ibn Ezra expressed his approval of Ptolemy's way of determining the quartile and sextile astrological aspects.34 In the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra sided with Ptolemy against the astrologer Mflsha'lUih about the relative astrological power that should be ascribed to the beginning of the first among the four quadrants of the natal chart as compared with the midheaven. 35 Also, both in Reshit lJokhmah and in the parallel place in the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra sided with Ptolemy against the ancients about the way of determining the Lot of Fortune or the Lot of the Moon. 36 Finally, in Seier ha-Moladot and in Reshit lJokhmah, Ibn Ezra endorsed some of Ptolemy's doctrines regarding the astrological power of the planets as dependent upon their positions in relation to the sun. 37 Disagreement and Rejection

But despite his admiration for Ptolemy and his agreement with him on a wide range of astronomical and astrological doctrines and methodological considerations, Ibn Ezra did not abstain from highlighting what he deemed as Ptolemy's errors, and even went to the extreme of unleashing upon him a harsh attack related to some fundamental astrological issues. Two main flaws were found by Ibn Ezra in Ptolemy'S astronomical work. One concerns certain inaccurate bits of data which in Ibn Ezra's opinion spoiled Ptolemy'S scientific work. Thus, regarding the geographic parameters of the city of Cordoba as 33 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, foJ. 80b, 73b; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, foJ. 49b; cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (10) pp. 271-307. For this astrological doctrine, see above, p. 34. 34 ME'OROT, 1933, p. l3; cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I (l3) pp. 72-75. 35 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, foJ. 40a; cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, II (5) pp. 162-165. 36 RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, IX, p. lxvii; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, foJ. 44a; cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (10) pp. 274-279 37 RESHIT I:IOKHMAH, 1939, VII, p. lvii; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, foJ. 58b.

248

PART FIVE

brought by Ptolemy in his A 1geraph ie, that is, Ptolemy's Geography rendered into Arabic, Ibn Ezra emphasized in Liber de rationibus tabularum that Ptolemy committed a grave error by asserting that the city's longitude is 9° instead of 27° and its latitude 36° instead of37,5°. 38 According to Ibn Ezra, Ptolemy's error stems from an inaccurate calculation of the moon's mean motion. 39 Also, concerning the apogee of the sun, despite the explicit admiration for Ptolemy's findings in this particular field,40 Ibn Ezra stated in Liber de rationibus tabularum that Ptolemy as well as the magistri probationum, that is, the Arab scholars, could have committed an error of two degrees. However, Ibn Ezra ended this critical remark in a tone of understanding. Since the apogee of the sun is not a star whose location may be easily observed, the error may have been caused by the use of the intrumentum probationis, that is, the astrolabe, an insufficiently accurate tool which provides inexact values. In the final analysis, Ibn Ezra considered that "haec fallacia in astronomia parum nocet", that is, the kind of errors that Ptolemy committed have no damaging effect on astronomy.41 The other focus of criticism is related to the quality and utility of Ptolemy's astronomical tables. In the first version of Seier ha- 'Olam, in a discussion related to the apogee of the sun, Ibn Ezra somewhat played down Ptolemy's contribution by stating that it was only a link in the chain of research. Ptolemy was followed by outstanding and careful scientists whom Ibn Ezra considered not only as not inferior to Ptolemy but even as improving upon the values obtained by him. All this led Ibn Ezra to the conclusion that Ptolemy's astronomic tables were no longer 38 UBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 79: "et invenimus in libro Ptholomei, qui est AIgeraphie, quod longitudo Cordube est 9 graduum, latitudo vero 36 graduum, multis vero temporibus et diversis probata est eius longitudo, ecIipsi solis et lune, 27 graduum, et latitudo, racione perfecta, 37 graduum et 30 minutorum, et in fine ostendam unde error contingit, nam longitudo et latitudo terre nee augescit nee decrescit." 39 UBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 86: "et hoc contingit quia in medio cursu June peccaverunt. Propter eandem causam erravit Ptholomeus in longitudine Cordube, dicens earn esse 9 graduum, quia secundum tabulus indorum ecIipsis que in Corduba tempore Ptholomei contingit ibi fieri non potuit nisi Corduba 9 graduum longitudinis esset, quod qui probare voluerit facile videre poterit, sed multis probationibus habetur eius longitudo 27 graduum." 40 UBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 91. For this passage, see above, p. 244. 41 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 92: "Ego autem dico quod et Ptholomeus et ceteri magistri probationum potuerunt falli circa locum altum solis vel in duobus gradibus vel amplius. Nam locus altus solis non est stella quam probent nee est inventus nisi secundum proportionem motus solis... Et si in instrumento probationis est fallacia unius minuti fallimur circa locum altum plusquam in uno gradu. Sed haec fallacia in astronomia parum nocet."

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

249

of any use. 42 A similar remark, linking to some extent Ptolemy's values for the sun's apogee with the quality and utility of his astronomical tables, may be observed in the introduction to the translation of Ibn alMuthanno!s Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizm'i. We read in this introduction that Ptolemy'S astronomical tables in his Almagest are "useless and contradicted by observation, since the apogees are not fixed with respect to the constellations"; but immediately after, Ibn Ezra admits that "Ptolemy himself did not commit these errors, which are due to his predecessors".43 Certain parts of Ptolemy'S astrological work aroused Ibn Ezra's criticism. In contrast to the aforementioned astrological references showing a generally concurring attitude towards Ptolemy's astrological work, we find in Ibn Ezra's astrological treatises another opposing set of remarks displaying clear disagreement with some of Ptolemy's astrological doctrines. Ibn Ezra belongs to the post-Ptolemaic generation of new astrologers who worked under the orbit of Arabic civilization. Therefore, it is hardly surprising to find in the first version of Sefer ha'Olam an interesting remark related to macro-astrology, showing Ibn Ezra's closeness to and acquaintance with the latest developments of Arabic astrology, as well as his aloofness from Ptolemy. This passage is a reference to Tetrabiblos II, 10, in which Ibn Ezra rejects Ptolemy'S position and endorses the methods of the modern and the ancient astrologers regarding the question whether the duration of a solar or lunar eclipse determines when the astrological influences will be felt. 44 Further, passing on to micro-astrology, in Sefer ha-Moladot and in both versions of Sefer ha- Te 'amim Ibn Ezra disagreed with Ptolemy on the interpretation and drawing up of the natal chart. Ibn Ezra dwelled upon such questions as whether the astrological aspects should be calculated when observed against the various zodiacal signs,4S whether the 42 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 81b. For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 368 (V.5). 43 According to Ibn Ezra, (HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 150, 300) one of the results of the imperfection of Ptolemy'S astronomical tables and of his over-reliance on his predecessors is that Ptolemy estimated that the solar apogee was near Gemini 5° and that the solar apogee does not move as the apogee of the other six planets. This error, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, stems from the fact that Ptolemy agreed, roughly, with the values obtained by Hipparchus, who worked with an astrolabe which was not as good as Ptolemy'S. As a result, Ibn Ezra essentially accepted Ptolemy's rules in his own work, "as modified by the Arab zij-writers whose observations were even more careful than those of Ptolemy". For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 366 (V.1.3). 44 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 83a. cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, II (10) pp. 198-9. 4S See MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 50b cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I (13) pp. 72-75. Ibn

250

PART FIVE

quadrants of the horoscope should be calculated in relation to the location of the star which rules at the time of birth,46 and whether the fourth and tenth horoscopic houses should be considered as referring to the fate of the parents. 47 In these places Ibn Ezra did not limit himself to merely expressing disagreement with Ptolemy but repeatedly stressed that his opinion is borne out by empirical and astronomical observations, as well as by the use of astronomical tables compiled according to the methods of Ptolemy and of the Persian and Indian scholars. 48 Ibn Ezra also found fault with Ptolemy'S approach to two astrological doctrines pivotal and much-discussed throughout the ages: the planetary terms and the astrological lots. Each of the twelve zodiacal signs was divided into five planetary terms of varying sizes, and each of the planets, except the moon and the sun, was assigned as 'lord of the term' to one of those five planetary terms in each of the twelve zodiacal signs. In the interpretation of the horoscope, the 'lord of the term' was assigned two powers (among five possible powers),49 but the precise size of each planetary term and the identity of the planet assigned to it were a bone of contention among different schools of astrologers, who proposed significantly different versions. 50 This controversy is faithfully reflected in the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, in which Ibn Ezra reports that several versions of the planetary terms are available, such as those proposed by the astrologers of Egypt, Persia and Babylon, as well as the version which Ptolemy found in an old manuscript. 51 In Reshit I;lokhmah and especially in Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, instead of dwelling upon this division of opinion, Ibn Ezra presented a list of the planetary terms which, upon close scrutiny, turns out to contain the Egyptian version of

Ezra's remark is slightly different from another consenting note by him which may be found in ME'OROT, 1933, p. 13. 46 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 32 cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (2) pp. 230-3. 47 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 40a; cf. TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (4) pp. 240-51. 48 See, for example, regarding the determination of the quadrants of the natal chart, TE' AMIM B, 1941, p. 32: "I recurrently performed experimentation, as when I determined the apogee of the sun at the time of birth by calculating the fractions and the entire years, and I determined the places of the stars by employing the astronomical tables of India and the astronomical tables of Ptolemy and the astronomical tables of Persia, which do not contradict observation." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 368 (V.6). 49 For this scale of powers, see note 60. 50 For a discussion of the astrological terms in the astrological sources, see TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I (20-21) pp. 90-107; KITAB AL-MADI:IAL, 1996, V, vol. II, pp. 325-328; For modern literature, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 206-15; TESTER, 1987, pp. 76-7. 51 TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 13,36.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

251

the planetary terms, thereby revealing Ibn Ezra's preferences. 52 In his first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra openly expressed his own opinion: "The planetary terms brought forward by Ptolemy are unreliable, since he himself admitted that he found them in an old manuscript. The Egyptian terms, however, are correct, because they are corroborated by experience. "53 In several of his astrological treatises, Ibn Ezra devoted entire chapters to a discussion of the multiple types of astrological lots, another much-discussed topic among the astrologers. The astrological lots are special celestial locations playing an important role in the natal chart and generally involving the calculation of a certain distance from a certain place in the zodiac, especially from the ascendant. 54 In all his references to the astrological lots, Ibn Ezra did not fail to emphasize Ptolemy's special approach in this particular field, focusing his attention on two main points: the fact that Ptolemy acknowledged only one astrological lot, namely, the Lot of Fortune, and the instructions Ptolemy gave in Tetrabiblos for determining the Lot of Fortune. 55 Such references to the astrological lots appear, usually in a neutral and objective tone, in Reshit /jokhmah,56 Mishpetei ha-Mazalot,57 and in the first version of Seier haTe'amim.58 But particularly interesting is the treatment given to the 52 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fo!' 15a; RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, II, pp. xiii, xv etc. 53 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 37b. In passing, it is worth noting that the reported fact that Ptolemy found his list of terms in an old manuscript was admitted by Ptolemy himself in Tetrabiblos. See TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I (21) pp. 102-3 54 For a discussion of this astrological concept see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 288-310; TESTER, 1987,pp.27-9;39-40;NoRTH, 1988,pp.217-220. 55 The Lot of Fortune is defined in TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (10) pp. 274-277 in the following terms: "Take as the Lot of the Fortune always the amount of the numbers of degrees, both by night and by day, which is the distance from the sun to the moon, and which extends to an equal distance from the horoscope in the order of the following signs, in order that, whatever relation and aspect the sun bears to the horoscope, the moon also may bear to the Lot of Fortune, and that it may be as it were a lunar horoscope." 56 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, IX pp. lxvii-lxxv. In this report, in whose framework 99 different types of astrological lots are mentioned, Ibn Ezra highlighted the discrepancies between Ptolemy and the ancients on this subject, but he admitted that the differences between Ptolemy and Masba'llah were more apparent than real, so that as a matter of fact they were basically in accord. 57 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fols. 24a-25a. Besides a brief remark about Ptolemy'S special approach regarding the lots, the singularity of this chapter lies in the fact that, in sharp contrast with the usual name goralot, appearing throughout Ibn Ezra's astrological work, the astrological lots are named by Ibn Ezra in Mishpetei ha-Mazalot by the special Hebrew word manot, which presumably is a literal translation from the Arabic cehem, meaning part. 58 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 44a-44b. For the Hebrew text and its English

252

PART FIVE

same subject in the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, in which Ibn Ezra adopted a rather passionate tone. There he wrote that Ptolemy the King mocked at the way the subject of the astrological lots was approached by the ancients, and that in clear contrast to them, Ptolemy acknowledged only one lot, that is, the Lot of Fortune or the Lot of the Moon, which was to be determined in a special way. And yet, Ibn Ezra's final note was against Ptolemy's position and in favor of his opponents': he concluded by stating that the ancients, and not Ptolemy, were the ones who took the right approach to the problem of the astrological lots.59 Up to this point we have noted, besides expressions of admiration for Ptolemy and an open endorsement of some of his doctrines and methodologies, a relatively mild and pinpointed criticism of certain parts of his astronomical and astrological work. We now tum to a final set of examples in which, in addition to the usual faultfinding of some specific astrological doctrine, we shall find an overt and straightforward censure of Ptolemy's astrological work, not least when Ibn Ezra compared the astrological to the astronomical contribution of Claudius Ptolemy. One of such somewhat surprising instances is that related to the lord of triplicity, a fundamental horoscopic parameter assigned, according to Ibn Ezra and other medieval astrologers, three powers (amongst five possible powers) and the third place in the hierarchical framework of the five horoscopic dignities (the lord of the house, the lord of exaltation, the lord of triplicity, the lord of the term, the lord of face).60 As for this translation, see below, p. 369 (V.7). 59 TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 37-9: "Ptolemy the King mocks at the ancients because of what they said about the astrological lots, and he only acknowledges the Lot of the Moon, which is determined both by night and by day from the distance between the sun and the moon, a distance which is added to the ascendant. And the purpose of this procedure is to regard the degree of the moon as if it were the ascendant ... You should know, however, that all the astrological lots proposed by the ancients are correct and true."For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 369 (V.8). 60 For this scale of 'powers', see, for example, the instructions given to cast the horoscope in MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 22b- 23a: "Observe the relative power which every planet has in the five places of domination and the place where the planet is [in the natal chart] as well, and you should grant five powers to the lord of the house, four powers to the lord of exaltation, three powers to the lord of triplicity, two powers to the lord of the term, one power to the lord of the face." (italics added) For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 369 (V.9). For very similar reports of this scale of 'powers' in Ibn Ezra's work, see 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 89a; RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, I, p. viii. For another similar report in Al-Qabisi's Introductorium ad scientiam astrologiejudicialis, see NORTH, 1988, p. 195; see also Abu Ma'shar's Kitab al-madbal al-kabir ila sina'at abkam al-nujum, KnAB AL-MADI;IAL, 1996, V, vol. II, p. 306. For modern literature on this astrological concept, see BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899, pp. 199-206.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

253

scale of astrological 'powers', Ibn Ezra reproached Ptolemy in the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim for putting the cart before the horse and giving priority to the lord of the triplicity over the lord of the house. 61 In the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, a significant escalation of the attack on Ptolemy's approach regarding the lord of the triplicity may be clearly perceived. Having presented a complete list of the signs of all the four triplicities and the lords belonging to each of them, Ibn Ezra wrote as follows: Batalmiyus (that is, Ptolemy in Arabic transliteration) is at variance [with us] regarding the houses of the triplicities, and we have already performed empirical experimentation to verify his approach and found it incorrect. Therefore, we should endorse the approach of the ancients, and [regarding this issue] I will now give you a general rule: everything that you may find of Batalmiyus that deals with the spheres is correct and nothing is available that surpasses it, but his assertions related to the judgments of astrology do not befit his wisdom, therefore you should only rely [in this area] on what has been said by Doronius the King and Masha'llah. 62

In Tetrabiblos, Ptolemy devoted an entire chapter to the four triplicities, their peculiar qualities and their corresponding lords. In this framework, he provided three of the triplicites with two rulers, one by day and the other by night, and the fourth triplicity (Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces) with one lord (Mars) and two co-rulers (moon and Venus).63 A comparison between the list of lords of triplicities brought by Ptolemy and the lists set forth by Ibn Ezra in several of his astrological works makes it crystal clear why Ibn Ezra differed with Ptolemy. In stark contrast to Ptolemy, Ibn Ezra presented in several of his astrological treatises a completely different list whose main characteristic is that it assigned five lords for every triplicity, two who rule by day, two who rule by night, and an additional co-ruler. 64 Evidently Ibn Ezra was acquainted with Ptolemy'S 61 TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 36. Here Ibn Ezra points to TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I (20), p. 93, in which Ptolemy criticizes the Egyptian system, which assigned (as Ibn Ezra and other medieval astrologers did) the first place to the lord of the house and only a subsequent place to the lord of triplicity. 62 TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 39a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 369 (V. 10). 63 TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I (18), pp. 82-7. 64 See, for example, MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 15a, wherein the following list is given: "Lords of the triplicity of fiery signs: the sun by day, then Jupiter, by night Jupiter, after that the sun and the co-ruler with them Saturn. Lords of the triplicity of earthy signs: by day Venus, then the moon, by night the moon, and after that Venus, and the co-ruler with them Mars. Lords of the triplicity of airy signs: by day Saturn, then Mercury, by night Mercury, and after that Saturn, and the co-ruler with them Jupiter. Lords of the triplicity of watery signs: by day Venus, then Mars, by night Mars, and after that Venus, and the co-ruler with them the moon." See similar lists in the following places: RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, II, pp. x, xiii, xv,

254

PART FIVE

Tetrabiblos and knew his list of rulers of triplicities, but Ibn Ezra, like other astrologers who worked under the orbit of Islam such as AbO Ma'shar, endorsed a completely different system. 6S The identity of the original author of this system is explicitly disclosed by Ibn Ezra in the above-mentioned quote: Doronius the King, that is, Dorotheus of Sidon (middle of the first century A.D.), who, at the beginning of his Carmen Astrologicum, gave a list of lords of triplicities which is essentially identical with that provided by Ibn Ezra. 66 What is most striking in the above-mentioned quote, however, is that Ibn Ezra made the most of his attack on one specific astrological doctrine to draw a sharp distinction between Ptolemy's astronomical and astrological contributions. In this particular framework, Ibn Ezra arrived at a far-reaching conclusion: whereas Ptolemy's astronomical work is superb and merits everyone's highest opinion, Ptolemy's astrological work "does not befit his wisdom". This was by no means a solitary instance. In other places, Ibn Ezra not only demoted Ptolemy's astrological work as being well below his astronomical contribution, but also went so far as to denigrate Ptolemy's achievements, by denying Ptolemy's very authorship over his chief astrological treatise. Note his scathing critique regarding the natural constitution of the planets, about which Ibn Ezra wrote the following lines in the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim: The explanation of the natural constitution of the planets is an extremely difficult issue which may be found in Tetrabiblos by BatalmiyUs. There he said that the moon is cold and wet because of the moist exhalations coming from the earth and because it is below the sun. And he said similar things about Venus and Mercury. Mercury, however, sometimes inverts its natural constitution and becomes hot because the velocity of its motion brings it in conjunction with the sun and is burnt by it. And he [Ptolemy] judged that Mars is hot and burning because it is close to the sun and the sun's light rises to it [to Mars], and he determined that Saturn is cold because it is far from the sun, and Jupiter's natural constitution is admixed because it is intermediary between the hot Mars and the cold Saturn. And I, Abraham, the author, say that this book [Tetrabiblos] was not written by BatalmiyUs because there are in it things which are devoid of any rational reasoning and contradict the results of empirical experimentation, as I will xvii; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, 37a, 38b, 39a; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 12. 6S For AbU Ma'shar's list of lords of triplicities, which is practically identical with Ibn Ezra's, see ABBREVIATION OF THE INTRODUCTION TO ASTROLOGY, 1994, pp. 24-7; KlTAB AL-MADaAL, 1996, pp. V, vol. II, p. 328. 66 CARMEN AsTROLOGICUM, 1976, pp. 161-2: "the lords of the triplicity of Aries (fiery signs) by day are the Sun, then Jupiter, then Saturn, by night Jupiter, then the Sun, then Saturn, etc.".

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

255

further explain in Seier ha-Moladot. And others said that they were able to know the natural constitution of the planets by empirical experimentation. The truth, however, is that there is no such a thing as a cold or hot planet or fixed star since they are all made of a fifth substance, as explained by Aristotle with incontrovertible proofs. 67 The natural constitution of the planets (toledet ha-meshartim) was a knotty question and a major theoretical subject in astrology entailing the great risk of attributing to the supralunar seven planets natural and physical properties which, according to the Aristotelian cosmological outlook, belong strictly to sublunar bodies. Ibn Ezra was very much aware of and worried about its dangerous implications and obsessively returned to this issue in both his scientific and non-scientific work, notably in his biblical commentaries. 68 In these places, he insisted that the heavenly bodies, in whose number he included the angels as well, are neither made out of the four sublunar elements nor inherently possess the natural and physical properties of sublunar bodies, but have the ability of generating astrological influence, thereby affecting the corresponding natural and physical properties of sublunar bodies. 69 Ibn Ezra devoted four out of the ten chapters making up Reshit lJokhmah and a considerable part of both versions of Seier ha-Te'amim to a discussion of this subject,7o In the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, which rigidly follows the order of subjects of Reshit lJokhmah, Ibn Ezra approached the problem of the natural constitution of the planets at the very beginning of the treatise, after a discussion of some cosmological issues and having dealt with the "fiery" natural constitution of Aries, Leo and Sagittarius. At this opportunity, he subjected Ptolemy, who, in the introduction of his Almagest. endorsed the Aristotelian binary division of the physical cosmological structure, to the harshest and most stringent criticism, for what he wrote about the natural constitution of the planets in his Tetrabiblos,71 In the aforementioned quotation, Ibn TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 35a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 370 (V. 11 ). See the following places: TE'AMIM B, 194, p. 3; LIBER DE RAnONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 103; FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1999, 1:1; SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, 1:1; COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES, 1994, 1:4; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, I, p. 319; COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 1525, 148; LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976,33:21. 69 For a discussion of this subject, focused on Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 33:21, see SELA, 1999, pp. 94-97. 70 See RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, IV, pp. xiii-Ii; V, pp. li-liii; VI, pp. liii-Ivi; VII, pp. Ivi-Ixii; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, IV, fols. 40b-42b; V, fols 42b-43a; VI, fol. 43a; VII, fol. 43b; TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 17-32. 71 For Ptolemy's endorsement of the Aristotelian physical outlook, see the introduction to ALMAGEST, 1984, p. 36. For Ptolemy's discussion of the natural 67 68

256

PART FIVE

Ezra promised to expand on this issue in his Seier ha-Moladot, which, as a matter of fact, was compiled immediately after he finished the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim. Such a reference may indeed be found in a central chapter of Seier ha-Moladot, in which Ibn Ezra expressed support for all those who came after Ptolemy, and especially for Masha'lHih, who mocked Ptolemy because he wrote in Tetrabiblos on the topic of the children that "we shall have to observe the planets that are in the midheaven or in aspect with it or with its succedent".72 But immediately after that Ibn Ezra wrote: "I just mentioned that, so that you should not rely on all those things written in that book [Tetrabiblos), because this book is of no substance. "73 In summary, this chapter enabled us to appreciate not only the extent and the subject-matter of the references to Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's scientific work, but also Ibn Ezra's attitude towards Ptolemy as a scientist. This scientific encounter was especially significant as a reflection of the way Greek science was received by Arabic and Hebrew medieval intellectuals: together with an admiring sentiment which attests to the favorable and enthusiastic reception of Greek science, it was possible to notice some sharp critical notes regarding both Ptolemy'S astronomical and astrological contributions. This is highly reminiscent of the fact that Ibn Ezra as well as other medieval intellectuals involved in science stand in between the Ptolemaic and the Copernican scientific revolutions. Some critical notes notwithstanding, Ibn Ezra saw himself as emulating and following in the footsteps of his most admired and sometimes harshly criticized master, Ptolemy. Therefore, we will never find in Ibn Ezra's scientific work a revolutionary approach striving to articulate a new scientific world view. For a different approach to Ptolemy'S work, and for an original and fruitful appropriation of Ptolemy's scientific ideas, we now turn to Ibn Ezra's biblical exegesis.

properties of the planets, according to the lines described by Ibn Ezra, see TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I (4), pp. 34-9. 72 TETRABIBLOS, 1980, IV (6), pp. 408-9. 73 MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 54b. Thereupon Ibn Ezra unleashed a fresh attack on Ptolemy, this time referring to what Ptolemy wrote in TETRABIBLOS, 1980, III (7), pp. 256-61, regarding twins when the sun and moon are in bicorporeal signs. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 371 (V.12).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

257

2. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in an Exegetical-Astronomical Discussion

This chapter and the following are intended to open a window enabling us to observe Ibn Ezra at work, not as a scientist but as a biblical commentator. Since the texts which will be studied are biblical commentaries, and since it may seem bizarre to a modem reader that such texts can well be instructive about science, a few introductory words are in order. A comprehensive reading ofIbn Ezra's biblical commentaries clearly shows that he did not evince any hesitation in introducing scientific contents into his commentaries. Perhaps the main reason for Ibn Ezra's medieval success and popUlarity as a biblical commentator is precisely his encyclopedic approach to biblical exegesis, an approach that he adopted by introducing in his commentaries, apart from a deep understanding of the biblical text, all branches of human knowledge, such as astronomy, astrology, mathematics, philosophy, grammar and logic. Biblical exegesis, however, should not be confused with science. The Ge'onim were harshly rebuked by Ibn Ezra in both prefaces to the two commentaries on the Pentateuch because they introduced scientific contents in their biblical commentaries in a manner which he considered largely objectionable. In his opinion, those Jewish scholars wrote about 'foreign sciences'or 'external sciences' in a most verbose style, and employed them in a way which was highly irrelevant to the exegetical issue under discussion, thereby converting their biblical commentaries into scientific encyclopedias. 74 It seems that Ibn Ezra's specific criticism of the Ge'onim's approach was meant to emphasize that the insertion of scientific data into an exegetical medium should be led by some qualifying and restrictive considerations. Although science should not be excluded from biblical exegesis, Ibn Ezra's criticism may be read as a recommendation to draw a clear-cut line between the exegetical and the scientific text, so that biblical commentaries ought to relate to strictly exegetical issues, while scientific treatises should be restricted to scientific subjects alone. Science ought to be regarded in an exegetical milieu as an auxiliary tool whose application is justified only in those places where the biblical text encloses hidden layers which make it necessary for scientific features to be fully elucidated. The current as 74 FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, pp. 1-2; SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, pp. 138-9. For the Hebrew texts and their English translations, see below, pp. 383 (VI.I) and 384 (VI.2). For a comparative analysis of both prefaces, see below, p. 331. See also FUNKENSTEIN, 1990, pp. 29-34; SELA, 1999, pp. 29-30.

PART FIVE

258

well as the following two chapters will illustrate how Ibn Ezra interspersed his regular exegesis of the biblical text with various appropriate scientific contents. We will be concerned in this chapter with Ibn Ezra's commentary on Amos 5:8. 75 This commentary has already merited some attention by recent scholars mostly interested in Ibn Ezra's exegesis. 76 The main consideration for revisiting this particular commentary was to provide a fresh and comprehensive interpretation that will highlight not only some remarkable astronomical pieces of scientific data but especially an explicit reference to Claudius Ptolemy which is embedded in it. The text of Amos 5:8 and Ibn Ezra's commentary on it will first be quoted as a single piece, so that the reader may catch an initial glimpse of what captured Ibn Ezra's attention in this verse. What we deemed to be the main constituent and essential ideas of the commentary is encapsulated in the consecutive passages, headed by alphabetical letters, into which the whole text of the commentary has been divided. Afterwards, to facilitate comprehension of the details, each of those passages will be quoted again at the head of a special section devoted to an analysis and discussion of its contents. Amos 5:8: He who made Kesil and Khima, and turns deepest darkness into morning, and makes the day darken into night: that calls for the waters of the sea, and pours them upon the face ofthe earth: the Lord is his name.1 7 (a) Abraham the author said: you should know that there are two places in the sphere, which are the poles. 'Ash, which is the Wagon (ha- 'Agalah), and is named the Bear (ha-Dov), is near to the northern pole. Therefore 'Ash is always visible, during the summer as well as during the winter, from the entire northern inhabited part of the earth. And near the southern pole there is a big star whose name is Red ('Adom) and in Arabic is named Suhayl. Near to this star there are some small stars which are visible from time to time to all those who dwell near to the equator. But these stars are invisible to those who live in the northern hemisphere, and therefore Scripture named them lfadrei Teiman (Chambers of the South, Job 9:9), because they are invisible to those who live in the inhabited part of the earth. 'Ash is so called because it is derived from the word 'Ushu (Joel 4:11), which are seven [stars] that are inseparable. And so we are still left with the task of expounding [the place of the stars] Kesil and Khima. (b) The opinion of our forefathers is that Khima is in the tail of [the zodiacal constellation of] Aries and the head of [the zodiacal constellation of] Taurus, and it consists of six stars which are visible even though small. This section is based on ideas presented in Sela, 1999 (i) pp. 308-314. 1987, pp. 146-148; SIMON, 1989, pp. 209-215. 77 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 371 (V.13). 75

76 RUIzGONZALEZ,

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

259

(c) It is known by incontrovertible proofs that the sphere of the zodiacal signs intersects the superior sphere at two points, which are designated as equinoctial points. Therefrom the sphere of the zodiacal signs inclines towards the north twenty-three degrees, plus half a degree, plus the half of the sixth of a degree, and likewise towards the south. And so, there are three points! (d) The sun moves along the path of the sphere of the zodiacal signs, therefore the morning will tum into deepest darkness and the day will darken into night in all the inhabited part of the earth. (e) The reason for calling this point Khima, is because Khima was located at this place in the ancient days. For the sphere of the zodiacal signs moves from west to east roughly one degree and a half in one hundred years. And Bafa/miyus the wise found in his days, namely, roughly one thousand years ago, that [the star] Cor Leonis (Lev ha-Aryeh) was located at [the zodiacal constellation of Leo] 2° and now this star is at [the zodiacal constellation of Leo] 18°. But it is known that Cor Leonis is always at 9° in relation to the constellation, but not in relation to the point of intersection. And Kesil is opposite Khima. 78 The opening words of this commentary make it clear that Abraham Ibn Ezra, the author, is intent not so much on identifying himself, a superfluous step in the middle of his work, as to catch the attention of the reader and to retain it for a while, for a special discussion which will be different in certain aspects from other parts of his regular biblical commentaries. This commentary, however, is not an exegetical or theological excursus 79 (see below, p. 288) but a straightforward commentary on the biblical text of Amos 5:8. On the other hand, two essential features make this commentary akin to Ibn Ezra's exegetical or theological excursus. First, in this commentary Ibn Ezra combined clearly scientific pieces of data, a common phenomenon in his exegetical excursus. Second, he constructed this text as a systematic inquiry, which is also a central feature of his exegetical excursus. As may be appreciated after a glance at the whole text, in his commentary on Amos 5:8 Ibn Ezra focused his inquiry on a strictly localized part of the biblical text, posed a major research problem, and proposed a working hypothesis to solve it. Subsequently he presented several alternative solutions for the problem, and finally defended his own final thesis, with the assistance of Batalmiyus the wise, that is, Claudius Ptolemy.

78

Commentary on Amos 5:8. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 371 (V.13.l-

79

Ibn Ezra usually presented himself in the exegetical or theological excursus as

V.13.5).

Abraham, the Spaniard, or as, Abraham, the author. See in this regard, for example,

long commentary on Exodus 3:15; 20:1; 23:25; 26:1; 32:1; 33:21.

260

PART FIVE

(aJ (a) Abraham the author said: you should know that there are two places in the sphere, which are the poles. 'Ash, which is the Wagon (ha- 'Agalah), and is named the Bear (ha-Dov), is near to the northern pole. Therefore 'Ash is always visible, during the summer as well as during the winter, from the entire northern inhabited part of the earth. And near the southern pole there is a big star whose name is Red ('Adom) and in Arabic is named Suhayl. Near to this star there are some small stars which are visible from time to time to all those who dwell near to the equator. But these stars are invisible to those who live in the northern hemisphere, and therefore Scripture named them /fadrei Teiman (Chambers of the South, Job 9:9), because they are invisible to those who live in the inhabited part of the earth. 'Ash is so called because it is derived from the word 'Ushu (Joel 4:11), which are seven [stars] that are inseparable. And so we are still left with the task of expounding [the place of the stars] Kesil and Khima. 80

From among the many concerns which the text of Amos 5:8 could raise in the mind of a commentator, Ibn Ezra's attention was totally absorbed in only one issue: to find the celestial position in which were created the two stars that were alluded to in Amos 5:8, Kesil and Khima. As the biblical text does not mention a single star but a pair of stars, from the very beginning Ibn Ezra stated the working methodology underlying his entire commentary - to look for the stars Kesil and Khima in a pair of strategically located celestial places. 81 Ibn Ezra began by looking at the poles and, in keeping with his methodology, he focused his attention on two additional biblical stars - 'Ash in the northern pole, and lJadrei Teiman (Chambers of the South) in the southern pole. Our author, however, enlarged the scope and put those two biblical stars within a wider astronomical, cultural and linguistic context. On the one hand, for the biblical 'Ash, which is near to the northern pole, Ibn Ezra provided a set of alternative names: first, the Talmudic name ha- 'Agalah (Pesa1;im 94a), that is, the Wagon, and thereafter the translated name ha-Dov, that is, the Bear, a generic denomination which may point to either of two constellations, the Great Bear (Ursa Major) or the Little Bear (Ursa Minor). In the list of stars which heads Reshit lJokhmah, Ibn Ezra differentiated between 'Ash, which is composed of seven stars, and ha-Dov ha-Gadol, that is, the Great Bear, which is For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 371 (V.13.1). This methodological criterion is apparent from the very beginning words of this commentary - "Abraham the author said: you should know that there are two places in the sphere .... " - and he maintained the same approach throughout all the different stages of his argument. 80 81

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

261

composed of 17 stars. This brings us to the conclusion that in his commentary on Amos 5:8, Ibn Ezra employed the generic name ha-Dov to refer to ha-Dov ha-Qatan or the Little Bear. 82 On the other hand, Ibn Ezra placed the biblical star /fadrei Teiman (Chambers of the South) very close to the Arabic named star Suhayl, to which he also gave an alternative Hebrew name, 'Adom, that is, Red, and did so because of the special color and remarkable brightness of this star. Apart from those purely astronomical references, our author expressed in this first passage a special interest in the etymologies of 'Ash and /fadrei Teiman. Ibn Ezra strove to show that in both cases those two biblical stars were intentionally named in the biblical text by highly meaningful Hebrew words. In other words, the literal meaning of the Hebrew words 'Ash and /fadrei Teiman points to the astronomical phenomena which permit a terrestrial observer to recognize those stars close to the northern and southern poles. Regarding 'Ash, Ibn Ezra maintained that this word is derived from' Ushu, which is the first word of Joel 4:11. Since in Ibn Ezra's opinion the word 'Ushu means "they gather together" (hitkab$u), it turns out that the word 'Ash is a direct allusion to the astronomical fact that 'Ash is composed of seven stars that are inseparable. In fact, the etymological reference to 'Ash in the commentary on Amos 5:8 is a reiteration of a similar statement in the commentary on Joel 4: 11, in which Ibn Ezra wrote as follows: '" Ushu its meaning is 'they gather together', and it is derived from 'Ash, which are seven stars that are inseparable because they dwell in the superior sphere, and they are visible during the summer and the winter from the earth." As in the case of 'Ash, Ibn Ezra strove to demonstrate that the name l;ladrei Teiman, meaning Chambers of the South, is not a linguistic accident but an expression which mirrors a real astronomical phenomenon. He clearly expressed this idea when he wrote that "these stars are invisible to those who live in the northern hemisphere and therefore Scripture named them /fadrei Teiman". The singular etymologies that Ibn Ezra gave to 'Ash and /fadrei Teiman as well as the special emphasis he laid on the etymological aspects of the problem bear witness to his particular approach to the Hebrew language as a language of science. As already said (see above, p. 105), in Ibn Ezra's opinion the biblical Hebrew terminology is a surviving remnant of the ancient Hebrew language, designated by him as "the most comprehensive of all the languages" and thus able to express the most subtle details of reality, and in this particular case, the names of stars. 82 RESHIT I;IOKHMAH,

1939, I, p. vi.

262

PART FIVE

Why did Ibn Ezra in the first stage of his inquiry focus his attention on the two biblical stars, 'Ash and /fadrei Teiman? Undoubtedly, he proceeded in this manner because he was aware that in Job 9: 9 the stars 'Ash and Kesil, and Khima and /fadrei Teiman, are mentioned together and brought in close relationship one to the other, even though 'Ash is not strictly identified with Kesil, and /fadrei Teiman is not identified with Khima. 83 However, an opinion identifying Suhayl with Kesil may be traced to the work of Sa'adiah Ga'on (882-942), Yonah Ibn Djanah (b. ca.990 Cordoba-d. ca. 1050), Judah Ibn Bal'am (flourished 11th century), and even to the astronomical work of Abraham Bar Hiyya (b. ca.1065-d. ca. 1140). 84 In all likelihood, in the first part of his commentary on Amos 5:8, Ibn Ezra was critically referring to the work of those earlier fellow Jewish commentators, even though he did not openly acknowledge this fact. And yet, if Ibn Ezra expanded on their idea about Suhayl and added a reference to 'Ash, he did so first of all because he was led by his methodological approach, which presupposed not one but two strategic celestial places. Be that as it may, Ibn Ezra brought an abrupt end to his reference to 'Ash and /fadrei Teiman when he stated that "we are still left with the task of expounding Kesil and Khima", thereby making it crystal clear that he did not agree with the previously presented opinion which identified Kesil with 'Ash, and Khima with /fadrei Teiman. But, since Ibn Ezra limited himself to a rather descriptive account, it is not completely clear at first sight on what grounds he objected to the opinion that Kesil and Khima should be located at the poles. It seems, however, that the answer to this question lies in the interaction between his descriptive account and his methodological approach. Besides the linguistic aspects, Ibn Ezra's attention focussed on one essential astronomical characteristic: to which extent the alluded stars 'Ash and /fadrei Teiman are visible by the dwellers of the inhabited part of the 83 Job 9:9 : "Who makes 'Ash, Kesil and Khima and lfadre Teiman." This is Ibn Ezra's commentary on this verse: "'Ash - is composed of seven stars. Kesil and Khima - two big stars, one of them at the northern part of the inclined sphere (that is, the zodiac) and the other at the southern part. And 'Ash is in the northern part of the great sphere (that is, the superior sphere) and lfadrei Teiman is a group of stars in the southern part of the great sphere, and they are invisible because the inhabited part of the earth is in the northern part, therefore Scripture called them lfadrei Teiman, as if they were in an hidden place." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 373 (V.14). 84 COMMENTARY ON JOB (Sa'adia Ga'on), 1973, commentary on Job 9:9 and 38:31 pp. 70-1, 189; SEFER HARiQMA, 1930, p. 294; COMMENTARY ON ISAIAH (Judah Ibn Bal'am), 1992, commentary on Isaiah 13:10, p. 79; HESBON MAHLEKOT HAKOKABIM (Abraham Bar I:Jiyya), 1959, p. 126; GOLDSTEIN, 1985, pp. 188-9.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

263

earth, that is, the inhabitants of the northern hemisphere. Thus, regarding 'Ash, he stated that this star "is always visible, during the summer as well as during the winter, from the entire northern, inhabited part of the earth". But, regarding lJadrei Teiman, Ibn Ezra emphasized that the name of this star - Chambers of the South - on its own suggests that the opposite is true, since the small stars which constitute lJadrei Teiman "are invisible to those who live in the inhabited part of the earth". According to his methodological approach, Ibn Ezra strove to find not a single star but a pair of stars placed in two highly significant and strategically important celestial places. It follows, therefore, that 'Ash squares with this criterion, whereas lJadrei Teiman does not. Ibn Ezra consequently rejected the poles and continued his examination, proposing an alternative pair of celestial places. (b) (b) The opinion of our forefathers is that Khima is in the tail of [the zodiacal constellation ot] Aries and the head of [the zodiacal constellation ot] Taurus, and it consists of six stars which are visible even though small. 85

Having examined and rejected the possibility that Kesil and Khima are located in the poles, Ibn Ezra turned to ponder a Talmudic tradition (Berakhot 58b) according to which Khima is located "in the tail of Aries and the head of Taurus".86 The same Talmudic tradition was referred to in some of Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries, in which he proceeded not so much to reject it as to correct it, by transferring Khima from the head of Taurus to an alternative place inside the same zodiacal constellation. Thus, in his commentary on Job 38:31 (a verse where both Kesil and Khima are again explicitly mentioned), after paraphrasing the same Talmudic tradition, Ibn Ezra identified Khima with a big star named by him as 'Eyn ha-Shor ha-Semoli, that is al-Dabaran, while Kesil was identified with Lev ha-'Aqrav, that is Qalb al-'Aqrav. Interestingly 85 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 372 (V. 13.2).

86 BABYLONIAN TALMUD, Berakhot 58b: "What is meant by Khima? Samuel said: About a hundred stars. Some say they are close together; others say that they are scattered. What is meant by 'Ash? - Rab Judah said: Jutha. What is Jutha? Some say is the tail of Aries; others say it is in the head of Taurus." Note, however, that whereas the Talmudic tradition considers "the tail of Aries" as a different place from "the head of Taurus", Ibn Ezra regards Khima as a constellation comprising six stars which span from the tail of Aries to the head of Taurus, as both places are continuous and very close one to the other.

264

PART FIVE

enough, in the same commentary he emphasized that Kesil and Khima are located at two diametrically opposed celestial places, thereby presupposing the same methodological approach which we have already observed in Amos 5:8. 87 Ibn Ezra reiterated the same identification of Kesil with Lev ha-'Aqrav in his commentary on Isaiah 13:1 and did so, as in his commentary on Amos 5:8, after rejecting the position that this star should be placed near to the southern pole. 88 In his scientific work, Ibn Ezra endorsed a similar position. Thus, in the very first chapter of Reshit f/okhmah, Ibn Ezra referred to Khima as one of the stars of the constellation of Taurus,89 and in the section dedicated to the constellation of Taurus he specified that the longitude of Khima is between the 13° and the 15° of Taurus. 9o Also in the first and second version of Keli ha-Neboshet, Ibn Ezra defined the longitude of 'Eyn ha-Shor ha-Semoli, that is al-Dabarfm, as 27,50° in the sign of Taurus. 91 Khima is also endowed in some of Ibn Ezra scientific treatises with some astrological features. So, in the first and second versions of Keli ha-Neboshet, Ibn Ezra identified Khima with al-Gadi 'a, which is one of the twenty-eight lunar mansions. Also in the second version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, he argued with some astrologers who held that Khima had some astrological influence affecting eye diseases.92 We arrive then at the conclusion that, according to what Ibn Ezra wrote in some of his commentaries and scientific works, Khima should be located somewhere inside the sign of Taurus, a position which concurred in very rough lines with the above-mentioned Talmudic tradition, although Ibn Ezra's position did not exactly match with the tradition brought in the Babylonian Talmud, Berackhot 58b. Nonetheless, one cannot too strongly highlight the remarkable fact that, 87 Commentary on Job 38:31: "Our forefathers said that Khima is [composed of] seven small stars which are at the end of the zodiacal constellation of Aries and six of them are visible, but in my opinion [Khima] is a big star whose name is 'Eyn haShor ha-Semoli, and Kesil is a big star [whose name is] Lev ha-'Aqrav... and one star is opposed to the other concerning its zodiacal sign, its degree and part of degree." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 373 (V.15). 88 A similar statement is also suggested in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Job 9:9, in which Kesil and Khima are placed at two symmetrically opposed points in the sphere of the zodiacal signs, whereas 'Ash and Qadrei Teiman are placed at the northern and southern pole. See this commentary in note 83. For other references to Khima, see commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:3; Amos 3:15. 89 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, I, p. vi: "In the sign of Taurus there are 33 stars, and Khima is on their back." 90 RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, II, p. xii. 91 NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 31; NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 39a; see also GOLDSTEIN, 1985 (ii), pp. 192-3. 92 NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 25; NEI;IOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol. 45b; TE' AMIM B, 1941, p. 42.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

265

in the following lines of his commentary on Amos 5:8, Ibn Ezra departed from his own opinion as well as from the above-mentioned Talmudic tradition, and adopted an utterly different position. On the one hand, in his commentary on Amos 5:8, Ibn Ezra limited himself to a descriptive account of the Talmudic tradition, and only the brief remark that Khima "consists of six stars which are visible even though small" gives the impression that this description does not fit the abovementioned criterion that Khima should be an important star placed in a strategic celestial place. But on the other hand, in the rest of this passage, Ibn Ezra proceeded to endorse and defend an utterly different position, which made it readily discernible that he rejected the Talmudic tradition. We turn now to consider these arguments. (c) (c) It is known by incontrovertible proofs that the sphere of the zodiacal signs intersects the superior sphere at two points, which are designated as equinoctial points. Therefrom the sphere of the zodiacal signs inclines towards the north twenty-three degrees, plus half a degree, plus the half of the sixth of a degree, and likewise towards the south. And so, there are three points!93 (italics added)

As if to challenge the above-mentioned Talmudic tradition, Ibn Ezra presented incontrovertible proofs which, under close scrutiny, emerge as one of the Ptolemaic astronomical fundaments. Ibn Ezra depicted the sphere of the zodiacal signs intersecting the superior sphere at two points, a geometric figure appearing in the introduction to Ptolemy's Almagest, in order to illustrate "the two primary motions of the heavens". That there are two different primary motions in the heavens: ... One of them is that which carries everything from east to west ... The other motion is that by which the spheres of the stars perform movements in the opposite sense to the first motion, about another pair of poles, which are different from those of the first rotation ... If, then, we imagine a great circle drawn through the poles of both the above-mentioned circles ... we will have four points on the ecliptic: two will be produced by [the intersection] of the equator, diametrically opposite each other; these are called 'equinoctial' points. 94

93 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 372 (V.13.3). 94 ALMAGEST, 1984, I, 8, pp. 45-47.

266

PART FIVE

By drawing this figure and invoking the underlying Ptolemaic theory (see above, p. 233), Ibn Ezra was intent on focusing the attention of the reader on "two points, which are designated as equinoctial points". He did so because in his opinion those 'two intersecting points' furnish the adequate answer to the main problem which Amos 5:8 presents to the commentator. In other words, it is precisely at the two intersection points of the celestial equator and the ecliptic, occurring at the two times of the year when the day and night are of equal length throughout the world wherein, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, the two biblical stars Kesil and Khima were created. The geometric figure of the two circles intersecting at two points was also depicted to stress the strategically important position which those two points occupy in the celestial domain. These two points are not merely part of a geometric diagram but the celestial place where, for a terrestrial observer, the zodiacal signs intersect the superior sphere, or, in other words, the points where the two primary motions of the heavens converge. The astronomical significance of the pair of points is thus completely congruent with the import that the biblical text presumably endows them, that is, to be the pair of celestial places where the two biblical stars Kesil and Khima were created. In the same passage, Ibn Ezra set forth a further essential, identifying characteristic of the zodiac belt, namely, the fact that the sphere of the zodiacal signs is inclined in relation to the superior sphere. However comprehensible and straightforward the graphic figure of the two intersecting circles may seem, Ibn Ezra decided to add a quantitative and clearly technical touch by stating that "the sphere of the zodiacal signs inclines towards the north twenty-three degrees, plus half a degree, plus the half of the sixth of a degree, and likewise towards the south". In this regard too, Ibn Ezra followed, in all likelihood, in the wake of Claudius Ptolemy, who viewed the obliquity of the ecliptic as one of the main characteristics of the "the two primary motions of the heavens", and even devoted one of the first sections of the Almagest to a determination of the obliquity of the ecliptic. 95 Whereas Ibn Ezra provided in his commentary on Amos 5:8 for the obliquity of the ecliptic a value of "twenty-three degrees, plus half a degree, plus the half of the sixth of a degree", which is tantamount to 23 degrees plus 35 minutes,96 Claudius Ptolemy in his Almagest specified 95 ALMAGEST, 1984, I, 8, p. 46: "But as it is, in addition to their movement towards the east, they are seen to deviate continuously to the north and south." See also ALMAGEST, 1984, I, 12, pp. 61-3. 96 Here Ibn Ezra employs the sexagesimal system in which a degree is divided into 60 minutes, so that "half a degree" are 30 minutes. The "sixth of a degree" are

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

267

for the same purpose a value for the obliquity of the ecliptic very close to 23 degrees plus 51 minutes. 97 Little wonder, however, that this pair of astronomers did not concur regarding the value of the same astronomical parameter, as may be learnt after a glance over Ibn Ezra's whole work. The obliquity of the ecliptic is one of the scientific subjects which Ibn Ezra was in the habit of developing in his scientific and non-scientific work as a controversial issue in a clearly eclectic guise. Thus, from Ibn Ezra's various references to this subject, we learn that Hindu scientists obtained a value of 24 degrees, which was also the most precise value of obliquity obtainable with the assistance of the astrolabe. Ibn Ezra was also aware that the value proposed by Claudius Ptolemy was of 23 degrees plus 51 minutes, that Ya1)ya b. Abi Man~ur (Abnebimezor) and Azarchiel Hispanus (Azarchel) proposed a value of 23 degrees plus 33 minutes; but the value of 23 degrees plus 35 minutes which appears in the commentary on Amos 5:8 was the special value for the obliquity of the ecliptic which Ibn Ezra ascribed to the magistri probationum collectively, as the Arab astronomers are usually called in Liber de rationibus tabularum. 98 It is worth noting that we are concerned here with a highly technical reference to the obliquity of the ecliptic, which Ibn Ezra introduced not in one of his scientific treatises but in one of his biblical commentaries. What motivated Ibn Ezra to proceed in this way? It seems that Ibn Ezra was intent on impressing his curious but non-professional readers by embedding this piece of specialized astronomical data in an exegetical milieu. However, Ibn Ezra's main motivation to present the obliquity of the ecliptic in this particular context can be found in the fact that he strove to compare his own theory about the location of Kesil and Khima with the Talmudic alternative theory or, to put it more precisely, to set therefore 10 minutes and the "half of the sixth of a degree" are 5 minutes. Altogether, the expression "half a degree, plus the half of the sixth of a degree" actually equals 35 minutes. 97 ALMAGEST, 1984, I, 12, p. 63. 98 A good example illustrating the way in which Ibn Ezra handled the problem of the obliquity of the ecliptic, one in which there appears the value of 23 degrees plus 35 minutes presented by him in his commentary on Amos 5:8, is given in LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 77: ''Nam indi dicunt 24 graduum integrorum declinationem solis esse, sed Abrachix et Ptholomeus dixerunt 23 graduum 51 minutorum, secundum horum sententiam arcus declinationis sic se habebit ad totum circulum ut II ad 83. Omnes vero alii magistri probationum dixerunt declinationem esse 23 graduum et 35 minutorum, exceptis Abnebimezor et Azarchel qui dixerunt earn esse 23 graduum et 33 minutorum." For this quotation and a very similar Hebrew formulation which may be found in 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fols. 8Ia-8Ib, see above, p. 24 note 28. For Ibn Ezra's eclectic handling of this subject, see SELA, 1999, pp. 300-304.

268

PART FIVE

one theory against the other. Since in both theories the pair of chosen points for the location of Kesil and Khima lie in the zodiacal belt, the zodiacal belt and its obliquity may be regarded as the only point of contact between them. And yet, the fact that the same zodiacal belt includes not one but an infinite number of pairs of points emphasizes the disagreement between the two theories. Ibn Ezra chose to shed light on the disagreement between both theories in an extraordinary way. Immediately after annotating the exact amount of the obliquity of the ecliptic, he wrote: "And so, there are three points!". With this extremely succinct and puzzling remark, Ibn Ezra seems to have presented the following idea: Scripture speaks clearly about a strategically important pair of points, which in Ibn Ezra's opinion are the two equinoxes, that is, the two points of intersection of the "the two primary motions of the heavens". The Talmudic alternative theory, however, puts forward an additional point, the tail of Aries and the head of Taurus, which is an obscure and unimportant point in the belt of zodiac. It follows, therefore, that both equinoxes together with this additional point make three points, which obviously are not the same as the pair of points that, according to Ibn Ezra, Scripture requires. In the development of this argument, one gets the impression that Ibn Ezra is extremely confident regarding the correctness of his own thesis about the location of Kesil and Khima. In the next section we will be concerned with the basis for his overconfidence. (d) (d) The sun moves along the path of the sphere of the zodiacal signs, therefore the morning will tum into deepest darkness and the day will darken into night in all the inhabited part of the earth. 99

As in the previous passage (c), Ibn Ezra is drawing on the same Ptolemaic theory. In this case it is an additional aspect which assimilates one of the two primary motions of the heavens into the annual solar motion along the ecliptic: Hence we get the concept of such a circle, which is one and the same for all planets, and particular to them. It is precisely defined and, so to speak, drawn by the motion of the sun, but it is also travelled by the moon and the planets, which always move in its vicinity... 100 99 For the Hebrew text, see below, 100 ALMAGEST, 1984, I, 8, p. 46.

p. 372 (V. 13.4).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

269

Ibn Ezra's words in passage (d) may appear at first sight as of secondary importance - a mere illustration or extension of passage (c). The significance of passage (d) in the framework of this biblical commentary, however, is of crucial consequence for the construction of the whole exegetical argument. Ibn Ezra's main intention here is to prove that his own thesis, that is, that Kesil and Khima were created in the two equinoxes, springs directly from the biblical text and is not merely a product of his own imaginative mind. This conclusion is the result of a comparison between the text of passage (d) and the text of Amos 5:8, which shows that Ibn Ezra's words include a periphrastic quotation of the biblical text itself. Scripture speaks of "the morning turning into darkness" and of "the day turning into night"; Ibn Ezra, for his part, wrote that "the sun moves along the path of the sphere of the zodiacal signs, therefore the morning will turn into deepest darkness and the day will darken into night in all the inhabited part of the earth". (italics added) For this idea, Ibn Ezra could have been indebted to a passage of the Baraita de-Shmu 'el, in which excerpts of Amos 5:8 were quoted several times as an illustration of the word tely, which in Ibn Ezra's opinion means the two points of intersection between the sphere of the zodiac and the superior sphere, that is, precisely the two points where, in his opinion, Kesil and Khima were created.101 Indeed, passage (d) reflects a clear intention to quote or paraphrase the biblical text, but Ibn Ezra's words also include a remarkable departure from the biblical text, an addition which reveals our author's thoughts. Ibn Ezra construed the allusions in Amos 5:8 to the transition from day to night as a reference to the vicissitudes of the sun as it moves along the sphere of the zodiacal signs. This reference is, of course, not an innovation by Ibn Ezra, but the usual way by which ancient and medieval sources refer to the fluctuation of time and the change in the relative length of day and night in different parts of the earth, when every day in the year morning turns into darkness and day turns into night as the sun moves in its annual path. But, along with an allusion to a continuous astronomical phenomenon perceptible on earth, Ibn Ezra intended to focus the attention of the reader on a singular episode of limited range in time and space. Therefore, amongst all the instances of the transition from day to night which occur as a result of the sun 101 BARAITA DE-SHMU'EL, 1901, p. 33: "ha-tely turns deepest darkness into morning ... ha-tely makes the day darken into night ... ha-tely that calls for the waters of the sea, and pours them upon the face of the earth." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 373 (V.16).

270

PART FIVE

gradually moving along the sphere of the zodiacal signs, Ibn Ezra singled out the particular case which occurs when "the morning will turn into deepest darkness and the day will darken into night in all the inhabited part of the earth". When and where does such an event occur? For Ibn Ezra and for educated people contemporaneous with him, the notion of residing somewhere was tantamount with the concept of residing in one of the seven climates. 102 The 'seven climates' in antiquity and in the Middle Ages outlined and divided the 'inhabited part of the earth', and one of their essential characteristics was a specific length of longest daylight which distinguished one climate from another. Twice a year the relative length of day and night was made equal simultaneously for all the 'seven climates', that is, in all the 'inhabited part of the earth'. That occurred twice every year when the sun, moving in its annual path, arrived at the two equinoxes, at which time the length of the day became equal to the length of the night for all the inhabitants of the seven climates. It was to these two events that Ibn Ezra pointed when he wrote that "the morning will turn into deepest darkness and the day will darken into night in all the inhabited part of the earth". (italics added) Why did Ibn Ezra think it fit to add this remark to the paraphrased biblical text? Which role did this remark play in the framework of his argument? Ibn Ezra construed his argument in this precise manner, it seems, because he believed that the text of Amos 5:8 not only informs us about the creation of the stars Kesil and Khima but also provides crucial clues to finding the exact celestial location in which those stars were created. Those two places are the two points in the annual path of the sun where, when the sun arrives, the day turns into night in all the inhabited part of the earth. The strategic significance of those two points is provided also by the fact that they embody the place where the two primary motions of the heavens meet each other, as well as the intersection of the sphere of the zodiacal signs and the superior sphere. (e) (e) The reason for calling this point Khima is because Khima was located at this place in the ancient days. For the sphere of the zodiacal signs moves from west to east roughly one degree and a half in one hundred years. And Bataimiyus the wise found in his days, namely, roughly one 102 For two examples related to the seventh climate, see above, p. 35 and below, p. 336 (Ll).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

271

thousand years ago, that [the star] Cor Leonis (Lev ha-Aryeh) was located at [the zodiacal constellation of Leo] 2° and now this star is at [the zodiacal constellation of Leo] 18°. But it is known that Cor Leonis is always at 9° in relation to the constellation, hut not in relation to the point of intersection. And Kesil is opposite Khima. 103

To all intents and purposes Ibn Ezra could or should have safely and convincingly concluded his exegetical argument without including passage (e), after presenting and successfully defending his own thesis with Ptolemaic incontrovertible proofs as well as with the highly reliable assistance (in this particular context) of the biblical text. And yet, Ibn Ezra felt that his task as a biblical commentator was not yet over. He was well aware that his own thesis, according to which Kesil and Khima were created in the two equinoxes, put him at odds with a Talmudic tradition according to which Khima is located at the "tail of Aries and the head of Taurus". Ibn Ezra, as a pro-Rabbanite and anti-Karaite Jew, generally adopted a reverent stance towards Talmudic sources (see below, p. 277). Evidently this was not a difference of opinion which Ibn Ezra could afford to ignore or treat light-heartedly. But how could such diverging opinions, which track down one and the same star to two utterly different places, be made compatible? It is precisely to restore harmony between him and his Talmudic sources that Ibn Ezra added passage (e), and it turns out that in the last part of his commentary he emerged from this embarrassing situation with flying colors. Instrumental in reconciling these two apparently irreconcilable opinions was the slow motion of the sphere of the fixed stars (see above, p. 218), as illustrated and proved by the changing location of the star Cor Leonis (Lev ha-Aryeh). This was a very bright, first-magnitude fixed star lying on the zodiacal belt, which was employed in antiquity and in the Middle Ages as a celestial beacon to map the position of the wandering planets. 104 But Ibn Ezra, in his commentary on Amos 5:8, chose to mention the star Cor Leonis together with an explicit reference to Batalmiyus the wise, that is, Claudius Ptolemy in Arabic garment. He proceeded to do so not only because he had read Ptolemy's work in Arabic translation, but especially because he was deliberately drawing on Ptolemy'S Almagest:

For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 372 (V. 13.5). Ibn Ezra provides the ec1iptical longitude of Lev ha-Aryeh with slight differences in the three versions of Keli ha-Neboshet. See NEI;!OSHET A, 1845, p. 32 (Leo 17,31°); NEI;!OSHET B, MANT. 10, fo!. 39b (Leo 17,31°); NEI;!OSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 67a (Leo 17,38°). 103 104

272

PART FIVE Therefore the star Cor Leonis has moved 2 2/3 0 towards the rear along the ecliptic in the 265 or so years from the observation of Hipparchus [-128/7] to the beginning [of the reign] of Antoninus [137/8], which was when we made the majority of our observations of the positions of the fixed stars. From this we find that 10 rearward motion takes place in approximately 100 years, as Hipparchus too seems to have suspected. 105

The impact of this passage from Almagest on Ibn Ezra's mind was so strong that he repeated the same reference to Claudius Ptolemy and Cor Leonis in two other parts of his scientific corpus: in the opening lines of the first version of the Sefer ha- Te 'amim and in Liber de rationibus tabularum, in a passage which has a striking similarity to Ibn Ezra's reference to Batalmiyus the wise in his commentary on Amos 5:8.106 A comparison between the passage from Almagest and Ibn Ezra's commentary on Amos 5:8 shows that Hipparchus was to Claudius Ptolemy what Claudius Ptolemy was to Ibn Ezra. In view of the fact that the cycle of the slow motion of the fixed stars is so long in relation to the standard human life span, only a continuous and prolonged chain of astronomical research could make possible the measurement of this inordinate slow motion. Nevertheless, at least three major differences may be observed between the reference to Hipparchus in Ptolemy's Almagest, and the reference to Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Amos 5:8. First, whereas Ptolemy referred to a chronological frame of reference of 265 years, Ibn Ezra considered a longer period of time stretching across one thousand years between the times of Claudius Ptolemy and his own times. Second, whereas Claudius Ptolemy inserted this reference to his master Hipparchus and the star Cor Leonis in a clearly astronomical treatise, Ibn Ezra made a similar reference to his master Ptolemy and the same star Cor Leonis in such a peculiar milieu as a biblical commentary and with the aim of giving the finishing touch to his exegetical argument. Third, while Ptolemy was intent on gauging the slow motion of the fixed stars, Ibn Ezra conceived the rate of slow motion of the fixed stars as a cosmic clock which enables one to establish the changing position of a star in time and space. In the final analysis, Ibn Ezra referred in his commentary on Amos 5:8 to Claudius Ptolemy and Cor Leonis with the aim of proving that "the reason for calling this point Khima is because Khima was located at this place in the ancient days". Relying on the change between the 105

ALMAGEST, 1984, VII, 2, p. 328.

106 TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 34b; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 82:

"Similiter invenimus quod Ptholomeus probavit in suo tempore cor leonis in 30 gradu leonis esse fere, hodie vero invenitur probatione in 18 0 gradu leonis."

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

273

position of Cor Leonis in Ptolemy's times and in his own times, Ibn Ezra showed that the discrepancy between his own thesis, which locates Khima at the vernal equinox, and the Talmudic tradition, according to which Khima is located "in the tail of Aries and the head of Taurus", is a consequence of the slow rate of motion of the fixed stars. This difference is more apparent than real, and it stems from the fact that the biblical text in Amos 5:8 has preserved a frozen image of the cosmic place where the star Khima was created. Meanwhile, the star Khima, as any other fixed star, has moved eastwards, obeying the laws of motion of the sphere of the fixed stars. Therefore, if the astronomer attempts to pinpoint the biblical stars Kesil and Khima at any time after their creation, he will of course not find those stars at the place specified in the biblical text. The stars would be found in another place, whose distance from the correspondent equinoxes (where both biblical stars were created) should be calculated by employing the motion rate of the sphere of the fixed stars.

3. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in an Exegetical Discussion about the Jewish Calendar An additional context within which medieval Jewish intellectuals displayed their high estimation for Greek science in general and for Claudius Ptolemy in particular is that related to what may be called "ancient Jewish science". An illustrative example to begin with may be found in the introduction that Ibn Ezra prefaced to his Hebrew translation of Ibn al-Muthanna:s Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi. At the final climactic point of a most praiseworthy section devoted to Claudius Ptolemy and his Almagest, Ibn Ezra merged ancient Greek and Jewish science by turning geometry into the Greek counterpart of the Hebrew gematria. Whereas geometry in this introduction was envisaged as the chief element providing scientific trustworthiness to Ptolemy's Almagest, the Hebrew gematria was regarded by Ibn Ezra as the science of measurement cultivated by the old sages ofIsrael: 107 107 Maimonides too employed the same tern gematria as the Jewish counterpart of Greek geometry in a Hebrew expression such as bokhmat ha-beshbon we-hagimetrayiot we-ha-tequfot, that is, science of arithmetic, geometry and the calculation of the solar cycles (such as solstices and equinoxes). See MAIMONIDES' LEITER ON ASTROLOGY, 1926, p. 44. The Hebrew word gematria, closely related etymologically to the Greek word geometry, was used by medieval Kabbalists to

274

PART FIVE All the proofs which Ptolemy brought forth in his great book called the Almagest are complete. No scholar can contradict his proofs, for they are taken from the science of measurement called geometry in Greek, and gematria by the sages of Israel. lOS (italics added)

The determination of the Jewish calendar, as will be seen in this chapter, was another pivotal subject which recalled the scientific achievements of both ancient Greek and Jewish science. Calendaric concerns were much more appealing and much more indispensable to an educated medieval Jewish audience than other essentially theoretical scientific issues, not least because of its ritual connotations and its consequences, from within and from without, for the religious collective awareness and national identity of a minority medieval community. Ibn Ezra devoted a good part of his literary work to calendaric issues, as did other twelfth-century Jewish intellectuals, such as Abraham Bar Hiyya and Maimonides (see below, p. 278). Our author, in contrast to the others, addressed calendaric topics not only in specialized, scientific treatises but also in his biblical commentaries, and even gave these references a very particular flavor. This chapter as a whole will be devoted to the study of Ibn Ezra's commentary on Leviticus 25:9, one of those exegetical references to the Jewish calendar. This text has been singled out amongst many others because it includes an explicit reference to Claudius Ptolemy in a clearly exegetical milieu: Judah ha-Parsy said that [the people ofJ Israel reckoned [their calendaric regulations] according to the sun. But if it were true, then Moses did not account for the complete annual motion, since the scholars of the zodiacal signs have been unable to clarify [the length of the year] till this very day. Thus, the scholars of India add the fifth of an hour to a quarter of a day [besides 365 days], while Ptolemy and his companions say that the 300th part of a day should be deducted [from the quarter of a day], and he [Ptolemy] is close to the methodology of the Jewish intercalation. And those who came after him said that the amount [that should be deducted from the quarter of a day] is the 106th [part of a day], and others [said] 110 refer to the substitution of numbers for letters of the Hebrew alphabet, a favorite method of exegesis used to derive mystical insights into sacred writings or to obtain new interpretations of the texts. Ibn Ezra was aware of this meaning of the word and condemned its use in his biblical commentaries as mere toying with numbers. See COMMENTARY ON DANIEL, 1525, 11:31; FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, 14:4; SHORT COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, 1:7. In the current quotation, however, Ibn Ezra, in using the word gematria, was referring to the Jewish counterpart of Greek geometry. lOS HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 149, 301. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 365 (V. 1.2).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

275

[parts of a day], others [said] 130 [parts of a day], and even 180 [parts of a day]. For there are those who reckon the year by completing the zodiacal signs in relation to a visible point, and others [do that] from the point of the sphere which is inclined to the north and to the south [that is, from the point of the sphere of the zodiacal signs]. But we [Jews] ought to rely on [Talmudic] tradition. The Persian even denies the meaning of 'this month' (Exodus 12:2).109

Ibn Ezra dealt with Judah ha-Parsy and the same topics that came up in this commentary in four other places: in his long commentary on Exodus 12:2 (see below, notes 115, 116), in the preface to the first commentary on the Pentateuch (see below, note 113),110 in an extremely similar but much more detailed passage in his Seier ha- 'Ibbur (see below, p. 281), as well as in the calendaric monograph 'Igeret ha-Shabbat. 111 All that makes the explanation of the commentary on Leviticus 25:9 and the elucidation of its more intimate details a relatively easy undertaking. Let us first focus our attention on Judah ha-Parsy, that is, Judah the Persian, a figure shrouded in mystery about whom no other reliable details are known apart from Ibn Ezra's references to him.ll2 From Ibn Ezra's explicit references to Judah ha-Parsy, two main items of information may be drawn. First, we infer that Judah ha-Parsy was affiliated to the Karaite movement from the fact that Ibn Ezra criticized him in the preface to his first commentary on the Pentateuch, in the very same exegetical framework in which he severely took to task other famous Karaite figures. l13 Second, we learn that Judah ha-Parsy compiled a book on the calendar l14 whose main thesis is mentioned in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Leviticus 25:9, namely, that the Jewish calendar was based on the solar motion, in much the same manner as in

the case of the Christians (a remark which Ibn Ezra does not fail to cite to denigrate Judah ha-Parsy), with the result that the year was divided,

109 COMMENTARY ON LEVITICUS, 1976, 25:9, pp. 93-4. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 373 (V.17). 110 In those two places, however, Ibn Ezra did not mention Claudius Ptolemy. III 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 189415, p. 65. 112 He was identified with the eighth-century sectarian leader Yudghan, of Persian origin, but this identification seems highly doubtful. See Encyclopaedia Judaica, Jerusalem, 1972, X, cols. 372-3. 113 COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1988, pp. 3-8. For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 374 (V.18). 114 Besides a reference in the introduction to the first commentary on the Pentateuch which was mentioned in the previous note, Ibn Ezra discussed Judah haParsy's calendaric book in 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a.

276

PART FIVE

not into twelve lunar months which do not fit into the solar year, but into twelve artificial months of approximately thirty days each. I 15 In his commentary on Leviticus 25:9, however, Ibn Ezra was not intent on proving that Judah ha-Parsy's main thesis was wrong. Only at the very end of the reference to Judah ha-Parsy in his aforementioned commentary on Leviticus 25:9, and in an extremely brief remark, was Ibn Ezra ready to assert that "the Persian even denies the meaning of 'this month", (Exodus 12:2). But he completed the task in the long commentary on Exodus 12:2, when commenting precisely on that biblical verse which in his opinion contradicts Judah ha-Parsy's thesis." 6 Actually, Ibn Ezra's chief purpose in his commentary on Leviticus 25:9 was much more comprehensive and far-reaching: he intended to challenge the Karaite's methodology and to defend the Rabbanite calendaric approach; that is, to demonstrate that crucial calendaric decisions should not be made by relying on independent judgmentl17 but on authoritative human decisions based on Talmudic tradition. Remarkable in this passage are the dramatic, we might even say the theatrical and somewhat contrived means, employed by Ibn Ezra to lead the reader to this conclusion. With a plain disdain for chronological and hierarchical coherence, he confronted Judah ha-Parsy, an obscure figure approximately contemporaneous with Ibn Ezra, with no other than Moses, the most eminent figure of a bygone age and the ultimate source of authority with respect to the Jewish commandments and laws. In the middle, between Moses and Judah ha-Parsy, Ibn Ezra placed Claudius Ptolemy and the 'scholars of the zodiacal signs', that is, the astronomers, as witnesses to this strange duel and as the exponents of the achievements of astronomical scientific research regarding the length of the solar year. lIS Ibn Ezra's intention was that the months of 30 days used in the Christian calendar, in sharp contrast with the lunar months clearly defined by the phases of the moon, were "arranged against the laws of nature" ('einah be-derekh ha-toladot). In this regard, see below, p. 375 (V.l9.2). 116 For Judah ha-Parsy's calendaric position, as expressed in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 12:2, see the Hebrew text and the English translation of the excerpts of this commentary quoted on p. 375 (V.l9.l, V.l9.2 and V.l9.3). 117 On this Karaite position, see the same section in the introduction to his first commentary on the Pentateuch (FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, p. 2) where Ibn Ezra severely criticized several famous Karaite figures: "A second approach is the one chosen by the distorters, albeit they are Israelites ... This is the way of the Sadducees, such as Anan, Benjamin, Ben Mashiach, Joshua and of all heretics who do not believe the words of the transmitters of tradition, turning away from it to the right or the left. Each one interpret verses as he sees fit. They do the same even with respect to commandments and laws." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 374 (V.lS). See also GOITEIN, 1967, V, pp. 363-4.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

277

Karaites versus Rabbanites

Why did Ibn Ezra think it fit to place Judah ha-Parsy, an obscure Karaite personage, face to face against Moses, the ultimate Jewish legislator? Why did Ibn Ezra offer his commentary on Leviticus 25:9 as a methodological confrontation between the Karaite and Rabbanite calendaric approaches? These are indeed meaningful and relevant questions, not least because of the remarkable fact that this commentary on Leviticus 25:9 is by no means an isolated case. What immediately captures the attention of the reader of Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries is that our author, when expounding a biblical verse having some calendaric implication, did not limit himself to the technical and exegetical aspects of the issue, but usually took occasion to castigate the Karaites collectively or to unleash an attack on some specific Karaite intellectual maintaining some calendaric position unpalatable to him. What is puzzling about this trend is that the Karaite movement reportedly flourished in the tenth century, that is, over one hundred years before Ibn Ezra's times, and was influential in the east, far away from the geographical ambit in which Ibn Ezra circulated. Therefore, the question arises: Was the impact of the Karaites, whom Ibn Ezra repeatedly and obsessively assailed, a figment of his imagination, an outdated and anachronostic episode, or a real and threatening historical phenomenon? To answer this question, it is worthwhile to place Ibn Ezra's defense of the Rabbanite against the Karaite methodology in its historical and cultural context. Some rules concerning the calendar were vaguely prescribed or implied in Scripture. These rules were afterwards exclusively administered by the Supreme Court of Palestine which functioned under Roman rule, and were subsequently superseded by a regular and stabilized calendaric system. This regular calendaric system was already in place in the tenth century, in the times of Sa'adiah Ga'on (882-942), within the Rabbanite community under the leadership of the more prominent Babylonian academies, even though from time to time some controversy might arise. 118 More than one hundred years later, a group of scientifically minded Rabbanite intellectuals, culturally nurtured by the intellectual climate created in al-Andalus, manifested a renewed interest in calendaric theoretical subjects, whose main expression was 118 Such as the rift between the academies of Jerusalem and of Bagdhad which almost created a schism with regard to fixing the years 4622-4624 A.M. In this regard, see GOlTEIN, 1967, V pp. 383-4; BORNSTEIN, 1904, pp. 45-102.

278

PART FIVE

the production of several calendaric treatises written in Hebrew. In the framework of this twelfth-century movement, Abraham Bar I;Iiyya compiled his Seier ha- 'Ibbur (Book of the Intercalation) approximately in the second quarter of the twelfth-century.119 Abraham Ibn Ezra followed suit with a prolific and influential contribution which included, besides numerous calendaric references in his biblical commentaries, his own Seier ha- 'Ibbur, three Responsa to questions posed by Joseph Narbonni, his monograph 'Igeret ha-Shabbat (see above, p. 38), as well as some parts of his Liber de rationibus tabuiarum l20 and presumably also parts of the lost Hebrew counterpart Seier Ta'amei ha-Lu/;lOt (Book of the Reasons behind Astronomical Tables). 121 Maimonides, for his part, wrote at first an early work entitled Qibur be-Qokhmat ha- 'Ibbur or Ma 'amar ha- 'Ibbur (Article on the Intercalation)122 and at a later age his much more elaborated and mature Hilkhot Kidush ha-Hodesh (Laws concerning the Sanctification of the New Month) which formed part of his Mishneh Torah. 123 These three· Rabbanite intellectuals, besides divulging and expounding the technical details of the permanent calendaric rules, naturally had very little to add to the regulations themselves, which were long ago a fait accompli. Three major innovative features, however, typify their concern with calendaric issues: (a) The outward expression of this revived interest was that all the calendaric-oriented works produced by the members of this twelfthcentury movement were written in Hebrew. This linguistic and cultural characteristic, noteworthy for its own sake, provided, through the use of the Hebrew language, a geographically all-embracing character to the movement which crossed the cultural borders of the Arabic language still employed by some Jewish intellectuals. (b) Another peculiar characteristic of these Hebrew calendaric treatises was a serious intention to explain the foundations of the Jewish calendar by implementing the tools provided by the new Greek-Arabic

119 'IBBUR, 1851. 120 LmERDE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 75-6, 98-100. 121 See SAFNAT PA'ANEAI;I, 1911, I, pp. 17-8, where Joseph Bonfils, a highly reliable supercommentator of Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries, writing at the end of the fourteenth century, brought a fragment of Ibn Ezra's lost Sefer ha-Lubot dealing with the lunar motion and referring to a fragment of Ibn Ezra's introduction to the first commentary on the Pentateuch, where he expressed his criticism of the Karaite ap'~roach to the calendar. For an analysis of this fragment, see SELA, 1996, pp. 200-207. I 2I;1mURBEl;loKHMATHA'IBBUR,BNF 1058. 123 SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

279

astronomy with which Andalusian intellectuals had become acquainted during the last decades. (c) This modernizing and updating trend was only one face of the coin. In contrast, all three of the above-mentioned intellectuals reverted to what they deemed as the ultimate sources of Jewish law in order to strengthen the Jewish calendaric regulations as they knew and described them. In the framework of this return to the sources, they not only asserted that the earlier regulations promulgated by the Supreme Court of Palestine foreshadowed the subsequent development of the calendar, but also emphasized that members of the ancient Supreme Court were engaged in astronomical computations and achieved results and values which were highly reminiscent of and closely related to the achievements of Greek science. 124 This propensity to revert to the sources was by no means the exclusive lot of the three above-mentioned Rabbanite-oriented intellectuals. Far from being an original idea, there are indications that this tendency was in fact a Rabbanite reaction to the parallel fundamentalist urge of the Karaites to return to the biblical sources of Judaism. The Karaite sect was founded in the eighth century and attained threatening impetus after the tenth century. The new movement drew its ideological energy from the acceptance of the Bible as the exclusive guide for the appropriate performance of the Jewish ritual, but their rejection of the authority of the Mishnah and the Talmud and their quest for independent search by rational thinking resulted in schism between them and the Rabbanite persuasion. 125 As regards the calendar, the Karaites reverted to 'natural' calendaric regulations which they deemed were established by Scripture, for example, by continuing to fix the first day of a month by actual observation of the appearance of the new moon. In all likelihood, the need to stabilize the calendar grew not only as a consequence of the fact that the Sanhedrin had gone out of existence but also because of the threatening influence of a rival sect proposing an alternative calendaric methodology.126 The Karaite threat 124 See 'IBBUR, 1851 (Abraham Bar l;Iiyya), pp. 93-4; 'IBBUR, 1874 (Abraham Ibn Ezra), pp. 6a-7b, 9a; SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 5:1-2, pp. 22-23; 10:6, p.41; 17:24-25, pp. 72-3. 125 On this Karaite position see GOITEIN, 1967, Y, pp. 363-4, who wrote: "The slogan of independent search by rational thinking was almost as strong in Karaite beliefs as the battle cry of the return to the Bible." Ibn Ezra himself faithfully reflected this state of affairs when describing the Karaite exegetical methodology in his introduction to his first commentary on the Pentateuch. 126 For some interesting insights about the links between the stabilization of the Jewish calendar and the development of the Karaite movement, see especially

280

PART FIVE

to the Rabbanites, however, far from vanishing with the passage of time, still gathered strength and was strongly felt in Andalusia in the first half of the twelfth century, a fact which may be corroborated by the evidence provided by Jewish intellectuals of the twelfth century, notably by Judah ha-Levy, an intellectual closely related to Ibn Ezra. As may be learnt from some parts of the Kuzari, Judah ha-Levy too thought it fit to fight his own calendaric war against the Karaites, and interestingly enough, relying on documents from the Genizah, we know that Judah ha-Levy was motivated to write his classic, the Kuzari, by a discussion with a Karaite philosopher from Christian Spain. 127 It was precisely the fact that the Karaites based their anti-rabbinical calendaric stand on a purportedly literal reading of the biblical text which they acknowledged as the unique and ultimate source to be relied upon - that provided Ibn Ezra with the formal excuse to occupy himself so busily with the Karaites in his own biblical commentaries. Beyond stressing the faulty understanding of biblical terminology or the improper use of Hebrew biblical grammar by the Karaites, Ibn Ezra severely criticized two main aspects of the Karaite explanation of the calendar. On the one hand, Ibn Ezra found fault with the Karaites' approach which relied on verses such as Genesis 1:14 and Psalms 104: 19 to assert that the Jewish holidays should be adjusted by an exclusively lunar calendar. 128 On the other, he attacked a different Karaite approach which relied on verses such as Exodus 13:3, Genesis 7:11, 8:13, to claim that the calendaric year should be reckoned on the basis of the solar motion. Wherever Ibn Ezra referred critically to the solar-oriented Karaite approach, he did so by assailing the Karaite Judah ha-Parsy, as may be learnt from the above-mentioned quote of Ibn Ezra's commentary on Leviticus 25:9. The Controversy over the Length of the Solar Year

The commentary on Leviticus 25:9 gives minute details of a widespread controversy setting apart several astronomical schools about the length BARON, 1958, VIII, pp. 194-6; see also GOITEIN, 1967, V, pp. 366, 383-4. 127 For Judah ha-Levy's fight against the Karaite approach to the calendar, see especially HAKuZARI, 1972, III, 35 p. 125; III, 38, pp. 127-8. For the documents from the Genizah, see GOITEIN, 1967, V, p. 456. 128 See, especially, COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 1525, 104:19, and FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1988, introduction, p. 3, wherein Ibn Ezra attacks the Karaite exegetical methodology in general and their approach to the calendar in particular.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

281

of the solar year. Mirroring the import of this debate in Ibn Ezra's mind is the fact that he reiterated the treatment of the same controversy in 'Igeret ha-Shabbat, the Responsa to Joseph Narboni, Seier ha-Moladot, Seier ha- 'Olam, and in both versions of Seier ha- Te 'amim. 129 But most enlightening are the reports given by Ibn Ezra in Seier ha- 'Ibbur and in Liber de rationibus tabularum, in two passages which are worth quoting in their entirety not only because of their similarities with the commentary on Leviticus 25:9 or the new details included in them, but especially in order that the reader may observe firsthand how one and the same subject is treated by Ibn Ezra in an exegetical, a calendarlc and in an astronomical environment. We present first the passage from Seier ha- 'Ibbur and immediately thereafter the parallel report in Liber de rationibus tabularum: Judah ha-Parsy did not tell the truth, since his opinion is contradicted by [the sense of the word] 'month' (godesh, Exodus 12:2); after all, what is renewed every month in the sun?130 Moreover, as there is an acrimonious debate between the scholars of India and the scholars of Greece whose chief is Ptolemy the King, who is able to tell us which is the length of the solar year? The scholars of India say that the [length of the] solar year is [composed of] the known [three hundred and sixty-five] days and a quarter of a day and the fifth part of a hour, so that a whole day is accumulated after roughly 120 years. And the scholars of Persia say that the added amount of time over a quarter of day is one day in 147 years, and there are also some Arab scholars who hold that the added amount of time over a quarter of day is one da, in 101 years. 131 And Ptolemy says that the solar year is lacking the 300 part [of a day] from the quarter of a day, and according to the tequfah l32 of R. Adda approximately the 360th part, and the opinion of Ptolemy is close to our opinion. The Arab scholars were very meticulous too. Some amongst them hold that one day is lacking after 106 years, and others say [that one day is lacking] after 130 years. That is very surprising, since while one [astronomer] adds to the quarter of a day, another one deducts from the quarter of a day, and after 129 See the parallel reports in the following places: LmER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 74-6, 79; 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, pp. 64-5; THREE QUESTIONS, 1847, pp. 1-2; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 59a; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 81abTE'AMlMA, BNF 1056, fol. 37b; TE'AMIMB, 1941, pp. 34,40. 13 In biblical Hebrew, the word bodesh stems from the root bdsh which has the sense of "new" and is used for verb forms having the sense of "renewing". Therefore, this word had apparently first carried the meaning of "new month" or "new moon". 13\ The sense of this special formulation, employed here and elsewhere in this text, is that the accumulated annual addition of the referred small amount of time over the quarter of days adds up to one day in the passage of 101 years. 132 In this particular place, the term tequfah indicates the moment at which the sun enters the zodiacal constellations of Aries.

282

PART FIVE 60 years it is very easy to examine the excess [or loss] of one single day, and that is especially true regarding those scholars who were knowledgeable about geometry and were very meticulous [in their observations]. Now I will reveal to you a secret which you should make every effort to understand. You should know that three methods are employed to determine the [length of the] solar year. The first is [to pay attention to] the time when the sun is in the point of intersection of the two superior spheres, when the length of the day is equal to the length of the night, and this is the year of Ptolemy and the Arabic scholars; the second method is to take a point in the solar sphere whose center (mu$aq) is far from the center of the earth, and this is the Persian year and also of some Arabic scholars; and the third method is [to pay attention to] the time when the sun is in conjunction with one of the stars of the zodiac, and this is the year of the scholars ofIndia. 133 The scholars of India [compiled their astronomical tables] according to the days of the world, which are called by them the days of Sindhind. They all agree that the [length of the] solar year, besides the quarter of a day, contains the 120th part of a day, which is the fifth part of one hour, so that the annual cycle of the sun is augmented by 3 degrees. The astronomical tables of al-Khwanzmi (Alcaurezmi), Ibn al-Saff'ar (Abnezafar) and Maslama (Mezlame) were compiled according to [the tables of the] scholars of India. These tables were compiled relying on those which are employed in the countries of the Christians. The scholars of Persia, however, asserted that the added amount of time over a quarter of day is the 115th part of a day, and Masha'allah (Mescella) and Abu Ma'shar (Albumazar) compiled their astronomical tables according to them. Hipparchus (Abracax) said that the fraction that should be added to the solar year [besides 365 days] is less than a quarter of a day. Ptolemy (Ptholomeus) proved that the fraction which is less than a quarter of a day is tantamount to the 300th part of a day, so that the annual cycle is, according to him, 88 degrees plus 48 minutes. According to the calculation of the Jews and to their [way of computing the] holidays, the fraction which is less than a quarter of a day in the framework of a year is tantamount to the 320th part, so that that the annual cycle is, according to them, 88 degrees plus seven eighths of one degree. The Muslim philosophers who are acquainted with the discipline of geometry made plenty of observations relying on the reasons and tools developed by Ptolemy. In addition, they, for their part, made their own contribution by compiling multiple tables which are commonly named tabulae probationum. Among them we find al-Merwazi (Almarodizi), Abi Mansur (Abnavimunzor), and Thabit b. Qurra (Tebit Bencore), who was the most celebrated Christian philosopher of their time; and after them AI-Nayrizi (Anarizi), the Muslim philosopher, and aI-Sufi (Azophi), AI-Battiini (Albatheni), Ibn Yiinus (Aveniunez), Banu Siikir (Beni Sechir) and Azarchiel the Spaniard (Azerchel hispanus). Many of them asserted that

133

'IBBUR, 1874, p. 8a. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 376 (V.20).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

283

the fraction which is less than a quarter of a day is the 106th part of a day, so that according to them the annual cycle is 86 degrees and 36 minutes. The others asserted that the amount that is less than a quarter [of a day] is the 130th part of a day. Thabit b. Qurra wrote two books about the solar year. In one of them he said that the amount that is less than a quarter [of a day] is the 106th part of a day, but in the other book he added the 150th part of a day to a quarter of a day. The philosopher Ibn Sina (Abencine) and Azarchiel practically agreed with his opinions ... Azarchiel said in his book about the solar year that the solar year should be considered from three points of view: First, according to the declination circle; second, according to the eccentric circle; and the third, according to the conjunction of the sun with the fixed stars. Thabit b. Qurra, for his part, wrote in his book about the solar year that there are two ways to consider the solar year: the year according to the eccentric circle, and the year according to [the conjunction of the sun with] the fixed stars. Ibn Sina agreed with him. 134

In these passages, Ibn Ezra discusses three different schools of

astronomers, collectively called in the commentary on Leviticus 25:9 by the suggestive name of bakhmei ha-mazalot, that is, scholars of the 134 LmER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 75-79: "Sapientes vero Indie secundum dies mundi, quos dies apellant dies de Scindehind, omnes in hoc consentiunt quod annus solaris, ultra fractionem quadrantis, 120m partem diei continet, que est 58 pars unius hore, et erit revolucio anni solaris cum augmento 3 graduum, et secundum indos composite sunt tabule Alcaurezmi et Abnezafar et Mezlame. Et tabule he sunt secundum quas operantur in terra christianorum. Sapientes vero persarum asserunt additamentum supra 4am diei esse 115m partem diei, et secundum eos Mescella et Albumazar suae tabulas composuerunt. Et dixit Abracax additionem fractionis in anno solari minorern esse parte 48 diei, et Ptholomeus probavit illam fractionem minorem esse 48 parte tantum quantum valet 300m8 pars unius diei, et erit anni revolucio secundum eum 88 graduum et 48 minutorum. Et secundum compotum iudeorum de festis suis deest quarte superexcrescenti in anno 320° pars unius diei, et erit revolutio anni secundum eos 88 graduum et septem octavaram unius gradus. Philosophi sarracenorum geometrie periti discipline secundum raciones Ptholomei et per instrumenta Ptholomei multa de celestibus probaverunt; insuper ex sua parte multa his rebus addiderunt, qui fecerunt multas tabulas, que omnes tabule probationum dicuntur, eorum Alrnarodizi et Abnavimunzor fuerunt, quorum contemporaneus Tebit Bencore christianorum summus philosophorum fuit; post hos Anarizi philosophus sarracenus et Azophi et Albatheni et Aveniunez et Beni Sechir et Azerchel hispanus; plurimi horum asserunt id quod deest quarte unius diei esse 106am partern diei, et erit secundum hos revolucio anni 86 graduum et 36 minutorum, et reliqui horum dixerunt id quod deest quarte esse 130am diei partem, et Tebit ben Core composuit duos libros de anno solari, in uno quorum docuit deesse 4te 106am , in altero superesse 4te 150am , et Abencine philosopbus et Azarchel fere utrique eius sentencie consentiunt ... Dicit Azarchel in libro de anno solari quod annus solaris tripliciter consideratur. Primus modus est annus circuli dec1inacionis; secundus est annus circuli puncti; tercius, annus adunacionis solis cum fixa. Thebit vero in libro de anno solari docuit duos annos tantum esse anni solaris, annum puncti et annum fixe eundem esse affirmans, cui assentit Abencine."

284

PART FIVE

zodiacal signs. These three schools of astronomers, as is usual with Ibn Ezra in such scientific debates, are grouped by national considerations, but are separated one from the other regarding the question whether the exact length of the solar year is more or less than 365 days plus a quarter of day. The first school is epitomized by those who add a small amount of time to the quarter of a day. This school is represented by the 'scholars of India' to whom the version of Seier ha- 'Ibbur attaches the 'scholars of Persia' too. Liber de rationibus tabularum informs also that some Arabic astronomers compiled their astronomical tables in agreement with the principles of the sapientes Indie, who were based largely on the Sindhind, an Arabic version of the Sanskrit work Brahma-siddhanta (7th century AD), and of the sapientes persarum. Thus, Alcaurezmi (alKhwarizmi), Abnezafar (Ibn al-Safffir) and Mezlame (Maslama) adhered to the 'scholars oflndia', while Mescella (Masha'allah) and Albumasar (AbU Ma'shar) followed the 'scholars of Persia'. At the opposite extreme, Ibn Ezra introduced "those who came after Ptolemy", whose scientific contribution is characterized by the fact that they deducted, from the quarter of a day, values ranging from the 180th to the I06 th part of a day, to obtain the exact length of the solar year. A comparative glimpse at the parallel reports shows that in this case Ibn Ezra addressed the latest state-of-the-art Arabic astronomical contributions. Thus, for example, we learn from Ibn Ezra's report in Seier ha-Moladot that those who proposed to deduct the I06 th part of a day were "great Arab scholars" such as Yahya b. Abi Mansur, alMarwadhi, Ibn al-Muqaffa' and al-Battani. 135 An even more vivid and complete picture is given in Liber de rationibus tabularum wherein "those who came after Ptolemy" are labeled philosophi sarracenorum geometrie periti discipline secundum raciones Ptholomei who, besides the names appearing in Seier haMoladot, include other prominent Arabic astronomers such as Thabit b. Qurra (Tebith BenCore), Ibn Sina (Abencine), al-Zarqal the Spaniard (Azarchel), AI-Nayrizi (Anarizi), alSufi (Azophi), Ibn Yunus (Abeniunuz) and Banu Sakir (Beni Sechir). In the middle, between those who add to and those who deduct from the quarter of a day, Ibn Ezra introduced "Ptolemy and his companions" and classified them as those who deducted the 300th part of a day. Likewise, in almost all the parallel reports of the solar year controversy, a special place of honor is reserved for Ptolemy, or collectively for Greek astronomy, and the special value proposed by him: the 300th part 135 MOLADOT, BNF

1056, fo!' 59a.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

285

of a day. Among these references, three stand out. In the commentary on Leviticus 25:9, "Ptolemy and his companions" are clearly recognized as distinct from the two other groups, and the reason given for that is because "Ptolemy is close to the methodology of the Jewish intercalation". In SeJer ha- 'Ibbur, while pointing to the closeness between this school and the Jewish intercalation, Ibn Ezra refers to the "the scholars of Greece whose chief is Ptolemy the King", a puzzling epithet which will merit special attention in a later section (see below, p. 296). Similarly, in Liber de rationibus tabularum, the compotus iudeorum de Jestis suis is brought immediately after the value proposed by Ptolemy for the length of year,136 and in another section of the same treatise, when examining different methods of intercalation, Ibn Ezra arrived at the conclusion that "the discrepancy between the Hebrews' and Ptolemy's length of the year is very small."137 The final paragraph in the passage from Liber de rationibus tabularum, which refers to the methodological explanations that both Azarche1 (al-ZarqiU the Spaniard) and Thebit (Thabit b. Qurra) gave to the problem of the length of the solar year, elucidates and furnishes the sources on which Ibn Ezra drew for the final methodological part of the passages from the commentary on Leviticus 25:9 and SeJer ha- 'Ibbur. It turns out that the three methodologies appearing in Liber de anno solari by Azarche1, which overlap the two methodologies appearing in Liber de anno solari by Thabit b. Qurra, are tantamount to the three methodologies which are presented in the fmal paragraph of the passage of SeJer ha- 'Ibbur as the 'secret' which underlies the methods of the three above-mentioned schools. 138 Thus, the annus circuli declinacionis is equivalent to that obtained by "paying attention to the time when the sun is in the point of intersection of the two superior spheres, when the length of the day is equal to the length of the night", which is the method 136 LIBERDE RATiONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, pp. 75-6: "Ptholomeus probavit illam fractionem minorem esse 4" parte tantum quantum valet 300ma pars unius diei, et erit anni revolucio secundum eum 88 graduum et 48 minutorum, et secundum compotum iudeorum de festis suis deest quarte superexcrescenti in anno 3200 pars unius diei, et erit revolutio anni secundum eos 88 graduum et septem octavaram unius gradus." 137 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 100: "Si consideramus quantitatem anni solaris secundum ciclum decemnovenalem hebreorum, non est differentia inter quantitatem anni solaris hebreorum et quantitatem anni solaris Ptholomei nisi parva. Nam Ptholomeus dicit quod in trecentis annis illud quod superest integris diebus anni minus uno die efficit quod trecenti quadrantes eficerent. Hebrei vero dicunt quod in 320 annis si integri quadrantes superessent unum diem plus eficerent." 138 Similar accounts, exhibiting the same three methodologies, may be found in the following places: 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894/5, p. 65; THREE QUESTIONS (Ibn Ezra's Responsa to Joseph Narboni), 1847, pp. 1-2; TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, foi. 37b.

286

PART FIVE

of Ptolemy, of the Jewish intercalation and also of some Arabic scholars. The annus circuli puncti is virtually the same as that obtained by "taking a point in the solar sphere whose center is far from the center of the earth", which is the methodology of the Persian year and also of some Arabic scholars. Finally, the annus adunacionis solis cum fzxa is tantamount to that obtained by "paying attention to the time when the sun is in conjunction with one of the stars of the zodiac", which is the method of the 'scholars ofIndia'. Utility and Futility of Sciences in the Determination of the Jewish Calendar Whereas the above-exemplified abundance of minute technical and astronomical details is predictable and even natural in an astronomical treatise such as Liber de rationibus tabularum or in a technical treatise dealing with the calendar such as Sefer ha- 'lbbur, the same feature seems quite incongruous in a biblical commentary. Let us ask then, which role does science play in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Leviticus 25:9? Why did Ibn Ezra think it fit to introduce such a massive dose of scientific details in this biblical commentary? Did Ibn Ezra forget his own harsh criticism of the Ge'onim, who in his opinion had recourse to foreign sciences in a most verbose manner, in a way which was highly irrelevant to the exegetical issue under discussion, and thus converted their biblical commentaries into scientific encyclopedias? We will try to show now, first, that when Ibn Ezra presented scientific data in such an extremely detailed and seemingly overdone manner (for an exegetical literary genre), he did so to clinch an eminently exegetical argument, and second, that science plays in Ibn Ezra's commentary an essentially negative role. Despite the misleading impression given by the numerous technical details, Ibn Ezra's chief purpose in his commentary on Leviticus 25:9 was not to enlighten his readers about the division of opinion among the three astronomical schools divided about the length of the solar year. Despite the fact that Ptolemy and the other astronomers are presented by Ibn Ezra as witnesses to a strange duel between Moses and Judah haParsy, the division of opinion separating these three astronomical schools was not introduced by Ibn Ezra in order to tip the scale in favor of either Judah ha-Parsy, an obscure Karaite personage, or of Moses, the ultimate Jewish legislator for the Rabbanite persuasion. Rather paradoxically, the three astronomical schools and their differing

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

287

methodologies were instrumental in the commentary on Leviticus 25:9 in demonstrating that science is of little avail in this calendaric controversy, so that solutions should be found elsewhere. A close reading of Ibn Ezra's commentary reveals that his purpose was to emphasize that scientists, even though honestly searching for the scientific truth, were unable to determine a universally accepted value. 139 Therefore, the multiple solutions proposed by scientific research are of little avail for the worshiper who needs clear-cut calendaric instructions in performing his ritual obligations. In the final analysis, Ibn Ezra arrived at the pro-Rabbanite and anti-Karaite conclusion that "we Jews ought to rely on Talmudic tradition". It is worth noting that this particularly negative way of involving sciences in calendaric polemics was by no means a solitary phenomenon in Ibn Ezra's biblical exegesis. By enlarging the scope and studying other instances in which Ibn Ezra came to grips in his commentaries with the Karaite calendaric approach, we reach the conclusion that emphasizing the inability of sciences to provide universally accepted values was the standard tactic employed by Ibn Ezra in attacking the Karaites in other calendaric issues, as well as in affirming the necessity to submit to Talmudic authority.140 A subtle but significant bias in favor of sciences, however, may also be detected in Ibn Ezra's account. Notwithstanding the disqualification of sciences as a deciding factor in calendaric matters, Claudius Ptolemy emerges as the leading scientific personality in this issue. The Alexandrian scientist is the only one whose name is explicitly recorded in the passages from the commentary on Leviticus 25:9 and Sefer ha'Ibbur amidst the other numerous contributions. The personal contribution of Claudius Ptolemy is also presented as being close to the 139 This assertion is clearly formulated when Ibn Ezra holds that "Moses did not account for the complete annual motion, since the scholars of the zodiacal signs were not able to clarify till this very day the length of the year". (italics added) 140 Such is also the case regarding the important lunar calendaric approach of the Karaites. A similar example, showing Moses confused by the various indecisive results of astronomical research, may be found in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 12:2: "If Moses relied on the conjunction of the moon and sun, he should have explained whether he meant according to the moon's mean motion or its true conjunction, which takes place opposite the sphere of the constellations, because at times there are approximately fourteen hours between the calculated conjunction and the true conjunction. It is because of this that our holy fathers said, 'At times it comes at longer intervals; at times it comes at shorter intervals' (Rosh ha-Shanah 25a)". For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 376 (V. 19.4). An almost identical presentation of the issue may be seen in the introduction to the first commentary on the Pentateuch.

288

PART FIVE

methodology of the Jewish intercalation, thereby implying two important points. First, that the decisions of Talmudic tradition regarding the Jewish regular calendar were based on astronomical considerations, and secondly, that the astronomical computations and values obtained by the ancient Jewish science were not only highly reminiscent of the achievements of Greek science but particularly related to the scientific contribution of Claudius Ptolemy. That may be truly appreciated by the fact that Claudius Ptolemy, besides proposing the deduction of the 300th part of a day, is given in Sefer ha- 'Ibbur a prominent and singular place of honor. Not only is he presented as the chief of the Greek scholars but he is also proclaimed as King. In addition, the parallel report in Sefer ha'Ibbur reveals a special and very significant link between the chief of the Greek scholars and ancient Jewish science. We are told there that the above-mentioned value proposed by Ptolemy for the length of the year is very close to the value proposed by the tequfah of R. Adda. 141 The most important point to be stressed in this regard is that by proposing this direct scientific link between Ptolemy and Rav Adda Bar ' Ahavah, Ibn Ezra was creating a direct connection between the best product of Greek science and the most refined contribution of ancient Jewish science. 4. The Encounter with Claudius Ptolemy in a Theological Excursus An exegetical excursus is an independent article presenting a theoretical

discussion in the framework of a biblical commentary. Ibn Ezra introduced such articles wherever he felt the need to enlarge the scope and discuss some burning and controversial exegetical issue, generally centered on a theologically-oriented subject. In such cases, Ibn Ezra took the liberty of deviating from the ordinary rigorous reference to the words of the biblical text and added new perspectives to the problem under discussion, applying in a plain exegetical milieu all his encyclopedic knowledge, particularly that related to scientific branches such as astronomy, astrology, mathematics, cosmology, Hebrew grammar and logic. A remarkable example in this regard is Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 33:21, in which he was mainly concerned with a 141 Tequfat Rav 'Adda is the system devised by Rav Adda Bar 'Ahavah (third and fourth centuries), about whose astronomical work almost nothing is noted in the Talmud. R. 'Adda is believed to have obtained a value of 365 days, 5 hours, 997 parts and 48 secondary parts for the tequfah; this was considered to be a more correct value than that of Mar Samuel. See 'IBBUR, 1851 (Bar I:Iiyya), p. 87; 'IBBUR, 1874 (Ibn Ezra), p. 6b; SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 10:1, p. 40.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

289

theologically loaded subject such as the unfolding of the secret meanings of the Tetragrammaton letters. 142 This excursus was considered by Ibn Ezra himself as a cardinal component of his exegetical work, an assessment which is corroborated by the multiple cross-references that he himself inserted in various parts of his long commentary on Exodus pointing to the exegetical excursus in his long commentary on Exodus 33:21. 143 In this chapter we will be concerned only with a fragment of this theological excursus, which will be divided into three consecutive passages, headed by letters. 144 Placed immediately after the grammatical and mathematical chapters of the theological excursus, the fragment under discussion contains the opening lines of the cosmological chapter of the excursus, which consists of a step-by-step account of the various cosmological layers and of their respective astrological influences upon mankind and nature. This fragment includes only the two initial cosmological layers, that is, in the first passage, the layer of the fixed stars and the zodiacal signs, and, in the third passage, the layer of the seven planets. In between them, we will deal with an excerpt from a problematic text which will require our special attention in due course. We have singled out this fragment because, as will eventually be seen, the presence of Claudius Ptolemy may be explicitly or implicitly felt in each of its three component passages. After this fragment, Ibn Ezra proceeded with a detailed description of the various types of conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, and subsequently with an astrological and theological account of their influence on mankind in general and on the Jewish nation in particular. 145 This interesting account, however, exceeds the boundaries of our chapter. We tum now to the text of our fragment from the exegetical excursus in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 33:21:

142 This idea is clearly expressed in the opening words of this theological excursus: "Abraham the author states: I have already explained that the name of God, which is written but not pronounced, is a proper name. This proper name refers to the Glory. If you add up all of the letters of God's proper name, you get seventy-two. The sages therefore said that it is God's explicit name." 143 See those cross-references in the commentaries to the following verses, all of them in his long commentary on Exodus: 6:3, 6:7; 7:3, 14:19, 15:11; 19:20, 20:2, 20:18; 25:26. Ibn Ezra also considered that this excursus is meant for the initiated and the educated, as may be learnt from the cross-references to it in his long commentary on Exodus 20: 18. 144 This section is based on ideas presented in Sela, 1999 (i) pp. 33-84. 145 For a detailed explanation of this part of the theological excursus in Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus 33:21, see SELA, 1999, pp. 85-114.

290

PART FIVE (a) Note, all plants, all that live on the earth, all fowl, cattle, animal, reptile and all human beings are tied to the forty-eight constellations of the sphere. This is the meaning of 'which the Lord thy God has allotted unto all the peoples under the whole heaven' (Deuteronomy 4:19). (b) Those who added to give light, which is an incongruous addition to the issue, perhaps they knew that but did not want to reveal the secret to Ptolemy. 'And that He had not allotted unto them' (Deuteronomy 29:25) is positive proof of this. (c) It is known that the seven [planets] have one hundred and twenty possible conjunctions. There is only one great conjunction which includes all [the seven planets]. There are twenty-one two-star conjunctions. It is the same case with five-star conjunctions and this number results from seven. The planets can be in a three-star conjunction in thirty-five ways, for this number too is a result of the conjunctions of the seven planets. The same is true of a four-star conjunction. Now the planets can be in a six-star conjunction in seven ways. 146

Claudius Ptolemy and the Forty-Eight Constellations of the Sphere The implicit presence of Claudius Ptolemy is strongly felt in passage (a), in which Ibn Ezra connected the existence of all living creatures in the sub-lunar world, including mankind, to the forty-eight constellations, mentioned and listed by Claudius Ptolemy in his star catalogue in Almagest VII, 5. This is an astronomical figure frequently mentioned in Ibn Ezra's work, scientific and non-scientific as well, and, in at least three of those places, he openly attributed this astronomical pattern to Claudius Ptolemy.147 Why did Ibn Ezra think it appropriate to refer to this specific aspect of Ptolemy's astronomical work in this particular exegetical context? The final part of passage (a) provides a peculiar account for that need. According to Ibn Ezra, the connection between the forty-eight Ptolemaic constellations and the various sub-lunar living creatures is somehow suggested by the text of Deuteronomy 4:19, so that he proceeded to quote part of this verse. That Deuteronomy 4:19 is, 146 For the Hebrew text of passage (a), see below, p. 378 (V.21.2). For the Hebrew text of passage (b), see below, p. 378 (V.21.3.a). For the Hebrew text of passage (c), see below, p. 378 (V.21.4). 147 Ibn Ezra directly ascribed to Claudius Ptolemy the forty-eight-constellation astronomical pattern in the following places: HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN ALMUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, (introduction) pp. 149,301: "Ptolemy divided the fixed stars into six magnitudes and assigned a magnitude to each star of the 48 constellations" (For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 365 (V. 1.2)) ; RESHIT ijOKHMAH, 1939, I, p. vi; MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 48a--48b. For other references to the same pattern, see long commentary on Exodus 20:14; commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:13; commentary on Deuteronomy 4:13; TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 2; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fol. 68a; ME'OROT, 1933, p. 7.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

291

in Ibn Ezra's opinion, a key and self-explanatory biblical verse is attested not only by the fact that he repeated its partial quotation (as in the above-mentioned passage) throughout his entire literary work, exegetical and scientific as well,148 but also by the fact that in almost all those places he abstained from any comment, as if a merely partial quotation were sufficient to convey the important contents of this biblical verse. But in the framework of his regular and continuous exegesis of the entire Pentateuch, when in due course he arrived at Deuteronomy 4:19, he could not help commenting on this partial fragment of the verse and revealing his opinion of its meaning: Which the Lord thy God has allotted - It is known by experience that each and every nation has a specific star and zodiacal constellation, and that each city has also its own zodiacal constellation. God has granted to Israel a most-favored status, in that He is their advisor. They have no star. See now, Israel belongs to God. 149

One thing al least emerges clear from this concise commentary: according to Ibn Ezra, the text of Deuteronomy 4:19 lays bare two important macro-astrological doctrines, whose meaning is rendered intelligible after reading some ofIbn Ezra's astrological treatises. Let us pause for a reference to them. In the first place, Ibn Ezra stated that the fate of nations is dominated by the joint government of a planet and a zodiacal sign. A typical feature of medieval astrological handbooks was the provision of separate descriptions of the planets' general astrological characteristics. Thus, in two of his astrological works, Ibn Ezra presented lists linking planets to nations. In Reshit Ijokhmah, our author succinctly stated, without any explanation, that Saturn governs the Jews, that the Christians are under the influence of the Sun, and that Venus governs the Arabs and all those who believe in the Mohammedan religion. 150 In the first version of Seier ha- Te 'amim, Ibn Ezra went on to offer brief explanations for the points presented in Reshit Ijokhmah:

148lbn Ezra introduced the partial quotation of Deuteronomy 4:19 in his commentary on Deuteronomy 32:9 and, besides the above-mentioned quote, once again in his long commentary on Exodus 33:21, in the same cosmological chapter with which we are here concerned. As for Ibn Ezra's monographs, he introduced the partial quotation of Deuteronomy 4:19 in the seventh chapter ofYesod Mor'ah; see YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, VII, p. 331. But Ibn Ezra partially quoted Deuteronomy 4:19 in such an odd place as the second version of Seier ha- 'Olam, a macro-astrological treatise. For this passage, see below, p. 295. 149 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 379 (V.22). 150 RESHITI;IOKHMAH, 1939,pp. xlii-xlviii.

292

PART FIVE

The Jews are governed by Saturn... since their zodiacal sign is Aquarius, which is the [planetary] house of Saturn. The Christians are governed by the Sun... since their zodiacal sign is Leo, which is the [planetary] house of the Sun. Those who believe in the Mohammedan religion are governed by Venus ... since their zodiacal sign is Scorpio in the term of Venus, and Venus was there (that is, in the term of Venus) when the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter took place. lSI The scope is significantly enlarged in these passages, and we are presented with new astrological agents which have a special effect on peoples or religions. The account of Venus as the star of the Muslims ostensibly differs from that presented regarding the Jews and the Christians. The association between Islam, on the one hand, and the sign of Scorpio and the planet Venus, on the other, is explained in terms of a momentous conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter that heralded the birth of Muhammad. Ibn Ezra presented a similar association in both the second version of Seier ha- 'Olam and the second version of Seier haMoladot;IS2 in the first version of Seier ha-Te'amim, however, he went on to add that this conjunction occurred in the 'term' assigned to Venus inside the sign of Scorpio. 153 As for the Jews and the Christians, Ibn Ezra drew on a doctrine extending back to the time of Claudius Ptolemy to explain the special relationship associating planets with zodiacal signs. According to this doctrine, Leo is considered to be the planetary house of the sun, Cancer is considered to be the planetary house of the moon, while all the other five planets have two planetary houses each, so that Capricorn and Aquarius were assigned to Saturn, Sagittarius and Pisces were allotted to Jupiter, Scorpio and Aries to Mars, Libra and Taurus to Venus, Virgo and Gemini to Mercury.IS4 Accordingly, as Aquarius is the zodiacal sign of the Jewish people, Saturn is regarded as the planet of the Jews, because Aquarius is the planetary house of Saturn. In similar fashion, as lSI TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 41a-42b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 379 (V.23). 152 See 'OLAMB, VAT 477, fol. 88b; LIBERDENATIVITATIBUS, 1484, fol. e lr. 153 As noted elsewhere, the planetary terms are divisions in each of the zodiacal signs, within which a certain planet exercises 'lordship'. In Ibn Ezra's account, the importance of Venus as the star of "those who believe in the Mohammedan religion" is enhanced in that the planet Venus was in the 'term' assigned to the lordship of Venus, inside the sign of Scorpio, when this epoch-making conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter occurred. 154 See TETRABIBLOS, 1980, I, 17, pp. 79-81 cf. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 36b.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

293

Leo is the Christians' zodiacal sign, the Christians are governed by the Sun, because Leo is the planetary house of the Sun. However, Ibn Ezra kept silent on the question of why it is precisely Aquarius that should be regarded as the sign of Israel, or why Leo is the sign of the Christians. As for this association, in all likelihood, Ibn Ezra drew on the dawr or mighty fardar, a macro-astrological technique of Persian origin employed by Abu Ma'shar, AI-Birilni and other Arabic sources in predicting religions and dynasties. 155 The dawr or mighty fardar is a cycle of 360 years ruled by a planet and a sign, which was further divided into four quarters, on the analogy of the solar year. The dawr or mighty fardar seems to give a satisfactory explanation for the connection between the Jews, on the one hand, and the pair Aquarius and Saturn, on the other. In an astrological history still in manuscript, which seems to draw on Abu Ma' shar and other sources, a resume may be found of an astrological history based on a sequence of mighty fardarat. The eighthfardar in this sequence, covering the years 860-500 B.C., is referred to as the period in which Moses appeared, and is described as being ruled by the sign Aquarius and the planet Saturn. IS6 Furthermore, a clear connection seems to exist between the dawr or mighty fardar, on the one hand, and the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, on the other.IS7 Although Ibn Ezra never referred explicitly to the doctrine of the dawr or mighty fardar, he acknowledged in his astrological treatises that the association between Aquarius and the Jews, and between Leo and the Christians, was due to momentous conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter which had a significant bearing on the establishment of Jewish and Christian religions. The conjunction related to the Jews occurred before the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, and took place in the sign of Aquarius, whereas the conjunction related ISS For the dawr or mighty fardar see: KITAB AL-Uu'l'F, 1968, pp. 60; ART OF ASTROLOGY, 1934, pp. 321-22, ch. 518; ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I, pp. 587-592. 156 This resume is quoted in KITAB AL-ULOF, 1968, pp. 68-9. The eighthfardar, ruled by Aquarius and Saturn, corresponds to the dawr number 71, brought in ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I, p. 588. 157 AbU Ma'shar explains in his Kitab al-qiranat (De magnis conjunctionibus), a book well known to Ibn Ezra (ON THE GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, 2000, I, 1, [25], pp. 20-25): "One observes when the conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] shifts from one triplicity to another [that is, a middle conjunction]. If the conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] indicates a change of religions and dynasties, that moment is made the starting-point of the period whose length is equivalent to the number of degrees of the sphere [that is, of the dawr]." AbU Ma'shar, however, provides a completely different explanation from that given by Ibn Ezra for the way by which the lord of the dawr is selected.

294

PART FIVE

to the Christians occurred before the birth of Christ and took place in the sign ofLeo. 158 Let us return to the commentary on Deuteronomy 4:19 to discuss the second macro-astrological doctrine. In the second place, Ibn Ezra maintained that a certain zodiacal sign holds its sway over a certain city. In this regard, reference was made to the so-called 'zodiacal sign of the city' (mazal medinah), an astrological concept mentioned by Claudius Ptolemy in Tetrabiblos II, 5 159 and defined by Ibn Ezra in the second version of Seier ha- 'alam as the ecliptical degree which rises just at the time when a city is founded. In both versions of his Seier ha- 'alam he amply illustrated this astrological doctrine by providing two lists of cities, mainly in the Mediterranean basin, each city accompanied by its corresponding zodiacal sign.160 After these two macro-astrological doctrines, there follows a brief allusion to the astrological status of the Jewish nation. Not surprisingly, Ibn Ezra as well as other medieval Jewish astrologers, such as Abraham Bar Hiyya, felt under the obligation, wherever they dealt with general astrology, to depict this astrological status as displaying a highly privileged bias in favor of the Jews vis-it-vis the astrological status of other nations or religions, particularly the two other monotheistic religions. 161 And yet, Ibn Ezra considerably belittled the soundness and reliability of this divinely favored astrological status by conditioning its enforcement upon the unlikely situation in which the entire Jewish nation as one man would observe God's commandments. This idea is eloquently expressed in two parallel passages pertaining to two quite dissimilar environments, the first in the long commentary on Exodus 33:21, the second in the second version of Seier ha- 'alam, a macroastrological treatise: It is because of this that Scripture states, 'which the Lord thy God has allotted' (Deuteronomy 4:19) ... This is what the rabbis mean by 'there is

158 See especially LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, 1484, fol. elf: "Sciendum etiam quod adunatio Iovis et Satumi qui in Aquario ante exitu iudeorum de Egypto. Eorundem de adunatio fuit in Leone ante Christi nativitate; Eorundem de adunatio fuit in Scorpione ante nativitate Machometi." For Aquarius, seen by Ibn Ezra as the zodiacal sign of the Jews, see long commentary on Exodus 6:7, 33:21; 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 88b. For Leo as the zodiacal sign of the Christians, see 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 88b; MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058, fol. 21a. 159 TETRABIBLOS, 1980, II, 5, pp. 162-3. 160 For the definition of the 'zodiacal sign of the city', see 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 88b. For both lists, see 'OLAMB, VAT 477, fols. 88b-88a; 'OLAMA, BNF 1056, fol. 83b. 161 For Bar ijiyya's position, see MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, p. 115; EPISTLE TO JUDAH BARZILAI, 1917, p. 27. See also SELA, 1999, pp. 119-20; BARKAI, 1997, pp. 341-7.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

295

no star for Israel' ('ein mazalle-Yisra'el: Shabbat 156a, Nedarim 32a) as long as they keep the Torah. If Israel does not keep the Torah, then the zodiacal sign rules over them, as has been proven by experience, for any conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter which occurs] when Aquarius is in an evil [astrological] configuration results in harm befalling Israel. Those acquainted with astrology (bokhmat ha-mazalot) will admit that. 162 It has been proven by experience that Leo and the Sun are assigned to Christendom (,Edom) and that a conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] occurred which ushered in the birth of he whom they deem to be God. Aquarius is the zodiacal sign assigned to Israel. You should know that our sages said that 'there is no star for Israel' ('ein mazal le- Yisra 'el: Shabbat 156a, Nedarim 32a). Yet the truth is that no zodiacal sign exerts any influence on them, whether harmful or beneficial, as long as they cling to God, to know him and to observe his commandments, and [this is the meaning ot] 'which the Lord thy God has allotted unto all the peoples' (Deuteronomy 4:19) and thereafter it is written 'the Lord has taken you' (Deuteronomy 4:20). But when Israel is not on the right path, then the zodiacal sign will dominate them, since then they are regarded the same as all the other nations. The conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter], which ushered in the birth of the Muslims' prophet, occurred, according to their opinion, in the zodiacal sign of Scorpio. 163

History combined with the effect of some powerful macro-astrological agents demonstrated that Israel's astrological status was not favored as expected. By the experience of his own times, our author was no doubt aware that instead of redemption, the Jewish nation was doomed to a permanent situation of exile. As a realistic astrologer, he explained this permanent Diaspora condition as the result of the astrological influence of a malign conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in Aquarius (see above, p. 149). Consequently, he endorsed the Talmudic dictum to the effect that 'there is no star for Israel' ('ein mazal le-Yisra 'el), meaning that the Jewish nation is free from any astrological influence, while in the same breath he did not express any doubt that "Aquarius rules over Israel". Interestingly enough, not only in the long commentary on Exodus 33 :21 but also in such an unexpected place as the second version of Seier ha'Olam, a macro-astrological treatise, in the framework of a remarkable passage referring to the astrological status of Christendom, Judaism and Islam, the text of Deuteronomy 4:19 was cited by Ibn Ezra to bear witness to this bipolar idea. 162 Long commentary on Exodus 33:21. This passage is part of the exegetical excursus which is analyzed in this section. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 378 (V.21.S). 163 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 88b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 379 (V.24).

PART FIVE

296

King Ptolemy, the Thief We arrive now at passage (b). At this introductory stage, it is in place to remark that the text of this passage, as was presented above, significantly deviates from the corresponding text of all the printed editions of Ibn Ezra's commentary on Exodus. In a preliminary phase of research we arrived at the conclusion that the text of the printed version of passage (b) is quite unintelligible, so that it is almost impossible to get at Ibn Ezra's genuine thought. Consequently we revisited the manuscripts containing this text. As a result of having recourse to a new set of manuscripts, a new version was obtained - slightly different in its wording from the previous one but considerably different in its meaning. After a comparative and contextual scrutiny of the texts, we came to the conclusion that the new version is in all likelihood the one which reflects the genuine original text more faithfully. Even though only an understanding of the original Hebrew texts may fully illustrate the real differences,l64 and before the arguments in favor of our decision are put forward, let us present the translations of the two versions of the same text face to face, first the new version, reconstructed with the help of the new set of manuscripts, and then the regular version taken from the standard printed editions of Ibn Ezra's commentary on Exodus. The parts which represent the chief differences between both texts are brought in italic type: This is the meaning of 'which the Lord thy God has allotted unto all the peoples under the whole heaven' (Deuteronomy 4:19). Those who added to give light, which is an incongruous addition to the issue, perhaps they knew that but did not want to reveal the secret to Ptolemy. 'And that He had not allotted unto them' (Deuteronomy 29:25) is positive proof of this. 165 This is the meaning of 'which the Lord thy God has allotted unto all the peoples under the whole heaven' (Deuteronomy 4:19). Those who added to give light to their eyes to explain the issue, it is possible that they knew

164 For the reader familiar with Hebrew, it is highly recommended to tum to the Hebrew texts of the two versions which will be presented in the following lines. 165 For the Hebrew text of this version, see below, p. 378 (V.21.3.a). This version has been reconstructed with the help of the following manuscripts: Rome, Vatican MS Ebr. 451, fol. BIb; Casanatense 2839, fol. 108b; Rome, Vatican MS Ebr. 38, fol. 124; Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS H6b. 176 fol. 140; MS Oxford, Bodleian Library, 218 fo1. 130b.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

297

this but did not want to reveal the secret to the students. 'And that He had not allotted unto them' (Deuteronomy 29:25) is positive proof of this. 166 The first words of passage (b), acknowledging that the connection between the forty-eight Ptolemaic constellations and the various sublunar living creatures is somehow suggested by Deuteronomy 4:19, do not lead to any special problems. A good starting point to straighten out the confusion of the other parts of passage (b) seems to be to focus attention on the bizarre expression to give light appearing in both versions. In all likelihood, by employing the expression to give light in close relation to Deuteronomy 4:19, Ibn Ezra addressed a Talmudic tradition which gave an account of the circumstances under which the Septuagint, the earliest extant Greek translation of the Pentateuch from the original Hebrew, was produced. This tradition is brought in Megilah

9b: It is related of King Ptolemy that he brought together seventy-two elders and placed them in seventy-two [separate] rooms, without telling them why he had brought them together, and he went in to each one ofthem and said to him. Translate for me the Torah of Moses your master. God then prompted each one of them and they all conceived the same idea and wrote for him:. .. Which the Lord thy God distributed to give light to all the peoples (instead of 'Which the Lord thy God has allotted unto all the peoples under the whole heaven', Deuteronomy 4: 19).167 (italics added)

We notice, then, that according to this account, all the elders produced as one man a uniform translation of the Septuagint, despite the fact that they were isolated one from the other. Yet the same Talmudic tradition goes on to inform us that the elders did not deliver to King Ptolemy an accurate translation into Greek of the Pentateuch. Each of them, although they worked in seventy-two separate rooms, committed an identical set of errors in order to distort the original text of the Torah and hide from King Ptolemy the purport of some key biblical verses. What is 166 For the Hebrew text of this version, see below, p. 378 (V.21.3.b). This version is a literal translation of the edition prepared by A. Weiser of Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries on the Pentateuch. This edition employed Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 171. See LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, p. 217. The same version of the text appears in LEVIN, 1985, p. 184 and in the Miqra'ot Gedolot, Venice 1525, (reprinted Jerusalem 1972). It is worth noting that A. Weiser in a note (see LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, p. 217, note 100) mentioned that some manuscripts give Ptolemy instead of students, as proposed in our version. In his printed edition, however, he preferred students to Ptolemy. The English translation of Ibn Ezra's long commentary on Exodus, prepared by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver, is based on a Hebrew text which is slightly different from the versions prepared by A. Weiser and by the Miqra 'ot Gedolot. 167 BABYLONIAN TALMUD, 1938, Megilah 9b, p. 49.

298

PART FIVE

particularly relevant to our discussion is that amongst those premeditated errors, the translators interpolated the phrase to give light into the text of Deuteronomy 4:19. Having said that, let us return to our text and deal with the discrepancies between the two above-mentioned versions. Actually, the Hebrew texts of both versions differ one from the other in only two places,168 which we will now proceed to analyze. Regarding the first discrepancy, the first version gives the phrase to give light, whereas the second version gives the phrase to give light to their eyes, which is a stock Hebrew expression (leha'ir 'einaiyiem) meaning 'to enlighten, instruct or illustrate'. Put briefly, we consider the text of the first version preferable to the text of the second because it has the enormous advantage of perfectly fitting the aforementioned Talmudic tradition. The text of the first version lends plausibility to the following two points: first, the phrase to give light is part and parcel of an addition or interpolation - as in the Talmudic tradition, and not as part of a stock Hebrew expression which blurs the meaning; second, this version not only suggests that the phrase to give light is an interpolation made by the translators, but also that this interpolation "is incongruous to the issue", that is, it radically alters the original text and the meaning of Deuteronomy 4:19, as was the intention of the seventy-two translators according to the aforementioned Talmudic tradition. The second discrepancy completely alters the identity of the person (or persons) to whom the translators did not want to reveal the secret presumably hidden behind the text of Deuteronomy 4:19. Whereas the second version presents some students, whose presence in this context is rather strained and removed from the above-mentioned Talmudic tradition (even though not completely implausible), in the new version there appears Ptolemy (Talmai), whose presence makes it crystal clear that Ibn Ezra is referring to the promoter of the Greek translation of the Pentateuch. In this case, the explicit reference to Ptolemy turns the scales in favor of the new version. The ultimate identity of the mentioned King Ptolemy, however, is not yet completely clear. It is important to bear in mind that passage (b) is 168 In both instances the discrepancy is related, as is habitual in those cases, to a pair of very similar Hebrew words. As for the first discrepancy, the first version renders the Hebrew word 'eino, meaning not, whereas the second version brings the word 'eineihem, meaning their eyes. The second discrepancy between the two versions is even more striking. Both texts differ only in three letters: whereas the first versio~ brings the word Talmai, which is the Hebrew name for Ptolemy, the second verSIon renders the Hebrew word talmidim, which means students.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

299

inserted between two plain references to the work of Claudius Ptolemy, the scientist. In passage (a), Ibn Ezra referred to the forty-eight constellations of the eighth sphere, which in final analysis are a clear allusion to Ptolemy's catalog of stars in Almagest VII, 5. In passage (c), as will be presently shown, Ibn Ezra referred to the "one hundred and twenty conjunctions of the planets", which is a cosmological constant borrowed from Seier ha- 'Ilan or Centiloquium, an astrological book which Ibn Ezra firmly believed was written by Claudius Ptolemy. Therefore, the following poignant question arises: Can King Ptolemy, who appears in passage (b) as playing the role of promoter of the translation of the Torah into Greek, be identified with the astronomer Claudius Ptolemy of passage (a), or with the astrologer Claudius Ptolemy of passage (c)? On first thought, this possibility appears to be extremely unlikely, to say the least. It goes without saying that from a strictly historical, chronological perspective, King Ptolemy and Ptolemy the Alexandrian scientist were two completely different persons: King Ptolemy Philadelphus, the promoter of the translation of the Pentateuch into Greek, reigned in Alexandria in the third century B.C., whereas Claudius Ptolemy, the scientist, performed astronomical observations during the reign of the Roman emperor Antoninus (A.D. 138-161).169 An overall reading of Ibn Ezra's work, however, furnishes the following two pieces of evidence which make it highly plausible that King Ptolemy and Claudius Ptolemy, in Ibn Ezra's mind at least, were one and the same person: first, Ibn Ezra frequently bestowed the royal title on Claudius Ptolemy, the scientist; second, there is no evidence that Ibn Ezra was aware of the chronological gap which separated King Ptolemy Philadelphus from Claudius Ptolemy. Let us now dwell upon these two points in detail. As said before, Claudius Ptolemy was Ibn Ezra's chief scientific source of inspiration. This conclusion is based, inter alia, on the fact that he quoted and referred to the Alexandrian scientist and to his scientific work more than to any other scientist. Characteristic of these references are the names employed by Ibn Ezra to identify Claudius Ptolemy, specifically the two chief appellations that eloquently mirror the reception of Claudius Ptolemy into Arabic and Hebrew civilizations. On the one hand, we find many times in Ibn Ezra's work the name Batalmiyus, which is the Arabic transliteration of Ptolemy; on the other hand, Claudius Ptolemy is frequently referred to by Ibn Ezra as Talmai, which is the biblical 169 ALMAGEST, 1984, p. 1.

300

PART FIVE

Hebrew name of Ptolemy (Samuel B 3:3 et passim). However, another set of names may be found in Ibn Ezra's work which present Claudius Ptolemy with his royal title. This is a fairly frequent phenomenon, which may be easily traced in several of Ibn Ezra's scientific treatises and monographs, such as Mishpetei ha-Mazalot, Sefer ha- 'Olam (second version), Sefer ha- Te 'amim (second version), Sefer ha-Me 'orot, Sefer ha-Shem, Keli ha-Neboshet (first version), Sefer ha- 'Ibbur and Sefer haMispar.170 The best place to appreciate this feature is the preface Ibn Ezra wrote to his Hebrew translation of Ibn al-Muthannd's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwdrizmi, wherein we read the following reference to Claudius Ptolemy and his scientific work: After al-Farghani, there arose another great scholar who translated the distinguished book about the constellations written by Batalmiyus, the King of Egypt, a Greek who lived a thousand years ago. This book is perfect and there is none superior to it in the science of astronomy ... All the proofs which Batalmiyus - who is also called Talmai - brought forth in his great book called the Almagest are complete ... Many commentaries on this book were written by Arab scholars, among them a scholar more eminent than the others in the sciences of geometry and astronomy, whose name is Mubammad b. Muthanna. He composed a very distinguished book for one of his relatives ... he included short proofs and diagrams whose principles are taken from the Almagest. In some places he elaborated on the explanation of Talmai the King. 171 (italics added)

What makes this passage especially relevant to our discussion is that Claudius Ptolemy features in it bearing four different appellations: (a) Batalmiyus. King of Egypt; (b) BatalmiyUs; (c) Talmai; (d) Talmai the King. This singular coronation of Claudius Ptolemy by Ibn Ezra has surprised some researchers, who found it difficult to accept that such a meticulous scholar as Ibn Ezra could have committed such a serious mistake as making no distinction between the identity of King Ptolemy Philadelphus and Claudius Ptolemy. In order to absolve Ibn Ezra of responsibility for this serious confusion, the medieval copyists of his treatises were blamed for affixing the title of King to the name of Claudius Ptolemy, thereby, out of sheer ignorance, disseminating this

170 MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, VAT 477, fols. 73b, 74b; 'OLAMB, VAT 477, fol. 87b; TE'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 29, 37; ME'OROT, 1933, p. 13; HASHEM, 1985, p. 45; NEI;IOSHET A, 1845, p. 12; 'IBBUR, 1874, pp. 8a, lOa; MISPAR, 1895, p. 45. 171 HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MVTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 149, 301. Brought with slight modification, in order to faithfully reflect the names of Claudius Ptolemy appearing in the Hebrew original. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 366 (Y.1.3).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

301

'error' among medieval Jewish intellectuals. 172 This position, however, can hardly be maintained. Not only is this assumption in glaring contradiction with the verdict of the sources, but it also turns a blind eye to some Arabic medieval traditions which provide support and trustworthiness to the alleged coronation of Claudius Ptolemy. Let us now ponder this evidence. Besides the numerous cases in which reference was made to Claudius Ptolemy by merely adding the royal title to his name, at least one case may be pinpointed where doing so was a deliberate remark. These are the opening words of the introduction to the second version of Ibn Ezra's Seier ha-She'elot (Book ofInterrogations): Two were the heads of the astrologers (Qakhmei ha-maza[ot), Ptolemy and Doronius, and both a/them were kings. Ptolemy endorsed the judgments of astrology and wrote three books about collective and individual astrology, but he did not agree with the astrological doctrine of the interrogations. 173 (italics added)

This passage clearly shows that the regal title in this case was ascribed to Claudius Ptolemy as an integral part of an explanatory statement and not as a mere accretion to his name, as is customary in the majority of the other cases. Such a wording strongly suggests that the royal title ascribed to Claudius Ptolemy was a statement intentionally made by the author himself and cannot be considered a later interpolation by a copyist. Much more compelling and convincing are some external pieces of evidence, which make it quite clear that the coronation of Claudius Ptolemy was not so much a bizarre innovation by Ibn Ezra as it was a clear indicator mirroring his deep involvement in medieval Arabic civilization. Evidence in this regard, close to Ibn Ezra in place and time, is provided by Sa'id al-Andalusi, a philologist, natural philosopher, historian as well as judge, active in al-Andalus in the eleventh century, who wrote the following reference to Claudius Ptolemy in his Kitab Tabaqat al- 'Umam (Book of the Categories of Nations):

See LIPHCHITZ, 1982, pp. 204-210. SHE'ELOT B, VAT 477, fo!. la. In this passage, Doronius is the astrologer Dorotheus of Sidon, of the first century A.D. For his astrological work see CARMEN ASTROLOGICUM, 1976. The Seier ha-She'elot dwells upon the astrological system of interrogations, called eroteseis in Greek, masd 'il in Arabic, quaestiones in Latin and she 'elot in Hebrew. This system is designed to reply to questions referred to the astrologer and relating to common incidents of daily life, such as concerning someone who goes missing, discovering a thief or recovering a lost item. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 380 (V.25). 172 173

302

PART FIVE There is also Batlymus al-Qaluzi (Claudius Ptolemy) the author of the book al-Majisti (Almagest), the book al-Manazir (Optics) and the book alMaqalat al-Arba (Tetrabiblos) on the study of astronomy ... Many people who claim knowledge of the history of nations include Claudius Ptolemy with the Greek Ptolemies who reigned after Alexander. 174

But the most conclusive source pointing to King Claudius Ptolemy is Kitiib al-mad1)al al-kabir ila sinii 'at a1)kam al-nujum (Great Introduction to the Science of the Stars' Judgements) by Ja'far Ibn Mul;lammad AbU Ma'shar AI-Balkhi (787-886), a treatise which was well known to Ibn Ezra. Ibn Ezra's references to Abu Ma'shar's astrological work are very frequent, but they were commonly made without specifying the specific source from which they were extracted. It can be shown, however, that Ibn Ezra drew heavily on AbU Ma' shar' s Kitiib al-mad1)al al-kabir ila sinii 'at a1)kam al-nujum. Such is the case, for example, regarding Ibn Ezra's breathtaking descriptions in Reshit lJokhmah of the decani or facies of the zodiacal constellations, an account which he copied in some cases word for word from AbU Ma'shar's Kitiib al-mad1)al. 175 In the fourth chapter of this astrological work, dealing with the nature of the planets, we find the following report about Claudius Ptolemy: We have an account that Greek kings reigned over Egypt for 275 years after Alexander the Macedonian. Ten of those kings who reigned successively were called by the name Ptolemy. One of those kings was born in the city of Philadelphia, reigned over Egypt and wrote an astronomical book in the Greek language called Almagest. He is credited with many other books and with an Astrological Treatise Divided into Four Parts (Tetrabiblos).176 (italics added) 174 TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, 1991, p. 27. But $1i'id al-Andalusi was aware that Claudius Ptolemy lived during the same period of time as Adrianus (A.D. 76-138) and Antoninus (A.D. 86-161), two Roman emperors. Consequently, after reporting about the tradition that made Claudius Ptolemy one of the "Greek Ptolemies who reirred after Alexander", he quite frankly depicted this account as an "error". I 5 For example, regarding the zodiacal sign of Aries, see RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939, II, p. ix: "In its first face there will ascend a figure of a woman, which is the radiant one, the tail of the sea-fish resembling a serpent, the head of the triangle, and the form of an ox. The men of India say that one finds there a head shaped like a dog, with a torch in its left hand and a key in its right hand." cf. INTRODUCTORIUM IN ASTRONOMIAM, 1489, fo1. 6e: "Dixit in primo eius decano ut ferunt femina cui nomine splendoris filia postquam cauda piscis marini ac principium eridonis caputque cervo tauri in forme ex cervo et tauro. Posthec cunocefalus manu sinistra candelas dextra clavam gerens." Ibn Ezra also began the introduction to the first version of Seier ha '-Olam with a harsh attack on Abu Ma'shar's Kitiib al-qiriiniit, because in his opinion he was astronomically wrong in relying on the mean motion of the planets according to Hindu theory and Hindu astronomical tables. See 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 80b. 176INTRODUCTORIUM IN ASTRONOMIAM, 1489, fol. 7c (translation of Hermann de

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

303

We arrive therefore at the conclusion that Claudius Ptolemy's coronation by Ibn Ezra is only a particular case of a much more extended cultural phenomenon which may be characterized as the Myth of the Savant King. 177 It is worth noting that Ibn Ezra not only coronated Claudius Ptolemy but the astrologer Dorotheus of Sidon as well, who was bestowed the royal title in both versions of Sefer ha- 'Olam, in the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim and in the second version of Sefer haShe 'elot. 178 Just as in the case of King Ptolemy, so too in the case of King Doronius, Ibn Ezra was following in the wake of Arabic medieval traditions, as may be learnt by reading the Arabic translations of Dorotheus' astrological work, in which the author is designated as Dorotheus, King of Egypt, and is also considered the father of Hermes, King of Egypt, as well. 179 Ibn Ezra's chief role in this regard may be seen as that of an intermediary, receiving the myth from Arabic sources and widely disseminating it among Jewish medieval intellectual circles of students and admirers of his work. 180 Evidence pointing decisively in this direction is the highly reliable testimony of Joseph Bonfils in his work $afnat Pa 'aneal}. We read in this work, written at the end of the fourteenth century as a supercommentary on Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, an explicit reference to King Ptolemy, who is characterized not only as a great scholar in astronomy and astrology but also as the promoter of the Septuagint:

Carinthie): "Post Alexandrus Macedonem Grecie reges Egypto cclxxv annis imperrase narrantur, quorum x continuo succedentes ornnes uno Ptholomei nomine vocati sunt. Ex quibus unus ex Philadelphia ortus in Egypto regnans astronomie Librum Almagesti greca ionica lingua scripsit. Eidem nonnulli et Astrologie Tractatus Quatuor Partium asscribunt." See also KITAB AL-MADI:IAL, 1996, II, p. 242 (Arabic text); V, p. 137 (translation of Jean de Seville); VIII, p. 56 (translation of Hermann de Carinthie). The same tradition was in all likelihood introduced by Abu Ma'shar into his Kitab al-Uluf, as may be learnt from a similar reference to Claudius Ptolemy written by ijamza al-I~fahani. See KITAB AL-UUJF, 1968, p. 131. 177 King Solomon's case may be seen as a precursor of this myth, at least in Ibn Ezra's mind. In the introduction to the second version of Seier ha-Miv/;/arim, he characterized King Solomon as performing the role of an astrologer. See MIVI:IARIM B BNF 1058, fo!' lOa. 178 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fo!' 90a; 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 83a; TE' AMIM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 39a; SHE'ELOTB, VAT 477, fo!' la. 179 CARMEN ASTROLOGICUM, 1976, pp. 262; KITAB AL-UuJp, 1968, pp. 9-11. In the same works, CARMEN ASTROLOGICUM, 1976, pp. 1,224 and KITAB AL-UUJp, 1968, p~. 9-11, Hermes too is titled King of Egypt and son of Dorotheus. 80 Regarding the spread of the myth of King Claudius Ptolemy among Jewish medieval intellectuals such as Abraham Ibn Daud, Abraham Zacut and Itzhak Abarbanel (who rejected the myth), see BEN-SHALOM, 1966, I, pp. 49,112, 136.

PART FIVE

304

You should know that Batalmiyus, the King of Egypt, is Talmai the King, the same person for whom our elders translated the Torah into Greek. He was second in line after Alexander the Macedonian and they both were students of Aristotle, the Greek scholar. This Talmai was a great scholar in the science of the stars and the zodiacal constellations. No one to this very day has been able to surpass him, as R. Abraham [Ibn Ezra] wrote in the introduction to his Book on Astronomical Tables. 181 (italics added) Let us now come to grips with the chronological aspect of the problem. On three different occasions, Ibn Ezra referred to the specific period of time of Claudius Ptolemy's life. We have already quoted from the introduction to the Hebrew translation that Ibn Ezra produced for Ibn alMuthanna's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi, in which we read that Batalmiyus, the King of Egypt, was "a Greek who lived a thousand years ago" (see above, p. 300). Also in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Amos 5:8, we read that "Batalmiyus the wise lived roughly a thousand years ago" (see p. 259). The third reference is from the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam, in which Ibn Ezra quoted a passage from Almagest referring to the fact that Hipparchus the astronomer lived two hundred years before Claudius Ptolemy.182 Taking into account the period during which Ibn Ezra lived and wrote, we arrive at the conclusion that Claudius Ptolemy, according to Ibn Ezra, lived in the first half of the second century, which is a quite accurate chronological assessment. The same may not be said regarding Ptolemy Philadelphus' s life, about whom Ibn Ezra did not say a word. Ibn Ezra's awareness of Claudius Ptolemy's period of life, on the one hand, and his utter silence about Ptolemy Philadelphus, on the other, make it plausible that in his opinion both Ptolemys lived at the same time. We therefore arrive at the conclusion that in Ibn Ezra's opinion, King Ptolemy, the promoter of the translation of the Pentateuch from Hebrew into Greek, and Claudius Ptolemy, the most important and most admired scientific source for Ibn Ezra's scientific work, were one and the same person. Furthermore, all the above shows that Ibn Ezra construed the aforementioned Talmudic tradition as a scenario in which King Ptolemy, behind the fa~ade and under the pretext of merely promoting the translation into Greek of the Pentateuch, was in fact intent on consummating an act of 'scientific espionage'. The Talmudic tradition gave many examples which illustrated how the translators distorted the original text of the Torah and hid from King Ptolemy the purport of 181

SAFNAT PA'ANEAI;I,

(V.26).

1911, I. p. 84. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 380

182 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo1. 81b cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, VII (3), p. 333.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

305

some key biblical verses. Amongst all those cases, Ibn Ezra was interested in the particular case of Deuteronomy 4:19. More precisely, he focused his attention on the attempt of 'theft' of the scientific secrets guarded in Deuteronomy 4:19, whose text, according to the Talmudic tradition, was distorted by the interpolation of the phrase to give light. This choice was not accidental, since Ibn Ezra believed that there is a close connection between the purport of Deuteronomy 4: 19 and the forty-eight constellations, which King Ptolemy himself analyzed and mapped in the catalog of stars that he compiled in Almagest VII, 5. Why was King Ptolemy, a distinguished astronomer and astrologer on his own merits, portrayed by Ibn Ezra as coveting the scientific secrets behind Deuteronomy 4:19? In all likelihood Ibn Ezra believed that by translating into Greek the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy 4:19, King Ptolemy sought to unveil some astrological secrets with which he was not so much acquainted. We can guess the nature of those astrological secrets by taking a glimpse at Ibn Ezra's own commentary on Deuteronomy 4:19 (see above, p. 291). There was little new that Claudius Ptolemy could have learnt from the doctrine of the 'zodiacal sign of the city' (mazal medinah), as he himself briefly referred to the same doctrine in his Tetrabiblos.1 83 On the other hand, King Ptolemy would have been attracted by the astrological secrets attending the peculiar astrological status of the Jewish nation which, according to Ibn Ezra, entailed a bipolar astrological situation in whose framework, on the one hand, "Israel has no zodiacal sign", but, on the other, "Aquarius is the sign of Israel". But above all, King Ptolemy would have been greatly interested in learning about the macro-astrological doctrine stating that the fate of nations is dominated by the joint government of a planet and a zodiacal sign. The link tying a planet and a zodiacal sign was based on an astrological tradition expounded by Claudius Ptolemy in his Tetrabiblos, but the macro-astrological doctrine in itself was a late development of Arabic astrology completely unknown by ancient Greek astrologers (see above, p. 293). The Theft ofScience from the Jews by the Greeks

Surprising and odd as the specific terms in which Ibn Ezra couched the Talmudic tradition may seem, the main idea underlying Ibn Ezra's interpretation should not be considered as something notably peculiar or 183

See TETRABffiLOS, 1980, II, 5, p. 163.

306

PART FIVE

innovative. In fact, Ibn Ezra's reference to King Ptolemy may be regarded as his particular version of the 'theft of science from the Jews by the Greeks', an ideological pattern whose footsteps may be followed from antiquity, but whose presence is most strongly felt in the work of twelfth-century Jewish intellectuals contemporaneous with Ibn Ezra. 184 Far from regarding themselves as trailblazers in the development of sciences, Jewish intellectuals involved in scientific undertakings in the twelfth century quite vehemently claimed that in bygone times Jews were already intensively engaged in scientific activities. In their opinion, earlier Jews had accomplished remarkable scientific achievements, not least in the field of calendaric regulation, astronomy and astrology, which brought them into close contact with the scientific achievements of the Gentile nations, and especially with Greek science. In the framework of those cultural contacts, so twelfth-century Jewish intellectuals argued, the Jews of antiquity sometimes fell victim to the "theft of their wisdom by the Greeks". We will devote this section to an explanation of some relevant expressions by twelfth-century Jewish intellectuals contemporary with Ibn Ezra, such as Abraham Bar Hiyya, Maimonides and Judah ha-Levy. This will be done not only to gain some insights into this cultural phenomenon, but also in order to put Ibn Ezra's own ideas in their proper historical and cultural context. Abraham Bar I:Iiyya believed that the ancient sages of Israel were deeply involved in science, an idea which may be clearly discerned in almost all his scientific treatises. Thus, in his epistle to Rabbi Yehudah Barzilai of Barcelona, written to defend himself against the allegation of astrological malpractice in his duties as a rabbi, Bar Hiyya strove to endow the learning and practice of astronomy and his admissible version of astrology with a respectable semblance. He did so by maintaining, inter alia, that "the saintly sages of Israel as well as the Gentile scholars were involved in its investigation and praised themselves for uncovering its secrets", and immediately after that added that "there is almost no discrepancy between the achievements of the sages of Israel and the Gentile scholars."185 A similar stance may be traced to Megilat ha184 For the development of this myth see ROTH, 1978, pp. 53-67, who coined the above-mentioned suggestive expression in the title of his article. N. Roth asserted that this pattern emerged first in the Hellenistic period amidst Jewish intellectuals who claimed that the legendary patriarchs and archetypes of Judaism, Abraham and Moses, were the original sources of philosophy and science. Roth's article was chiefly devoted to the development of the myth in Antiquity, and paid less attention to its subsequent medieval evolvement, one which answered to a quite different intellectual and cultural climate. 185 EPISTLE TO JUDAH BARZILAI, 1917, p. 29.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

307

Megaleh, wherein, after expressing serious reservations about the worthiness of the universal astrological history which he incorporated in the fifth chapter (see above, p. 103), he wrote that "in all my astronomical calculations I relied on Ptolemy, the chief of the astronomers among all the nations, and I did that because he concurs with the opinion of our forefathers, may their memory be blessed" .186 In fact, by proposing this sort of argument, Bar I:Iiyya's chief aim was to legitimize the learning of the 'external sciences' or 'foreign sciences', and the main tool to accomplish that purpose was to convert the new Arabic-Greek science into a rejuvenated version of pristine Jewish wisdom, thereby blurring its innovative character, which might be grasped as undermining religious faith.187 A far-fetched version of the same stance is noticeable in the second chapter of the second part of Bar I:Iiyya's Seier ha- 'Ibbur (Book of the Intercalation), devoted to the controversies generated between the nations concerning the determination of the length of the lunar month. At the very core of this chapter there appears an almost literal citation of a fragment of Ptolemy's Almagest IV, 2, which served Bar I:Iiyya as a basis for developing a discussion about the contribution of ancient Persian, Chaldean, Babylonian and Greek scientists. In the final analysis, Bar I:Iiyya strove to show that the value advanced by Hipparchus for the length ofthe lunar month, that is, 29, 31, 50,8,9,20 days - employing the hexadecimal system then in vogue - is identical with the value proposed by the ancient sages of Israel, that is, 29 days, 12 hours and 783 parts - employing a special division of the hour into 1080 parts ascribed by Bar I:Iiyya and other twelfth-century intellectuals to the old sages of Israel. 188 Besides accentuating this close link between ancient Jewish and Greek science, Bar I:Iiyya adopted a remarkably radical stand

186 MEGILATHAMEGALEH, 1924, V (introduction), p. 119. 187 For a similar approach in Bar I:Iiyya's work see also, $URATHA'ARES, 1546, pp.

4-6; MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, 1924, V, p. 111. 188 See 'IBBUR, 1851, II, 2, pp. 35-38; cf. ALMAGEST, 1984, IV, 2, pp. 175-6; Bar I:Iiyya employed here a special division of the hour into 1080 parts which in his opinion was specially designed by the ancient sages ofIsrael in the framework of the Jewish intercalation system in order to accommodate all the numerical details of the lunar month's length. The same system of 1080 parts of an hour was mentioned, employed and explained by Maimonides (see SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967,6:2, p. 27) and by Ibn Ezra (,IBBUR, 1874, II, p. 3a), who employed the same arguments as Bar I:Iiyya. Ibn Ezra, for his part, named this division of the hour with the suggestive epithet 'parts of Israel' in his long commentary on Exodus 12:2. Judah ha-Levy too employed the same measurement units in a similar context (see HAKuZARI, 1972, Iv, 29, p.190). O. Neugebauer, however, asserts that this division of the hour originated in Babylonian astronomy of the last centuries B.C. (see SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, Astronomical Commentary, p. 117).

308

PART FIVE

which eloquently conveyed the idea of the 'theft of science from the Jews by the Greeks'. That may be appreciated at the end of the abovementioned chapter, in which Bar l;Iiyya felt compelled to append the following clarification: All the above has been said to make known to you that all the learned Gentile scholars acquired their wisdom from our sages ... and you should know that Hipparchus learnt from them and drank from the spring of their knowledge. Likewise, each particular field of wisdom with which the Gentiles are acquainted, they learnt from our forefathers, may their memory be blessed. 189

In the opinion of Maimonides (1135-1204), ancient Jewish sciences flourished in past times but were snuffed out under the oppression of foreign nations, or, as worded by Maimonides himself: We have already explained that all these views [regarding astronomical and astrological matters] do not contradict anything said by our prophets and the sustainers of our Law ... However, the wicked from among the ignorant communities ruined our good qualities, destroyed our words of wisdom and our compilations, and caused our men of knowledge to perish, so that we again became ignorant. 190

A perusal of some of Maimonides' writings gives the distinct impression that the old sages of Israel were intensively involved in astrology and astronomy. In his Letter on Astrology, addressed to a group of rabbis of Provence, Maimonides asserted that astrology played a crucial role in

Jewish history in the era when the Temple was destroyed, going to the extreme of stating that the old Kingdom of Israel was lost and the Temple destroyed because some of the Hebrew forefathers busied themselves with works of astrology and endorsed its doctrines, instead oflearning and implementing the art ofwar. 191 Maimonides also claimed in the Laws concerning the Sanctification of the New Month that the astronomical methods of the i$tagninin, a Talmudic term employed elsewhere by him to designate the astrologers, were regarded by the sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish legislative and judicial court which functioned under Roman rule and reflected the state of affairs that existed in the Talmudic period, as the paradigm which should be followed when coming to fulfill calendaric regulation functions. 192 189 'IBBUR, 1851, II, 2, pp. 37-38. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 381 (V.27). 190 GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED, 1963, II, 11. p. 276. See also GUIDE OF THE

PERPLEXED, 1963,1, 71,p. 175. 191 MAIMONIDES' LETfERON AsTROLOGY, 1926, p. 44. 192 SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 1:6, p. 4. For this passage, see SELA, 2001 (i), pp. 70-1.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

309

Despite the fact that Maimonides held that Jewish sciences became extinct "because of our [nation] being dominated by the pagan nations",193 nowhere did he explicitly refer to the 'theft of Jewish wisdom by the Greeks'. A perusal of Maimonides' relevant writings shows that in his opinion both civilizations arrived at remarkable scientific achievements by developing along parallel lines. 194 Even though Maimonides emphasized the proximity between those accomplishments,195 he also pointed out some divergences, and in one case at least, he even did not refrain from remarking that the achievements of the Gentiles were superior to those of the old sages of Israel. 196 Be that as it may, the modern reader of works such as the Laws concerning the Sanctification of the New Month gets the strong impression that Maimonides' references to the separate and parallel development of Greek and Jewish science were made to legitimize the study and practice of the new Arabic-Greek science within Jewish society, especially in order to afford access to sciences for such practical and compelling uses as the regulation of the observation of Jewish ritual. 193 GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED, 1963, I, 71, p. 175: "Know that the many sciences devoted to establishing the truth regarding these matters that have existed in our religious community have perished because of the length of the time that has passed, because of our being dominated by the pagan nations." 194 See, for example, SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 17:25, p. 73: "As regards the logic of all these calculations-why we have to add a particular figure or deduct it, how all these rules originated, and how they were discovered and provedall this is part of the science of astronomy and mathematics, about which many books have been composed by Greek sages-books that are still available to the scholars of our time. But the books which had been composed by the sages of Israel, of the tribe of Issachar, who lived in the times of the Prophets, have not come down to us. But since all these rules have been established by sound and clear proofs, free from any flaw and irrefutable, we need not be concerned about the identity of their authors, whether they were Hebrew prophets or Gentile sages. For when we have to do with rules and propositions which have been demonstrated by good reasons and have been verified to be true by sound and flawless proofs, we rely upon the author who has discovered them or has transmitted them only because of his demonstrated proofs and verified reasoning." 195 See SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 11:2-3, p. 42; 18:10-1, p. 77. . 196 This is the case regarding the belief that the motion of the spheres produces mighty sounds. Maimonides drew a comparison between, on the one hand, the opinion of the sect of Pythagoras and some of the sages of Israel who supported this belief, and, on the other hand, the opinion of Aristotle in De Cae/o, who disagreed with this belief. Maimonides' opinion in his Guide of the Perplexed, II, 8, is that "you should not fmd it blameworthy that the opinion of Aristotle disagrees with that of the Sages", and that in this case ''the sages of the nations of the world have vanquished". Interestingly enough, precisely the opposite position was endorsed in Ibn Ezra's commentary on Psalms 93:4, which, relying on Ezekiel 1:24, asserted that "those unable to hear the music of the spheres are deaf, in the same manner as those who are unable to see the deeds of God are blind".

310

PART FIVE

In other words: it is permitted to employ the scientific exploits of the Gentile scholars because in the final analysis they mainly agree with the achievement of the old sages of Israel. 197 Judah ha-Levy (d. 1141), Ibn Ezra's close friend, also believed that the sciences of Israel thrived in past times, especially astronomy, a scientific field which served as a central tool in calendaric uses. 198 In sharp contrast with Talmudic law, which was preserved throughout the hardships of the exile, old Jewish science vanished, in ha-Levy's opinion, because it was not shared by the people but was the exclusive intellectual property of a minority group of scholars. 199 Judah ha-Levy emphasized the originality and antiquity of Jewish sciences, as in the case of "the calendar, based on the rules of the revolution of the moon, as handed down by the House of David".200 But Judah ha-Levy drew a clear-cut line of differentiation between old Jewish wisdom, which achieved an unsurpassable degree of precision, being based on prophecy and divine revelation, and the sciences of the Gentiles, inexact by nature because they were a product of human research and therefore always subject to alterations. For one thing, he exhibited with great pride the excellent and wonderful accomplishments achieved by old Jewish wisdom in the field of astronomy, and especially in the calculation ofthe calendar. As for the observations of the Greek and other astronomers, he noted that not only were they not faultless, but also that they "were obliged to insert corrections and supplements every century, whilst our calendar is always free from error, as it rests on prophetic tradition".201 197 See SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 17:25, p. 73 quoted in note 194. 198 Regarding Jewish astronomy see BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946, II, 64; IV, 29, p. 212: "I have already called thy attention to the fact that they were so skilled in real astronomical observations that they knew the revolution of the moon which, according to Davidian tradition, amounts to twenty-nine days, twelve hours and seven hundred ninety-three fractions. No flaw has been found in it hitherto. They also calculated the solar year...". But the old sages of Israel were engaged in astrology as well, and in this regard see BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946, N, 9, p. 190. 199 BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946, IV, 31, pp. 214-5: "Because their contents were retained in the minds of a few people, only one of whom was an astronomer, another a physician or an anatomist. If a nation perishes, it is first the higher classes which disappear, and literature with them. There only remain the law books which the people require, know by heart, copy and preserve. Whatever element of those sciences was embodied in the Talmudic law code was thus preserved by the zeal of man;, students." 20 BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946, II, 64, p. 108; see also a similar expression in IV, 29, p. 213. Interestingly enough, extremely similar opinions may be found in the work of Ibn Ezra (,IBBUR, 1874, 3a; LIBERDERATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 98), but also in the work of Abraham Bar l;Iiyya (,IBBUR, 1851, III, 5, p. 93), and Maimonides (SANCTIFICATION OF THE NEW MOON, 1967, 1:1, p. 3; 5:1-2, pp. 22-3). 201 BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946, II, 64, pp. 107-8. See also IV, 29, pp. 213-4.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

311

Judah ha-Levy not only strove to demote the foreign sciences by presenting them as less precise and always subject to alterations, but also by regarding them as a stolen and degraded copy of the original Hebrew science. The following is the special manner in which he worded this idea in the Book ofKuzari: Now the roots and principles of all sciences were handed down from us first to the Chaldaeans, then to the Persians and Medians, then the Greeks, and finally to the Romans. On account of the length of this period, and the many disturbing circumstances, it was forgotten that they had originated with the Hebrews, and so they were ascribed to the Greeks and Romans. To Hebrew, however, belongs the first place, both as regards the nature of the languages, and the completeness of meanings. 202 We notice here, aptly formulated, a further expression of the 'theft of philosophy from the Jews by the Greeks'. Judah ha-Levy's view, however, is not a mere repetition of Abraham Bar J:Iiyya's already mentioned position. What captures the readers' attention in this quotation is the remarkable idea that the first place belongs to the Hebrews because they were the original speakers of the Hebrew language, the first language and the "most comprehensive". This is a pivotal idea, developed elsewhere by Judah ha-Levy in the Kuzari,203 and at its very core stands the notion that Hebrew is a divine language, deliberately designed by God as the most fitted to express all the conceivable semantic fields as well as the most subtle details of reality, let alone scientific terminology. Here we have an appropriate connecting link between Judah ha-Levy and Abraham Ibn Ezra. The latter too emphasized, as already mentioned, that the Hebrew language was the first in order of time and the "most comprehensive" (see above, p. 105). Ibn Ezra's formulations are so similar to Judah ha-Levy's that one is impelled to assume that the idea was jointly elaborated and refined during their tete-a-tete meetings and discussions, before they abandoned al-Andalus in 1140. The main difference between them, however, lies in the literary context within which the similar idea was presented. Ibn Ezra conveyed his view of the 202 BOOK OF KUZARI, II, 66. p. 109 (with slight changes). Judah ha-Levy recfitulated the same idea in BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946, I, 63, pp. 46-7. 20 BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946, IV, 25, pp. 202-3: "The language created by God, which he taught Adam and placed on his tongue and in his heart, is without doubt the most perfect and most fitted to express the things specified, as it is written: 'And whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof (Genesis 2:19). This means that it deserved such a name which fitted and characterized it. This shows the excellence of the 'holy tongue' as well as the reason why the angels employed it in preference to any other."

312

PARTFNE

Hebrew language in all three versions of Keli ha-Nehoshet (The Book on the Astrolabe), a clearly technical scientific treatise, and did so in order to account for his difficulties as a writer and translator. Being obliged to render highly technical Arabic terminology into Hebrew, a language dotted with technical lacunae, he derived comfort from airing the idea that the pristine Hebrew language was once upon the time the "most comprehensive and the first among the languages of all the nations". Judah ha-Levy, for his part, chose the medium of a philosophical-theological treatise and regarded the reception of the Hebrew language by his Hebrew ancestors as an initial and preparatory stage, after which the so-called 'theft of philosophy from the Jews by the Greeks' was perpetrated. We arrive at the conclusion that Abraham Ibn Ezra, just like Abraham Bar ijiyya and his friend Judah ha-Levy, believed that the accomplishments of ancient Jewish science were coveted and sometimes even stolen by the scholars of other nations. However similar his view may seem, Ibn Ezra diverged from his companions mainly in the way he emphasized, and in the manner in which he mixed, the ingredients of this myth, notably by endowing them with a remarkable biblical paraphernalia. He believed that the biblical Hebrew text, as a remnant of the original Hebrew language, embraced not only scientific terminology but also scientific ideas and theories which were aptly expressed via that terminology. Thus, for example, Ibn Ezra, the biblical commentator and scientist, discovered in a variety of biblical verses a number of references which in his opinion pointed to central Aristotelian scientific theories, such as the bipartite division of cosmos or the quadripartite elementary division of sub-lunar matter. 204 Another remarkable example is provided by Ibn Ezra's references to Deuteronomy 4: 19, a verse which, in his opinion, includes some important macro-astrological doctrines related to the forty-eight Ptolemaic constellations. Even though Ibn Ezra viewed the translation of the Pentateuch from Hebrew into Greek as an attempt to steal those astrological secrets, he believed that the sinister design of King Ptolemy, the Thief, was thwarted by the translators, who committed an identical set of errors, so that in the final

204 See the following places: FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1999, 1:1; SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, 1:1; COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES, 1994, 1:4; YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, I, p. 319; COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 1525, 148; LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, 33:21. He also dwelled upon this subject in his scientific treatises. See TE'AMIM B, 194, p. 3; LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM,

1947,103.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

313

analysis this particular undertaking of the 'theft of science from the Jews by the Greeks' was not accomplished. The 'One Hundred and Twenty' Conjunctions of the Seven Planets

(c) It is known that the seven [planets] have one hundred and twenty possible conjunctions. There is only one great conjunction which includes all [the seven planets]. There are twenty-one two-star conjunctions. It is the same case with five-star conjunctions and this number results from seven. The planets can be in a three-star conjunction in thirty-five ways, for this number too is a result of the conjunctions of the seven planets. The same is true of a four-star conjunction. Now the planets can be in a sixstar conjunction in seven ways.205 Claudius Ptolemy's subtle and implicit presence may also be perceived in passage (c), as will be presently shown. More conspicuous is the number 'one hundred and twenty', which is presented in our passage as a universal constant of pivotal cosmological significance involving the conjunctions of the seven planets. The seven planets appear as a single cosmological unit, completely bereft of any astrological overtone, and their conjunctions present a mathematical combinatorial problem which may be worded as follows: what is the total sum of combinations (involving at least two planets) which may be formed with seven planets - when there is no importance to the order in which the planets are chosen but when no planet may appear more than once in any particular combination? Ibn Ezra, however, did not confme himself in this passage to simply advancing a cosmological thesis but also intended to accompany it with what may be called a demonstration or explanation. The reader, even if he is not knowledgeable in mathematics, quickly understands that the number 'one hundred and twenty' represents the total sum of the partial combinations of two, three, four, five, six and seven planets. And yet, the details of this account remain in a state of utter obscurity and unintelligibility. Especially bewildering is the fact that instead of bringing the partial results of the combinations in the expected ascending consecutive order (two, three, four, five, six and seven stars), Ibn Ezra invented a completely different, mysterious and apparently incoherent order of presentation (seven, two, five, three, four, six stars). Also, in vain will the reader look for a hint about the methodology employed by the author to obtain these partial results. 205 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 378 (V.21.4).

314

PART FIVE

A completely different story about the same 'one hundred and twenty' conjunctions appears in the introduction to the first version of Seier ha- 'Olam, in which Ibn Ezra introduced a parallel account of exactly the same issue but couched in totally different terms. In sharp contrast with what we found in the theological excursus, this second account begins precisely with a discussion of the methodology chosen by the author to solve the combinatorial problem: The conjunctions [of seven planets] are one hundred and twenty. And you may understand the reasoning behind this number in the following manner: You may obtain the sum of all the [whole] numbers from one to any other number you wish, if you multiply this [latter] number by half its value, and add to the result half of its value. 206 As an illustration we present this question: what is the sum of all the [whole] numbers from one to twenty? Answer: we multiply twenty by half of it, that is, ten, and then add half to the result, so that the final result will be two hundred and ten. 207 Ibn Ezra did not claim originality for this formula. Quite the contrary, at the very beginning of the third chapter of his arithmetic textbook Seier ha-Mispar, he acknowledged that he borrowed this precise formula from a book written by the 'scholars of reckoning' (i;1akhmei ha-i;1eshbon). In the following paragraph of the same chapter in the same book, however, Ibn Ezra ascribed to himself an additional formula to solve exactly the same problem: "Abraham the author said: I found a different solution [to the same problem]. Add to the square of the number its root, which is the number itself; then take half of this addition; this number represents the requested result."208 That he regarded his own formula as a veritable contribution, worthy to be recorded as such, even though the formula which he ascribed to himself appears to a modem eye as algebraically equivalent to the other formula which he took from a book,209 illustrates the extent to which his mathematical approach was guided by the guidelines of Arabic algebra of his times, based more on verbal than on symbolic solutions of algebraic problems. 210 206 That is, sum(Ln) = (n * nl2) + (nl2). 207 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fo!' 80b. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 381 (V.28.1). In the second version of Seier ha- 'Olam, Ibn Ezra limited himself to the mere presentation of the thesis. See 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fo!' 86b. 208 MISPAR, 1895, pp. 24-5. Both fonnulas appear at the beginning of the third chapter devoted to teaching the operation of addition. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 382 (V.28.5). 209 That is, on the one hand, his own fonnula, sum(l...n) = (n2+n)/2, and, on the other hand, the borrowed fonnula, sum(I ... n) = (n*nl2) + (nl2). 210 See, in this regard, BIGGS, 1979, pp. 109-136; BOYER, 1985, pp. 249-89; UNGARU, 1989, pp. 100-7.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

315

The continuation of the parallel account in the fIrst version of Seier ha- 'O/am shows that if Ibn Ezra intended to provide his explanation with a distinct mark of originality, he attained that, not so much by proposing a new formula as by endowing the borrowed formula with the singular capability of solving some crucial parts of the problem of fInding the total number of combinations (of at least two planets) in which seven planets are involved. The application of the formula to this particular problem may be fully appreciated in the following lines of the same passage, in which Ibn Ezra exhibits its use in solving the two-star problem. Now we begin and ask how many two-star conjunctions there are, that is, how many combinations of only two stars (among seven stars) there are. We know that the planets are seven. Saturn has six conjunctions with the other planets. So, six multiplied by half its value, plus half its value, represents twenty-one [conjunctions], and this is the number of two-star conjunctions. 211

Following the solution of the two-star problem, Ibn Ezra pressed ahead and persisted in the application of the same formula to solve the much more complicated problems related to fInding the number of three-star and four-star combinations. 212 But fmally he gave up. Regarding the much more complicated problem related to fInding the number of the fIve-star and six-star combinations, he jettisoned the formula and resorted to an individual solution. 213 Striking as the contrast between these two accounts may seem, the peculiar solution provided in the fIrst version of Seier ha- 'O/am furnishes substantial clues to understanding the strange modus operandi For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 381 (V.28.2). is the way Ibn Ezra used to solve the three-star problem. 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 80b: ''Now we wish to know how many three-star conjunctions there are. We begin by taking Jupiter and Saturn, and together with them we take any of the other five [planets], and we obtain five. We multiply five by three, which is half its value, plus half its value, and we obtain fifteen [conjunctions]. Those are the conjunctions of Saturn. And those of Jupiter are four, which multiplied by half its value plus half its value give ten. And the conjunctions of Mars are three, which multiplied by half its value plus half its value gives six. And the conjunctions of Mercury are two, which multiplied by half its value plus half its value gives three. And Venus has only one conjunction, and the sum total is thirty-five." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 381 (V.28.3). 213 'OLAM A, BNF 1056, fol. 80b: "Now we wish to know how many five-star conjunctions there are. We found for Saturn fifteen, for Jupiter five, for Mars one, and the total sum of five-star conjunctions is twenty-one. And as for the six-star conjunctions, there are six for Saturn, one for Jupiter, and the total sum is seven. And there is one conjunction of seven stars." For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 382 (V.28.4). 21\

212 Here

316

PART FIVE

by Ibn Ezra in his long commentary on Exodus 33:21. In the following comparative analysis we will be concerned with two main points: first, the order in which the partial solutions were presented, and second, the methodological approach behind the provided solution. We learn from the ascending consecutive order (two, three, four, five, six and seven stars) in which the problem was solved in the introduction to Seier ha- 'O/am that Ibn Ezra was intent on showing an overall solution to a complex problem in a way which is as clear and systematic as possible. Conversely, from the fact that in the theological excursus he disregarded the expected consecutive order of the partial solutions, we learn that Ibn Ezra was interested in dazzling and bringing his audience under the spell of the numbers and their co-related fascinating qualities, much more than searching for a mathematical and systematic solution of the overall problem. Let us illustrate this last point with the following example. Ibn Ezra presented the partial result of the two-star combination just after the partial result of the five-star combination. He did so, as he himself stated in his long commentary on Exodus 33:21, because both problems resulted in one and the same final number - 21 conjunctions - even though the quantity of stars involved in each case was different - two and five stars.214 Thereupon he employed exactly the same artifice to show that the number of the three-star combinations (35) is equal to the number of the four-star combinations. 215 In all likelihood, Ibn Ezra turned the problem on its head in the theological excursus and began by finding the number of seven-star combinations, precisely the opposite of what he did in the second account, because according to some Indian astrological traditions, well known by him, the genesis of cosmos happened at the same time that a seven-star conjunction occurred. 216 We turn now to the methodological approach behind the solution of the combinatorial problem. Quite naturally, Ibn Ezra started his account 214 "There are twenty-one two-star conjunctions. It is the same case with five-star con!unctions. " 21 "The planets can be in a three-star conjunction in thirty-five ways, for this number too is a result of the conjunctions of the seven planets. The same is true of a four-star conjunction." 216 Ibn Ezra referred to this Indian tradition in two similar and parallel passages. See LIBER DE RATIONIBUS TABULARUM, 1947, p. 88: "et medius cursus omnium planetarum secundum indos sumptus est a diebus Acintdeindi, qui dixerunt Dominum omnes planetas in capite Arietis creasse et dies mundi dixerunt esse 1000000000000 et adhuc 77000000000 et adhuc 215000000 et adhuc 450000, et secundum eos omnis planeta revertitur ad punctum sui loci sine fraccionis superadictione." See also HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 152,299.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

317

in a scientific treatise such as Seier ha- 'Olam with the presentation of the algebraic formula, and was even ready to provide a solved exercise to illustrate its usage, because he regarded this formula as the master-key making possible the solution of several parts of the complex combinatorial problem. Conversely, in the theological excursus, he completely ignored the formula and withheld the reasoning behind the provided partial solutions from his readers, because he was stimulated by clearly theological motives, and not so much interested in providing a mathematical solution. That becomes clear if we read just the opening paragraph of the theological excursus in the long commentary on Exodus 33:21: Abraham the author states: I have already explained that the name of God, which is written but not pronounced, is a proper name. 217 This proper name refers to the Glory. If you add up all of the letters of God's proper name you get seventy-two. 218 The sages therefore said that it is God's explicit name. If you add the square of one, the first number, to the square of five, the true middle number, you will get the numerical equivalent of God's name. 219 This is also true regarding the conjunctions of five planets. When you add up the letters that one enunciates in naming half of the letters that make up God's name you will also get the numerical equivalent of God's name. 220 (italics added)

As may be fully appreciated in this passage, the inclination to busy himself with combinatorial problems, a quite natural tendency in a mathematician like Ibn Ezra, was not confined to mathematical or scientific applications. He gave free rein to this propensity in a plainly theological milieu, notably in the uncloaking of the hidden meanings of the name of God, by processing the combinations of the numeric values of the letters composing the Tetragrammaton. This is a central quality in the thought of Ibn Ezra, in all likelihood tinted with Pythagorean colors, which may be amply noticed in several of his theological excursuses in 217 Ibn Ezra referred to this grammatical-theological subject in another famous theological excursus, that is, in his long commentary on Exodus 3:15. See COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1996, 3:15, pp. 64-91. He also devoted an entire monograph to the same issue. See HASHEM, 1985, pp. 419-438. 218 If we perform a substitution of numbers for letters of the Hebrew alphabet, we obtain Y=10, H=5, V=6. Now, Ibn Ezra pointed to the following cumulative calculation with the letters of the Tetragrammaton: Y(lO) + YH(15) + YHV(21) + YHVH(26) =72. 219 That is, l2+5 2=26=Y+H+V+H. 220 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 377 (V.21.1). The "letters that one enunciates in naming half of the letters that make up God's name" are yod and heh. Yod is spelled yod(lO), vav(6), dalet(4). Heh is spelled heh(5), alef(I). To add up those letters is tantamount to yod(lO) + vav(6) + dalet(4) + heh(5) + alef(l) = 26 = Y +H+V+H.

318

PART FIVE

the framework of his biblical commentaries on Exodus,221 as well as in some of his monographs such as Sefer ha-Shem, Sefer ha- 'Ei)ad and Yesod Mor'ah. 222 In the above-mentioned introductory passage, Ibn Ezra first toyed with the number seventy-two, which is the cumulative sum of the numerical values of the letters of the Tetragrammaton: Y(lO) + YH(15) + YHV(21) + YHVH(26) = 72. But the same number is also the sum total of the numerical values of the letters of secret and alternative names of God, according to ancient traditions known to Ibn Ezra. 223 Thereafter Ibn Ezra focussed his attention on the number twenty-six, which is the sum of the numerical values of the letters of the Tetragrammaton (26 = Y + H + V + H), and raised three points related to this number. Two of them are related to arithmetical operations performed on the numerical values of the letters of the Tetragrammaton. 224 The third point, even though connected to the Tetragrammaton, does not refer directly to the numerical aspect of its letters but to the conjunction of the planets. It turns out that the number twenty-six is combinatorially related to the conjunctions of five planets in precisely the same way as the number one hundred and twenty is related to the conjunction of seven planets. Put in other words, the number twenty-six is the solution to a similar combinatorial problem which may be formulated as follows: what is the total sum of combinations (involving at least two planets) which may be formed with five planets - when there is no importance to the order in which the planets are chosen but when no planet may appear more than once in any particular combination? As in the case of the seven planets, regarding the combinations of five planets it is necessary to divide the problem into 221 See short commentary on Exodus 3:13; long commentary on Exodus 3:15 and 33:21. 222 See HASHEM, 1985, III, pp. 422-3; N, p. 423; V, pp. 424-6. HA'EI;IAD, 1985, p. 399. YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, XI, pp. 338-41. See also some interesting remarks in BARON, 1958, pp. 152-3; 159-60; 354 note 16. 223 These traditions are based on three consecutive biblical verses, Exodus 14:1921, each of which contain precisely seventy two letters. Ibn Ezra refers to this tradition in his long commentary on Exodus 14:19: ''Now because these three verses (19, 20, 21) are connected to each other and each one has seventy-two letters, we find in them, as stated in the books, the sign of the secret of God's explicit name. However, in my opinion it is so written because, as I will explain in the Torah portion Ki Tissa [that is, precisely the above-mentioned introductory passage from the theological excursus in the long commentary on Exodus 33:21], the numerical value of God's glorious name comes to seventy-two." Ibn Ezra refers in similar terms to the same tradition in HASHEM, 1985, p. 424 and in his short commentary on Exodus 3: 13. 224 See above, notes 219 and 220.

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

319

four separate, partial questions dealing with the combinations of two, three, four and five stars. After solving those four partial problems, we reach the conclusion that the total sum of combinations of five planets is twenty-six, a number which, according to Ibn Ezra, possesses the fundamental quality that it represents the sum of the numerical values of the letters of the Tetragrammaton as well (Y + H + V + H = 26).225 All the afore-said refers to the numerical relation between numerical values of the letters of the Tetragrammaton and the number twenty-six, which is the total sum of combinations of five planets. Can a similar conclusion be drawn regarding the relation between numerical values of the letters of the Tetragrammaton and the number 'one hundred and twenty'? Even though a straightforward and explicit statement to this effect is missing in the theological excursus, such a connection is strongly suggested by the fact that a direct and clear link is established between the numerical values of the letters of the Tetragrammaton and the number twenty-six, which is the total sum of the combinations of five planets. Still, a clearer and more explicit statement is provided by Ibn Ezra in a passage of Seier ha-Shem: On the letters of the Tetragrammaton: ... if we add the first letter to the second, and we do so with all the four letters [of the Tetragrammaton], we get the number seventy-two. 226 And the reasoning behind those three verses, (that is, Exodus 14:19-21) ... is that each of them contains seventytwo 1etters. 227 And if we multiply the [sum of the] two first letters of the Tetragrammaton by half their value, plus half their value, according to the formula to obtain the sum of all the [whole] numbers, then we get the number one hundred and twenty.228 (italics added)

In this passage from Seier ha-Shem, a theological monograph devoted precisely to revealing the secret meanings behind the letters of the Tetragrammaton, Ibn Ezra referred in the first place to the number seventy-two and presented, about this number, the same qualities which 225 The number of combinations of 2 planets from among 5 planets is 10; The number of combinations of 3 planets from among 5 planets is 10; The number of combinations of 4 planets from among 5 planets is 5; there is only one combination of all the five planets together. Therefore, the final result is: 10 + 10 + 5 + 1 = 26 combinations. 226 That is, Y(1O) + YH(15) + YHV(21) + YHVH(26) = 72. 227 See note 223. 228 HASHEM, 1985, p. 424. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 382 (V.29). The alluded "formula to obtain the sum of all the [whole] numbers" is sum(l...n) = (n*n/2) + (n/2), that is, the same formula that Ibn Ezra presented in the introduction to the first version of Seier ha- 'O/am in order to solve the combinatorial problem related to the conjunctions of seven planets. In this passage n = yod(10) + heh(5) = 15, that is, the sum of the two first letters of the Tetragrammaton.

320

PART FIVE

we have already seen in the theological excursus in the long commentary on Exodus 33:21. Two further additional qualities, however, not only leave an innovative mark on this passage from Seier ha-Shem but also tum it into an especially relevant contribution to our current discussion. For one thing, the significance of the number 'one hundred and twenty' (about which we know that it represents the sum total of the combinations of seven planets) appears in very close relationship to the first two letters of the Tetragrammaton. Then, in order to disclose this relationship, Ibn Ezra employs in this purely theological environment precisely the same formula - sum(l ... n) = (n*nl2) + (nl2) - that he used in the introduction to the first version of Seier ha '-Olam in solving the combinatorial problem related to the conjunctions of seven planets. He reiterated a similar assertion in Yesod Mor 'ah, though in this case he did not explicitly acknowledge the fact that he employed the same formula. Regarding the half of the Tetragrammaton [that is, yod(10) + heh(S) = IS], if you add all the [whole] numbers [from one] until this number, you get one hundred and twenty.229 (italics added)

Apart from those references, the number 'one hundred and twenty', viewed as a universal cosmological constant involving the conjunctions of the seven planets, was embedded by Ibn Ezra in several key places in his biblical commentaries, usually without any remark or explanation. He introduced this numerical pattern in his long commentary on Daniel 10:21 and his long commentary on Exodus 3:13, in the framework ofa discussion of the irregular motions of the planets. 23o He did the same in the commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:3, where he focused on the influence of the conjunctions of the planets over the multiple manifestations of the sun, and in the second commentary on Genesis 1: 14, where he regarded the one hundred and twenty conjunctions of the planets as a central pattern of cyclical time.231 To be sure, those exegetical contexts as well as the other aforementioned references allow us to deduce that, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, the number 'one hundred and twenty' was not only imbued with a strong theological significance as an expression of the 229 YESOD MOR'AH, 1985, XI, p. 340. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 383 (V.30). Indeed, if we employ the above-mentioned formula: sUffi(Ln) = (n*n/2) + (n/2J' when n=IS, we obtain 120. 23 See, for example, the reference in the long commentary on Exodus 3:l3. For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 383 (V.31). For a discussion of those biblical commentaries, see SELA, 1999, pp. 78-80. 231 See, for example, the second commentary on Genesis 1:14. For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 386 (VI.4).

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

321

numerical values behind the letters of the Tetragrammaton, but also represented a pivotal cosmological constant deeply affecting the machinery of the heavens and the flow of cyclical time. All that brings us now to the burning question of where he borrowed this remarkable numerical pattern from. Claudius Ptolemy lies hidden behind this idea of turning the number 'one hundred and twenty' into a meaningful pattern, and, indirectly, he is involved in the combinatorial exercises produced by this number as well. Actually, Ibn Ezra borrowed this numerical pattern not so much from the genuine Claudius Ptolemy of antiquity as from his medieval reflection, an unreal and mythical personality by which Claudius Ptolemy was known by Ibn Ezra as well as by Arabic, Latin and Hebrew civilizations. Ibn Ezra took the cosmological reference to the number 'one hundred and twenty' from the fiftieth article of Kitab aI-Tamara, which is the Arabic name of an astrological book known as Centiloquium or Liber Fructus in the Latin civilization, and known by Ibn Ezra himself by the Hebrew names Seier ha- 'Ran (Book of the Tree) or Seier ha-Peri (Book of the Fruit).232 Medieval Arabic, Hebrew and Latin intellectuals firmly believed (until recent times) that Kitab alTamara, or Centiloquium, or Seier ha- 'llan, was written by Claudius Ptolemy himself as the epitome of his bulky Tetrabiblos. The Centiloquium, this supposedly Ptolemaic astrological book, consisted of one hundred astrological statements and was commonly circulated in manuscripts accompanied by a commentary which expanded on its succinct articles. The commentary to Kitab aI-Tamara was authored by A1;unad b. Yusuf al-Mi~ri (b. 835 in Baghdad-d. 912 in Cairo), a distinguished Egyptian mathematician who also left some mathematical works, such as a work On ratio and proportion, and a book On similar arcs, both of them afterwards translated into Latin and leaving their imprint on European mathematicians. 233 But a glimpse of the Centiloquium quickly reveals post-Ptolemaic elements among its miscellaneous astrological materials, such as in article 66, wherein a reference is made to the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter, an astrological doctrine not known by Greek astrology but developed and well-known at a later time by Arabic astrologers. 234 This is a clear sign indicating that Kitab aI-Tamara or Centiloquium is a 232 See above, p. 241. 233 Ahmad b. Yusuf al-Mi~ri

was appointed private secretary to Ahmad ibn Tulun, who then fonned the administration of Egypt. See SCHRADER, 1970, pp. 82-3. 234 CENTILOQUIUM, 1938, p. 29.

322

PART FIVE

spurious Ptolemaic work, whose genuine author was A1;unad b. Yusuf alhimself, the same who appended to it a commentary.23S Why did Abroad b. Yusuf al-Mi~ri disclaim his own authorship over the Kitab a/Tamara in favor of Ptolemy'S? In all likelihood, he did not have much confidence in his own worth as an astrological writer and at the same time held in high esteem the astrological work of Claudius Ptolemy. Consequently, he did not fmd a better artifice to assure the publication of his own astrological work than to convert part of it into a commentary upon a book attributed to Claudius Ptolemy, a book which in reality he wrote himself. A reading of the fiftieth article of the Centiloquium shows that its author endowed it with a clear cosmological character: "Ptolemy said: you should not ignore the one hundred and twenty conjunctions of the planets, since in them is immersed the knowledge of everything that affects this world of generation and destruction. "236 As may be learnt from the aforementioned biblical commentaries, Ibn Ezra fully endorsed the cosmological significance of the one hundred and twenty conjunctions of the planets. He credulously believed, as did many others until recent times, that he was borrowing the idea from the astrologer Claudius Ptolemy, even though in fact he was following in the footsteps of A1;unad b. Yusuf al-Mi~ri. As for the commentary to the fiftieth article, A1;unad b. Yusuf al-Mi~ri, the Egyptian mathematician, endowed it with a combinatorial character, and interpreted the number one hundred and twenty as the total sum of the partial combinations of two, three, four, five, six and seven planets. 237 In this case, Ibn Ezra, the mathematician, was presumably fully aware that he was following in the Mi~ri

235 This idea has already been presented by recent researchers. See PLESSNER, 1960, pp. 1100-1102; SCHRADER, 1970, pp. 82-3; LEMAY, 1987, pp. 58-9, note 1; 701; KITAB AL-MADI;IAL, 1996, I, pp. 263, 269. 236 SEFER HAPERI, BNF 1055, fols. 52a-72a. The text of the fiftieth article was quoted in Latin by the astronomer Dalmau Ses Planes in the introduction to an astronomical treatise he wrote in the second half of the fourteenth century. As may be noticed in the following quotation, Dalmau Ses Planes too believed that Claudius Ptolemy was the genuine author of the Centiloquium. See TABLAS DoN PEDRO, 1962, p. 87: "Ptolomeus vir in scientia stellarum peritissimus, exorator Centilogii sui propositione quinquagesima, sic ayt: 'Non obliscaris causam 120 coniunctorum que sun in stellis erraticis. In illis enim est maior scientia eorum que fiunt in hoc mundo"'. 237 I employed the so-called Seier ha-Peri. haniqrah Meah Diburim, that is the Hebrew translation made by Kalonimus ben Kalonimus in the thirteenth century, which includes the commentary of Abmad b. Yusuf al-Mi~ri. SEFER HAPERI, BNF 1055, fols. 52a-72a: "Commentary: the one hundred and twenty conjunctions of the planets is what we obtain by adding the combinations of two, three, four, five, six and seven stars. And these are the numbers ... ".

FOUR ENCOUNTERS WITH CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY

323

wake of the Egyptian mathematician, and yet he made his own contribution by furnishing two parallel solutions. In the first version of Seier ha- 'Olam, he provided an original solution to the combinatorial problem by ingeniously employing an algebraic formula to solve some parts of the combinatorial problem. In his long commentary on Exodus 33:21 and in some his monographs, without ignoring the combinatorial character of the problem, he strove to show that there is a clear relationship between the number of combinations of the conjunctions of the seven planets and the combination of the numerical values of the first two letters of the Tetragrammaton.

CONCLUSION Abraham Ibn Ezra stands in between the Ptolemaic and the Copernican scientific revolutions. As such, his scientific work is endowed with the essential flavor of this interim period. Even though in his scientific corpus occasional critical tones may be heard, we will hardly find in it any significant innovation, not to mention any scientific breakthrough. And yet, if despite this seemingly unappealing feature, medieval (and modem) readers were (and are) so fascinated with his achievements, both scientific and non-scientific, this happened (and still happens), not because Abraham Ibn Ezra participated in any 'scientific revolution' but because he was an integral part of a pivotal 'cultural revolution'. If in a 'scientific revolution' an old outlook is dethroned and superseded by a new one, in a 'cultural revolution' something similar happens, not because the new ideas are intrinsically innovative but because they are being transferred for the first time from one civilization into another. The long period between the Ptolemaic and the Copernican scientific revolutions knew several such 'cultural revolutions': the reception of the Hellenic scientific world view into the Roman Mediterranean commonwealth; the reception of the Hellenic scientific world view by the Arabic civilization; the reception of the Arabic-Greek scientific world view into Jewish and Christian civilizations. Abraham Ibn Ezra plays a pivotal role in the last of those 'cultural revolutions', and the concluding chapter of the book has been devoted to a summary and analysis of three aspects of the role Ibn Ezra played in it: the place of Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's thinking, the manner in which Ibn Ezra inserted sciences in his whole literary work, and the role and place of astrology in his work. Abraham Ibn Ezra is a child of the Ptolemaic scientific world outlook, and Claudius Ptolemy, no doubt, is the main scientific character featuring in his literary work, scientific and non-scientific as well. This readily emerges from the very fact that Ibn Ezra referred in his scientific work to Claudius Ptolemy more than to any other scientist. But the towering stature of Claudius Ptolemy in Ibn Ezra's mind is more of a central mental trait than a mere statistical figure. The persona with whom Ibn Ezra was acquainted was not the flesh and blood astronomer, astrologer and mathematician of antiquity but a figure encompassing a cluster of myths. They were created in the bosom of Islamic civilization,

CONCLUSION

325

and Ibn Ezra, in his turn, did not just receive these myths, but expanded and transmitted them to the Jewish civilization of his time as a token of his own reception of the Ptolemaic world view. It was not Claudius Ptolemy that Ibn Ezra grasped but Batalmiyus, who is Ptolemy in Arabic transliteration, and Talmai, who is the biblical Hebrew name of Ptolemy. Indeed, Ibn Ezra was drawn to the Arabic mythical Ptolemy, who, according to AbU Ma'shar's in his Kitflb al-madhal, "reigned over Egypt and wrote an astronomical book in the Greek language called Almagest and ... an Astrological Treatise Divided into Four Parts" (see above, p. 302). However, Ibn Ezra engendered a Jewish mythical Ptolemy as well, that is, not merely King Ptolemy but King Ptolemy, the Thief, who promoted the translation of the Septuagint, thereby perpetrating a sinister but thwarted attempt of 'theft of science from the Jews by the Greeks' (see above, p. 305). Also, the very special manner in which Ibn Ezra introduced sciences in his literary work may be considered as a typical product of the interim period between the two aforementioned scientific revolutions. Ibn Ezra's approach in this regard is adequately illustrated by the way the Ge'onim were harshly rebuked by him for introducing scientific contents in their biblical commentaries. Let us recall that Ibn Ezra considered their exegetical methodology largely objectionable and therefore he advised his readers "to learn external sciences from the books of experts in the external sciences" (see below, p. 331). It is completely clear that Ibn Ezra's aim was not to deter his readers, or the prospective exegete, from introducing scientific contents into exegetical discussions or biblical commentaries. Instead, Ibn Ezra's criticism may be read as a recommendation to draw a clear-cut line between the scientific text, on the one hand, and the exegetical text, on the other, not because the former should include scientific contents while the latter should not, but because each of them epitomizes a quite different approach or way to transmit and implement scientific knowledge. One approach is embodied by the 'books of experts of external sciences', that is, the scientific book, which in Ibn Ezra's opinion is mainly a textbook or reference book aimed mainly at conveying to the layman conventional scientific knowledge. As seen in the first part of this book, his scientific books are composed, explicitly or implicitly, of paraphrases or quotations of previous sources, and they are infused with a clear didactic character which do not make any pretension of innovation. Ibn Ezra's scientific books are also endowed with some typical non-revolutionary features of the scientific production of the

326

CONCLUSION

period prior to the Copernican revolution: they gradually and critically enlarge the borders of the accepted scientific world view without posing any serious challenge to it. Indeed, Ibn Ezra avoids as much as possible a narrow and unilateral approach and enlarges considerably the scope by transforming the presentation of some burning scientific theory into an arena where scientists and scientific schools belonging to different times, nations and religions meet together and clash on the issue. It is in this particular framework that Ibn Ezra sometimes adds his own ideas, which he frequently presents as the result of his own empirical experimentation. An additional quality that characterizes the scientific writings of Ibn Ezra is the extremely sharp criticism with which he sometimes attacks his predecessors, the most famous Greek and Arabic scientists. Despite these critical notes, we will never find in Ibn Ezra's scientific work a revolutionary approach striving to articulate a radically new scientific opinion. The second approach is embodied in the exegetical excursus that Abraham Ibn Ezra introduces in his biblical commentaries. Let us recall that the exegetical excursus is an independent article presenting a theoretical discussion in the framework of a biblical commentary. In them, Ibn Ezra took the liberty of deviating from the ordinary rigorous reference to the words of the biblical text and added new perspectives to the problem under discussion. This approach combines rich scientific contents, particularly that related to scientific branches such as astronomy, astrology, mathematics, cosmology, Hebrew grammar and logic. This approach also uses what can be somewhat anachronistically designated as the model of the 'scientific research article', and is intended to reveal some exegetical novelty or discovery using concise scientific data and terminology, accessible only to the initiated. Thus, paradoxically, we find that while the 'scientific book' is distinguished by its pedagogical and non-innovative character, the 'exegetical excursus', which also includes considerable scientific data, embodies a tendency towards research and free polemic. It is commonplace to consider Ibn Ezra's biblical commentaries as one of the most accomplished achievements in Jewish medieval biblical exegesis. Can his exegetical excursi too, especially those which include considerable scientific contents, be considered as making any significant contribution to the development of the history of science in the medieval period? If we take into account that one of the main motivations of Ibn Ezra was to confront the biblical text with the Ptolemaic world view, we may well consider these 'scientific research articles' inserted in his

CONCLUSION

327

biblical commentaries as part and parcel of the scientific development of his time, even though from a strictly formal point of view they do not belong to the corpus of scientific works. These 'scientific research articles' may be also seen as a continuation or extension of the scientific textbook. As a result of this widening trend, Abraham Ibn Ezra uncovers new aspects, almost completely absent in his scientific corpus. For example, he applies mathematical data to discover the secret meanings underlying the numeric values of the Tetragrammaton letters (see above, p. 317), discovers the place of biblical stars by applying both astronomical and exegetical criteria (see above, p. 258), introduces significant astronomical material in order to clarify some controversial issues related to the Jewish calendar (see above, p. 273) or implements different traits of the Ptolemaic cosmological conception in order to explain the creation of the world (see below, p. 332). Perhaps the most central and enlightening case in this regard is that related to astrology, which we will now reflect upon. The reception of astronomy into Islamic, Jewish and Christian society was substantially less problematic and disturbing than that of astrology. Astronomy provided a most appropriate rationale for the calendaric aspects of the ritual, thus becoming almost indispensable to faith. Since the astronomers' attention was almost exclusively directed to the supralunar domain, because the links of the supralunar domain with the divine or with the sublunar world were almost completely out of their scope, theologians could, with no trouble, consider astronomy as a harmless 'foreign science', the perfect handmaiden of theology. By contrast, the astrologers' assumption that general and particular destiny may be prefigured was construed by the opponents of astrology as undermining the basis of religion, because it endorses an absolute denial of human freedom. Moreover, the astrologers' assumption that their techniques enable them to know how the motions of supralunar bodies provoke alterations in the sublunar world was sometimes grasped as sheer pagan star worship, as a denial of divine omnipotence. Interestingly enough, Ibn Ezra and other medieval scientists not only were undeterred by these disturbing and embarrassing aspects of the astrological metier but also went to the extreme of making astrology the very nucleus of their scientific and non-scientific work. As we have seen, an overall look at Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus shows that it was composed of about thirty works, dealing with multiple and various subjects. And yet, one cannot too strongly emphasize that astrology stood at its very core. Fourteen out of these thirty treatises are

328

CONCLUSION

clear-cut astrological works; this number includes the astrological encyclopedia, the gem of Ibn Ezra's scientific corpus. Other Hebrew astrological works were composed by Jewish astrologers in the following generations, but no Hebrew medieval writer matched Ibn Ezra's achievements in this field. His Hebrew astrological treatises were an accomplished product, widely circulating in manuscript during the Middle Ages. His astrological treatises, like his other scientific books, were designed as textbooks or reference books and did not entertain any pretension of innovation. Nonetheless, we have seen in the third part of the book (see above, p. 144) that a number of creative ideas, not so much related to the development of original astrological doctrines or new technical data as to a singular integration of stock astrological and astronomical ideas with religious, philosophical and cultural concepts, are discernible in the idiosyncratic introductions to some of his astrological treatises. However influential his astrological treatises, Ibn Ezra's astrological impact went well beyond what he achieved in his scientific corpus. The fame of his astrological skills within Jewish society was won mainly as a result of having applied astrology to his biblical commentaries. This subject has been scarcely raised in this book and it seems adequate to briefly refer to it at this final point. l To Ibn Ezra's mind, the astrologer's paraphernalia was highly useful in explicating major biblical episodes and events. Some examples, by no means comprehensive, now follow. 2 In his biblical commentaries, Ibn Ezra asserted that: (i) the flood and its chronology were the result of astrological and naturalistic, not supernatural, causes;3 (ii) the so-called benei ha- 'elohym, literally, the sons of gods, appropriately selected the 'daughters of men' as wives because they were knowledgeable about astrology;4 (iii) Rachel stole the terafim of her father, Laban, because the terafim were astrological tools meant to predict the future;s (iv) the murder of the inhabitants of Shekhem occurred in the 'third day' because at this time there took place an unfavorable quartile astrological aspect;6 (v) some inauspicious

I have been chiefly concerned with this subject in SELA, 1999 (i). All the following examples were deliberately taken from Ibn Ezra's commentaries on Genesis and Exodus. 3 First commentary on Genesis 7:4, 8:3, 8:5; second fragmentary commentary on Genesis 7:11,8:1. YEsonMoRAH, 1985, p. 331. See SELA, 1999 (i),pp. 100-1. 4 First commentary on Genesis 6:2; second fragmentary commentary on Genesis 1

2

6:2.

5 First commentary on Genesis 31:19. 6 First commentary on Genesis 34:25.

CONCLUSION

329

configuration of the stars was the main reason for Abraham's infertility;7 (vi) the question of how many months passed between Moses' conception and birth may be satisfactorily solved by applying Nimubar, a complicated astrological doctrine designed to determine the ascendant, the most fundamental parameter of a natal horoscope, in those cases when the precise time of birth is not known;8 (vii) the people of Israel were doomed to remain in exile in Egypt because of the astrological influence of a conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in the sign of Aquarius;9 (viii) the golden calf, instead of being made for the glory of God, was converted into a sinful object of worship because some astrologers committed a grave act of astrological misjudgment when coming to select the form of the idol; 10 (ix) the fourth commandment, the commandment about the Shabbat, corresponds to the sphere of Saturn, (which is the most malignant among the seven planets but is also the star in charge of the Jewish people), because Saturn is astrologically in charge of the first hour of Saturday; II (x) central biblical figures such as Bezalel, Bil'am, Laban, and l;Ianoch feature in Ibn Ezra's commentaries as acquainted with astrology.12 Astrologers, in Ibn Ezra's opinion, are collectively mentioned in the biblical text under the names of kasdim, (Daniel 2:2), bachamim (Exodus 7:11) or qosmim (Isaiah 44:25). It is in his commentary on Daniel 2:2, as an explanation of the name kasdim, that Ibn Ezra provided one of the most felicitous descriptions of the astrologer's metier: The kasdim are the astrologers (1;Jachmei ha-mazalot) ... their practical craft enables them to predict future events, since they are knowledgeable about the interpretation of the horoscope of the newborn, they know how to direct the degrees [of a star] (see above, p. 34) according to the terms (see above p. 250), according to the aspects of the planets and of the two

Long commentary on Exodus 6:3, 23:25. Ibn Ezra expounded the horoscopic technique in MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 47a48a, wherein he drew on Claudius Ptolemy (Tetrabiblos m,2), on a Persian doctrine called Nimubar, and on Banoch (Hermes). He also referred to this technique in TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 32. The same horoscopic technique was introduced in his long commentary on Exodus 2:2: 9 Long commentary on Exodus 6:7, 33:21. See also MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fo1. 46b. For this passage, see above, p.148. 10 Long commentary on Exodus 32:1: For an explanation of this commentary, see SELA, 1999 (i), pp. 291-299. II Long commentary on Exodus 20:13; see above, p. 156. 12 For Bezalel, see long commentary on Exodus 31 :3; For Laban, see commentary on Genesis 31:19; For Bil'am, see commentary on Numbers 23:9-10; For Banoch, see second fragmentary commentary on Genesis 5:29. 7

8

330

CONCLUSION luminaries (see above, p. 28), and they are acquainted with the revolutions of the year, month, week and day.13

In light of the aforesaid, the following idea may be presented: central elements of Graeco-Arabic astrology, in the historical setting of the rise of medieval Hebrew science, underwent not only a passive 'reception' but also an active 'appropriation'. A main factor, as seen in the second part of the book, was that the astrological apparatus was couched in Hebrew terms, through the creation of a Hebrew scientific vocabulary. Emerging initially as merely one among the 'foreign' or 'external' sciences, a serious attempt was made to transform astrology into something close to a 'Jewish science'. Astrology not only functioned as a universal interpretive tool enabling individuals to come to grips with their particular destiny. From the very first stages in the absorption of Graeco-Arabic science, astrology played a central role in the analysis of Jewish history, was converted into a legitimate tool for the interpretation of fundamental texts of Judaism, and provided an adequate rationale for the performance of central aspects of Jewish ritual and religious life.

13 Long commentary on Daniel 2:2. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 383 (V.32). Here reference is made to a progressed horoscope, that is, a chart whose elements the planets, the ascendant, the medium coeli, etc. - are turned round through an angle corresponding to the length of time from birth to the date for which prognostication is required. In this regard, see TESTER, 1987, pp. 169-71.

APPENDIX ONE TWO EXEGETICAL EXAMPLES ILLUSTRATING THE ITALIAN AND FRENCH PERIODS

As already said (see above, p. 10), several features reflect the difference between the Italian and the French periods of Ibn Ezra's exegetical endeavors. First, the French period was devoted by Ibn Ezra to writing a second version of some of the biblical commentaries he had already composed during the previous Italian period. Second, whereas in Italy Ibn Ezra composed short and concise commentaries, in France he wrote long and verbose commentaries. Third, a comparative study of two commentaries on the same biblical book conveys the impression that in the interval between the two commentaries, Ibn Ezra underwent a significant spiritual shift. Two illustrative examples follow, each of them presenting a pair of parallel exegetical passages, one of the Italian and the other from the French period. The first example relies on two prefatory parallel passages taken, the first, from the preface to the short commentary on the Pentateuch written in Lucca around 1145, and the second, from the preface to the long commentary on the Pentateuch written in Rouen ten years thereafter. Both prefaces were meant to be a step-by-step presentation and criticism of several methodological approaches to biblical exegesis. Here he referred to the exegetical methodology of the Ge'onim, the heads of the Babylonian Talmudic academies, whom he criticized in both prefaces for employing the secular sciences in their exegetical commentaries in a manner which he regarded irrelevant to the exegetical issue under discussion. In the introduction to his short commentary on the Pentateuch, after setting out several examples designed to emphasize their flaws, Ibn Ezra advised his readers to avoid the biblical commentaries of the Ge'onim and added that "if one desires to learn external sciences (.(Jokhmot .(Ji$onot) let him learn them from the books of experts in these fields (me-sifrei 'anshei tevunot)".! Which books did he have in mind? Were there in Lucca in 1145 any available scientific books to satisfy their scientific curiosity? One must recall that Ibn Ezra himself gained his scientific education in al-Andalus through the instrumentality of Arabic scientific literature. But his readers must have had little access to the relatively scarce scientific literature ! For the Hebrew text and its English translation, see below, p. 383 (VI. I).

332

APPENDIX ONE

available in Latin Europe in the middle of the twelfth century, precisely when the main elements of Greek-Arabic science were in the process of being cast from the Arabic language into Latin and Hebrew moulds. Ibn Ezra, in all likelihood, proposed to direct his prospective readers to learn 'external sciences' in an Andalusian library well-equipped with Arabic scientific treatises. A similar criticism is noticeable in the preface to the second (long and fragmentary) commentary on the Pentateuch written in Rouen ten years thereafter. In a similar vein, Ibn Ezra asserted in the second parallel passage that the Ge'onim did not feel any embarrassment about introducing in their exegetical work 'external sciences' as well as scholarly controversies about the creation of the world. On this second occasion, however, our author strove to emphasize his opinion that a prospective audience would find the Ge'onim's commentaries unwanted and superfluous. He made his stand clear by asking the following loaded question: "And how can all that - that is, the 'external sciences' and the scholarly controversies about the creation of the world which the Ge'onim incorporated into their biblical commentaries - be of any benefit to the believer in God and in his Torah?" Moreover, after quoting several examples illustrating the Ge'onim's misuse of 'external sciences', Ibn Ezra did his best to belittle the efforts of the Ge'onim as well as to prove his own commitment to the Jewish religion. Note his statement that "the Torah warned us not to seem wise in our own eyes [as the Ge'onim did], but only to be in complete harmony with our God".2 In brief: a substantial change occurred between the Italian and the French periods. In Italy, Ibn Ezra's prospective audience was typified by the educated reader, in all likelihood an Andalusian reader, who, not content with the deficient commentaries of the Ge'onim, sought to complete his scientific education "from the works of experts in sciences". In northern France, however, Ibn Ezra's prospective audience was personified by "the believer in God and in his Torah". This reader, who strove "to be in complete harmony with our God", was viewed by Ibn Ezra as considering the reading of the scientifically orientated commentaries of the Ge'onim to be potentially harmful or superfluous to his religious belief. A similar impression is conveyed by the two commentaries Ibn Ezra wrote on Genesis I: 14 - the first from the short commentary on the Pentateuch written in Lucca around 1145, and the second from the long 2 For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 384 (VI.2).

TWO EXEGETICAL EXAMPLES

333

commentary on the Pentateuch, written in northern France ten years later. Even though in both commentaries Ibn Ezra aimed at arriving at an identical conclusion, we find him arguing against two disagreeing commentators confronting him with fairly different cosmological arguments. In the first commentary on Genesis 1: 14, the exegetical opponent was 'a prominent Spaniard sage' (.(1akham gadol sepharadi). This was not meant as recognition and an expression of esteem, but was rather a scornful epithet by which Ibn Ezra derisively identified an eleventhcentury Jewish Andalusian scholar. Under close scrutiny, this 'prominent Spaniard sage' emerges as being identical with Mar I;Iassan, who, besides biblical commentaries, wrote several treatises on the Jewish calendar. 3 According to Ibn Ezra, this known Andalusian scholar stated that the firmament (raqi'a) referred to in Genesis 1:14 is divided into eight parts, seven for the seven planets and one for the sphere of the zodiacal signs. In other words: the alluded-to 'prominent Spaniard sage' was an educated commentator who integrated into the biblical word raqi 'a a simplified version of the Aristotelian cosmos. This cosmological model, still accepted in the Middle Ages and endorsed by Ibn Ezra himself,4 consisted of a central Earth surrounded by revolving, translucent spheres to which were attached the seven planets, whereas the outermost eighth sphere supported the fixed stars. If Ibn Ezra himself supported the eight-sphere cosmological model, the curious reader would indeed wish to know on which grounds Ibn Ezra censured the opinion of the 'prominent Spaniard sage'. Ibn Ezra's position may be fully appreciated in his own words: A prominent Spaniard sage stated that the finnament (raqi'a) is divided into eight parts, for the seven planets and for the sphere of the zodiacal constellations. However, this cannot be because we know there is no body above the sphere of the zodiacal constellations. Behold, Scripture explicitly states, in the firmament of the heaven (bi-rqi'a ha-shamayim), 3 Ibn Ezra explicitly referred to Mar ijassan in Sefer ha- 'Ibbur (,IBBUR, 1874, p. lla.), where he scornfully stated that Mar ijassan wrote three treatises on the Jewish calendar "of no great import". Mar ijassan should definitely be identified with the so-called 'prominent Spaniard sage' because in Ibn Ezra's second commentary on Genesis 1:6 the same Mar ijassan explicitly endorses precisely the same cosmological arguments which were held by the 'prominent Spaniard sage' in Ibn Ezra's second commentary on Genesis 1:14. Mar ijassan was also sarcastically referred to by Abraham Bar ijiyya in his own Sefer ha- 'Ibbur. See 'IBBUR, 1851, pp. 54,94. 4 Ibn Ezra himself endorsed this eight-sphere cosmological model, though at times he added a ninth sphere. For Ibn Ezra's opinions in this regard, and especially on the ways he employed to construe this cosmological model, see above, p. 214.

334

APPENDIX ONE which clearly indicates that there is a heaven above the firmament. 'The heaven of heaven' (Nehemiah 9:6) and 'To him that rideth upon the heaven of heaven, which are of old (qedem)' (Psalms 68:34). Note that the word qedem in the verse quoted above does not mean east [but ancient]. Instead, Rabbi Sa'adiah Ga'on, may the righteous be remembered for a blessing, was afraid to comment on this verse. It appears to me that the sun, the moon and the other stars are called luminaries in the firmament (ba-raqi'a) because they are visible there. 5 (italics added)

It turns out that Ibn Ezra did not challenge the validity of the eightsphere universe. The disagreement between Ibn Ezra and the 'prominent Spaniard sage' was essentially semantic, though it implied a sharp difference of opinion of serious cosmogonical consequences. Actually, what Ibn Ezra could not abide was that the alluded-to Mar l;Iassan read the biblical word raqi 'a, that is, firmament, as embracing the eightsphere cosmological model, thereby suggesting that Genesis 1: 14 describes the physical creation of the whole supralunar cosmic structure. Ibn Ezra plainly stated on several occasions that "raqi 'a is the air", thus implying that the biblical word raqi 'a points in actuality to the most external layer of the sublunary domain. 6 Thus, since the luminaries, according to Genesis 1: 14, were created in the raqi 'a, it turns out in Ibn Ezra's opinion that the biblical narrative refers to an essentially visual phenomenon which is relevant to the sublunary domain. In other words: Genesis 1: 14 does not describe the physical creation of the supralunar domain but is a reference to the first occasion in which the celestial bodies could have been seen from the earth, the first occasion in which their movements could have been calculated, thereby marking such a momentous event as the creation of cyclical time. The latter idea was clearly expressed by Ibn Ezra in his second commentary on Genesis 1:14, written about ten years later in Northern France. 7 In this commentary, however, Ibn Ezra no longer confronted a scholar endorsing the reigning cosmological model, but rather a simplistic commentator who stated that "all [the] seven planets dwell in a single sphere", that is, an interpreter who strove to demonstrate that the 5 First commentary on Genesis 1:14 in FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, pp. 16-7. For the Hebrew text, see below, p. 385 (VI.3). 6 On the distinction Ibn Ezra made between raqi 'a and shamayim, a biblical word which applies to the superlunary abode where the stars and their spheres dwell, see above, p. 126. 7 Second commentary on Genesis 1:14. SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976, p. 151. "Behold, the meaning of Let there be luminaries is that they should be visible in the firmament ... that man will be able to calculate their movements." For the Hebrew text of this commentary, see below, p. 386 (VIA).

TWO EXEGETICAL EXAMPLES

335

heavens were created as a single sphere in which the seven planets were all placed together. 8 The relatively sophisticated arguments of Ibn Ezra's first dissenter, an educated commentator opposed to him on exegetical matters but endorsing the prevailing cosmological model, together with the fact that Ibn Ezra wrote the first commentary on Genesis a relatively short time after he emigrated to western Europe, suggests that in his first commentary to Genesis 1: 14 he addressed an educated Andalusian Jewish audience and that he presumably still cherished the hope of returning to the Iberian peninsula. On the other hand, the relatively crude arguments of his second disputer - arguments based more on intuition than on scientific theory - may be regarded as truly representative of the cultural level oflbn Ezra's new readers in Northern France. This was an audience desirous of acquiring new knowledge but still poorly acquainted with the new Greek-Arabic science. This shift in audiences gives the impression that in the time-span between his first and second commentary to the Pentateuch, Ibn Ezra gradually disengaged himself mentally from an Iberian milieu arid became closer to his new audiences in Italy and France.

8 For the similitude between the arguments Ibn Ezra brought in his second commentary on Genesis 1:14, on the one hand, and the introduction to the second version of Seier ha-Te'amim, see above, p. 217.

APPENDIX TWO

HEBREW TEXTS

In the header of every quotation we have indicated the source from which the Hebrew text has been extracted. In those cases where we have borrowed the English translation provided in other works, we have noted at the head of the quotation and in brackets, the source from which we have obtained this translation. Otherwise, all the translations are the author's.

1.1 Opening sentence of 'Igeret ha-Shabbat. 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 1894IS,p.61. 'It'37 i137:::1'N:::I n:::llt' '7''7 '!n:::l mlt'37 37lt'm mND 37lt'm C'D'7N n37:::1'N n:::llt':::I 'i1', N'i'li1 'Ni1 "37D nnN "37:::1 'n"i1 N'T37 l:::1N N'i'li1 "'DO Ci1':::IN 'IN' n:::l~ It',n'7 .n:::llt'Ui1l"Ni1 m'7':::I1D '37':::Ilt'i1 '7':::11:::1 N'i1lt' l"Ni1 i1!i'

In the year 4919, in the middle of Saturday night, on the fourteenth day of the month of Tevet, I, Abraham Ibn Ezra the Spaniard, was in one of the cities of the island called Angleterre, which is part of the seventh among the climates of the inhabited part of the earth.

1.2 Excerpt from the introduction to 'Igeret haShabbat. 'IGERET 189415, p. 63.

HASHABBAT,

,mi1 m'7137 c'nlt' ':::l C'Dlt'i1 mi'n ';':::llt'D 1':::1 ni','7nD l'N :m1Ni1 n'7'nn N'i1 nNT1 ,n"'i'l c'nlt':::I m'::lnn7.l 1m ,l"Ni1 i'!'7.l nnNi1 i'!,7.llt' nm''737i1 m::107.li1 1i1 1i1 , '71'71i1 n'lt'lt' m'lt"7.ln 'nlt' 'D:::l '7N7.llt''7 C1 l'D''7 nnNi1 m~l '737 m"Dn7.l Clt'7.l'

'It'37 C'llt'i1lt' ,n'n'TDi1 N'i1 , c''71'71i1 m37'ln '7:::l n'7'7':::l N'i1 nnNi1 i137Uni1 mm i137'lnm .c'mlt'7.li1 n37:::1lt' C1 ,'737' 'D07.li1 i1T7.l ::l,'i" m37lt' ,":::l::l c''7'37 m'7T7.l c'mlt'7.li1 '71'71 '1'0 ':::l ,c''71'71i1 m37'ln '7:::l n'7'7':::l N'i1 C1 n':::I'377.li1 N'i1 i1'1lt'i1

l'7.l' i1~n N'7 ,m'7T7.li1 IIi' mD'lt' i1,:::1'7 It'7.llt'm ,m'7T7.li1 '71'71 '1'0 '7N C''7lt'D1 ','7n It',nm ,C'lt',nD i1"1::l mlt'i1

m'i1

":137:1' ••• nDN:1 mlt'i1 N'm ••• '7NDlt"

l'lt'N'i1 : C'i''7n i1lt''7lt''7 mlNi1 nNT 'ni''7n

P

'737 ,l~i'i1 "NDi1 N'i1lt'

m:1'7:1

.i1"ni1 C" n'lt'N':::I 'It'''7lt'm ,i1"ni1lt',n n'lt'N':1 '1lt'i1 ,i1"ni1 nllt' n'lt'N':1

This is the beginning of the epistle. There is no disagreement among the scholars of the ordinances of heaven (Job 38:33) that there are two circles which embody the [two] superior motions whose center (Job 36:16) is the earth. The two circles intersect at two points, and from there they separate, as one of the circles tilts to the south and also to the north at the rate of two fifths ofa sixth of the circle [that is, 24 degrees]. One of the motions encompasses all the motions of the spheres. its

HEBREW TEXTS

337

direction is eastward, and [in its framework] the twelve zodiacal signs rise in twenty-four hours, and the seven planets too rise almost in the same amount [of hours]. The second motion is westward, and it too encompasses all the motions of the spheres, for the poles of the planets' spheres are similar to the poles of the sphere of the zodiacal signs, and the sun alone keeps the line of the zodiacal signs, and does not deviate northward or southward ... and [its motion] is the true year ... and since the year is divided into months, and the month is dependent on the moon, which is the smaller luminary, therefore I divided this epistle into three parts: the first part dealing with the commencement of the year of the Torah, the second with the commencement of the month of the Torah and the third with the commencement of the day of the Torah. 1.3 Excerpt from the first commentary on Genesis 1:5. FIRST COMMENTARYONGENESIS, 1976,p. 15. Cl ,::1137 i"l'i'l : W""!:l i" ,C,' ::l'37i1 N'i"lZ1 l:::1n' N' ,C,' N'i" "NillZ1 '7:)NlZ1 ,nN' •'llZ1 C" C37" il7:) ',nN C,,' 'i'::lm ::l'37i1 iI'iI "'N' •,nN C" 'lZ1 'i'::l iI'iI

[FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1988, pp. 33-34 (with slight changes)] Once it is stated that God called the light 'day', it is impossible to maintain that the evening, too, should be considered part of the day. The correct interpretation [of 'and there was evening and there was morning, one day' (Genesis 1:5)] is that the evening passed, and the morning of one day also came. If the intention [of this verse] is to teach that the evening and morning make a day, then what is the meaning of '[and there was evening and there was morning,] a second day'?

1.4 Excerpt from the second commentary on Genesis 1:5 in Fragmentary Commentary on Genesis. SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, p. 159. 1!:lil iI"'iI ':::I •,nN C" 'N'i" 'i"::lm ::l'37i1 ':::I ::l,n:::lil '7:)N' 1'N

,ii'"

::l'37i1lZ1 ,nN'

.C,' iI"'iI N'i' 1'N' ,C"iI

Since the evening is [part of the] night, it makes no sense that Scripture should designate the evening and the morning as 'one day'. As the night is the opposite of the day, how could it be possible that the night should be designated as day?

1.5 Third commentary on Genesis 1:5 in 'Igeret ha-Shabbat. 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 189415,p. 75. 'il7:):::I' .CiI'llZ1 n"':::1 nnN il37'lnlZ1 .C'l7:)TiI C'llZ1i1 "N n"':::1 C" n'7:) iIlm

lZ137" (N:::I: 1 n'lZ1N'::l) ::l,n:::l' .C'N C7:)lZ1 nN N'i'" CN'::l iI::li'l' ':::IT (::l: iI n'lZ1N'::l) ::l'377:) C"iI ':::I n'lZ1N'::l illZ1377:)::l Cl 'N::lnil iIlm .ClZ1'::l'" "37 mln:::l ,nlZ1N" C'N' .::l'37 '37

338

APPENDIX TWO

And the word day includes both times, which are included in one motion. Like in the case of 'male and female he created .... and called their name Man' (Genesis 5:2). And it is written 'For the man also and for his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them' (Genesis 3:21). Therefore it is clarified with the evidence of the biblical Creation that the day extends from evening to evening.

1.6 Calculation of the horoscopic houses in Mishpetei ha-Mazalot. MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF 1058./01. 16a.

1"::J "'lV3In n'::Jn n'mn n'n' e'~31!:l ':J ,m::r'Nn ::JM1~ '!:l:J mnlV' e'n::Jn n'lVN" n'n' ,"N~ ::J, f'Nn ::JM1~ n'n eN' .'lV,'n m?31~ '!:lO~::J '31'lVnn n'::J::J e"31::r~n m?31~ e'lV'~n '::JM1~lV i1T e'i'~::J p'~'m ,'l'~lVn n'::J::J e"31::r~::J n'::Jn n?nn m,lV' m?31~ ,":J e'~lVn '::rn::J n'n' ,IU'O n?nn n~'::rn ?l~n n'n eN mm ,'::rm .i'!:lO ,::J I'N ':J ",'::J::J el "l'31::J e'N nN" nlVmln '?:J::J, ,'?' ?l~~ The beginning of the [horoscopic] houses changes in relation to the latitude of the countries. Thus, sometimes the beginning of the tenth [horoscopic] house calculated according to the rising times is the same as the beginning of the ninth [horoscopic] house calculated according to equatorial degrees. It may even occur in the high latitudes that the beginning of the [tenth horoscopic] house calculated according to the rising times is [the same as the beginning of] the eighth [horoscopic] house [calculated according to equatorial degrees]. Example: in this place whose latitude is 50.5°, if the ascendant is at the beginning of the sign of Cancer, the midheaven is at 24° at the sign of Aquarius; this may be clearly and unreservedly observed with the astrolabe. I. 7 Opening sentence of the third chapter of Sefer ha- 'lbbur. 'IBBUR, VAT 48,/01. 72a.

mnlVpm e',n'n mm? '::In? 1',::r 'IN n~Nn n!:l'pn ":JlNlV e"p : lV'?lVn '31lVn N'::r,n? ?:Ju n?N n3l'::J ':J ?::rn mm?, e",?, P!:l::r? lV~lVn n'Ul mm? p ,nN' n?31' m?31~ n~:J::J' e,'n nlVp' n3llVn p?m n?'?::J' e"::J n3llV nt'N' e,i'~ ?:J ::Jm, '?nn 'lVN' e,i'~' n"'N~n e,p~ ?31 mm? '::JnN p ',nN e,i'~' e,i'~ ?:J::J ?l~ ?:J .m"N~n m"i' n3l' ,,::J3I::J "?N 'l? lV' ?"l '?nn 1,,::rlV The third chapter: before I discuss the true [reckoning of the] vernal equinox, I ought to draw up tables of the arcs and cords, afterwards tables of the declination of the sun to the north or to the south, as well as tables of the shadows. Only after we are acquainted with these subjects will we be able to calculate the latitude of any place, any hour of the day or of the night, the parts of the hour, the arc of the day, how many degrees each zodiacal constellation ascends in any place. Thereafter I will draw up tables of the place of the luminaries and the place of the

HEBREW TEXTS

339

caput draconis, for which there is a great need when we come to calculate the eclipses of the luminaries.

1.8 Closing sentence of the fragment of Sefer ha- 'lbbur. 'IBBUR, VAT 48, fol.75a. ilK'~ m~" ; m37Wil p' mT~ nKD~ il37W ?~::J n~':ltil ?T~ 9':ltn nll}'Mlil '?~::J' nKD~ 1P,m 1"K W"'D' m~'p~il pn'~ 1"K ?37 o'n::Jn~ m"K~il O'::J~,~it .mT~

And with the astrolabe you should add the ascendant zodiacal constellation at any hour in the eastern part to the hours; I wrote about the shape and the appearance of the stars and the luminaries taking into account the longitude of the places, and the meaning of (the word) longitude is your distance from the eastern cardinal point.

11.1 Introduction to the first and second version of Keli ha-Nel;1oshet. NEQOSHET A, 1845, p. 4; NEQOSHET B, MANT. 10, fol 34b. 9K' itWP 1"::J OK ,~ mnK l'll}?::J Ol,n? l'::J~::J n~ l'K '::Jn~it "'DCit Oit'::JK OKl .K'P~::J ::J'n~it P' itl~~ 0'37'" 'lMlK l'KW W"pit l'll}?::J ,~ Abraham the Spaniard, the author, said: It is difficult to translate from one language into another, and it is especially difficult to translate into the holy tongue, since we only know of it the part that is extant in the Bible 11.2 Introduction to the third version of Keli ha-Nel;1oshet. NEQOSHET A, 1845, p. 4; NEQOSHET C, BNF 1054 fol. 4b: : W'Pil l'll}? ,~ 37" 37'~ll}? 1'::J~ ?~ .'::Jn~it "'DCit K'T37 1::J "K~ ',::J Oit'::JK OKl C37 m?l "::J37::J' .O?'~? itl'WK'it itn'il K'it ,~ ,C"lit nmll}? ?~~ it::Jm itn'it Cil'D~ Cl'll}? iln~ll}l' ,C37' C37 l'll}? ,,7J?', C"l::J '::J'37nil W'Pil n7J'K7J ll}'Pil 'il1lK!7J K? ,,::J ,::J,? Cil"DC::J '~':lt'il K? 'WK' ,C'K'::Jlil "DC P' O,'::J 'KWl K?' .mnK l'W? ?K l'll}?7J m7Jll}il cmK Ol,n? 037Uil1 m7Jll} w,n? illl}P' 1~ ?37 ,::J'n~ Abraham the Spaniard, the son ofMe'ir the son of Ezra, the author, said: Everyone, having an understanding of what he hears, knows that the holy tongue was the most comprehensive since it was the first among the languages of all the nations. But, since the holy people were exiled from their Holy Land, they intermingled with the other nations, learnt their languages, and so forgot their own language and were only left with the books of the prophets. But all those words which the prophets had no need for in their works, do not appear at all in Scripture. Therefore it is difficult to create new nouns, that is, to translate them from one language into another.

340

APPENDIX TWO

II.3 Description of the astrolabe's plates in the second version of Keli

ha-Nel;lOshet. NElfOSHET B, MANT. 1O,fol. 36a. 'm~'

C'l!) ,:m:J" '~m 1U'1U C~il 'l!) ClI illil' 1U'11) Cil n1m,m m':J C~il 'l!)' .c'i"n illl:J1U 'll i',m il'il' '~~11) n~!):J :J'1U'il ':J n1~'~il "':Jlll:J11)

The upper part of the mater is regarded as a plate; there are also three plates. So that, together with the upper part of the mater, there are three and a half plates. And the seven climates of earth are engraved on both sides [of the plates], because the inhabited part of the earth is extended only to the north and is divided into seven parts. II.4 Astrological properties of the planet Venus in the first version of Sefer ha- Te 'amim. TE 'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol. 42b.

m,n 'll ~'il11) ,~ C"'lil~' 'n:J1U '1'1 'll:J "l'l il:J:J ':J 'ilil ":Jlil 'i',n:J' ... illl .i"~ ClI 'n:J1U m':Jnnil:J C11) il'm illl ":Jl:J :J'i'll C'T~ n1'il ":JlI:J '~lI~1U' Venus ... exerts influence on the fifth climate since this is the relative position of the sphere of Venus in relation to the sphere of Saturn, and from among the nations, [Venus exerts influence on] the Muslims, since their zodiacal sign is Scorpio in the [astrological] term of Venus, and (Venus) was there in the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter. II.S Excerpt from the commentary on Psalms 74: 17. COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 74:17,1525. ~'m' l"i' Oll~' :J'1U"il ~'nn' ~" O"lI' O':J~l Oil m":Jl illl:J1Uil ':J ":JTm m?':Jl ClI ill ":JTil? ClI~' c", n~!):J 'n~i" '~~1U n~!):J :J'1U"il :J" n1'il ":JlI:J •~'m 'n~ 0'i'~:J ~1il l"i' 'n~ c'i'~:J n1'il:J ':J r'~

And he mentioned that the seven climates stand forever, and the inhabited part of the earth will not change, and the reason for writing 'summer and winter' is because the overwhelming majority of the inhabited part of the earth is in the north and only a slight part is in the south, and the reason for mentioning this together with the climates is because when in one place it is summer, in the other it is winter. II.6 "Parma version" of a passage from the chapter dealing with the apogee of a sphere. HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MuTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 297.

'l'l Cil~ il:J~~il '~:Jn nll' 'll C"l'l " 1U' c'm1U~il~ m1U~ ,:J, ':J r'~il i'~'~ ~'il 'i'~'~' 1n"lI~~~ 'll clI~m il"!)~ 'll 'l'ln~ ~'il' m'T~il 'l'l' .r'~il i'~'~~ i',m 'i'~'~' mil:Jlil 'l'l ~'i" 'n~ 'l'l' n1'T~il 'l'l ~'i'"

'1U~lil

[HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY,

1967, p. 154] Every planet has spheres, according to the scholars of Saba, among them the sphere of the zodiac which rotates on its sheath,

HEBREW TEXTS

341

whose middle or center is the center of the earth, and it is called the sphere of the zodiac. Another sphere is called the sphere of apogee, and its center is removed from the center of the earth. II.7 "Michael version" of a passage from the chapter dealing with the

apogee of a sphere. HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 395. ?l?lil Cil~ ,'lil?N nl7' ?l7 C'l7,,' C'?l?l ,? 11," C';":Jlil c':J;";'ill~ :J;',;' ?;,? ';' ?l?l' m?T~il ?l?l N'P' Y'Nil T;"~ 'T;"~' T;"~il ?l7 :J:JO' m?T~il ?l?l? il~"il •Y'Nil T;"~~ Nl'" ?l?lil i1T T;"~' C"il ?l?l N'P' ,nN [HEBREw TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY,

1967, p. 28] Every one of the planets has fixed spheres, according to the opinion of the Hindus, among them a sphere like the sphere of the zodiac which rotates about the center which is the center of the Earth and another sphere called the sphere of apogee whose center is removed form the center of the earth. II.8 Excerpt from the commentary on Job 36:16. COMMENTARY ON JOB, 36:16,1525. .il"plil Nm pl"~' il?Ul7il :J:J'Oil 'pil N'il :Jn1 ';' ?IU~ 1" N,m

Both words are employed allegorically, since ra1;lab is the circle line and mU$aq is the center point. II.9 Commentary on Job 37:10. COMMENTARYONJOB, 37:10, 1525. •C'?l?lil l7l'~N:J il"Pl;' N'illU Y'Nil N'il - pl"~:J

Be-mu$aq: [the meaning of mU$aq] is the earth, which stands as a point in the middle of the spheres. II. 10 Introduction to Sefer $a1;lot (Purity of Language). $Al;lOT, 1985, p. 370. 1,n:J il"Pl;' N'illU .Pl"~ill~ nnNil ill7,mil .C';'" IU?IU ?l7 ml7,mil ?;, "0 illm n'l7l'~N Y'Nil ';' ; il?l7~ ?N il~~?~ nl7'ln N'illV ,lVNm "'Nil nl7,m nNT' - il?Ul7 nNn - pl"~il ?N n'llVil ill7'lnm .m?T~il ?l?l pl"~ N'il ilPl"~' C'?l?lil 1,n:J pl"~il :J':JO n'IU'?lUil ill7'lnm .il~~ ?N il?l7~?~ ill7'ln N'illV ,Y'Nm C'~il nl7'ln .il~~? N?' il?l7~? N? ill7Un N'illU .C'?l?lil nl7'ln nNn-

I reveal now the secret which underlies all motions, which may be divided into three classes. The first motion is from the center, which is a point in the middle of the circle, and this is the motion of air and fire, which move from below (that is, from the earth's center) upward (that is, away from the earth's center), since the earth is in the middle of the spheres and its center is the center of the sphere of the zodiacal signs. And the second motion is towards the center, and this is the motion of

342

APPENDIX TWO

water and earth, that is, a motion from above (that is, from heights) downward (that is, towards the earth's center). And the third motion is around the center, and this is the motion of the spheres, that is, a motion which is neither upwards nor downwards.

11.11 Commentary on Psalms 19: 1O. COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 19: 10, 1525. lV~lVi1 ?N C:l137:::l C'n1lV~i1 n:l137~ '!):l m?i~i1 n~:ln '~!)lV~ ':l 37'" - 1'~!)lV~' ?37 1~N

P ?37 1"i1 '?37:::l '37~' i1i 1':::l37:::l' i1?N? i1?N

C'lV'n:l~ C':l1Y:::l C'~!)lV~ lV" •"n' 'i"~ ClVi1 '~!)lV~

Judgments - It is known that the judgments of the science of the zodiacal signs are arranged according to the relation of the planets towards the sun; since some [astrological] judgments are brought in contradiction to other judgments, it sometimes happens that the astrologers go astray and make mistakes. Therefore it is written that the 'judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether' .

11.12 Excerpt Jrom SeJer ha-Shem. HASHEM, 1985, pp. 419-420. nY'Jn nJ37lVJ Ci1'?YlV ,C'nJ Ci1lV m~'i'~ 'JlV? m1 - C'~lV ?l?li1 N1i'J i1i 1':::lY:::l'

C'~lV

m'i1?

1:ln' Cl ... i1~i'i1 ?N i1~i'i1 1~ n'1:::li1 i1~i':::l n"'i'J 'nlV:l cm ?l?li1

, ,:::lJn '?ni1 lVN1 C'N1i'J cm ,C'i1:::lm C'?l?li1 C'JlVi1 m1:::ln~ m'i'J 'nlV? T~1 .n'1:::llVnJ ", i1??n i11!)lV C'~lV m'1:::l : '37m

For this reason, the sphere is called heavens, hinting at the two places that are at rest and upon which the motion of the sphere takes place. They are as two points at the extremity 'running from end to end' (Exodus 25:28) ... And perhaps [the word] heavens hints at the two points of intersection between the two superior spheres, which are called the head of the dragon and its tail, and the proof for that is: By his wind, the heavens were made fair, his hand slew the na1;Jash baria1;J (Job 26:13).

11.13 Excerpt Jrom 'Igeret ha-Shabbat. 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 189415, p. 67. nlVnJi1 ?'lY:::l l"~'i1 mN1? ?:l,' C'N ?:l Cl ... 'J'37:::l i1i i1N" ?l?m n1'~ ":l~' •1":l UJ'N 1lVN:l' 1":l N'i1lV:l

And he who is acquainted with the form of the sphere will see it with his own eyes ... Likewise anyone may see the analogy [of the sphere] with the assistance of the circular rim of the astrolabe, both the spherical astrolabe or the planispheric astrolabe.

HEBREW TEXTS

343

II.l4 Commentary on Psalms 103:21. COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 103:21, 1525. •nml7C 'l7:Jtz1:J Ciltz1'l7:Jtz1il Cil

,'mtz1C' ,C'l"?l7il C'Ctz1il N:J! Cil -

"N:J! ,,::I,:J

Bless, his hosts - these are the host of the higher heavens, and his attendants are the seven which are in seven spheres. II. 15 Excerpt from the first commentary on Genesis 1: 11. FIRST COMMENTARYONGENESIS, 1976,p. 16. •n1?1nil N'il m ,Ctz1il m!c:J mtz1l7? C'C:J' Y'N:J n::l Ctz1 illi11

This teaches that God placed in the earth and in the water a power to bring forth at God's command, and this is nature.

II. 16 Exegetical excursus in the long commentary on Exodus 23:25. LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, pp. 153-4. The text has been divided into four paragraphs dealing with the science of the soul, natural science, medicine and astrology. nC::In:J 'pOl7nil N?' ,m"n 'ntz1il 'c::In ,C'?"l c'c::In tz1' .':JnCil Cil':JN 'CN .1 ,,:Jl7:J .mc::Inil1c t3l7C "::ITN N? CN ,m::l':Jil il?N tz1'!l? 'n?'::I' N? P ?l7 .n1?,nil ilCtz1lil 1':J C"l7!CN tz1" ,,:J il"tz1p ill"?l7il ilCtz1li11 ,?!ltz1il C?'l7ilC C'Nil ~'"tz1 N'il ilCtz1lil '::I ,tz1!ll' :J"il ?l7 'N'p' tz1'pil J1tz1?:J, .mn::l 'ltz1 Cil illi11 •~1li11 m'i11 •y!lnil nl7'lm mtz11'ilil ?::1 n::l N!' illCC' ,tz1N'il mC:J il:Jtz1'C' ,ilC::Inil n?l7:J N'i11 ,il'll::l 'C'l7il ?::1 ?l7 ':J1nil? il"tz1 ntz1p:JCil N'i11 ,C'Nil "n ,:J, ,:J?:J ?'O::l N'!" ?::1 ,(t3: T n?ilp) O,l7::1? 1m':J ?il:Jn ?N ilC?tz1 'CN 1::1' .0l7::1il 1tz1!ll i11Nn '::I :J,n::l il::l::l' .?'::IN? i11NnCil N'i11 ,,:J::I:J tz1!lli11 .(N':t3::1 '?tz1C) tz1?tz1il '?N ,? ill"ilntz1 N':Jltz1 C'N tz1' illi11 .illCC ?ltz1Cil mNm ,(::I::J' C',:J,) 'l:J illi11 .il!l' N?' ilpTn N? 'N ,il!l' m ilpTn 'T 'N ,m!l' 1?::1 'N ,mpTM m'::ITlil ":Jlil?' pm? il"nil 1m i::J::llil cwm .C'l'lUll C'l'll C"IUl7' ill7::JW ?l7 C'N TN ,mCtz1l il"nil il'iln N? CN' .il'?l7 ~llil ?,tz1C' N? TN' ,ill"?l7il illltz1lil ?"lil?' .ilCtz1lil ?l7 ~llil ':J1'

m,

,m,

1. Abraham the author said: There are some great scholars who are very learned in the two laws (that is, the written Torah and the oral Torah) but have not busied themselves with natural science. I therefore cannot begin to explain the above-mentioned blessings without first mentioning a bit of the sciences. Man's body belongs with the lowest world, the superior soul is connected to the body, and there are intermediaries between the body and the soul. These are two powers which are referred to in the main in the holy tongue as rual) (that is, animal soul) and nefesh (that is, vegetative soul). For the wise soul has its place in the brain of man and from it comes the power of all emotions and the desire to move. The animal soul is situated in the heart and life depends on it. The animal soul desires to dominate, that is, it seeks to overcome all

344

APPENDIX TWO

opposition. It is the source of anger. Solomon similarly said, 'Be not hasty in thy spirit to be angry' (Ecclesiastes 7:9), and 'A fool spendeth all his spirit' (Proverbs 29: 11). The seat to the vegetative soul is in the liver. It is the vegetative soul that desires to eat. It is thus written, 'because thy soul desires' (Deuteronomy 12:20). The vegetative soul is the source of sexual desire. Now some people are generated in such a way that these three souls are strong. In others these three souls are weak. In other instances, one soul is strong, another weak, or neither weak nor strong. Accordingly, people may fall into twenty-seven different categories. God gave the Torah to strengthen, to intensify, and to increase the power of the superior soul. When this happens, the body does not rule over it. However, if the Torah is not observed, then the body overpowers the soul. il'~ ,m,m '37 il':JlW C'N ,::l '::l ,m"nil n~::ln 'El::l '137" •'W~

"

1nN illm .2 il~W1il illm .il' il~" il~"Nil il'~il '::l ,WNil m"n 1::l '::l ,~N '37:J il'il' il~"N cm l'NW C'N :J'Wnl Cl •,,:JO, '::l,nw il~::ln il11'N 'WN::l ~"'il ',nN nEl'" 'lEl' CW il'il N'W c,n ,El",:J ""il illm .037::lW '37 '''i'' 'El,m ,nN N:J' "El",:J ,cn~::ln ON1~' m'~w' 'WN::l' .,m,n o"m 'N'W':J ,n:J il'37n' owm .'037::l n37~W~ 'N '0 OEl", il'il'W ??::lm .Oil' i"T' N'W ,:J, ,::l, il'W' " , O::l',," r~Nn' il~W1il r~Nnil:J' .~"'il n37~W~ 'N 010 il~W1ilW ,':J'il ,Elil N" ,il~W1il .m'm N'i'lil N,m ,O'~Wil1~ O'Nil ,:Ji"W ~'"il '~'Wil n::l

2. I will explain with the following parable. We know from the teaching of natural science that any person whose temperament is overcome by red bile will be angry, for this is the natural property of fire and red bile is like fire. Now when the soul is unintelligent it pursues the wants of the body because it cannot overcome its desires. Additionally, let us consider a person who is not by nature hot. If another person comes along and curses him to the point where he becomes angry, he begets heat in his body which was not there before he became angry. God the exalted, in his kindness, chose Israel and taught them his Torah. If Israel observes the Torah they become wise. Their wisdom guides them in a straight path to all things that will not harm them. The general rule is: the body must be subservient to the dictates of the soul rather than the soul being subservient to the dictates of the body. When the soul is strong then the power which preserves the body grows in might, and this [power] is known as nature. ",::l ,m"nil n::l ,on, ilN:J il'N~ W' '::l ,ilnw~' '::lN~ ,::l:J il'iln il::l':Jil illm .3 Ol::llil '::l'N ":J37:J O'N:J O'N"nnil ,::l illm .(":' il::l'~) 37:Jwn N" '::lNn ilnN O'N:J C'N"nn W', .,~n' nN ,,:J, .Cil~ il"nil ,~'W ,nEl' N' illi11 .~"':J 'm,'om :Jm::l T"37' ,o'mW~il n::l'37~ m1nWil 'El::l "'Nil "l'W ":J37:J ~'"' r'n~

,m,

HEBREW TEXTS

345

,'::I:Jln oum O~ K!m, ",! " T'K n"nn '1.)'111 i1lO1 .(l:J: n:J m1.)111) ,::I'im n'n1.) ,~ 'm::l' i1lO1 .(::1': T~ ::I"n,) O'K~"::1 OK ':J 'n nK 111" K' ,',n::l Ol :::I,n:J T:J ,~ .mK'~'n n1.):Jn 3. Now [our verse tells us that] God's blessing shall be upon all food and drink. For there is a curse that weakens the power of nature, as in 'Thou shalt eat, but not be satisfied' (Micah 6:14). Observe that all illnesses come from the food that enters the body. Now a person who observes the Torah will not fear them. This is the meaning of 'and He will bless thy bread' (Exodus 23:25). There are other diseases that come from outside the body due to a change in the air caused by a shift in the configuration of the planets. It is concerning this that our verse states, 'and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee' (Exodus 23:25). Look, a person who observes the Torah has no need for a physician along with God the Revered. Scripture thus writes, 'yet in his disease he sought not to the Lord, but to the physicians' (II Chronicles 16:12). I have thus spoken on medicine.

n"'111 n1.) ",:J o"im ,01'v' '''In ':J ':J ,~, .m'T1.)n n1.):Jn ,~ '::I'K nn~' .4 n'n' i1lO1 ."K1.) v'1.)~ '::1'01 .n'K 'K n'K ,,~, ""n1'l'::1 O'm1111.)n n:J'1'1.) K" n,v1' n'nn111 'K ,o'",'n ":J111n, omn m,m ':J ,n':J1111.) n'nn111 n111Kn "'1.) ,'::I:Jln 0111n ,O'l::l "", K'111 ,m"n '~:J' ,""1.)::1 0111::1 v::l,n n'n OK i1lO1 ."n p '1' ,O'l::l ""'111 '1' 1"Tn m,',1' Tvn', ,m":Jn m"n n:J Y1.)K' ,,::1 v::l, n'n OK "1.)K111 ,n11 .(K: T' n'111K'::I) O'1.)n n'01 'l~' "nnn "111 'K 'lK On'::IK' 0111n '1.)K ,mK n::l'K 'lK ,'l'::I1'n111 '1.)1' n"::1 m':Jn OK' .,'111 ml'll~!K1.) K! '''T 'l'l'1.)'v

'~:J

::I'~n' 'K'::Il K' ':J ,O'::I:J':Jn n:J'1'1.)::1 n1!l i1T T'K' .m',nn n!lK ':J .'K1.) 'K1.)::1 'l::l "::Iv' on!"1.)::I' ,O:J,!, 0111n m'::I1" "1.)n o':J"n V' .'~111n 0"1" 1',n, 'K .'::Ivl K' "1.)111l OK i1lO1 .0" '1' ':J~01 ,::1, '~111n o"1'n

4. I will now speak about astrology. Know that the occurrences that befall each new-born are indicated by the configuration of the planets at the time of birth and by the way that one planet is aligned with another. The meaning of the aforementioned is deep. If the horoscope of a woman determines that she will not be able to carry her children to term, then it will be the nature of her womb to abort the children in it. The same is true if the horoscope determines that the woman will be barren and will not have children. Consider the case of a person who cleaves to God and was born under an horoscope which determined that he will have such a physical make-up that is unable to beget children. Then, if he truly cleaves to God, the revered God will strengthen the natural power of this man's kidneys and see to it that his sperm functions properly so that he will be able to have children. God therefore told Abraham, 'I am God Almighty; walk before Me, and be thou whole-

346

APPENDIX TWO

hearted' (Genesis 17:1). This is what the rabbis meant by 'Go forth from thy planetary configuration' (Shabbat 156a). God told Abraham, 'And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly' (Genesis 17:2). For I will overcome nature. But this is not a victory over the configuration of the stars, for they were not created to do good or ill to the lower world. On the contrary, they always go and do the service of God, as that is what they need to do. And according to their hasty movements the inhabitants of the lowest world receive from them a thing and its opposite. Thus if we observe the Torah we will not receive evil from the heavenly bodies. II.17 Description of the rete of the astrolabe in the third version of Keli ha-Nel;lOshet. NEQOSHET C, PINSKER 26, fol. 59a.

i',nn ,C"tV Cl'NtV c'i',n C'ltV' ni"Ml n,uy n::J tV" 'n:l::JtV' C1 N'i'n : ntV,n "'lm ,n,m::J ,n"N ,yu,o ,C'~Nn ,"tV ,n,u : cntV ,c"mllln m'T~' Inn YUi'n ::JtVn N'n 'm:lTntV n,uym .C'l' ,'" ,"1 ,ntVi' ,::J,i'Y ,C'lTN~ cntV C"~"" c'::J:l':lm ... c'y,,' C"~'" C'::J:l,:l n""Nn ::JtVn, rm~' ,m'T~n '"'" m'''N .':lTln ::JtVnn ,tV C'l"::J cn C"'N~tVn The rete: it is also called shabaka and it has a circle which is divided into two unequal parts. The smaller part [of the circle] is reserved for the northern zodiacal constellations, which are Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo and Virgo; while the bigger part includes the southern zodiacal constellations, which are Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius and Pisces. The mentioned circle is named the girdle of the dress of the zodiacal sphere, and outside the girdle of the dress are the southern known stars ... while inside the girdle of the dress are the northern stars. 11.18 The meaning of the word node. HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN ALMUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 296.

::Jm:l i" ,mT:l 0'" ptV,::J N'n : n::J'tVn .nNTn n'~n tV",,, n~' ,nm'N n~ cn~ C"l'l c'mtV~' tV' ':l i1T CYU, n'::J'y y,tV,::J p,n:l nmN '~l'n N' mm,n C'ltV n'N' ... 'l~~ nU'l N,ntV i" 'tV~ln '"'" "y'tV:l ",y'tV nU'ln '"'" i1T n:ll' i1T m~'i'~ C'ltV::J Cn'ltV ,m:l' n'Uln '"'"' m'T~n '"'" CntV C"l'ln N'i'ln i1T Cn'::JN '~N .,::Jln y'lMn tVN' N'i" C1 ,nm'N cm::Jn~ C'i'~ N'i'" .n"::J tVMltV"i'n PtV,::J [HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S COMMENTARY,

1967, p. 155 (with slight changes)] What is the node and what is the meaning of this word? Answer: It is called kazohar in Persian, but the writer of the tables did not translate it properly into Arabic. Know that the planets have spheres, among them a sphere equal in size to the

HEBREW TEXTS

347

parecliptic, but inclined to it ... These are the two spheres, the sphere of the zodiac and the sphere of inclination. They intersect in two places opposite each other, and the place of the intersection is called aljawzahar. It is also called the head and tail of the dragon. - Abraham (Ibn Ezra) said: this is called in the holy tongue na.bash baria.b. III.l Introduction to Sefer ha-Moladot. MOLADOT, BNF 1056, fol. 46b. The text has been divided into paragraphs reflecting the main ideas which have been analyzed in part IlL im"l7i1 i1~:Jni1~ l7,,' 'll'N' m'T~i1 n~:Jn:l ":JlU~ ':J "'DOi1 Ci1':lN " '~N .1 .Ci1~ '~lU'i1' C"N'i1 C":l'i1~ '~lUl N'lU ,,:ll7:l C':lT:J "l" "i1'lU C'~l7D lu' .C':J" 'n ":JTN i1lm C'~'Di1 "~:l' C''':Ji1 'l" ,~ TnN ,,~,

1. Abraham the Spaniard said: Every scholar learning the science of the zodiacal signs who is not acquainted with the superior science will sometimes be found to have made erroneous astrologicaIjudgments. For he has not been wary of matters that call for caution. And I will make an important statement: universal judgments override particular judgments, with respect to which I now present eight rules: i1N" "N'lU" "'~i1 i1'i1 CN ,~ ,N'i1 Cl7 i1T'N~ "'li1 nl7" " lU'lu 'Ni1 .2 N'i1lU i1"'1i1 m:ln~:l ':J ,,:ll7:l ,~ T'" "N' T'N ,,~ ,m'i1' ""~ ':l~~ n~'l7~:l ,:J,' N' ~'Di1 i1T n~ i1lm ,m'l:l '~l7 m'i1' i1l~~ ":lni1 ':l~ i',y, 'n:llU m:ln~ i" Ci1~l7 i'0l7n', :l'l7n', C'~'~i1 Cl7 i1'i1' "'li1 ,~ T"'lU "N' i1~~' ,"~i1 '~:l' •'~Yl7:l ,,~ i1'i1' N'

2. The first rule states that [the astrologer] should know to which nation the new-born belongs. Given the case that the new-born is an Israelite and that the stars' configuration of his horoscope determine that he will become a king, it is not appropriate that [the astrologer] should pronounce the judgment that this Israelite will be crowned king. For it has already been made clear that the great conjunction, that is the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, has decreed that the nation of Israelites should remain in exile. Thus this individual power cannot abrogate the more general force. Hence it is fitting that in this case [the astrologer] should pronounce the following judgment: the new-born will be close to kings, he will mingle with kings and run affairs with them, but he himself will not become a king. "'li1 nl'~N i1'i1nlU i1,,' N' '~i1 n':l:l "N'lU' "'~:l 'n:llU NY~ C1 i1~:J' .3 .,~ i1'i" "Nl7~lU' m"'~:l i1'i1 CN i" i1l'~l 'n':l ,m,n:l

3. Likewise, if in the natal horoscope of an Israelite we find that the planet Saturn is in the ninth horoscopic house, that circumstance will not

348

APPENDIX TWO

signify that his religious belief will be wrong, but if the [same] natal horoscope applies to the births of Ishmaelites, that will be the case. ill:J?il OY illl il'il'lV '!)"YK lV':J 't"K:J '?'lil ':J ,0'?':Jlil nK!)~ ':Jil 1"m .4 p' ,0',nKil O'?':Jl:J OillV O'lVlKil 'll:J '?'~il il'il'lV 1"l K? nn~'::ril il?Y~:J T"l K? il~n :J:J:J '?'~il ?Y U'?lVil il'il OK il:J:J' ,'?':Jl 'lVlK m,,::r 'll:J il:J:J il'il' om ':Jlnil ,,:JY:J lV':J 't"K:J o:Jn m'il? pn' K? ':J ,il~:Jn 'l'~ ?:J:J o:Jn il'il'lV •mn~ 'lVlK 'll:J T':J~ il'il'lV T"l p' il'lV' m,?,n il'il' K? :J"Y ,lV~lVil

4. The second rule is related to the climates. For if the subject for whom a horoscope has been cast is born in Ethiopia and in the ascendant of his horoscope we find Venus together with the Moon, we will not maintain that the outcome of his horoscope will be similar to [the outcome of similar horoscopes belonging to] people who reside in other climates. Accordingly, only in the case of people dwelling in the same climate will we consider a similar outcome for [horoscopes based on] similar configurations of the stars. Thus, if the ruler of the horoscope is the planet Mercury, we will not maintain [unconditionally] that the newborn will be wise in any sort of sciences, since it is impossible that a wise person will be born in Ethiopia, because of the increased heat of the sun there. Therefore, even though the temperament of this Ethiopian will not be as balanced as should be, we will judge that he will be cleverer and wiser than his fellow-countrymen. n:J:J OK illm ,ill"~' ill"~ ?:J ?Y il?"lil m:Jn~il~ K:Jil ??:Jil 'lil 1"m .5 O"'~::J l'KlV O'::J, O'lVlK il::J O""l:J lV'lV '!)"YK ,ilY'" ill"~ 'Y :J,n m:Jn~il OK ,0?'Yil n!)'pn nK!)~ "il 1"m .0',:J 'l'il' ill"~il m,p!) K:J:J ,:J,n:J 'm~'lV il?n'lV O'K "'~:J T'KlV '!)"YK ,ilY'" ill"~? il'P'lV '?,n il!)'pnn ??:J~ K:J .??:Jil ?U:J' K' U'!)il ':J ,',nil ,mK mp' illlV ilmK:J

5. The third rule stems from the great conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] which holds its sway over cities. Thus, if the power of the conjunction determines that a certain city will be plunged into war, all the inhabitants born in that city which is destined to go to war will be killed, even though their personal horoscopes do not indicate that they will be put to the sword. The fourth rule refers to the power of the revolution of the world-year. The revolution of the world-year has the power to bring illness to a certain city, even though the personal horoscopes of its inhabitants do not determine that any of them will develop a disease that year. This is because the astrological judgments affecting particulars have no power to annul universal astrological judgments. p ,nKm ,nnK ill"~:J 'K Yl':J O"?'l ':J "il OK ':J ,iln!)lV~il nK!)~ 'ilil1"m .6 ,ill"?Y il"lV?' ilm:Jl il?Y~? m?y? '?'~il n:J:J lV" 'm!) mlV~ p ':Jm illlV~ m:J ':J ,1?~il nK!)~ "il 1"m "mo il'il' mlV~il p' 1?~ :J'lV' illlV~il P illil

HEBREW TEXTS

349

C':J, C'lZ11N ilDn'7D'7 N'!" illil ilDn'7D'7 n:l'7'7 ,,'7'D:J lZ1' 1'7Dil CN ':l ,'7'7:l n:l:l •'D'i'DD 37lmnil'7 CilD ,nN ,'7'D:J l'NlZ1

6. The fifth rule is concerned with the [power arising from the social rank of the] family. If two children are born at one and the same time and in the same city, one of them the son ofa member of the royalty and the other the son of a servant, and the horoscope of both of them predicts that they will ascend to high social rank and assume supreme power, then the son of a member of the royalty will become a king and the son of the servant will become a merchant. And the sixth rule is concerned with the [power of the] king, since his authority stands for a universal power. Thus, if the personal horoscope of a king determines that he will make war, then he will drag into war a multitude of people whose horoscopes do not determine at all that any of them will change their location. C';" C'il 1,n:J "i'il 'D':J il1'DC:J C'N C1:l' CN ':l ,m'7,nil nNDD 'Til 1"m .7 N'7 C':J't3il C':J:l:lil CillZ1 illm i"! nnD'!il il'737D:J C'lZ1'lZ1 'D"37N ,'37'C' 1'7'il ill'DC:J C':J C'lZ11N ~'7N il:l:l' ,'1'7'37" N'7 ,n:JlZ1 t3'Dm ,'7'7:l N'il m'7,nil ':l ,'7!1' CilD ,nN '7:l ,'7'D:J N!D' i" ,il1lZ1 ilmN:J mD'lZ1 CilD 'N '7:l ,'7'D:J N!Dn N'7, nnN C'i'D N'illZ1 C'il 1,n:J il'il N'7 ,'7'N' ,P'CD C'i'D '7N C"nil "'i'DD ,nN 37'lillZ1 •'7!1" i'T1 t337D ,'7 37'N' 1:l'CD

7. And the seventh rule is concerned with natural power. If somebody embarks on a ship in the cold season and the sea becomes tempestuous, he will not survive, even though he took the precaution of assuring that in the ascendant [of the horoscope] there be Jupiter and Venus, which are favorable stars. For natural power is a universal power, and the particular [configuration of the stars] that he selected will be of no avail for him. The same holds for a thousand people embarking together in a ship - they will all die when the sea becomes stormy even though the particular horoscope of each of them determines that they will survive this year. Yet, [the astrologer] may find in the horoscope of each of them that the life-ruler reached a dangerous place. But if some of them happened not to be on the sea, which is a perilous place, then he will only incur a lesser harm and will survive. nD:ln:J C:ln ,'7'lil il'il CN ':l ,ilD:lnil N'il iln:l' ilDlZ11il n:l nNDD 'nil

1"m .8

m'737D '7N C"ND C1:lil:J 37'" 1DT:J c,nD ''7n '1'i" ':l 'nllZ1 nD'i'n:J ilN" m'7TDil "i''7 m'i'lZ1D ilnlZ1" cn '7:lND '7:lD ''7nil N:J C"i' Nm 'DlZ1' CN illm ,nnD'!il

ClZ1:J nt3':Jil il:l:l' ,nnD'!il ,n'737D:J C"ND C1:lil:J 'DU m'7,n 'lZ1'nn illil ,'DU i'DC 1'N :l"37 ,,'7'D:J i'T1 '7:lD 'l'7'!il'7 m'7''737 'li'nl ,'7, m:Jc ,'7 :J:JC' ClZ1il ,:J'7 '7:l:J 1":l ,1'1"il ,''737 'lZ1:JnlZ1' C'D37D ':l m'7TDil '1":J '7':llZ1DilD "DlZ1 ,m' i"'!il ':l •"il'7N C37 C'Dn ':J'7lZ1 'D "lZ1N illm (il:l:'D 'il'37lZ1') '7'7'il' C'DC'i" :J,n:lil 'DNlZ1

350

APPENDIX TWO

8. The eighth rule is concerned with the power of the wise soul. Consider the case of a scholar in the science of the zodiacal signs who observes in [the horoscope of] his anniversary nativity that he is bound to come down with fever at a certain time when Mars enters in the degree of the ascendant. If he takes precautions before the illness comes, abstaining from any hot food and drinking beverages in order to cool one's body, then he will maintain balance in the temperament of his body when Mars enters in the degree of the ascendant. Likewise, he who trusts God with all his heart, God - 'by Him actions are weighed' (I Samuel 2:3) - will, for him, bring about the proper causes to save him from any harm prognosticated in his horoscope. Therefore, there is no doubt that the righteous person is more protected than the scholar regarding the judgments coming from the stars, since sometimes the scholar's acuteness of judgment will be faulty, as Scripture says (Isaiah 44:25), 'and makes diviners mad'. See now, fortunate is he whose heart is wholly with his God. III.2 The three types of conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter and the revolution of the world-year in the second version of Sefer ha- 'Olam. 'OLAM B, VAT 477,fol. 88a.

?N illlViI ?W m!)'pn:J Cl iIlt1p 'N n~lIll~N 'N iI?"l m:Jn~ ?:l? ?:lnOil : C~??:lil ??:l iI~iI~ iI?"lil m:Jn~iI '~?lI 'WlV lI,m :J,t1i1 ~:l nll'? 1? lV~ p' .C~??:lil ',:J, 'N ill'WN'iI p~n1nlV mnN n:l'lI~ N':J~lV mnN iI?"l m:Jn~ '37 '~37~' "l' '11 ':J?~ ?11 n'l1ll~l(in '111 "l ??:J ?11 iI'" ill illin .W'!)I( 'WI(:J iIlnlV'nw ??:l m:Jn~? n:J 1'1( iIllV C~'lVl1i1 c,n:J' m:J?~:J n37'l~ '1( n!)o,n ?lI iIlt1pil1 .mnN iIlW n!)'pn n:l:J iI'iI~ "'O~, iI'p~ '~:l 'N:J' C~':J' ?11 iI"n illlViI n!)'pm Universal precepts: When you inquire about universal affairs you should take heed of every great, middle or lesser conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] as well as of the revolutions of the world-year. You should, however, distinguish between them. Good or evil stemming from a great conjunction is universal, and will persist until another great conjunction occurs which brings about a new system that will do away with the influence of the previous one. Great conjunctions determine general affairs concerning nations and peoples. Middle conjunctions hold sway over the kings of nations and peoples. Lesser conjunctions have the power to add or lessen in affairs of state or kingdom, and after twenty years the power of this conjunction vanishes. The revolution of the world-year has power over eventualities happening as it were by chance, but rapidly loses its influence as soon as the power of a new revolution of the world-year is felt.

HEBREW TEXTS

351

III.3 A responsum by Sherira Ga'on (d. 1006) and Qai Ga'on (d. 1038)

dividing astrology into a hard and a soft version. RESPONSA OF THE GE'ONIM, 1887, p. 207 cf MAIMONIDES' LEITER ON ASTROLOGY, 1926, pp. 37-43, esp. 37-8. Nl',nN Nl1l l'illD N:l'N' •.• 'll1 l',n l'l'N C':J:l,:l:J c'nnil ml'llUON '?l7:J, C'l' 'ND ~':l? ,nl7':J ?,:l', 1D'1 ?TD;' N?W C',:J, ,nD:ln:J ;,W,l7 C'N l"DN' 'WDlW 'D'N' C'N?W 'WDl:J Nn?'D? ;,? '?Nm 1ND 1,mD 'l'l ',n 'Dl "1'11 .?TD;' ;'?,:l', m?TDm C':J:l,:l;, 1D ;'?l7D? ;"i"l7, ;,?W ';'111 N';, ml"?l7 C'N ?W l':J':J Nn?'D? '?Nm 1ND l'illD' .?TD C'l' ;'D "'lW? ;,m:l:J ?,:l' N';, ~N' N'il 'l;'? 1':J, 'l;'? 1':J, .'?TD C'lW ;'D ~':l? n?':l' C'N:J N':J' 'D'N' ;''':J C'D?'l7;' 'IN'i'D 'nWD? C'N ?,:l' l'?'N? ;"l"l7:J 'nN cn ?TD C"l' 1"nN NO'l 'N;,' ?"') ;"?'!N? ;"Di' Nn'l':l ;,":Ji';" l'?'N?' (;"Dl1 c"n N?' :nDO'n) l';':J llU!D' .'m ;,'l'D 'mD?' (;"'?!N? And the second type [of astrologers] says that man by means of his wisdom can do things which are not determined by the stars, and man may even purposefully change what has been determined by the stars. And those [who belong to the second type] are divided into two further types. There are those who make things dependent on the human soul, and they say that the spirit of man and his soul hold a higher rank, that the soul is the fundamental quality of man, that the essence of the soul is above the stars and zodiacal signs, and that with the help of the power of the soul, man can change things that have been determined by the stars. But there are others [belonging to the second type] who judge that things are dependent on Almighty God, and they say that God created in man the ability to change what has been determined by the stars. In any case, both types maintain that the hurts stemming from the stars may be averted. Consider a case in which the stars provoke fever at a certain time. While those [belonging to the first type] say that man should drink cold beverages in order to cool his body, the others [belonging to the second type] maintain that God will avert the calamity.

,m"

IIIA Excerptfrom Sefer ha-Shem. HASHEM, 1985, p. 427. •(:l: n'i' c'?;,n) ,:J 'N:J' c'i"'! ';'? ,l7W;, m ; CW;, m'mN Cl7U:J On the meaning of the letters of the [divine] Name. This is the gate of the Lord, into which the righteous will enter.

III.5 Excerpt from the commentary on Psalms 1:3. COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 1:3, 1525. ;'N":J ,':l;,? C';'?N m,n ;'N?D ;,';,nw ;,D:ln;, ;'DWl;, "'D Cl7U ':l 'nl7' 'D?' i"'! ':IT 1":l ..• ;,n"l ?l7D ;,"D;,:J l"?l7;, ;,D?'l7:J i':J,m n!l? C"D'l7;, "Wl7D' .;':l,:J?

352

APPENDIX TWO

And in my opinion his fruit is the wise soul. But the wise soul should be filled with the Torah of God, and should know his eternally permanent deeds and should be suitably attached to the upper world after its separation from the body ... this is the meaning of 'the memory of the righteous is blessed' (Proverbs 10:7). III.6 Excerpt from the long commentary on Exodus 3:15. LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976,p. 34. 'l):J mllmil ?:J, ,c'm1U~iI n:J'Y~ '!:l:J P'?Y n:J n?:Jv~' ,C)'~~ C'NiI n~1U)' n:J ?:Jv? ?:J,m C':JN?~iI ,'O:J "~Yn iI~1U)iI c:Jnn CN' •'N':JiI nY:J ?"lil N:J~iI .,:J:J)iI C1U:J v:J, iI'iI' 1N .C':JN?~iI "N ", ?Y ?:JV1U P'?Y n:J~ ?"l

Man's soul is made ofthis same kind [as the angels]. It receives superior power in accordance to the configuration of the planets, that is, in accordance with the way each of the planets is arranged vis-a-vis the stars of the zodiac at the time of birth. If the soul grows wise, then it will discover the secret of the angels and it will be able to receive a power which is stronger than the superior power that the soul received from the light of the angels. Man will then cleave to God the glorious. III.7 Excerpt from the introduction to the first version of Sefer haMivbarim. MIVJfARIM A, 1969, p. 9. ""1U iI~ ?:J ?Y Y"l? n~ f)'O'iI?' C'U'!:lil n~v ?u:J? n:J m"?YiI C'NiI n~1U)? 1U' •??:JiI ?U:J? iI? n:J l'N ,C':J:J':JiI

v'

The superior soul of man has the power to somewhat avert the particulars and to augment or reduce all that which is indicated by the stars, but it has not power to annul the universals. IlL8 Excerpt from the introduction to the second version of Sefer haMiv/;Jarim. MIVJfARIM B, BNF 1058./01. 9a.

v'

,nY':J C'NiI ?:J,' C':J:J':JiI ?:J ?Y m:Jl C'V~~ ilN':J) C'NiI n~1U)1U ,,:JY:J . 'nY'~ UY~ ,on?

Only because the human soul has been created from a place higher than the stars can man purposely hope to slightly reduce the pernicious sway of the stars over him.

IIL9 Excerpt from the introduction to the first version of Sefer haShe'elot. SHE'ELOTA,BNF 1056./01. 52b . .Y"l? Cl f)'O'iI?' '~1UiI? ?:J,' m,'?y C'NiI n~1U)1U ,,:JY:J,

Since the human soul is the superior soul, man can be protected, that is, he can augment or reduce the sway of the stars.

HEBREW TEXTS

III.10 Excerpt from

353

the commentary on Exodus 20:2. LONG

COMMENTARYONExODUS, 1976, 131-2.

C"~1.3 1"N1.3 1'nN~'il 'WN 1'il?N 'il ":JTil il1.3? ",:J:J ~m11.3 "?il il"il' " 'l?NW 1'N ':J 37' •"?N 'n:mzm iln'il nNn ,1'n'w37W 'IN' 1"N' C'1.3W 'n'W37W '1.3N N?' C'1'1.3N1.3 C':J'il ':J •':J:J1il ClV:J C'1'1.3N1.3 CilW C:J?:J Cnl'1.3N:J m,w C'N '1:1 m?371.3 ',:1,:1 :I~:J i1T 'N'W ,Cil1.3 il?371.3?' .il:J:J Cil'l"N Cil? '1.3N'W C'lTN m371.3Wil? C" ,1.3'W' ,C'il?N 1'N ':J ,'37'37? O"i"!)N N':I' CN' ,ilW1.3? CWil 1n1W il"nil m?37? m?371.3 ,1.3:J CilW ,m1.3:Jn ,,1.3" ,:J? 'NW1 'WN' .:J'Wil? '37" N? ':J ,Oil'!)? C'Nil '1U:I, ,m'n:l' c'n1.3~:J' m:Jn1.3:1 CWil ilW371.3 ,':J' ,'~!)n C'i'1.3 ?N Cil:l il:l1" .nl':Jn1.3il nNT ?37 il'il il1.3?' ,m,?,nil '!):J ':IN' ':IN ?:J ilW371.337"W ,'1.3~37:1 ,'1.3'37 N'illV '37~1.3Nil C?'37:1 CWil 'W371.3 CilW ,C'?l?lil ',:1, n37'? 1:J ',nN ,:I? il1.3? il1:J?il37" C1' ,i1l1.31.3lV1.3Wil "i" il1.3:J' ,i1l:l'm 'N W1.3Wil "i'n 'n1.3 1m 37'" 37" CWil ':J,,1.3, .i'!)O Cil:l 1'NlV n",1.31 m'N':I 37" il?N ?:J, .il? C'l '1.3, m'i'l .CWil nN ?':JW1.3il

Rabbi Judah ha-Levy, who rests in glory, once asked me: why did God say, 'J am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt' (Exodus 20:2), rather than, I am the Lord thy God who made heaven and earth and created you? I answered the following: know that people who believe in God the glorious are not on the same level of faith. Many believe what they have heard, that is, they believe because their masters have told them so. Above them are those who believe because of what they have read in the Torah, which God gave to Moses. Now they would keep still if a heretic were to come along and argue that God does not exist, for they do not possess the means to answer. Now a person whose heart stirred him up (Exodus 35:26) to study the sciences, which are the steps that lead to the place of his desire. He will see God's works in the metals, in the plants and living creatures, and in the human body itself. He will know the makeup of each organ according to its particular nature. He will similarly know the reason why it was shaped according to this particular pattern. His heart will then aspire to learn the science of the spheres that are the Lord's works in the middle world, which is everlasting. He will learn when the sun or moon is eclipsed and how much of the sun is eclipsed by the moon. He will know why the moon is eclipsed and what brings about its eclipse. He will know all these things by incontrovertible proofs which are beyond a shadow of a doubt. Thus, by learning the ways of God the scholar will come to know God.

354

APPENDIX TWO

IV.1 Introduction to Reshit Qokhma. RESHIT QOKHMAH, 1939, p. v-vi. The text has been divided into paragraphs reflecting the main ideas which have been analyzed in part IV. ,nN C'N "n' N' 'lUN::I '::I 'Im~il N'il '::I (': N'P C"iln) ,,,, nN" il~::In n'll.'N' .1 mpn~ m~lUn Cll.'il nN"ll.' "37' ,:I'P:I il~::Inil mln TN ,mNn nN'~' ,:1" "l'37 "ll.'~) ll." 'l"nln 'n'u~ 'n~ll.'l "I)'il:l' ,"n ,~, ,::I (1': n, :I"N) C"~ll.'~' C'~ll.' .(:1::1: 1 n'll.'N':I) C"37' 'm (N': n 1. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Psalms 111: 10); that is the foundation, for when man refrains from following his eyes and his heart in their tendency to satisfy his desires, then wisdom comes to rest in his heart (Proverbs 14:33); furthermore, the fear of the Lord (Psalms 111: 10) protects him from the ordinances of heaven and their dominion on the earth (Job 38:33) all the days of his life, and after the soul takes leave of his body, he will inherit substance (Proverbs 8:21) and will live forever (Genesis 3:22). C'l'~'Pil 'Ol 'll.'N::I C'~I)ll.'~il 1":1 (1': n, :I"N) C'~ll.' npn ll."I)' ,nN illm .2 llnnN Cll.'il 'N' C'~37~il llm'I):I '1)0 ':lnN 'I)Oil ilT C"ll.'Nll.' ,nN' ,'" ,nN ", n::l' ':1::1,::1 il37:1lU' ,'n",:ln "m'T~' ,'p,n:l' 'l'lil m~':ll'll.'N' '37ll.' .1~N 'l'T37' 10~~' C'37I)~' cn'37~' m'T~il n::l:l 'lll.' '37ll.' .cn'll.'~~' Cn37'lm cm::l' cm'37~' C'lll.'il c'n:lm 'l'lil m'37':I' m::l' m'37~il '~:I~:I 'll."'ll.' '37ll.' .n",!m C':I::I'::Iil '37 Cilll.' C'N':llil ,::I, "" 'll.'N ,::I, cn::l' C'mll.'~ il37:1ll.'il 10~~:I '37':1' '37ll.' •'ll.'37 n::l:l 'll.'ll.' '37ll.' .", 'n~' cn::l "1' 'n~ C'mll.'~il ',:1,:1 'll."~n '37lU .il~'Nil C'n'll.'~il '~::J~::J '17'::JlU '37ll.' .,',nN' ll.'~ll.'il 'll)' cm'il 'I) '37' C~!37::J C'mll.'~il 'll.'N ,::I '37 ilT C37 ilT cn::l 10~'ll.' Cil"::J' ,,::1, c":lm C::IO~~' cmln~' cm::Jn~' '37'll.'n '37ll.' .ml)'pn:l' C""l::J' m'Nll.'::J C'mlU~il 'l" '37 'l'~ll.' '37ll.' •"" '37ll.' .m'T~il '~::In "'::Itilll.' m"'lil ,::I 'NlU' C'n:lil m"u:I' C'mll.'~il m"u:I ,,::1, 'l'lil m'37~ '37 cnpn37m C1ill~ 1'" c'mll.'~ il37:1ll.'il "N nn"T:I "'lU37 .Cil'l"l37 2. Now I shall begin to explain the ordinances of heaven (Job 38:33), employing the method of astrology as the ancients have experimented generation after generation. When this book is finished, I shall write a treatise explaining the [astrological] reasons. And may the Lord assist me, Amen. This book is divided into ten chapters. The first chapter deals with the form of the sphere and its parts, with its zodiacal signs and its constellations, with the seven planets, their qualities, power, motion and their dominance. The second chapter dwells upon the power of the zodiacal signs, their qualities, their action, the condition of the stars and the constellations. The third discusses the aspects of the degrees, and the influence of the quarters of the sphere and of the twelve houses. The fourth deals with the condition of the seven planets and their influence

HEBREW TEXTS

355

and with all that which they indicate to all the creatures on earth. The fifth chapter deals with the planets, and with the question of when their power increases and when it wanes. The sixth chapter deals with the power of the planets when they stand alone and when they stand in front of or in back of the sun. The seventh deals with the aspects of the planets, their conjunction, their stations, their conditions, their separation, and with all the things in which is involved the reciprocal conditioning of their power over all that which they prognosticate. The eighth deals with the astrological judgements of the planets, regarding the doctrine of the questions, the nativities and the revolutions. The ninth refers to the lots of the planets, the lots of the houses, and all the other lots mentioned by the astrologers. The tenth discusses the radiation of the light of the seven planets and their direction through the degrees of the sphere, and everything pertaining to them.

Cil!U ,C'mlU7;)n n31:IIU 'W Cn31'ln:2 p':2n' n7;):mn nN1 '31 "pn'w ,':JW7;) ':J .3 cn"l'l:2 cn31'lm ,T"'31n 'l'ln m'317;) m:2':20 Cn31'ln:2 cn:J',n:2 C','n7;) :2':20 cnw m31'lnn n'N ,:J, ,m'l7;)n '1'1:2 cnw C'l"'31n C':2:J':Jn n:J'l' Cm'n:2 ,m':Jlln m31'lnn ':J ,:2,:2 ":2n' 1N .'U'31n 1,n:2 n"pl '7;):J Y'Nn N,nW p!'7;)n 31'" ,:2,;' nn .C"':21n 'El:J Cn'lU317;) ~'nn' ,m,w' m,w Cn31'lnW 'El-'31-~N cm"m C'mW7;) n31:2Wn n31" ,m'7;)",n m"N7;)lUn cm,!, 'l'ln m'317;) 'ElO7;):2 .cn'W317;) ,:J, C'U'Elm c''':lm 3. Any scholar who investigates this science will observe the motions of the seven planets which are hasty in their motions when they move around the degrees of the superior sphere, and their motions in their own spheres when they face the uppermost stars which are in the sphere of the zodiacal signs, and all these motions which take place around the center which is the earth, which is just like a point in the middle of the circle. Then he will fully realize that the aforesaid motions [of the planets], even though they proceed evenly and straight, vary their effect according to the [seven] climates. These things will [the scholar] know by being acquainted with the number of degrees of the sphere, by [recognizing] the northern and southern constellations of the [eighth] sphere, by being cognizant of the seven planets and their natural constitution, by becoming knowledgeable about [the astrological effect derived from] the universals and the particulars and all their actions. IV.2 Introduction to the second version of Sefer ha-Te 'amim. TE 'AMIM B, 1941, pp. 1-2. This introduction was divided into three parts which were headed by numbers to indicate their correlation with the corresponding parts in the introduction to Reshit /fokhmah (see above IV.I). The same number at the beginning of two parts means that the

356

APPENDIX TWO

indicated part in the introduction to the second version of Sefer haTe 'amim is a commentary on the corresponding part in the introduction of Reshit IJokhmah. Note that the succession ofparts in the introduction to the second version of Sefer ha-Te 'amim does not precisely follow a numerical order but reflects the sequential order in which these parts are treated in the introduction to Reshit IJokhmah. ill(" "l' ':l ':l ,'n31,' OlIJI(' .ilIJ:ln n'lVl(' '!:l0:J 'O,IJ O'lV' 'n'I('il illil .1 O'lV'1i' n31" ilIJ:ln 'n1IJ, 1(' : ili" T:J ''''1( ',:J,:l I("lm ':J:llil OlVil ,'O:J "IJ?? : 031~m ,(':' "lVIJ) "" O'IJlV il'31 'IJ : ,IJI( P '31 .0':lI('IJil OillV ,(l:' "lVIJ) ,:J, 0'1( 'l:J' 31"'il m":J' ilIJlV il'31 'IJ ':l ,O'IJlV ':lI('IJ:l ilIJ"lV n31' 31'l l('lV :J' 'IJ:ln 0"1(' .(l': n, :J"I() O'IJlV mi',n n31"il : :J"I(' ,IJI( 1':Jn' OlVm ? nIJI( m:J' O'IJ31!:l 'Ol Ol ,O'IJlV' OlV!:ll iln'31 m'IJil nIJ:ln O,'O:J, " , ,nl( " , 'lV!:ln .O,':J il'31'

1. Behold now, I have taken upon myself to lay the foundations of the Book of the Beginning of Wisdom. And I certainly knew that all [intelligent] creatures will take pains in learning the secret of the Glorious and Awe-Inspiring Name (Deuteronomy 28:58), as Agur son of Yaqe said: I have not learned wisdom; that I should desire to have the knowledge of the holy (Proverbs 30:3), who are the angels. Therefore, he asked: Who has ascended up into heaven, and come down again? (Proverbs 30:4); And the meaning of that is: we should never have knowledge as complete as that of the heavenly angels. For, who has ascended there and when coming down communicated to man the truth? And God, the Blessed, asked Job: Knowst thou the ordinances of heaven? (Job 38:33). The wise in heart, however, sought [this knowledge] generation after generation, and their souls ascended into heaven by the ladder of geometry, they also often conducted experiments and were successful in their intent. ,"l'l:J ,nl( ':l ,O'n1lVIJ il31:JlV ,,:J31:J ,il31:JlV Oil O"l'lil ':l ,'l'I(' illm .3 : UIJIJ O':J, O'IJ':J m31'ln O"lVIJilIJ il~IJ' I('il O'~31IJ O'IJ':J ,n31,m O"lVIJm 'lVl(:l 'l'I(' ':l ,"31' .il"'l il'iln ill"'31il 0"31" il"l31 1,n:J il''''31 m'il ,,:J31:J ':J:l,:l ,,'no' O'n1lVIJm p"31il nl( '!:llVil ,'no' '':In 031 O'n1lVIJilIJ ,nl( ':Jnn' m"lil m'TIJil 'IJ:ln 'i',nlV ,:J'il PIJilil l('illV O'IJlVill(:JllV ,'l31" P '31 .m'TIJil mT1J 'I( :J,31IJIJ 3131,mIJ l('illV 'll(lIJ' ,O'n1lVIJil "l'lIJ il'31IJ' I('il ,n"IJ '31 il31:JlVil "l'l' m'TIJil 'l'l 0" ':l:J 'l'I('lV ,,:J31:J, .illlV O'31:JlV:J nnl( il'31IJ '31 p',31 'l'l mIJ':l lV'lV 'l31" ,On31,m 1!:lil :J'31IJil ,I( mTIJIJ O':l"il 0':J:l,:l O'lTI(IJ' il'~ lVl(' l('illV ,mIJ'i'IJ 'llV:J ':JnnIJ 1(';" •m31'ln:J '3131'ln' ':lillV ,O,,:l p!:ll ' l ' lVIJlVil 0"31' il~n il'~ lVl('IJ' .il"'m O"il "nlV' TI(' m'TIJil 'l'l 031 m'TIJil 'I('i" P '31 .m'TIJil 'i' '31 lVIJlVil 1'ilIJ ':l ,p"31il I(,m 'lV'il 'l,m 'll:l .O"IJ", 0""1(' O"l'!:ll

HEBREW TEXTS

357

3. And behold, we have seen that seven are the spheres, because there are seven planets and each of them is in its sphere, and the sphere which completes its motion in a few days is beneath the sphere whose motion takes more days for completion. For when one circle is inside another circle, always the uppermost circle is the bigger. Moreover, we have seen that whenever one of the planets is in conjunction with another planet, the lower planet hides the uppermost planet, and the planets, in their turn, hide the stars of the zodiacal signs. Therefore, we knew that the host of heaven (Genesis 2:1; Deuteronomy 4:19 etpassim), that is, the immense multitude [of stars] which has been divided by the scholars in the science of the zodiacal signs into forty-eight constellations, is above the spheres of the planets, and we found that it moves from west to east [at a rate of] one degree in seventy years. And since we have observed that every day the sphere of the zodiacal signs and the spheres of the planets move from east to west in a direction which is the opposite of their [own] movement, we know that there is some semblance of a superior sphere over all the other [spheres], and all [the spheres] are driven by its motion. And [the superior sphere] intersects the sphere of the zodiacal signs in two places, that is, the head of Aries and the head of Libra, and then the length of the day is equal to the length of the night. And from the head of Aries the sun always moves inclined to the north in relation to the upright sphere, that is, the superior sphere, for the path of the sun is along the line of the zodiacal signs. Therefore, some of the zodiacal signs are called northern and other southern.

c''71'71n m~' cm~' c'mumn '737 C'l(n n37' '!)::l m"~l m'l(' lV'lV '137'" .2 l'l( m'7l~n '~!)lV~ '737 i" .cm'7!)lV' Cmn:l1 C'i'~' Y'Nn 1~ ci'm~' C'l~i'n mN,!),n n~::ln:l lV'lV '~::l nm'Ol cn~ 11)" .nm'~'::l on i" n1~''711) n1'l(' on''737 nN 'i''7n 'lVl(::l' C'ln:l~' m'l(' m'7l~n n~::ln:l lV' C1 .m'7,nn 1!)n cnlV ,C',:I, .C':I, C',:l11) mn '!)0~'7 m'n ":137:1 ,m'737~ 0"11) '737 m'7l~n '71'71 2. And we know that man's reason has conclusive proofs concerning [the existence of] the planets, their dimensions, the dimensions of their epicycles, their distance from the earth, their apogees and perigees. Regarding the judgments of the zodiacal signs, however, there are no complete proofs, but rather only [proofs] which are the product of analogies. And some proofs derive from experimental evidence, just as there are things opposed to nature in the science of medicine. And in the science of the zodiacal signs there are proofs and observations, as when the sphere of the zodiacal signs is divided into 360 degrees, because this number has plenty of submultiples.

358

APPENDIX TWO

IV.3 A description of the 'science of the stars' in Sefer $urat ha- 'Are$ by Abraham Bar lJiyya. $URAT HA 'ARE$, 1546, pp. 4-6. ,:1,1.3 ,nK i',n .C""l c'i',n C'lW' C'K '1'37:1 ni',m C':I:J':JiI n1.3:Jn ':J '1.3'K' C':I:J:JiI ,'il1.3' Y'NiI '37 :I:I'Oil 'l'lil ,'il1.3 '37' Y'NiI n'l:lm C'1.3WiI m'lr '37 ':J:I ill1.31il K'il mil i',nil1 •'l':lWn W"'!)' ,m'1.3' mil ,'il1.3 "0' 37'i":1 C'l'nlil C'W CiI:I l'NW ml1.3N1' m,w' ,'ml37U' ,'m'N' ,:J, ':JWiIiI m:JN'1.3' 37'1.3i1 n1.3:Jn i',nil1 .1"Tnil n1.3:Jn nN'i'lil N'iI1 C'1.3:Jnil ':J '1'37:1 n:l'W1.3i11 iI'371.3i1 N'iI .ili"!)O m37"N1.3i1 '37 ,:1,1.3 N'iI1 l'WK'iI i',nil 'N i':I'l' '"n C':I:J:JiI n1.3:Jn1.3 'lWiI ,:J,' ,'K' ,CiI' m1.3,m CiI',Y C"'371.3 C':I:J:JiI m:J'il1.3 'WK Y'N:I mw,nn1.3i1 n"'i'iI 11.3 mil i',nil '1.3:Jn "':1 n",01.3i1 m'N'il1.3 CK':I '1!)' cmN l':liI' C'K CY ill1.31 'l'N mil i',nil1 .CiI'l'1.3'i' 1il' "01.3 'WK nm'Olill1.3 'N CiI'l1.3T:I mN:liI :I,'W K'K .1"Tn n1.3:Jn N'i'l l1'K' l"O'lil n:JN'1.3 N'i'iI' "N' N'iI1 37'1.3i1 n1.3:Jn N'iI1 l"Tn n1.3:Jn mNlr,n N'iI nNTiI l"Olil n:JK'1.3 ':J C'N" CiI'l'1.3i11 C'K '1:1 il1.3:Jnil " , 'Y C"1.3'YiI C'1.3:Jnil l'K' ,ilTiI C"Y:I C'N '1:1 C'lill iIl1.31.3W n,y,nil 11.3 mK:I C,,:J, nm:J1 m'N' C1'N iI'm'N'W '1!)1.3 nKTiI iI'371.3i1 ':J l'lnl1 .m1"01il1 m':lOil

ii'

And I say that the science of the stars is divided by man into two main parts. One part deals with the form of the heavens and of the earth, with the motion of the sphere turning about the earth, with the motion of the stars fixed in the heavens, and with the order and measure of these motions and an explanation of their reckoning. This part is essential to all scientific knowledge and rational thinking, and all its proofs and statements are entirely correct beyond any doubt. This part is held in high esteem by all scholars, and it is called science of observation. And the second part of the science of the stars depends on the first and follows upon it. This part deals with the occurrence of events on the earth which are heralded and caused by the stellar motions. [This part explains] how man can foretell future events on the basis of evidence provided by the scholars of this art, taking into account the events of their own times and the experimental evidence transmitted to them by the ancients. But this part does not belong to truly scientific knowledge; it should be called art based on experience and must not be called science of observation. But the overwhelming majority of mankind think that the art based on experience follows from the science of observation and that it constitutes the benefit provided by the latter in this world. The scholars who rely on scientific wisdom, however, do not credit it with this dignity, for its proofs are not [entirely] true, and they all derive from suppositions and experimental evidence.

HEBREW TEXTS

359

IVA Establishing a new month. FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS. 1976. pp.3-4. iIl:1'il :1'0 '37 lZ""il ON ,'NW1 "'lil ':1'il "37 ,'N':1~ OWil "37'~' il'il "N' '1'1 il:1ll :1'0 '37 ON' ,m':11'~ m37lt" 0" 0"lt'37' il37:1lt' Oillt' ,m'T~il '1'1 ':l ,O'~:l" n37':l ',nil '1'1 :1'0 '37 'N ,N!~' Y'Nil i'!'~~ i""' 'i'!'~ 'It'N ,N!"il .0'~n:1' n~N:1 ill 1!)il 1~i'il 'l'lil 1'il~

Furthermore, even if the Bible explicitly said: let the moon be as a sign for God's holy seasons, a very important aspect of the problem remains to be solved. Does a new moon start when the moon completes circling the sphere of the zodiac, i.e., every 27 days plus a few hours, or when it completes the apogee of the eccentric sphere whose center is far from the center of the earth, or when it completes circling the sphere of the dragon according to the calculation of wise men, since its epicyclical sphere turns in the opposite direction? IV.6 The debate on the trepidation theory. 'IBBUR, 1874, p. 10a. "37:1 m'T~il '~:l" 1':1' m'N'il "37:1 m'T~il '~:l" 1':1 il"'l ni"'"~ ':l 37' "~N O""N' ,"'" "37' 'l'lil '1'0':l O"~'N m"!il 'It'lN ':l ,m"!i11 O'~!)lt'~il il1"iln 1:l '37 ,0"'" 1'!)!' 'l'ln'lt' O'lTNt.)' il'~ 'T~ O'i't.):1 1~i' '1'1 It''lt' ':1'il 1!)i11 ,nt.)N:1 Oil 'It'Nt.) ,m' ,1'!)!:1 'l'lil ON ,O"il '!n:1 It'~lt'iT m'37~ OiTlt' O"t.)'N It'' : n"37~iT '!)Ot.) '37 'It':1nlt'i11 ,0'" nN!):1 '1'lit iT'iT' 'It'N:l :1,i' 1't.)iT '~'n iT1i11 .iT'37~ m'lt"'lt' 'nlt" n"37~ 'It'37 OiTlt' "t.)N O""N' iT1'~lt' .m'Tt.)iT '1'1 '11:l nt.)NiT N'i11 ":137iT 1"t.)

You should know that serious debate has arisen between the scholars of the zodiacal signs who rely on proofs and the scholars of the zodiacal signs who rely on [astrological] judgments and images, since those who trust on images state that the poles of the sphere ascend and descend, but others assert that there is a small wheel at the equinoxes that alternately moves northwards and southwards. Therefore, the degrees of the sun at noon, if the wheel is turned northwards, seem more than they actually are, and the opposite happens when the wheel turns downwards. They were wide of the mark concerning the number of the degrees: some of them assert that they are 8 degrees, but others state that they are 10 degrees and two thirds of one degree. Ptolemy the King, however, was very close to the values obtained by the methods of the Jewish intercalation and this is true [when the observation is made] against the zodiac.

360

APPENDIX TWO

N.7 The debate on the trepidation theory. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fols. 37b-38a: "" Cl ,?Y' m?TlJil ?l?l 'l'O '::J C"IJ'N lV'lV C'l'IJ'i'il 1':1 mnN ni',?nlJ illm '!:)? "'il 'lJ::Jm .C'lTNIJ' il?~ lVN':I Cil m?uy 'nlV '::J "IJN c',nN' .m?371J 'n .C'3737UnlJ Cl'N m?mil ?l?l ':I::J::JlV C"IJ'N Cil '::J ilml " , 'lV37 cn::JN?1J c'i"i"lJm nnN il?371J illlV 'i'? '3737'ln' '::J CillJ37 O"IJ?~:I' "IJN C'l'IJ'i'm .illlV '37? il37,millV p::Jlm C'llV ,,'O? nnN il?371J n37,m '::J 'NlrlJ Cil',nN

Another controversy arose between the ancients. Some of them asserted that the poles of the zodiacal sphere alternately ascend and descend 8 degrees, but others stated that there are two wheels at the two equinoxes. The Indian scholars acknowledged that they worked with great craft according to their art and stated that the stars of the zodiacal sphere do not move. The ancients, and Ptolemy among their number, asserted that the stars move one degree in one hundred years, and those who proceeded meticulously after them found that the motion is of one degree in 66 years. The true value, however, is one degree in 70 years. N.8 The debate on the trepidation theory. 'IGERET HASHABBAT, 189415, p.65 il37'lnil '::J "IJN C'l'IJ'i'il '::J .m?TlJil ?l?l ':I::J,::J n37'ln ":137:1 ni',?nlJil ilN:I' C'37:1lV:I C"IJ'N lV" .C'llV lVlV' C'lVlV:I "IJN C'l"nNm .illlV ilNIJ:I nnN il?371J illVYIJ:I C'llV ?37 m?YlJil i'?n? ,?::J,' N? '::J .il:l"i'il ",:1 C"lV37 l"Olil '?::J, ; illlV ill'lJnil p ?37 .ml~i' m?'l37 'nlV m:lnlJil m"i'l 'nlV:I '::J C"IJ'N lV" ; C'N '1' C37!:) il?'37 C37!:)

.m,,'

The controversy arose owing to the motion of the stars of the zodiacal sphere. The ancients said that the motion is of one degree in 100 years. Later researchers stated [that the motion is of one degree in] 66 years, and others said [one degree in] 70 years. But [this occurred because] the experimental tools (that is, the astrolabes) are not accurate enough, since being made manually by the craftsmen they are unable to divide one degree into two parts. And others affirmed that there are two small wheels in both intersecting points, therefore the figure sometimes ascends and sometimes descends. IV.9 Method offinding out the exact age of an astrolabe. NEJjOSHET C, 64a:

PINSKER 26, fol

:I::J'::Jil c'i'1J ?::Jnoil ,illV37llV ,? lV' C'llV illJ::J mUnJil '?::J n37'? n'lr' CN illm NlrlJn TN ,il"!:)Nil :llVn n?371J ?::Jnom ,C'lJlVil 'lrn ?37 ,nil ,1J'i'1J C'lVnlV ,P'?37il illJ::J 37" ,,? 'n:lmlV :I::J'::Jil C'i'1J ?::Jnom ,ClV N'illV ?TIJ:I P'?37il :I::J,::J n?371J .illlV C'37:1lV:I nnN il?371J il37,m' :I::J'::Jil '::J 37" ,Cil'llV 1':1 lV'

m?371J

HEBREW TEXTS

361

If you wish to know how many years have elapsed since your astrolabe was built [you should proceed as follows:] (a) observe the place of some uppermost star by placing the pointer [of some star in the rete] over the midheaven [of the astrolabe] and look at the corresponding zodiacal degree in the ecliptic of the rete; then you will know at which degree and in which zodiacal sign the uppermost star is; (b) look at the place of the same star that I wrote to you; (c) calculate the difference in degrees between both measurements, and you should know that the star moves at the rate of one degree in seventy years.

IV.IO The superior sphere in the commentary on Psalms 8:4. COMMENTARY ON PSALMS, 8:4, 1525.

m?T7)il ?l?l 'l'7)lVil Pl'7)i11 n:J? ':l:J,:J illV7)n?, n"'I(7)? nml'7) il37:llV ':J l"" .":l:JilI(O:J "'lVl'i11 :l'l'7)? n1T7)7) 1?'ilil P'?l'il ?l?l 'l"lVni11 ?""ill(:l~ OlVlV

It is known that seven spheres are for the luminaries and for the five

planets, and the eighth is for the sphere of the zodiacal signs where the great host dwells, and the ninth is for the superior sphere which moves from east to west, and the tenth is for the Throne of Glory.

IV.II The superior sphere in the long commentary on Exodus 20:13. LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, p. 139. ?:J 1'?'7) l('illV ,l"?l'il ?l?l 'll:J I('il ,1? il'il' I(? l('illV ,'llVil ":l'il illi1' O'il?1( "ll:J '7)1(' .ml'lV l':l'I(' O"lVl':l :l'l'7)? n1T7)7) onl',m 1lJil O'?l?lil ":ll':l I(":lil l('illV 'i11:llVn O':l" .O'?l?lil P~'" OlVil n:J:l ':J l",1i1? ,o',nl(

.9'" 'll'l(lV Now the second commandment, which is 'Thou shalt have no other gods beside me' (Exodus 20:3), corresponds to the superior sphere, which propels all the spheres from east to west, which is the opposite of their own movement, in twenty-four hours. It is in reference to this sphere that Scripture states, 'other gods' (Exodus 20:3). It says this to let us know that the spheres run by the power of God. Many considered this sphere to be the creator because it is incorporeal. IV.12 The superior sphere in Reshit /fokhmah. RESHIT /fOKHMAH, 1939, Lp. vi. l(1i1lV P'?l'il ?l?l:l Oil il?I(' ... m?T7) 'I('P' o'p?n 'lVl' O'llV? ... p?m ?l?lil .n",~ 0'l':l'1(' m'7)lV O??:J illi11 m'7)"'i11 m'?I(7)lVil m"~il Ol' 'l'7)lVil

The sphere is divided into ... twelve parts which are called zodiacal signs ... which are in the superior sphere, that is, the eight sphere, and [the twelve zodiacal signs] together with the northern and southern constellations they comprise the forty-eight constellations.

362

APPENDIX TWO

IV.I3 The superior sphere in the Astrolabe Book. NEIJOSHET C, PINSKER

26./01. 63a.

'?37:J '37'" ... m":lr

n"~

?37

'iI1i'?n m?T~iI Cll)ll) l"?37i1 ?l?liI .C'lll)' C"ll)37' ~?N l"?37i1 ?l?lil ':J:J':J~ m'~iI

m?T~iI '~:Jn

The superior sphere where the zodiacal signs are was divided by the scholars of the zodiacal signs into forty-eight constellations ... and the geometricians recognized in the superior sphere one thousand and twenty-two stars. IV.I4 The superior sphere in the commentary on Joel 4:11. COMMENTARYONJOEL, 1989, 4:11,p. 169-70.

f'i':J C'N'l CiI' P'?37i1 ?l?l:J Cil ':J

'''!In' N? C?'37? C':J:J,:J 'T CillU

.f'N:J

ll)'37 •••

~"n:J'

... the Bear (Job 9:9, 34:32) comprises seven stars which never come apart because they are in the superior sphere, and they are visible in the summer and the winter. IV.IS The superior sphere in the commentary on Ecclesiastes 1:13. COMMENTARYONEcCLESIASTES, 1994, 1:13. C'~ll)iI

N:J:lr ?:J Cll)ll) P'?37i1 ?l?l? ll)~ll)iI nnn '~:J C'~ll)iI nnn n?~:J T~'ll) l:Jn', .?l?lil n",:lr C'37:J'N' iIl~IU?37 m?T~iI "0 n~:Jm

And it might be that the words 'under the heaven' (Ecclesiastes 1:13), as in the case of 'under the sun' (Ecclesiastes 1:14), hint at the superior sphere where the host of heaven is, and the wisdom concerning the secret of the zodiacal signs relies on the forty-eight figures of the sphere. IV.I6 The superior sphere in the first version of Sefer ha- 'Olam. SEFER

'OLAMA, BNF 1056./01. 81b .

.illll) ilN~ ?:J:J nnN iI?37~ P'?37i1 ?l?l:J lillU C':J:J':JiI 1?iI~ ':J '~N O,'~?U:J Cl Ptolemy, too, said that the motion of the stars which are in the superior sphere is of one degree in one hundred years. IV.I7 Heading of a procedure in the third version of Keli ha-Nel;oshet. NEIJOSHETC, PINSKER 26,fol. 62b . .?T~' ?T~ ?:J iI?37' P'?37i1 N'illU '1U"iI ?l?l:J m,IU' m?37~ iI~:J:J n37'? To find out how many equal degrees will each zodiacal sign rise in the upright sphere, which is the superior sphere. IV.l8 Calculation of the lots. RESHIT /fOKHMAH, 1939, chap. IX,p. Ixxiv-

Ixxv. ,m?T~iI ?l?l 1" C':J?'iI c'mlU~iI ':J ":J37:J m,IU m?37~:J m?"lil iI?N 'N':lr'" Cil ?:JiI ,1:J ?T~~ 1:J n~':lril1 1:J n?37~:J' 1:J ?T~:J 1:J :J:J,:J '~N' 'IUN:J ':J

m?37~:J

363

HEBREW TEXTS m?37~ CillU C"37!~iI m?37~ i"

,m,lU m?37~:J m?'1lil 'K'!'iI

ill ":J37:J'

,m,lU

.m?T~iI ?1?1~ iI?37~? K'illU 1"?37i1 ?l?lil

The lots are calculated employing equal degrees because the planets move along the sphere of the zodiacal signs. For when someone says that such and such star is in such and such zodiacal sign in such and such degree, or when it is said that the ascendant is in such and such zodiacal sign, in all these cases reference is made to equal degrees. Therefore, the lots are calculated employing equal degrees, by contrast with the degrees of the ascensions, which are degrees of the superior sphere which is above the sphere of the zodiacal signs. IV.19 The nine-spheres system in Seier ha-Mispar. MISPAR, 1895, p. 1, 79-80. nK m:J:J'c m?"l m?1l37 37lUn ,1"?37i1 C?1l7i1 K':J ,,:J? :J1lUlil ClUiI ':1 ":J37:J '!:lC, '!:lC:J Cil iI~:lnil m:J'nl ':1 '~K iI"!' '!:lC ?37:J' •?!:llUiI C?'37i1 K'illU f'KiI Cil 'u '37 ,nK ':1 37' .•• 1':JlUn ?:I -"c il37lUn ':1 C"!:lC~ il37lUn '!:lCiI iIli11 •"!:lC, .CiI? C'?lU~l Cil CiI',nK C"!:lC~iI ?:I, m?1l37 'U 'll:l CillU n~K:J C"!:lC~iI

Since the Sublime Name created alone the superior world, nine grand spheres go round the earth which is the lower world. And the author of Sefer Y e~ irah said that the paths of wisdom lie on seier and slor and sipur. And slor is nine numbers since nine is the end of any reckoning ... You should know that nine are the true numbers which stand against nine spheres, and all the ensuing numbers are assimilated to them. IV.20 The nine-spheres system in Seier ha- 'E/;1ad. SEFER HA 'EQAD, 1985, p. 422. 'll:l Cil m?l37 c'nlU ':1 :nlUMl "37' ••• iIl'lUK'iI n:l'37~iI ?:I -"c il37lUnil ,?l?ln~ '?nil lUK':J 'Uil C1 ':1 '~Kl' .n':J'37~ n'llUi11 n'mT~ nnKiI ,ml"?37i1 .,nK ,!? mnKi11 ,nK ,!? n:l?'iI nKn

[The digit] nine is the end of the first system... and we consider that two spheres are against the superior [spheres], one of them eastern and the other western. And we also state that the ninth [sphere] revolves around the caput draconis, and one of the spheres moves to one side and the other [moves] to the other side. IV.21 The philosophers vis-a-vis the astronomers regarding the existence 01 the ninth sphere. $URAT HA 'ARE$, 1546, I/, p. 60-62. C?'37:J mK!~lil ?:I m'!', C'~lUiI m'!' 'i'17 ?37 C"i'1MiI C'!:l'C'?'!:lil '~:ln ':137' m?T~iI 37'i" 'l'~lUi11 n:l? ':J:I:I 'T? 'T Oil~ ,O'17'i" 'U OillU O'~lU '17'i" ?37 m1 'l11.' ?17 :J'17~? mT~~ ?:liI nK ?l?l~iI 17'i"iI '17'11.'ni11 ,:J O'l'nl n:J11.' ':J:I:I ?:I, 'l':liI '~lU n:JnlU' O'i'~iI ?:JK ,??:I :J:I:I iIlil37'i":J 1'K' ,O",:J, 1'!:l!:J 'lUK C':JUi'

364

APPENDIX TWO

n:JN'm '~:Jm ... C'!l'O"'!lil nl" N,m .:J'3I~' n1m~ C'l'l" C'3I'V'il mO:J' ilN'~~ "'31 m'3I Cil' T'NlV 'l!l~ "'lV3I' plV ,:J '3I'lVnil 3I'V" 'lVlVn N' C':J:J:Jil C'~lV:J C'l'~ cm Cn1'Vm Cl"3I:J Cil"N ilN'lil '31 cn~:Jn '31 C'l3llVl cm l'3Iil .:J'3I~' n1T~~ C"":Jil 'NlV nN :J:JO~il m'T~il 3I'V' C":J~ il1:Jlil ,C'3I'v' 'n

You should know that the scholars acquainted with philosophy who conduct research about the essentials of the creation of the heavens and the creatures of the world asserted, regarding the number of the celestial spheres, that they are nine: seven spheres are assigned to the seven planets, the eighth is the sphere of the zodiacal constellations and the fixed stars, and the ninth is the sphere which propels all from east to west around the two poles which are in the north and in the south. This sphere has no star, but God the Almighty set it to encompass all the other spheres and to set them all in motion from east to west. This is the opinion of the philosophers ... But the astronomers did not take into consideration the ninth sphere, not to mention a tenth [sphere], since no ocular proof is available for that. In the pursuit of their science they rely on what is observable to them by dint of astronomical observation and logical conclusion. They count in the heavens only eight spheres, the highest being the sphere of the zodiacal constellation, which propels all the other spheres from east to west. IV.22 The ninth sphere in the Code of Maimonides. MISHNEH TORAH, 1927, pp. 132-5.

'v?"

,mv?"

?:J 'lV3I C'llV? C'l'~'Vil C'~:J"il ":Jil nN ~'v~ N'illV '3I'lVnil ?l?l CillV 1l~~ il~~?lV C':J:J':Jil l~ ,:J ilN,nlV 'T il"~ ClV '31 ClV " "3Iil ,il?m:J ,il"N ,l~'o ,C'~'Nn ,"lV ,il'~ cm~lVlV - m?T~il lil1 .,'nnn C'l":J~ N?' ilv,?n N' ,:J l'N ,'~~3I '3I'lVnil ?l?l .C'l' ,'?' ,"l ,nlVv ,:J'v31 ,C"lTN~ N'il 'l'~lVil ?l?l:JlV C':J:J':Jil ":J'n:J N'N .:J:J,:J N?' "Nil n"'~il ':J~ il"~ il'lV3I c'nlVil '?N' .lil~ :J,'v 'N ,'?Nil m"~il n'l:Jn ':JlV C""l C':J:J,:J:J ilN'''lV m~lV lil' '?3Iil TNlV ?':J~il l~T:J N'N c'v,nil lmN 'll:J ml":J~ "il N? n",~ C':J:J'O l":J 'l'~lV 'l'l:JlV C':J:J':Jil ':JlV '!l' ,~3I~ ,:J:JO ,:J:J ilTil lm:J ':IN ."N ,nN C,':J "ll:J lV~lVil ,'iln'lV .m':J:J:J l':J:J'o lillV N'N ,n1'mlV~lVil '~:J .illlV C'3I:JlV~ :J"'v:J lil~ :J:J,:J ,:J "ll:J ",

v,m v,n

v,m

The ninth sphere which encircles them all, the ancient scholars divided into twelve segments, for each and every segment they invented a name after the name of this image you see in it as a reflection of the stars beneath it. They are the Zodiac: Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius, Pisces. The ninth sphere itself is not segmental and not of a form resembling any forms of these, and not a star. But, in conjunction with the stars of the eighth sphere, is that which can be seen in the large stars wherein appear

365

HEBREW TEXTS

the likeness of these fonns, or the semblance thereof. These twelve fonns were not set directly opposite those segments save only during the ante-diluvian period, when these names were invented for them; but in these times they have long ago reclined a little, because all the stars in the eighth sphere revolve similarly to the revolution of the sun and the moon, only they revolve heavily; and the distance covered by the sun and the moon in one day, it will take each star of them to cover almost seventy years. V.1 Excerpts from the introduction which Ibn Ezra prefaced to his

translation of Ibn al-Muthannti's Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwtirizmi. HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MuTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 300-302. n~:Jm p::JlUnil n~:Jn "0 3",' ?~l7~lU'::J ?"" o:Jn Oi' i"nl7~il ::Ji'l7' 'n~' .1 O'!l ':J?~ ~'O ~'illU "''''T' 1'::JlUn? O'mlU~il ?lU 'l7:::r~~il 1?il~il ::J'lUm O'nl7il 'O'~ 1::J '~n~ il'il O:Jnil iln ,m? O::J'lU,m O'!l m:J?~ ?:J lU::J:J "'i'il ':J O'~,~,~, O'i'?m, p::JlUnil 0'?!l,:J il?~il O'~'::JlU O'::J'l7il '~:Jn ?:J, '~T'~':J?~ 1"::J mm?il illUl7~ ?:J ~'~m ~'m O?~~ i'nl7'~ ~mlU O:Jnil '!l0::J ::J,n:J:J lU"lUil

i"

il~"J'~il~

O:Jnil il:JJ:J

illUl7~? ilmn~::J

mlU

?l7 il?i' mn~ .O',::J,? 0l7~ 1m ~?

~'illU o"'~?nil

1. [HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA.'S COMMENTARY, 1967, p. 148] After Jacob the translator, there arose a great scholar among the Arabs, who knew the secret of the sciences of reckoning and chronology. He reduced the mean motion ofthe planets to the reckoning [era] of Yazdegird who was the last of the Persian kings, for the Arabs conquered the entire kingdom of Persia and converted its inhabitants to their religion. This scholar was Mul:tammad b. Musa al-Khwarizmi, and all later Arabic scholars multiply, divide and extract square roots as is written in his book on Hindu reckoning. AI-Khwarizmi prepared the entire set of tables in a different manner, which is easier for students and which is equal to the work of Kanka, the Hindu scholar, but he also did not give proofs for his statements.

'TJil

',::J, ?:J?

1m,

o:Jn "'n~ 0i" .2 ~'il O"~~ 1?~ O"~?~::J '::JnlU m?T~::J ,::J:JJ '!l0 i"nl7illU ?"" o:Jn Oi' "'n~' O'?"?"il n~:Jn::J 'J~~ il?l7~? T'~ O?lU ~'il '!lOil iln O'JlU ~?~ ,? lU" 'J,' il'il ?l7 Oi'?n ~'m m?T~il ?,,?,,::J OillU O'J"?l7il O'::J:J':Jil m~' r'~il~ O:J?il~' 0"0' OillU O'::J:J':Jil ?:J? '!l0~ 1m, plU~'il "::J:Jil i1J~'i" i1J'lU~'il il?l7~m m?l7~ lUlU O'JlU' ~?~ ?"?"il ?:J n",:::r OillU n",~ n"~::J OillU O??:J, m?l7~ lUlUil~ nn~ ?:J::J 0'~~~Ji1 ?:J? ??:Jm o'mlU~il 'J'i'n ?:J? 0l7~ 1m ~'m O'ml7~il ,::J? O"lUl7' O"~?~::J ~'::JillU m'~'il ?:J, il~"J'~il O:Jnil '!l~ ::J'i'l7' i"nl7illU mm?il illUl7~::J O'lU ?,:J' T'~ m"~" m'~' Oil '~O'''~?~ ~'i'J ~'il ?""il "!l0::J '~?n ~'i'Jil ~m '~T'~':J?~

0l7~

'm'!l?~ '~lU ?~l7~lU'::J

366

APPENDIX TWO

l'W?:l1"'i'W m'~it n~:m Cl7um "l7'Wit n~:)M~ Cit m'N' ,~ Cit'?l7 i',?n? c~n ,mW"D 'DOit itn .mN"U~l ,mN C'N"i' C'W"i'it ?N'W' '~~n1 itN"U~" 1'" 'ln~ 1:1 '~n~ m?T~:I' m'~:1 C?'~~ N?D'~ c~n Cit~, ?N37~W':I C':I, C'~:)M mn1?it itW37~ ?~ C37U' c'mw~it 'l'i'n:l 'N~ ':I~l 'DO ":I"i'~ ,nN? ,:ln1 Cit"i'37' it,:lri' 1":1 n",:lr:l nm'~'m m'N'it "~Tm '~nN'~?N 'DO:l C':I'n~it .1?~it '~?n~ ,m' 'N:I? f}'o,'w m~'i'~ w', 'UO'l~?N 'DO~ C'n1i'? 2. [HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 148-9] After him there arose a scholar in Islam by the name of al-Farghani, who gave reasons for all the statements of al-Khwanzmi. After al-Farghani, there arose another great scholar who translated the distinguished book about the constellations written by Ptolemy, the king of Egypt, a Greek who lived a thousand years ago. This book is perfect and there is none superior to it in the science of astronomy. It reveals the secrets of the heavenly motions as seen from the earth, and the measure of the fixed stars which lie on the sphere of the zodiac. Ptolemy divided the fixed stars into six magnitudes and assigned a magnitude to each star of the 48 constellations. The first magnitude is also called "first glory", and the entire sphere contains 1022 stars excluding the nebulae. He established the reasons for all the rules of planetary motion, and his proofs also apply to the rules found in the zij which Jacob translated from the Hindu scholar. All the proofs which Ptolemy - who is also called Talmai - brought forth in his great book called the Almagest are complete. No scholar can contradict his proofs, for they are taken from the science of measurement called geometry in Greek, and gematria by the sages of Israel. Many commentaries on this book were written by Arab scholars, among them a scholar more eminent than the others in the sciences of geometry and astronomy, whose name is Mubammad b. Muthanna. He composed a very distinguished book for one of his relatives ... he included short proofs and diagrams whose principles are taken from the Almagest. In some places he elaborated on the explanation of Talmai the King.

Cl'N Cl' l'37it n'N'~? mnnWl Cit ,~ n?371M Cit:l1'N 'UO'l~?N 'DO:l mn1?it Cl .3 'l~~ C'l'~'i'it ?l7 it',?n ml7Uit i" itTit 'DO:l itl7U N? '~?m n",:lrit 1" C"~'W 'l'i'n Cit '?W 'DO:l CitW c'l'i'nm 'DOit itT '~'?Wit:l :lU'it 'N:I mN:lN ,:I,it itT, ,m' 'i"i'" 'i',:I, it:l,it mn1? ":lnw ?Nl7~W' '~~n ?~ 'l'i'n cm C~!l7:1 '~?n .'~?n~ 3. [HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY, 1967, pp. 149-50] The tables in the Almagest are useless and contradicted by observation, since the apogees are not fixed with respect to the constellations. Ptolemy himself did not commit these errors,

HEBREW TEXTS

367

which are due to his predecessors, and I will explain this matter fully when I come to the end of this book. The rules in my treatise are essentially those of Ptolemy, as modified by the Arab zij writers whose observations were even more careful that those of Ptolemy.

:mn C'n111)7;) i111mni1 mi1:31 mmn::l ,mmn '::l 'N~ C':3' C'~::ln 'mN:ll~ i1lm .4

T"::l 111~111i1 mi1:31 C'i'~ ':337 C"'37i1 1':3111n, C'111'111' i1N~' rt'N nl111 C,'i1 '~'i'~ ",:3 C'::l ,'i1 N" mi1:31i1 C'i'~ 'In:3111 'N37~111' '~::ln Ci1 i1'N' C'~'Nn~ m'37~ 'D':ll'N' 37Di'~'N I:3N' ""~'N' ":lll~ ':3N 1:3 "n', ':3'37i1 111:3n 1'111N'i1 ,nN 'Ni"T'N Ci1':3N' 'N"'l::lONi1 INm •"l'i1i1 C'::ln'N' i1'i' 1:3 n:3m "l'::l'N :3i'37" .C'37N'N I:3N' "noN'N I:3N' 'In:3'N' "'DO 4. [HEBREW TRANSLATIONS OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA's COMMENTARY,

1967, p. 150] But many scholars have observed that the sun's apogee moves just as the apogees of the five planets do; and its position today, in the year 1160 of the Christian Era, is Gemini 27°. These are the Arab scholars who observed the apogee of the sun, and all of them did not live at one time. The first was l:Iabash the Arab (al-l:Iasib), and Ya1;tya b. Abi Man~ur, al-Marwadhi, Ibn al-Muqaffa', aI-Sufi, Ya'qub al-Kindi, Thabit b. Qurra, the Hindu sage, Theon the Alexandrian, Ibrahin al-Zarqal the Spaniard, al-Battani, Ibn al-'Isti, Ibn al-A'lam. V.2 The Hindu scholars and Ptolemy. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056,jol. 38b. 0"~'~:3' :3lTi1 1"i' C111' C'~'Nn~ m'37~ ',:3 ',ni1111N' ,,:3::l '::l "~N ",i1 '~::ln1 •'~37 1',m :3::l::l 1]]'N ',ni1111N' '::l Ci1"37 137"

The Hindu scholars said that Gemini 4° is the exaltation of caput draconis and the depression of cauda draconis, but Ptolemy laughs at them since the caput draconis is not by any means a star, and he is completely right. V.3 The Hindu sages divided in equal parts the zodiacal signs. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056,jol. 38~

n'N'~ 'D::l i" m111:3 m'T~i1 'i',n ",i1 '~::ln111 ;;::lm ,"N "D C'::l":ll C',:3, i1'N' .m'N'i1 ",~ "N'i1 'D::l ",':3n1 0"~'~:3' .m":lli1 C37~m 1'37i1

These things require a long explanation and the rule is that the Hindu sages divided in equal parts the zodiacal signs by relying on their senses, that is, by taking in consideration their forms. Ptolemy and his companions, however, [divided the zodiacal signs] as it is appropriate by employing the method of the [mathematical] proofs.

368

APPENDIX TWO

V.4 The secret behind the 'efod and the breastplate in the long commentary on Exodus 28:6. LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, p. 186-7. ,il:Jllm~il 'D:l Cil il'N' .•. "Oil n!p n~'N p' ,Tllmm "DNil ,:J, N'il p'~37 "0' p' ,:J':J p"nil 'D:l m'N ~DlU~il p' ,C"llUil illUlUil il:l:l' ••• nnN T:JN:J Cil 1:l '37

'D:l ':In:l' 'n":l' N' "Oil ilT m'l' 'n'N'il "N' ••• l'37il ilN'~' p"nil 'D:l n:lN'~ "0' ,nm~il 'DO ,~, N'lU ,~ m':J' N' ':l ",:l 'DOil "D:J 'n1:Jnw :In:l~il .C'~lU

[COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1996, pp. 595-8] There is a very deep

secret behind the 'efod and the breastplate. I will refer only to a part of this secret ... Now these things can only be grasped by the mind. Hence six names were inscribed in one stone ... six names were similarly inscribed on the second stone. On the other hand, the names on the breastplate were not divided in the same manner that they are grasped by the mind. They were divided in a way that could be perceived by the eye ... Now if I wanted to even begin to reveal this secret it would take up more space than the entire commentary which I composed on this book. For only an individual who has studied works on geometry and the secret of the way the sky works can understand the secret of the 'efod. V.5 Ptolemy's astronomical tables. 'OLAM A, BNF 1056,fol. 81b. il:l:l' il'il il:l:l ,C'~'Nn 'T~~ 'lUlUil il'37~:J W~lUil mil:Jl C'P~ ':l '~N O"~'~:J' 'N!~' ,il~:ln:J 'l~~ o'mnD Ol'N O':J' C'i"i"C ,',nN 'N:J min .C"37' il'il' 'lU inWil "il~il '37 ,m' mN~ 37:J'N O"~'~:J l':J' Cl':J lU'W mlU C"lU37' lU"n:J .C"illU~C Cil' l'N O"C'~:J 'W mm, :l"37 ,o"~'~:J

And Ptolemy said that the apogee of the sun is in Gemini 6°, in this place it was and in this place will remain forever. And yet Ptolemy was followed by punctilious scientists whose wisdom is not inferior to his, and they found that in the span of 720 years between them and Ptolemy there is a discrepancy of 400 (?) in Ptolemy's values for the mean motion. Therefore, Ptolemy's astronomical tables are of no avail today. V.6 Astronomical-astrological experimentation. TE'AMIM B, 1941, p. 32. C37 il"'il n37W:J W~Wil mil:Jl m'37~ 'nnp'lU ,m:J' C'~37D 'n'Ol ':llN mm O'D mm" '~'n mm" ",il mm':J C':J:l':lil c'P~ 'nlpn ,C'llUil ':J", c'p,nil .1'37il n'N'~' n~N CilW ,mm,m

I recurrently performed experimentation, as when I determined the apogee of the sun at the time of birth by calculating the fractions and the entire years, and I determined the places of the stars by employing the astronomical tables of India and the astronomical tables of Ptolemy and the astronomical tables of Persia, which do not contradict observation.

HEBREW TEXTS

369

V.7 Ptolemy and the lot oJthe moon. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, Jols. 44a44b. 'nt i1:l,l7 i1'i1nll.' i1?l77.) ll.'i':I'll.' ,,:ll7:1 n7.)N:I N'i1 ,,:I? i1l:l? ?,11 ':l '7.)'N 0"7.)?~:I ?,11 N'i1 i1n ll.'7.)ll.'i1 ?N nn7.)'~i1 i1?l77.)i1 1'l7:l Y'Ni1 ?N i1:1"i'i1 N'i1ll.' i1l:l?i1 .i1l:l?i17.) i1?'?:I, 0":1 ni"'ll.' '7.)N :l"l7 i1l:l?i1

Ptolemy says that the lot of the moon is the only truly one because its distance in degrees from the moon, which is the nearest planet to the earth, is equal to the distance between the ascendant and the sun. And this is the lot of the moon which will be determined [in the same manner] both by night and by day. V.8 Ptolemy the King mocks at the ancients. TE'AMlM B, 1941, p. 37-9. ",:I? i1l:l?i1 ?,l1:l i" ;"'7.) l1'N' m?'l1i1 ',:1, ?l7 0'1'7.)'i'i17.) ?ni1' 1?7.)i1 '7.)?n ?l7 '!J07.)i1 f)'o,', i11:l?i1 1':1' ll.'7.)ll.'i1 1':1 ll."ll.' ,i'n'7.)i17.) i1?'?:1 Ol 0":1 ni'?'ll.' ':l ,l7" ... nn7.)'~ N'i1 '?N:l i1?l77.) i1l:l?? N'~'i1? ,:I,i1 ill 0l7~' .nn7.)'~i1 i1?l77.)i1 .0'1':l1 0i1 0'1'7.)'i'i1 "7.)Nll.' m?'l1i1 i1?N ?:l

Ptolemy the King mocks at the ancients because of what they said about the astrological lots, and he only acknowledges the lot of the moon which is determined both by night and by day from the distance between the sun and the moon, a distance which is added to the ascendant. And the purpose of this procedure is to regard the degree of the moon as if it were the ascendant ... You should know, however, that all the astrological lots proposed by the ancients are correct and true. V.9 The scale oJpowers oJthe natal chart. MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, BNF

1058,fols. 22b- 23a. mW7.3i1 c'i'7.3::J Cl ,il"Wil n17.3,i'7.3 ilW'7.3n::J mw7.3 ?::l? w' il?ll.'7.37.3 il7.3 ?::lnOil mW'?ll.'i1 ?l7:1?, ,i1l7:1'N ,,:I:li1 ?l7:1?, ,mn:l i11U'7.)n n':li1 ?l7:1? 1m ,'7.)~l7? .,nN 0'1!Ji1 'll.'?' ,O'llV ?':lli1 ?l7:1?, ,i1lV?lV

Observe the relative power which every planet has in the five places of domination and the place where the planet is [in the natal chart] as well, and you should grant five powers to the lord of the house, four powers to the lord of exaltation, three powers to the lord of triplicity, two powers to the lord of the term, one power to the lord of the face.

V.IO Ibn Ezra's attack on Ptolemy's astrology. TE'AMIM A, BNF 1056, Jol.39a. ?l7 1'7.)01 :l"l7 '1"':1 i1?l7 N?' ",:1, '1'0'1 ,:I:l, mll."?1Ui1 'n:l:l i'?,n O"7.)?~:I' l'N' l':ll N'i1 O'?l?li1 ?l7 ,:I,ll.' O"7.)?~:I? N~7.)nll.' ,:1, ?:l 1? '7.)'N ??:l, 0'1'7.)'i'i1 0"1"" 0'1":1 '7.)Nll.' i17.) ?:l i" ,n7.):ln '!J:l Ol'N "~!Jll.'7.)' "l" i" '17.)7.) i1'1l77.)'1 .0i1';l7 1'7.)0 mi1 y'N7.) i1??N Nll.'7.) 'N 1'17.)i1

370

APPENDIX TWO

Ptolemy is at variance [with us] regarding the houses of the triplicities, and we have already performed empirical experimentation to verify his approach and found it incorrect. Therefore, we should endorse the approach of the ancients, and [regarding this issue] I will now give you a general rule: everything that you may find of Ptolemy that deals with the spheres is correct and nothing is available that surpasses it, but his assertions related to the judgments of astrology do not befit his wisdom, therefore you should only rely [in this area] on what has been said by Doronius the King and Masha'llah.

V.II The natural constitution of the planets.

TE 'AMIM A, BNF 1056, fol.

35a. 'DNlV C"D?~:I? C"l1lV C'lV'lV ill1:1'Nil 'DC:I NJDl' illVi' c'mlVDil m,?,n Cl1~' .lVDlVilD il?DlV N'illV ,,:ll1:1, il'?N Y'Nil 1D N:lil 'Nil ,,:ll1:1 iln?, il'i' ill:l?il ,~ Cl1 ':lnnD ,'ml1'ln m"ilD:I ilDn :I~~ m'il ,,:ll1:1 i" ilDn :I~~' illl ?l1 'DN il~~' ,m?,n:l 1DilnD N'il ~"l1 ilD"lVil ?':ll nnn nnN illlV:I m:l' C'Dl1D Cl~" lVDlVil "'N' lVDlVilD :I,'i' 1n"il ,,:ll1:1 1IJ"lV cn N'illV C"ND ?l1 ,m cn il'il' C'Dl1D ,~ i"J m'il ,,:ll1:1, lVDlVilD i',n, ,m'il ,,:ll1:1 'i' N'illV 'n:llV ?l1 ,m "?N il?'l1 ':lnDil Cil':lN 'IN' .n~C'DD ,m?1n iln'il 'i'il 'n:llV 1':1' cnil C"ND 1':1 'l1JDN nl1'il ?'i"lVD C'?~:I C':I, C',:I, ClV lV' ,~ C"D?~:I '':In N? 'DCil ilT ,~ 'D'N 1"D C,l1,' m,?,nil il?N ,~ "DN c',nN' .m'?'Dil 'DC:I lV'DN 'lVN~ P'Clil1 n'lV'Dn m?,nD Cil ,~ cn 'N 'i' N'illV l"?l1 N?' mlVD :I~~ l'N ,~ nDNil1 l"Clil .m"Dl m'N':I '~C"N "D 'lVN~

The explanation of the natural constitution of the planets is an extremely difficult issue which may be found in Tetrabiblos by Ptolemy. There he said that the moon is cold and wet because of the moist exhalations coming from the earth and because it is below the sun. And he said similar things about Venus and Mercury. Mercury, however, sometimes inverts its natural constitution and becomes hot because the velocity of its motion brings it in conjunction with the sun and is burnt by it. And he [Ptolemy] judged that Mars is hot and burning because it is close to the sun and the sun's light rises to it [to Mars], and he determined that Saturn is cold because it is afar from the sun, and Jupiter's natural constitution is admixed because it is intermediary between the hot Mars and the cold Saturn. And I, Abraham, the author, say that this book [Tetrabiblos] was not written by Ptolemy because there are in it things which are devoid of any rational reasoning and contradict the results of empirical experimentation, as I will further explain in Sefer haMoladot. And others said that they were able to know the natural constitution of the planets by empirical experimentation. The truth, however, is that there is no such a thing as a cold or hot planet or fixed star since they are

HEBREW TEXTS

371

all made of a fifth substance, as explained by Aristotle with incontrovertible proofs. V.12 Tetrabiblos is a book 0/ no substance. MOLADoT, BNF 1056, /01.

54b. Nil' n'~~' "M n'~M~ l~M ,,~,~ ;:lnc)] 0;'37; ':1 O"37lU "M '!)O~ '~N O"~;~~'

nT ,; 'm:lTM .0M~37 l',m ";37 O'l'37;~ OM~37 M;N NlUN~' ,',nN O'N~M ;:1, M'M ONlU "!)O~ ,':lTn nTM ':1 lU~~ ,~ l'N ':1 '!)OM ,,~, ;:1 ;37 ,~on N;lU "~37~ (;T~~ ;II!) ;T~ ON lU~lUM 'N m~;M 'N n1!)1l '~ ,; lU'lU ;T~~ m~;m lU~lUM •"M' O'~'Nn ':l1~~~ ,,~; M'M' N; ';'lM n1!)ll'~ ,; lU'lU n~'!M

Ptolemy said in the book Tetrabiblos that regarding the topic of the children we shall have to observe [the planets] in the tenth and eleventh horoscopic houses. And all those who came after him, and Masba'llab among them, mocked Ptolemy and they are completely right. I just mentioned that so that you should not rely on all those things written in that book [Tetrabiblos], because this book is of no substance. For Ptolemy said in his book that if the sun and the moon are in bicorporeal signs, or if the sun is in the ascendant in a bicorporeal sign, then the new-born will not be alone in the womb since twins will be born.

V.13 Commentary on Amos 5:8. COMMENTARY ON AMOS, 1989, pp. 209215. ;~ o~~~~l O!iJ ' /;17 Nj1~iJ l'~r;tiJ Mi~? 01'7 nJ1t7¥ 't::l? 1~'M7 ;'QiI~ M1t':;! M1&"37 •,~~ MJ'M~ fjl$v '~. Amos 5:8: He who made Kesil and Khima, and turns deepest darkness into morning, and makes the day darken into night: that calls for the waters of the sea, and pours them upon the face of the earth: the Lord is his name. N'MlU ,'lU37" .0'1'OM om ,;l;l~ lU' n1~'i'~ O'llU ':1 ,37' :'~n~M OM'~N ON1 .1 r'i'~ ,0;'37; lU37 MN" 1:1 ;37 ,'1'!)!M1'OM~ ~"i' Nm ,'~"M' N'i'lM Nm ,M;l37M ,N'i" '0"1(' ,;"l ~:I':I '~"'M 1'0; ,,~o lU" •'l'!)!M ~'lU"M ;:I~ ,~'1n~' ;:1; ,0'~37!) 'N" M;N' ,";N O'~"i' 0'1~i' O'~:I':I lU" .';'MO' - ;N37~lU' l'lU;~' '"n' ~'n:lM ON'i' 1:1 ;37 ,M;N~ ,nN 'N" N; "l,!)!m .mlUM 'i'M~ ~"i' ""lU ,~ ;N") "lU'37' 'Tl~ 'lU37' N'i'l' .1'N'1 ll'N ~'lU"~ OMlU "~37~ ,(~: ~ ~"N) 'l~'n .M~':I' ;'0:1 :lU'!); 'NlU1 mm .o"'!)n~ Ol'NlU M37~lU OMlU ,(N':'

1. Abraham the author said: you should know that there are two places in the sphere, which are the poles. 'Ash, which is the Wagon (ha'Agalah), and is named the Bear (ha-Dov), is near to the northern pole. Therefore 'Ash is always visible, during the summer as well as during the winter, from the entire northern inhabited part of the earth. And near the southern pole there is a big star whose name is Red ('Adom) and in

372

APPENDIX TWO

Arabic is named Suhayl. Near to this star there are some small stars which are visible from time to time to all those who dwell near to the equator. But these stars are invisible to those who live in the northern hemisphere, and therefore Scripture named them IJadrei Teiman (Chambers of the South, Job 9:9), because they are invisible to those who live in the inhabited part of the earth. 'Ash is so called because it is derived from the word' Ushu (Joel 4: 11), which are seven [stars] that are inseparable. And so we are still left with the task of expounding [the place of the stars] Kesil and Khima. '!:l"37N ,C'Nil C':J:l,:l il1U1U Ci11 ,i'1U 1UNi' il?~ :JlT N'il il~':l1U ,'l'l'~'P n37" .2 .C'l~p Cil1U

2. The opinion of our forefathers is that Khima is in the tail of [the zodiacal constellation of] Aries and the head of [the zodiacal constellation of] Taurus, and it consists of six stars which are visible even though small. ,m~'p~ C'l1U:J l"?37il ?l?:m C37 i:Jnn~ m?T~il ?l?l1U ,mi'~l m'Ni:J 37"" .3 1U?1U' C'i1U37 p!:ll 'l? m?T~il In?l il~'l C1U~' .m1n1Uilil mpl 'NiP' Cil'l1U' ! m"pl'l Cil illi11 .C'i' 'l? il:l:l' ,iln'1U1U 'ln1 il?37~ 'ln1 m?37~

3. It is known by incontrovertible proofs that the sphere of the zodiacal signs intersects the superior sphere at two points, which are designated as equinoctial points. Therefrom the sphere of the zodiacal signs inclines towards the north twenty-three degrees, plus half a degree, plus the half of the sixth of a degree, and likewise towards the south. And so, there are three points! il?'?? c", ,m~?l? ip:Jil 1!:liln'

P

?37 ,m?T~il ?l?l 1i':J n:l?1i1 1U~1Ui11 .4 .::J'1U"il ?:l::J 1'1Unn

4. The sun moves along the path of the sphere of the zodiacal signs, therefore the morning will tum into deepest darkness and the day will darken into night in all the inhabited part of the earth. ill1U ilN~ ?:l::J ':l .C'l'~'Pil C'~'::J il~':l iln'il C1U ':l - il~':l i11plil N'iP? C37~1 .S ,C:lnil 01'~?~::J '~'::J illi11 .'ln1 il?37~~ :J1iP niT~? :Ji37~~ m?T~il ?l?l ?l?ln' .ili1U37 ill1~1U ?37 C"il illi11 ,m?37~ c'n1U ?37 il'iNil ::J? Nl~ ,C'l1U ~?N pi 1? l'N' m'pl 'll:l N? pi ,ili1lil 'll:l m?37~ 371Un ?37 il'iNil ::J? N1i1 C?137? ':l ,371'" .il~':l n:ll? N1il ?'O:l illi11 .ni::Jn~il

5. The reason for calling this point Khima, is because Khima was located at this place in the ancient days. For the sphere of the zodiacal signs moves from west to east roughly one degree and a half in one hundred years. And Batalmiyus the wise found in his days, namely, roughly one thousand years ago, that [the star] Cor Leonis (Lev ha-Ariyeh) was located at [the zodiacal constellation of Leo] 2° and now this star is at

HEBREW TEXTS

373

[the zodiacal constellation of Leo] 18°. But it is known that Cor Leonis is always at 9° in relation to the constellation, but not in relation to the point of intersection. And Kesil is opposite Khima. V.14 Commentary on Job 9:9. COMMENTARYONJOB, 1525, 9:9. ?N~1t' nND:I ,nNl"I C'?"l C':I:::l,:::l 'ltu - l"I~':::l' ?'O:::l .C':I:::l,:::l l"I37:1tu Cl"I - tu37 Cl"I - l~'n '"m .?"ll"l ?l?ll"l l'D! nND:I tu37' :Ill nND:I 'ltum l"I~Ul"l ?l?l~ 'N" N?' ?N~tu nND:I :I,1t'''l''I m'l"I ":137:1' ?"ll"l ?l?ll"l :Ill nND::l Cl"Itu C'::l:::l,:::ll"l .N::lMl C'i'~::l Cl"I '?N:::l '"n CN'i' P ?37 C'::l:::l,:::ll"l cmN

'Ash - is composed of seven stars. Kesil and Khima - two big stars, one of them at the northern part of the inclined sphere [that is, the zodiac] and the other at the southern part. And 'Ash is in the northern part of the great sphere [that is, the superior sphere] and Qadrei Teiman is a group of stars in the southern part of the great sphere, and they are invisible because the inhabited part of the earth is in the northern part, therefore Scripture called them Qadrei [Teiman], as if they were in an hidden place. V.15 Commentary on Job 38:31. COMMENTARYONJOB, 1525,38:31. " Cl"I C'N'lm l"I?~ ?T~ ~'O::l cm C'l~i' C'::l:::l,:::l l"I37::ltu Cl"I l"I~':::l "~N C'l'~'i'm ?"l ::l:::l,:::l ?'O:::l, '?N~tul"l "tul"l 1'37 N'i" ?"l ::l:::l,:::l N,m ,nN N'l"Itu 'l'37::l l':::llm .i'?n::l' l"I?37~::l' n'::l::ll"lT 'll:::ll"ln ••• ::l'i'37 ?T~ ::l? "l"I

Our forefathers said that Khima is [composed of] seven small stars which are at the end of the zodiacal constellation of Aries and six of them are visible, but in my opinion [Khima] is a big star whose name is 'Eyn ha-Shor ha-Semoli, and Kesil is a big star [whose name is] Lev ha'Aqrav ... and one star is opposed to the other concerning its zodiacal sign, its degree and part of degree. V.16 Ha-Teli in the Baraita de-Shmu'el. BARAITA DE-SHMU'EL, 1901, p. 33. C'l"I ,~? N"i'l"I '?nm ••• 1'tunl"l l"I?'?' C"l"I '?nl"l ••• m~?! 'i'::l? 1D,m '?nl"l •f'Nl"I 'lD ?37 C:::lDtu',

Ha-tely turns deepest darkness into morning ... ha-tely makes the day darken into night ... ha-tely that calls for the waters of the sea, and pours them upon the face of the earth. V.17 Excerpt from the commentary on Leviticus 25:9. COMMENTARY ON LEVITICUS, 1976, pp.

93-4

N? l"Ill"l ,l':::lll"lT l"I'l"I '?'N' .tu~tul"ll'::ltun::l C'l'~ "l"I ?N'tu' ':::l ,'~N 'O'Dl"Il"I"l"I" ':::l ,"N? l"IN'!'l"I? l"Ill"l '37 ,?:::l' N? m?T~l"I '~:::ln ':::l ,l"I~'~n l"Iltu 1?l"I~ l"Itu~ W"D i'?n ,on' ':::l ,C"~'N ""::lm '~?m ,l"I37tu tu~'n C"l"I37'::l' ?37 C'D'O'~ "'l"I '~:::ln

374

APPENDIX TWO

,lUlU' il~~~ p'm ,"~~ ,',nN c'~:Jm .":JYil 1'm~~ :J"P ~'m ,C,':J rn~~ lU?lU~ mllU ~mlU ,~ lU' ':I ,C'l'~lU' il~~ Cl ,C'lU?lU' il~~ c"n~' ,'lUY' il~~ c"n~' 'lnlN' .?~~lU?' l'~'? "Ulil ?l?lil m'pl~ lU" ,n'~'l il"Pl~ rn?T~il n~?lUil? .'O'!:lillU'n:l' lU,n "!:l ':I "Y' .il?:JP? C':I"l Judah ha-Parsy said that [the people of] Israel reckoned [their calendaric regulations] according to the sun. But if it were true, then Moses did not account for the complete annual motion, since the scholars of the zodiacal signs have been unable to clarify [the length of the year] till this very day. Thus, the scholars of India add the fifth of an hour to a quarter of a day [besides 365 days], while Ptolemy and his companions say that the 300th part of a day should be deducted [from the quarter of a day], and he [Ptolemy] is close to the methodology of the Jewish intercalation. And those who came after him said that the amount [that should be deducted from the quarter of a day] is the 106th [part of a day], and others [said] 11 0 [parts of a day], others [said] 130 [parts of a day], and even 180 [parts of a day]. For there are those who reckon the year by completing the zodiacal signs in relation to a visible point, and others [do that] from the point of the sphere which is inclined to the north and to the south. But we [Jews] ought to rely on [Talmudic] tradition. The Persian even denies the meaning of This month (Exodus 12:2). V.18 An attack on the Karaites. FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976,

pp.2-5. l'~'l:J' llY:I ,C'P"lil 1" n~n ... C'?~'lU' Cil CN' ,c'?m?n" m,n:J ':Jil 1"il ilU'l ~m' ,T'~~' ~? mil 'p'nY~ ',:J,:J 'lU~ ,T'~ ?:I 1:1' ,ilY'lU" n'lU~ 1:J' ,~ "Y' ... c'pn:J' rnl~:J Cl ,C'P'O"il lU'''' 'l'l':I lU'~ ?::J, ,1'~'il? ,~ ?'~~lUil? ,'''0 ':In 'O'''il il"il' illil '::J ,C',,"o C" C'lU?lU ?Y lU,nil ,~, '::J 'l? '''0 .'''0 C'lU,nm ,illlUillU~lUil 1':JlUn:J' [COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1988, pp. 3-8] A second approach is the one chosen by the distorters, albeit they are Israelites ... This is the way of the Sadducees, such as Anan, Benjamin, Ben Mashiach, Joshua and of all heretics who do not believe the words of the transmitters of tradition, turning away from it to the right or the left. Each one interpret verses as he sees fit. They do the same even with respect to commandments and laws ... Furthermore, who says that a month consists of thirty days, for behold, Judah ha-Parsy wrote a book in which he counted the year and the months according to a solar year.

HEBREW TEXTS

375

V.19 Excerpts from the long commentary on Exodus 12:2. LONG COMMENTARYONEXODUS, 1976,pp. 60-2. U!)llm::J i17~nil nmv '!)::J O'l'1:) "il 'K'tv' '::J ,'O'!)il il"il' ,"K .illil tv,nil .1 illl'N ill:J'il nltv '::J ,(': l' m1:)tv) il'37'1:)' nNTil ili'nil nK m1:)tv' ,n'N" .0"'37il .0"" 'K 11!):l' ilmUl '!)::J ,,:J, tv1:)tvil n::J"il:J o'"n ,':li'il1tv',nil '1:)' '::J ,il1tv .ill'::Jl ,:J, N"

1. [COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1996, p. 203] This month. Rabbi Judah ha-Parsy says that the Israelites, like the uncircumcised, employed a solar calendar. He offers as proof, 'Thou shalt therefore keep his ordinance in its season' (Exodus 13:10). But lunar years are not all equal, as the seasons of plowing and harvest are dependent solely on the movement of the sun as it travels to the north or the south. However, he did not speak correctly. tv,nnn 0'1:)37!) il1tv37 o'ntvtv 'K" ,il1:)n;, nltv 'K il:J"i' O"'37il nltvtv ":J37:J' .2 ,,:J17:J ,tv,n i',n '::J' 'K'i" "tv37 O'ltv '37 illtvil '1:)' 'i',n ,il1:)nil nltv:J ill:J'il .m",nil 1":J ill'K Oil1:) il1:)::JOilil nKT1 ,ill:J'iltv,n m1:)'1:) :J,'i' K'iltv

2. [COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1996, p. 205] Due to the fact that the year of the uncircumcised is close to a solar year, and because they saw that the moon is renewed twelve times during a solar year, they divided the days of the year into twelve parts and called each part a month, because it is close to the days of a lunar month. This arrangement of theirs is not in keeping with the laws of nature. nK!)1:) "l'tv Oil' K:J' '::J ,m,tv Ol'K O'lIVil '::J '::J ,'O'!)il il"il' '37 l'37U' IV" .3 IV,n '::J:J "i'il 'N Omil il:J'" U371:)" ,'U371:)' 'K O'1:)IVlil ,:J,'tv ,0'mIV1:)il m'371:) Otv il'iltv ,il"i'lil 'K tv1:)tvil :J,tv:J :J':JN K:l1:)l K' P '37 .37",il lill1:)il1:) illIV'tv 017 il1:)"tv mtv1:) 1m' ::l'::lK' ::l'::lK l'::l 'il" .::l'::lK TK K:l1:)ltv ,il1::l17tv illtvil n'nn::l tv,n ill 'K:J ,0:l'N:J N:l1:)lil :J':JNil '37 l'::J1:)'O 'N'tv' "il ::J"37 ,0'37':Jtv n!)o,n .il1tvil 'i'il1:) Y'N '::J i'n11:) '!)::J m:l'Nil '::J:J ,n37 illntv' :J':JNil '::J ,N:l1:)l il'il'IV

3. [COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1996, pp. 208-9] We can refute Judah ha-Parsy with the argument that not all years are equal. The years differ, due to the effect of the planets, in that the rain increases or diminishes and the heat or cold increases or diminishes each month, making it different from the known norm. Spring is therefore not be found to have arrived when the sun returns to the spot that it was in the beginning of the previous year, although it was then spring. There is more than a year and two weeks between one spring and the next. The Israelites therefore relied on the spring found in their country in whatever month it occurred as the time of the appearance of spring varies in all countries according to the distance of that land from the equator.

376

APPENDIX TWO

"'Zl 'D:::l 'N ,'37JZlNil ,'ilZlil 'D:::l CN ,1ll'D' " il'il "'Zlil '37 ,ZlO CN illm .4 C37D ,'nZlNil "'Zl' ":l37il "'Zl 1':l il'il' C'Zl37DIll ,m'TZlil '1'1 'll:::l N'illl1 ,'nZlNil N:l C'Zl37D C'Ill"Pil 'l'm:lN "ZlN ilT ":l37:l' ,m371ll ''''Zl :mp 37"1' C37D' ~'O'il' .m'TZlil nZl:::ln:l37'" N'illll 'Zl P' n37" ,:::l,' N' ilT, .il'JP:l N:l C'Zl37D' il:::l"N:l 4. [COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1996, p. 210, with slight changes] If

Moses relied on the conjunction of the moon and sun, he should have explained whether he meant according to the moon's mean motion or its true conjunction, which takes place opposite the sphere of the zodiacal constellations, because at times there are approximately fourteen hours between the calculated conjunction and the true conjunction. It is because of this that our holy fathers said, 'At times it comes at longer intervals; at times it comes at shorter intervals' (Rosh ha-Shana 25a). Only one who knows his way in the science of the zodiacal signs can know this. . V.20 The controversy over the length of the solar year in Sefer ha'lbbur. 'IBBUR, 1874,p. 8a. ':::l:l 1l1Zllllil Ill,nn' ilZl ':::l UIll'n:::ln

Ill,n n,Zl ':::l nZlN 'ZlN N' 'O'Dil il"il' Cl illm

"'il 'Zl:::ln 1':l il"'l np"nZl illil ':::l ,ilZlnil nllll N'il ilZl:::l 'l' "1' 'Zl "37' ,Ill,n C'Zl'il N'il ilZlnil nllll ':::l "'il 'Zl:::ln "ZlN' ':::l ,,'Zlil 'Zl,n Cll1N':l' 1" 'Zl:::ln 1':l' :::l"P :l"P:l C,' illi11 (il37IllIllZl'", ,"J) il37ll1IllZl'", n'Ill"Ill' C"il n'37':l" C'37"'il lU" ,illlll T"ZlP:l ,nN C" n'37':l'il '37 mDomil ':::l "ZlN O'D 'Zl:::ln illm ,~O'l C'llll 'Zl'N 'Zl,m ,illlll N"P:l ,nN C" n'37':l'il '37 mDo,nil ':::l C"Zl'N 'N37ZlIll' 'Zl:::lnZl ,O"IllZl p,nZl :n,p N'N :l, nD'pn '37' Ill"Zl ,nN p,n C"il n'37':l'Zl il,on illlllil ':::l ':::l C"Zl'N CilZl Ill" ,'P'P' :lU'il 1:::l Cl 'N37ZlIll' 'Zl:::l", ,'l'n37" il:l"P 'Zl,n n37" '37 ~O,' ilT illil ':::l "'1 ilZln illm ,illlll '''P:l C"Zl'N c',nN' C'llll '''p:l C" ,on' ,,:::l' N,m ,n37'il "Pill 'D' C"Zl :l,'P C'lll1 'O:l N':l' illm ,on' ilT, C"il n'37':l' ,11'il:::l 'P'P" m'Zlil 'Zl:::ln "illll C'Zl:::lnil "N ':::l ~N' ,C"P:l1ll 'Pil ilT:l P',:l, iIlV'lll' p,nnn lUZllllil nllll ':::l 37' "n37" ,:l' C'Ill' ,ilTil "Oil " il'lN illi11 C"l'l C'llUil m:lnZl C'PZlZl 1'll1N' p,nil ll1Zlll1il m'il n37Zl ,nNil p,nil ,c'p,n p,nm ,'N37ZllU' 'Zl:::l", 'Zl,n nllll N'il nNn ,il"'il C37 C"il mnlll' TN' ,C'm:llil Cl ,O'D nllll N'il nNn 1"Nil pJ'ZlZl p,m 'pJ'Zl1l1IllZllllil 'l'l:l il"Pl 'll:::l 'llllil :l:::l,:::l C37 IllZllllil m':lnnil n37Zl N'il '1ll"1l1il p,nm ,1:::l C'l'Zl 'N37ZlIll' 'Zl:::ln:l Ill' •mil 'Zl:::ln il:l"P N'il nNn m'TZlil illnZlZl ,nN

Judah ha-Parsy did not tell the truth, since his opinion is contradicted by [the sense of the word] 'month' (Exodus 12:2); after all, what is renewed every month in the sun? Moreover, as there is an acrimonious debate between the scholars of India and the scholars of Greece whose chief is Ptolemy the King, who is able to tell us which is the length of the solar year? The scholars of India say that the [length of the] solar year is [composed of] the known [three hundred and sixty-five days] days and a

HEBREW TEXTS

377

quarter of a day and the fifth part of a hour, so that a whole day is accumulated after roughly 120 years. And the scholars of Persia say that the added amount of time over a quarter of day is one day in 147 years, and there are also some Arab scholars who hold that the added amount of time over a quarter of day is one day in 101 years. And Ptolemy says that the solar year is lacking the 300th part [of a day] from the quarter of a day, and according to the tequfah of R. Adda approximately the 360th part, and the opinion of Ptolemy is close to our opinion. The Arab scholars were very meticulous too. Some amongst them hold that one day is lacking after 106 years, and others say [that one day is lacking] after 130 years. That is very surprising, since while one [astronomer] adds to the quarter of a day, another one deducts from the quarter of a day, and after 60 years it is very easy to examine the excess [or loss] of one single day, and that is especially true regarding those scholars who were knowledgeable about geometry and were very meticulous [in their observations). Now I will reveal to you a secret which you should make every effort to understand. You should know that three methods are employed to determine the [length of the] solar year. The first is [to pay attention to] the time when the sun is in the point of intersection of the two superior spheres, when the length of the day is equal to the length of the night, and this is the year of Ptolemy and the Arabic scholars; the second method is to take a point in the solar sphere whose center is far from the center of the earth, and this is the Persian year and also of some Arabic scholars; and the third method is [to pay attention to] the time when the sun is in conjunction with one of the stars of the zodiac, and this is the year of the scholars of India. V.21 Excerpts from the long commentary on Exodus 33:21. LONG COMMENTARYONEXODUS, 1976,pp. 215-8. C:lYi11 ,C:lYil CW l't'il ,l't'Pl 'l'l't' :Jl'l:Jlil CWil 'l'lW,'!) ,:J:J : ':Jn7)il Cil':Jl't '7)l't .1 "7)l't P ?Y ,C'Y:JW, C'lW? il?Y' l'11'l'11l'til ?:J '!)O7) ':Jnl'l 'Wl't:J, •":J:Jil l't'il 1'17)l't:J 'Y:l7)l'til Y:J17) ?l't PWl't'il Y:J17) ':Jnl'l 'Wl't:J, .W"!)7)il CW l't'il ':J ,'l'7):Jn l't~:J'W l'11'l'11l'til 1':Jn:J Cl .1'l:J? ':J:J,:J ilW7)nil l'11':Jn7) :J"l .Cllm '!)07):J il'il' .CWil '!)07):J il'il' CWil ':In:J Cil:J C'l'til

1. Abraham, the author, states: I have already explained that the name of God, which is written but not pronounced, is a proper name. This proper name refers to the Glory. If you add up all of the letters of God's proper name you get seventy-two. The sages therefore said that it is God's explicit name. If you add the square of one, the first number, to the square of five, the true middle number, you will get the numerical equivalent of God's name. This is also true regarding the conjunctions of

378

APPENDIX TWO

five planets. When you add up the letters that one enunciates in naming half of the letters that make up God's name you will also get the numerical equivalent of God's name. O"'11)P O'N 7:" 11)~'in il'nin il~il:lin 'l'Yin Y'N:l o"nin o'n~~m 7::1 '::1 .Y" .2 O',:l,) O'~Yil 7::17 omN 1'il7N " p7n '11)N mn .7l7lil m":lr m'~11)' O'Y:l'N:l .(~':'

2. Note, all plants, all that live on the earth, all fowl, cattle, animal, reptile and all human beings are tied to the forty-eight constellations of the sphere. This is the meaning of 'which the Lord thy God has allotted unto all the peoples under the whole heaven' (Deuteronomy 4:19) . •'~7M7 "Oil m7l7 ,:lr, N7' ill 'Y" '7'N l"lYil OY~~ 'l'N "Nil7 O'£)'O'~in N.3 .(il::1: ~::1 O',:l,) Oil7 p7n N7' l~Nlil ,Yin

3.a Those who added to give light, which is an incongruous addition to the issue, perhaps they knew that but did not want to reveal the secret to Ptolemy. 'And that He had not allotted unto them' (Deuteronomy 29:25) is positive proof of this. "Oil m7l7 ,:lr, N7' ill 'Y" '7'N .plYil OY~~ Oil'l'Y "Nil7 O'£)'O'~in :l.3 .(il::1:~::1 O',:l,) Oil7 p7n N7' .1~Nlil ,Yin .0,,'~7M7

3.b Those who added to give light to their eyes to explain the issue, it is possible that they knew this but did not want to reveal the secret to the students. 'And that He had not allotted unto them' (Deuteronomy 29:25) is positive proof of this. '£)01.)::J il7"lil m:m1.)il1 .il17:llUil m':ln~ O"lUY' ilN1.) Oil m':ln~il '::1 .Y"" .4 iln il::1::1 il11)1.)nil ni:ln~ O'll::1' .0"11)Y' MnN N'il il'llUil m:ln~in .MnN N'il 07'::1 ilY:l11)~ N:lr" '£)O~il ill OllU .0'11)711)' illU~n il11)711)il m:ln1.)' .ilY:llU~ N:lr' '£)O~il .ilY:llU illUlUil ni:ln~ min .ilY:l'Nil ni:ln~ il::1:J' .m':ln~

4. It is known that the seven [planets] have one hundred and twenty possible conjunctions. There is only one great conjunction which includes all [the seven planets]. There are twenty-one two-star conjunctions. It is the same case with five-star conjunctions and this number results from seven. The planets can be in a three-star conjunction in thirty-five ways, for this number too is a result of the conjunctions of the seven planets. The same is true of a four-star conjunction. Now the planets can be in a six-star conjunction in seven ways. OY7 '7 m'il7 " np7 O::1MN' (~':' O',:l,) p7n '11)N inN OlUil '~N ill ,,:lY:l, .5 .:l7 O"'l; N .up M:l11) 7N'11)'7 7T~ pN 7"Tn "~N11) 'iln ••• (::l :, O',:l,) il7nl .ilO'l1.) N'il '11)N::1 7T~il Oil:l ~'711)' .in'~11)' N7 ON' .il'111il "~'11) Oil11) l1.)T 7:J .(N M~::1n O'Y,,'in .7N'11)'7 ilY' N:l' illil .ilY' M::1'Y~:l '7' 7m, m:ln~ 7::1 '::1

•T::l "" m7T~il

HEBREW TEXTS

379

5. It is because of this that Scripture states, 'which the Lord thy God has allotted' (Deuteronomy 4:19) ... This is what the rabbis mean by 'there is no star for Israel' (Shabbat 156a, Nedarim 32,a) as long as they keep the Torah. If Israel does not keep the Torah, then the zodiacal sign rules over them, as has been proven by experience, for any conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter which occurs] when Aquarius is in an evil [astrological] configuration results in harm befalling Israel. Those acquainted with astrology will admit that. V.22 Excerptfrom the commentary on Deuteronomy 4:19. COMMENTARY

ONDEUTERONOMY, 1976,p. 221. "37 ?:J? ?T1~ lU' J:J, ,?T1~' 37'" :l:J,:J C37' C37 ?:J? lU' ':J ,~m, i10m~ ,:l, .i'?M 'lUK ?K'lU' illm Ci1? :l:J,:J K?' ,Cll37" cum m'i1? i1?"l i1?371.l ?K'lU'? ClV ClUm ."37' .ClUi1 n?Ml

'Which the Lord thy God has allotted' - It is known by experience that each and every nation has a specific star and zodiacal constellation, and that each city has also its own zodiacal constellation. God has granted to Israel a most-favored status, in that He is their advisor. They have no star. See now, Israel belongs to God. V.23 Peoples, planets and zodiacal signs in the first version of Sefer ha-

Te'amim. TE'AMIMA, BNF 1056,/0Is. 41a-42b. •,n':l K'i1lU '?, C?11.l m'i1 ":l37:l C'"i1'i1 ...'i'?n:l' ...'n:llV .i1n':l N'i1lV i1"K C?11.l m'i1 ":l37:l C"K C'Ui11.l i1i'?n:l' ...lV1.llUi1 i1'm i1lJ ?':ll:l :l'i'37 C?11.l m'i1 ":l37:l ?K371.llU' m,n ?37 N'i1lV '1.l C"li11.l ... i1lJ .i"ll C37 'n:llU m':lnni1:l ClU

The Jews are governed by Saturn ... since their zodiacal sign is Aquarius, which is the [planetary] house of Saturn. The Christians are governed by the Sun ... since their zodiacal sign is Leo, which is the [planetary] house of the Sun. Those who believe in the Mohammedan religion are governed by Venus ... since their zodiacal sign is Scorpio in the term of Venus, and Venus was there when the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter took place. V.24 The astrological status of the monotheistic religions in the second

version ofSefer ha- 'Olam. 'OLAM B, VAT 477, fol. 88b. C':llU,nlU lU'K? '?"lU m:ln1.li1 i1n'i1 ':J, C"N? lU1.llU' i1"KlV K'i1 i10,J1.l ,:l, i" n:llU) ?N'lU'? ?11.l J'K "1.lK 'J'1.l:JM ':J 37" ?K'lU' ?11.l K'i1 '?, ?T1.l' .m?K NmlU Ci1:l ~'?lV'lV ?T1.l J'K ClU:l C'i':l, Ci1lU J1.lT ?:J ':J n1.lNm (K"37 :l? C'"J ; K"37 ,Ji' ?:J? 1i1?K ,,,, i'?n 'lUN i1n ,'mll1.l mlU37?' ,,':Ji1? N'i1 ClU:l :l'~i1? 'K 37'i1? ?37 ?K'lV' J'K 'lVK:J' (:J:' C',:l,) ,,,, Mi'? C:JnK' :l,n:J "'MN' (~':' C',:l,) C'1.l37i1

380

APPENDIX TWO

C'U il'ilil m:lM~il1 .C'~Yil ;:J:J C':JlUMl Cil TK ':J Cil:J U';lU' ;T~il il'lU'il 1"il .:J,i'Y ;T~:J il'il C,:J, '!); C';KY~lU'~ K':J1 c'i'

It has been proven by experience that Leo and the Sun are assigned to Christendom and that a conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter] occurred which ushered in the birth of he whom they deem to be God. Aquarius is the zodiacal sign assigned to Israel. You should know that our sages said that 'there is no star for Israel' (Shabbat 156a, Nedarim 32,a). Yet the truth is that no zodiacal sign exerts any influence on them, whether harmful or beneficial, as long as they cling to God, to know him and to observe his commandments, and [this is the meaning of] 'which the Lord thy God has allotted unto all the peoples' (Deuteronomy 4:19) and thereafter it is written 'the Lord has taken you' (Deuteronomy 4:20). But when Israel is not on the right path, then the zodiacal sign will dominate them since then they are regarded the same as all the other nations. The conjunction [of Saturn and Jupiter], which ushered in the birth of the Muslims' prophet occurred, according to their opinion, in the zodiacal sign of Scorpio. V.25 Opening words of the second version of Sefer ha-She'elot. SHE'ELOTB, VAT 477,fol. 1a. il"~ '~;m ,C':J;~ Cil'llU ,0"1"" 'llUil '~;n ,nKil C'llU "il m;T~il '~:Jn 'lUK' ':J il"~ m'K' m';'~:J C1 C;'Yil ',:J,:J illU;lU C"!)O ,; lU" m;T~il 'U!)lU~ .nm:J1 Cil m;KlUil

Two were the heads of the astrologers, Ptolemy and Doronius, and both of them were kings. Ptolemy endorsed the judgments of astrology and wrote three books about collective and individual astrology, but he did not agree with the astrological doctrine of the interrogations. V.26 Characterization of Claudius Ptolemy in $afnat Pa 'anea1;1 by Joseph Bonfils. $AFNAT PA 'ANEAl;l, 1911, I p. 84. il'il1 n'l" il"nil 'l'm:J' ,; ':In:JlU 1;~il '~;n N'il1 C"~~ 1;~ o,'~;u:J ':J Y' '~;n il'il1 'l"il C:Jnil OK;UUO"N "'~;n Cil'llU ,'il1 l"i"~ "lO:J;K il1lU~ "1!); 'il1~:J Ci' K; il~:Jnil nKT:J' m;T~il1 C':J:J':Jil n~:Jn:J ;"1 c:Jn ':JTlil .';lU mm;il '!)O n;nn:J Cil':JK " ";Y "Yil 'lUK:J C"il 'Y ,',nK;'

You should know that Batalmiyiis, the King of Egypt, is Talmai the King, the same person for whom our elders translated the Torah into Greek. He was second in line after Alexander the Macedonian and they both were students of Aristotle, the Greek scholar. This Talmai was a great scholar in the science of the stars and the zodiacal constellations. No one to this very day has been able to surpass him, as R. Abraham [Ibn Ezra] wrote in the introduction to his Book on Astronomical Tables.

HEBREW TEXTS

381

V.27 The link between ancient Jewish and Greek science in Bar !;liyya's Seferha-'lbbur. 'IBBUR, 1851, II, 2,pp. 37-38. il~::Inil ,,~; il~::In ,::l,::l C';'::IlU~il c'u '~::In ;::IlU 137"'il; illil l'l37il ;37 ;::lK il~::In ;::1, ,Cil'ml'37~~ ::lKlU' Cil~ ,~; (lU"::I'::lK) K'illU 37,n ... 'l'm::l'~ K'ilil

.;"T u'm::l'~ ilmK m~; il::ll'K'i'::lil il~::IM1

All the above has been said to make known to you that all the learned Gentile scholars acquired their wisdom from our sages ... and you should know that Hipparchus learnt from them and drank from the spring of their knowledge. Likewise, each particular field of wisdom with which the Gentiles are acquainted, they learnt from our forefathers, may their memory be blessed. V.28 The one hundred and twenty conjunctions in the introduction to the first version ofSefer ha- 'Olam. 'OUM A, BNF 1056, fol. 80b. '37 'K~ '::l,n'11) l'::llUn ;::1 '::1 37'" .C'DO~ 37"; ;::I,n il::l::l' ::I"i' Cil m'::ln~m .1 n37'; m!l' ill l"~" •,nK 'In ;K' 'In ;K '::I'37~ 'K'J'il; ;::I,n il'il'lU 'DO~ ill'K illm ,nK 'In ;37' " K'illU ''In ;37 '::I 1"37l illm ,'::1 '37 'K~ '::l'n~il 'DO~ il~::1 •''', 'DO~il il;37'

1. The conjunctions [of seven planets] are one hundred and twenty. And you may understand the reasoning behind this number in the following manner: You may obtain the sum of all the [whole] numbers from one to any other number you wish, if you multiply this [latter] number by half its value, and add to the result half of its value. As an illustration we present this question: what is the sum of all the [whole] numbers from one to twenty? Answer: we multiply twenty by half of it, that is, ten, and then add half to the result, so that the final result will be two hundred and ten. C'::l::l,::1 '::l "::lnn'lU C37um ,m'llUil m'::ln~il 'DO~ il'il' il~::1 n37'; ;M3 illm .2 1"37l illm " m'::ln~ c'mlU~il C37 'n::llU; lU' illm 'T Cil C'mlU~il '::137"" ,C,::l; .m'llUil m'::ln~il 'DO~ il::l::l' K"::1 il;37' ,nK 'JM1 ''In ;37 "

2. Now we begin and ask how many two-star conjunctions there are, that is, how many combinations of only two stars (among seven stars) there are. We know that the planets are seven. Saturn has six conjunctions with the other planets. So, six multiplied by half its value, plus half its value, represents twenty-one [conjunctions], and this is the number of two-star conjunctions. ,nK Cil~37' 'n::llU C37 i"J 'l~lU' m,nil illm ,m'lU"lUil il~::1 n37" 'l'J' .3 il'17 ,nK 'JM1 'DO~l"! 'In K'l"!11) '1 '37 ,mK 'l::l'37 'il 'DO~il il'17" 'ill"! C"nKil~ 'JM1 '::l '17 cmK 'l::l'17 ,', i"J m'::ln~ m'il' "K' illm ,'n::llU m:lM~ n~m ,,"u 'JM1 'K '17 cm'17 '::l il~n m::ln~' ,', "17 '::l '17 C'l::l'17 '1 C"K~ m':ln~' ,', "17

382

APPENDIX TWO

m':ln~il "DO~ Cil illnn il"'

,:li1 illm

,nn~ C"DWil C37 illl m:ln~' ,'l "37

.m'w"wil

3. Now we wish to know how many three-star conjunctions there are. We begin by taking Jupiter and Saturn, and together with them we take any of the other five [planets], and we obtain five. We multiply five by three, which is half its value, plus half its value, and we obtain fifteen [conjunctions]. Those are the conjunctions of Saturn. And those of Jupiter are four, which multiplied by half its value plus half its value give ten. And the conjunctions of Mars are three, which multiplied by half its value plus half its value gives six. And the conjunctions of Mercury are two, which multiplied by half its value plus half its value gives three. And Venus has only one conjunction, and the sum total is thirty-five. "37 illil nn~ C"~~' 'il i"~" '"U 'n:lw, U'~~' m'w~nil ~'~'il' U'~' .4 .'t illm i"~' nn~' " 'n:lw, W' m'WWil m':ln~m .~"::1 m'w~nil m':ln~il

Now we wish to know how many five-star conjunctions there are. We found for Saturn fifteen, for Jupiter five, for Mars one, and the total sum of five-star conjunctions is twenty-one. And as for the six-star conjunctions, there are six for Saturn, one for Jupiter, and the total sum is seven. And there is one conjunction of seven stars. V.28.5 An additional formula which Ibn Ezra ascribed to himself. 24-5.

MISPAR, 1895, pp.

N'ilW W'Wil l'::Iwnn -,'0 37::1"0 ;37 E)'om : mnN

1"

'nN:i~ '::In~il Cil':I~ ,~~

.Wi":I~il ~'il ':I'n~il '~m ':I'n~il il~::1

ilN"

'~~37:1

Abraham the author said: I found a different solution [to the same problem]. Add to the square of the number its root, which is the number itself; then take half of this addition; this number represents the requested result. V.29 On the letters ofthe Tetragrammaton. HASHEM, 1985, p. 424. ,C',:lnl tl'lWil C37' '~37' ,'lWil C37' '~37 T'W~'il 'l':ln C~' ... CWil m'm~ 'DO~:I ":137:1 ••• U', ,~:I" ,370" : CilW C'i"OD ilW'W C37U' .:1"37 'DO~il il'37' Cn37:1'~' c'~n '37 nmW~'il m'm~ c'nWil 'l::l'37 C~, .m'm~ :1"37 'n~' 'n~ ,::I m'il .::I"i' C'DO~ il'37' t~ ,C":ln~il ,::I UDW~::1 'n~ '~n nDO,n:l

On the letters of the Tetragrammaton: ... if we add the first letter to the second, and we do so with all the four letters [of the Tetragrammaton], we get the number seventy-two. And the reasoning behind those three verses, (that is, Exodus 14:19-21) ... is that each of them contains seventy-two letters. And if we multiply the [sum of the] two first letters of the Tetragrammaton by half their value, plus half their value,

HEBREW TEXTS

383

according to the formula to obtain the sum of all the [whole] numbers, then we get the number one hundred and twenty. V.30 Regarding the half of the Tetragrammaton. YESOD MORAH, 1985, XI,p.340. .C"lUl" mt~ ill'" "ll:J' 'lUN C"l:JO~il " 1,:m::l ,ClUil " '~n illi11

Regarding the half of the Tetragrammaton, if you add all the [whole] numbers [from one] until this number, you get one hundred and twenty. V.31 The one hundred and twenty conjunctions in the long commentary

on Exodus 3: 13. LONG COMMENTARY ON EXODUS, 1976, pp. 32-33. Cl'l:J' ,f'Nil i'~'~~ i',n, 'i'~'~ illillU ,"'''il ""',,::1 C" T~i'il ""',,::1 il"l' Cl'l:J' illi11 .•• n'l"nN ::I'lU' Cl'l:J' ,"~l" Cl'l:J' ,il~il~n' Cl'l:J' f'" ,"" 'N "",,, il"l' "N "::Il'::I' .C"lUl" ilN~ Cil ,C'lUlU' mN~ lU'lU~ nnN il'l'~::1 C,::I, m'::In~il .Cil"i'~::1 " 9N' C~~l'::I 'l:JlUil C"l'::I C'N'::Ili1 " 'lnlU' C"'l'lUil

Sometimes [the planet] ascends its epicycle, at other times in its large sphere, whose center is removed from the center of the earth, and sometimes its sphere ascends or descends, sometimes it runs and sometimes it tarries ... Now there are one hundred and twenty conjunctions in one of the three hundred and sixty degrees. It is due to these irregular movements that different things happen to man's body and certainly to his fortune in this lower world. V.32 A description of the astrologer's metier in the commentary on Daniel 2:2. COMMENTARY ON DANIEL, 1525, 2:2, p. 6. ",,~ cnl"::1 cn'N'~ 'l:J, m,'nl'il C'l"" CillU ••• m'T~il '~'n Cil C"lU'i11 m"N~il 'llU' c'mlU~il C'::I"il '~::I~ 'l" 1"'::I"il 'l' m'l'~il "'ill' C'Nil .c,'m 17'::llUm lU,nm illlUil nl:J'i'n1

The kasdim are the astrologers ... their practical craft enables them to predict future events, since they are knowledgeable about the interpretation of the horoscope of the newborn, they know how to direct the degrees (ofa star) according to the terms, according to the aspects of the planets and of the two luminaries, and they are acquainted with the revolutions of the year, month, week and day.

VI. 1 Excerpt from the preface to the first commentary on the Pentateuch. FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976,pp. 1-2. 1,n::l il"i'l' n~Nil CN' ,il::l"lUl 'l'" 'lUlN mlUl:Jl~' ,il::lm, il"'N nnNil 1"il il~m ,C'",,, "" il::l' .il'nn::l ::I::I'Oil ~mil N'il ::Imil 'i" 1"il nNT ,il''''l'il ,"'" 'l' n'lUN'::I~ C',l:JO 'llU '::InlU i'n~' ::I" ,C"Nl'~lU' m"~::1 m::l'lU'il '~'n N,m ,,',m 1lUni11 "Nil "l'::I nl'~N ,"N 'il' i"Ol:J::I, .C"::I' ::I"~ il" N' "l" ,C"~ N'~'il '::I'~ (::I': N n'lUN'::I) f'Nil N~'n lU",l:J::I' ."'il N" 1lUn::l 1"il

384

APPENDIX TWO

;::1: N n'IVN':J) m'nil mlV!ll 1V"'!l:J' ,C'?"l' C'lUi' ,C'n~llm C'lll7i1 ?l7 ,:J," "!l:J' ,iI?'lil pNl iI"l70 :J, iI?l7 nNTiI iI?O~:J' .m"::Il m~::In N':JiI (,::1: N n'IVN':J '~::In '!l ?l7 m'::ITlil m'~iI nl7'? m,nN ml7' O'l::lil (": N n'IVN':J) m"N~ 'ii' TN .nm:Jn 'lVlN "!l0~ C'~?' ,nmll'n m~::In ?l7 "~l7? illl"m •.. m"!lOil CiI~ IV" .C'N':JiI CiI"!lO:J m'N' '?:J C'l'Nlil '::I ,nm::ll Til CN ,cm'N':J p':Jn' .C'N'll'iI T'N~' C'i' '~::In 1" ,l7,' N?IV

[FIRST COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1988, pp. 1-2 (with slight changes)] The first way (to biblical interpretation) ranges far and wide (from the text). It is beyond the interest of our time. If truth be likened to a dot within a circle then this approach can be compared to the periphery of the circle, which goes round about only to return to its starting point. A number of great scholars chose this approach, namely, the wise men of the academies in Moslem countries, such as Rabbi Isaac, who composed two books on the first chapter of Genesis, from 'In the beginning' (Genesis 1: 1) to 'were finished' (Genesis 2: 1), and did not finish this commentary, so verbose was he. He makes mention of the believers in a god of light and a god of darkness in his commentary on the verse 'Let there be light' (Genesis 1:3). But he (Rabbi Isaac) walked in darkness without being aware of it. In his comment on 'And the earth brought forth grass' (Genesis 1:12), he brought forth words from his fancy and spoke about trees and plants, both large and small. On the other hand, on the term 'living creature' (Genesis 1:20, 1:24) he quoted foreign sciences. In the same vein, Rabbi Sa'adiah, Ga'on of the Diaspora, commenting on the verse 'Let there be luminaries' (Genesis 1:14), quoted the opinion of secular scholars and gave the dimensions of the heavenly bodies according to the astronomers ... If one desires to learn external sciences let him learn them from the work of experts in these fields and let him examine their proofs and see if they are correct. The Ge'onim only cited from these works without offering any of the proofs as to the veracity of the opinions they quoted. Some of the Ge'onim had no knowledge of the method of the ancient sages and how they arrived at their conclusions.

VI.2 Excerpt from the preface to the second commentary on the Pentateuch. SECOND COMMENTARY ON GENESIS, 1976,pp.138-9. ,C':JIV' C'll' m'i'l:J Cl7!l .C'l'Nlil 'IVN' cm ,C'l':Jl' c'~::In iI:J ,::1" ,n'IV'?lVm "~l7'1V mN'iI? ,nmll'n m~::In C'!lO:J 'O'l::l' '::I ,C':J:J'O :J:J'Oil :JM1i1 'i':J Cl7!l' T'~N~? ?'l7,' iI~ ilT1 •,nN":J:J C?,l7 '~::In mi'?n~ ",::IT' '::I ,ml"?l7 nm::ln ?l7 CiI:J IV' 1"ll iI~ "'::IT' ,(N': N n'IVN':J) C'NIV':J' "!l fl7 nlV'!l:J' •,m,n:J' CIV:J "'::IT' (": N n'IVN':J) m"N~ 'ii' nlV'!l:J' .C'N!l"iI 'O:J 'Nll~' iI?N' ,C'N':Jl?

HEBREW TEXTS

385

'?'):In 'Ol 'WX:J ,m":ll ilY:lWiI n:J ''':J oi'n '~"W?')' ,OnY'lm Oi'n1?')' On1?') .o'?)'?)n 'l'iI'X OY iI'iIl i" ,o'o:Jn:J 1)'l'Y:l iI'iIl X'W iI"iIlii iI,mil1 .m'mil

The third (way to biblical interpretation) was chosen by scholars and wise people, namely, the heads of the Ge'onim. Sometimes their commentaries were focused on the central issues, but sometimes they were irrelevant and focused on matters of peripheral concern. Since they introduced in their books external sciences, to exhibit that they are concerned with lofty subjects, and they mentioned scholarly controversies about the creation of the world, and how can all that be of any benefit to the believer in God and in his Torah? And in their commentary to the terms 'grass' and 'fruit tree' (Genesis 1:11) they discussed the extent to which they are necessary to the creatures, but this topic fits in the books of the science of medicine. And in their commentary on the verse 'Let there be luminaries' (Genesis 1:14), they mentioned the size, distance and motions of the heavenly bodies, as well as the astrological judgments which are related to the power of the seven climates, as it was experimented by the astrologers. The Torah, however, warned us not to seem wise in our own eyes [as the Ge'onim did], but only to be in complete harmony with our God.

VI.3 Excerpt from the first commentary on Genesis 1: 14. FIRST COMMENTARYONGENESIS, 1976,p. 16-7. '1'1' O':l:J':JiI ilY:lW' ,O'i',n iIl'OW 'Y i',m Y'i"iI ':J ,"'''0 "'1 o:Jn 'OX Y'i',:l ,?)'X :l,n:JiI iIlil1 .m'T?)iI '1'10 iI'YO' ~'1 l'X ':J ,pn' x, ill' .m'Toil 'OW:l :l:J", ,(': ~ iI'Om) O'OWiI 'OW 1:J' •'lOO iI'YO' O'OW W'W iI"'W ,O'OWiI n':l '''T iI"YO " pX1il1 .n1TO 'll'X ilTii O'i'0:l O'i" '(": no O"iln) O'i' 'OW OW ':J ,Y'i',:l m"x?) Oil O':l:J':JiI 7:J' iIl:l7i11 lV?')lVillV 'l'Y:l l':Jlil1 O'i'?)iI ill?)

.'x"

A prominent Spaniard sage stated that the firmament is divided into eight parts, for the seven planets and for the sphere of the zodiacal constellations. However, this cannot be because we know there is no body above the sphere of the zodiacal constellations. Behold, Scripture explicitly states, in the firmament of the heaven, which clearly indicates that there is a heaven above the firmament. 'The heaven of heaven' (Nehemiah 9:6) and 'To him that rideth upon the heaven of heaven, which are of old' (Psalms 68:34). Note that the word qedem in the verse quoted above does not mean east [but ancient]. Instead, Rabbi Sa'adiah Ga'on, may the righteous be remembered for a blessing, was afraid to comment on this verse. It appears to me that the sun, the moon and the other stars are called luminaries in the firmament because they are visible there.

386

APPENDIX TWO

VI.4 Excerpt from the second commentary on Genesis 1,'14. SECOND

COMMENTARYONGENESIS, 1976,p. 151. m'N'::l ill m71" ,C'mll11.m i1Y::l1V? Ci1 nmy7.) i1Y::l1V '::l ,1Vn::l? ?::l,J N? i1Jm CnY::l1V ,'i1 CN '::l •?::l? ",::li1 '::l1i1 "::llN i1Jm .m1'7.)i1 '7.)::ln

i"

C,J'::l' N? m"7.)l

i1n'm ::lm'::l' 1"N::l '7.)31 "::lnni1::l ''::In ,'no7.) Ci17.) 1nN i1'i1 N? 1nN l'Y7.)::l i1'i1' N? CN C'7.)1Vi1 Y'i',::l '7.)N' 1'N' .?::li17.) i1?Y7.)? m?l7.)i1 ?l?l'

.m1V

cn~m7.)

c,'m mnym C'Yl'i1 '::l ••• Y'i',::l 'N"1V m"N7.) 'i1' CYU i1Jm ••• l'::lJ '1V"'£l i1N7.) Ci1? 1V'1V C'J,'?Yi1 C'm1V7.)i1 '7.)::l m1V7.) CY m1V7.) m'::lnni1 17.)n i1J1Vm Y'i',::l 'N"1V m"N7.) 'i1' CYU i1Jm ••• C'::l::l,::l, m"N7.)::l ',?n ?::li1 m'::ln7.) C"1VY' .Ci1::l C1N "£l0'1V

No one can refute that there are seven spheres for seven planets, and we know that [feature] by means of incontrovertible proofs which only the geometricians can thoroughly understand. And now I will mention the clearest [proof] of all: if [we assume that] all the seven planets were in a single sphere, then it would be utterly impossible for one planet to be hidden behind other planet when one planet is in conjunction with other planet in longitude or in latitude, since in this case all the planets should move with identical speed. And the sphere of zodiacal constellation is above all. That my interpretation is correct is corroborated by the fact that Scripture explicitly states 'in the firmament of the heaven'. Behold, the meaning of 'Let there be luminaries' is that they should be visible in the firmament ... Since the minutes, and the hours, and the day, and the year, and the time when one planet is in conjunction with another planet, as is the case regarding the planets which have one hundred and twenty conjunctions, all that depends on the luminaries and the stars ... Behold, the meaning of 'Let there be luminaries' is that they should be visible in the firmament, that man will be able to calculate their movements.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Works by Abraham Ibn Ezra Tractatus de astrolabio conscriptus dictante authori quodam egregio philosopho Mro. Abraham, British Library Cotton Vesp. A II, fols. 37-40. Tractatus de astrolabio conscriptus dictante authori AsTROLABIO, ARUNDEL quodam egregio philosopho Mro. Abraham, British 377 Library Arundel 377, fols. 63-68. Tractatus de astrolabio conscriptus dictante authori ASTROLABIO, 1940 quodam egregio phi/osopho Mro. Abraham, in Jose M. Millas ValIicrosa, "Un nuevo tratado de astrolabio de R. Abraham ibn Ezra", AI-Andalus, V, 1940, pp. 9-29. COMMENTARY ON AMos, Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Amos, in U. Simon (ed.), Abraham Ibn Ezra's Two Commentaries on the 1989 Minor Prophets, Ramat Gan 1989. COMMENTARY ON Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Daniel, Miqra 'ot DANIEL, 1525 Gedolot, Venice 1525, (reprinted Jerusalem 1972). Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Deuteronomy, in A. COMMENTARY ON DEUTERONOMY, 1976 Weiser (ed.), Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Torah, III, Jerusalem, 1976. COMMENTARY ON M. Gomez Aranda (ed.), EI comentario de Abraham Ibn ECCLESIASTES, 1994 Ezra del Eclesiastes (Introducci6n, traducci6n y edici6n critica), Madrid, 1994. COMMENTARY ON Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Pentateuch, Exodus (Shemot), Translated and annotated by H. Norman Strickman EXODUS, 1996 & Arthur M. Silver, New York, 1996. COMMENTARY ON Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Hosea, in U. Simon (ed.), Abraham Ibn Ezra's Two Commentaries on the Minor HOSEA,1989 Prophets, Ramat Gan, 1989. COMMENTARY ON ISAIAH, The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah, M. Friedlander (ed.), New York, 1873. 1873 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Job, Miqra 'ot COMMENTARY ON JOB, Gedolot, Venice, 1525, (reprinted Jerusalem 1972). 1525 COMMENTARY ON JOEL, Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Joel, in U. Simon (ed.), Abraham Ibn Ezra's Two Commentaries on the 1989 Minor Prophets, Ramat Gan, 1989. COMMENTARY ON Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Leviticus, in A. Weiser (ed.), Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Torah, III, LEVITICUS, 1976 Jerusalem, 1976. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Psalms, Miqra 'ot COMMENTARY ON Gedolot, Venice, 1525, (reprinted Jerusalem 1972). PSALMS, 1525 DIWAN,1886 E. Eiger, Diwan Ie-Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, Berlin 1886. 'EI;IAD, 1921 Abraham Jbn Ezra, Buch der Einheit, aus dem Hebrliischen ubersetzt nebst Parallelstellen und Erliiuterungen zur Mathematik Jbn Esras, von Ernst Muller, Berlin, 1921. ASTROLABIO, VESP. AII

388

BffiLIOGRAPHY

Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha- 'Ebad, in Abraham Ibn Ezra Reader, Annotated texts with introductions and commentaries by I. Levin, New York-Tel Aviv, 1985, pp. 399--414. FIRST COMMENTARY ON Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Genesis, in A. Weiser (ed.), Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Torah, I, Jerusalem, GENESIS, 1976 1976. FIRST COMMENTARY ON Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Pentateuch, Genesis (Bereshit), Translated and annotated by H. Nonnan Strickman GENESIS, 1988 & Arthur M. Silver, New York, 1996. FIRST COMMENTARY ON Ibn Ezra, First Commentary on Genesis, in M. Cohen (ed.) GENESIS, 1999 Miqra 'ot Gedolot 'Haketer', Ramat Gan, 1997-1999. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, FUrth, 1834. HASHEM, 1834 HASHEM,1985 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, in Abraham Ibn Ezra Reader, Annotated texts with introductions and commentaries by I. Levin, New York-Tel Aviv, 1985, pp. 419--438. HEBREW TRANSLATIONS B.R. Goldstein (ed.), Ibn al-Muthanna's Commentary on OF IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwarizmi, Two Hebrew COMMENTARY, 1967 versions, edited and translated with an astronomical commen1aIy, New Haven-London, 1967. 'IBBUR, VAT 48 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha- 'Ibbur, Vatican Ms Ebr. Urbinati 48, fols. 59b-75a. 'IBBUR,1874 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha- 'Ibbur, ed. by S.Z.H. Halberstam, Lyck, 1874. 'IBBUR, 1971 Sefer ha- 'Ibbur, in Me'ir Y~baq Bak'al (ed.) Sefer Mishpefei ha-Kokhavim, Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 57-94. 'IGERET HASHABBAT, Abraham Ibn Ezra, 'Igeret ha-Shabbat, in S.D. Luzzato, 1839 Kerem Hemed, IV, 1939, Prague, pp. 159-173. 'IGERET HASHABBAT, Abraham Ibn Ezra, 'Igeret ha-Shabbat, in M. Friedlander, 1894/5 Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England, 2, 1894/5, pp. 61-75. LATIN TRANSLATION OF E. Millas Vendrell, EI comentario de Ibn al-Mutanna a las IBN AL-MUTHANNA'S Tablas Astronomicas de al-Jwarizmi, Estudio y edici6n COMMENTARY, 1963 critica del texto latino, en la versi6n de Hugo Sanctallensis, Madrid-Barcelona, 1963. LIBER DE NATIVITATIBUS, Liber Abraham Iude de nativitatibus, Venetia, 1484. 1484 LIBER DE RATIONIBUS Jose M. Millas Vallicrosa (ed.), EI Libro de los TABULARUM, 1947 Fundamentos de las Tablas Astronomicas de R. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Madrid-Barcelona, 1947. LONG COMMENTARY ON Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary on Exodus, in A. Weiser EXODUS, 1976 (ed.), Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Torah, II, Jerusalem, 1976. ME'OROT,1933 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Me 'orot, in J. L. Fleischer (ed.), Sefer ha-Me'orot, Sinai, Yearbook of the l;Iokhmat Israel Society in Rumania, 1933, pp. Xlii-Ii. ME'OROT,1971 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Me'orot in Me'ir Y~baq Bak'al (ed.), Sefer Mishpefei ha-Kokhavim, Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 7-19. MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer Mishpefei ha-Mazalot, Rome, VAT 477 Vatican MS Ebr. 477, fols. 68a-86 a. MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer Mishpefei ha-Mazalot, Paris, BNF 1058 Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1058, fols. 14b-26b. 'EI;IAD, 1985

BIBLIOGRAPHY MISHPETEI HAMAZALOT, 1995 MISPAR, 1895

389

Sefer Mishpefei ha-Mazalot, in Me'ir Y$baq Bak'al (ed.), Seder 12 ha-Mazalot, Jerusalem, 1995, II, pp. 153-189. Seier ha-Mispar, Das Buch der Zahl, ein hebraischarithmetisches Werk des R. Abraham Ibn Esra, Zum ersten Male herausgegeben ins Deutsche ubersetzt und erliiutert von Dr. Moritz Silberberg, Frankfurt a. M., 1895. MIV1;IARIM A, 1969 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Seier ha-Mivbarim (first version), in J. L. Fleischer (ed.), Seier ha-Mivbarim, Jerusalem 1969. MIVJ:IARIM B, BNF 1058 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Seier ha-Mivbarim (second version), Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1058, fols. lOa-14a. MOLADOT, BNF 1056 Sefer ha-Moladot, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1056, fols. 46b-61b. MOLADOT,1995 Seier ha-Moladot, in Me'ir Y$baq Bak'al (ed.), Seder 12 ha-Mazalot, Jerusalem, 1995, II, pp. 193-248. NEI:IOSHET A, BNF 1061 Keli ha-Neboshet, first version, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, MS Heb. 1061, fols. 148v-164r. NEI:IOSHET A, 1845 Keli ha-Nel;xJshet, first version, ed. H. Edelman, Koenisberg, 1845. NEI:IOSHET A, 1971 Keli ha-Neboshet, first version, in Me'ir Y$baq Bak'al (ed.), Seier Mishpefei ha-Kokhavim, Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 99-132. NEI:IOSHET B, MANT. 10 Keli ha-Neboshet, second version, Mantova, Biblioteca di Mantova, Fondo Ebraico Mantovano, MS Ebr. 10, fols. 35-51. NEI:IOSHET C, PINSKER 26 Keli ha-Neboshet, third version, Warsaw, MS Pinsker 26, fols. 58-71, right col. NEI:IOSHET C, BNF 1054 Keli ha-Neboshet, third version, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, MS Heb. 1054, fols. 4v_lOr. 'OLAM A, BNF 1056 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Seier ha- 'Olam (first version), Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1056 fols. 80b-86b. 'OLAMA,1937 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Seier ha- 'Olam (first version), ed. J. L. Fleischer, 'Otzar ha-.lfayim, XIII, 1937, pp. 33-49. 'OLAMA,1971 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Seier ha- 'O!am in Me'ir Y$!;taq Bak'al (ed.), Seier Mishpefei ha-Kokhavim, Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 36-54. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha- 'Olam (second version), 'OLAMB, VAT 477 Rome, Vatican MS Ebr. 477, fols. 86b-95a. RESHIT I;IOKHMAH, 1939 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Reshit .lfokhmah in Raphael Levy and Francisco Cantera, The Beginning of Wisdom, An Astrological Treatise by Abraham Ibn Ezra, Baltimore, 1939. SAFA BERURAH, 1839 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Safa Berurah, H. Lyfinann (ed.), Furth, 1839. SABOT, 1985 Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer Sabot, in Abraham Ibn Ezra Reader, Annotated texts with introductions and commentaries by I. Levin, New Yord and Tel Aviv, 1985, pp. 377-398. SECOND COMMENTARY Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary on Genesis, in A. Weiser (ed.), Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Torah, I, Jerusalem, ON GENESIS, 1976 1976. SECOND COMMENTARY Ibn Ezra, Second Commentary on Genesis, in M. Cohen ON GENESIS, 1997 (ed.), Miqra 'ot Gedolot 'Haketer', Ramat Gan, 1997.

390

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-She'elot (fIrst version), Paris, Bibliotbeque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1056, fols. 62b-70a. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-She'elot (fIrst version), in SHE'ELOT A, 1995 Me'ir Y~baq Bak'al (ed.), Goralot ha-Rab'a, Jerusalem, 1995, pp. 6-39. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-She'elot (second version), SHE'ELOTB, VAT 477 Rome, Vatican MS Ebr. 477, fols. 53b-68a. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-She 'elot (second version), SHE'ELOT B, BNF 1058 Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1058, fols. Ib-5a. SHIREY HA-QODESH, I. Levin, Shirey ha-Qodesh shel Abraham Ibn Ezra, Jesusalem, 1975-1980. 1980 SHORT COMMENTARY ON A. Mondschein (ed.), Ibn Ezra's Short Commentary on Daniel, Ramat Oan, 1977. DANIEL, 1977 SHORT COMMENTARY ON Ibn Ezra, Short Commentary on Exodus, in A. Weiser (ed.), Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Torah, II, pp. 239EXODUS, 1976 355, Jerusalem, 1976. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Te'amim (fIrst version), TE'AMIMA,BNF 1056 Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1056, fols. 34b-46a. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Te'amim (fIrst version), ed. J. TE'AMIM A, 1951 L. Fleischer, Jerusalem, 1951. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Te'amim (second version), TE'AMIMB,1941 ed. Naphtali Ben Menachem, Jerusalem, 1941. THREE QUESTIONS, 1847 'Elu ha-shalosh she 'elot, nishalu le-rav ha-bakham morenu R. Abraham Ibn Ezra, sha 'alam tor ha-torah we- 'edei hate 'uda, rabenu David Bar Kavod Ravenu Joseph Narboni, in M. Steinschneider (ed.), Sefer Shne ha-Me'orot, Berlin, SHE'ELOT A, BNF 1056

YESOD MORAH, 1985

1847.

Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer Yesod Morah we-Yesod Torah, in Abraham Ibn Ezra Reader, Annotated texts with introductions and commentaries by I. Levin, New York-Tel Aviv, 1985, pp.315-342.

Primary Sources ABBREVIATION OF THE INTRODUCTION TO ASTROLOGY, 1994 ALMAGEST, 1984 ART OF ASTROLOGY, 1934 ASTROLABE, 1987 ASTROLOGICAL HISTORY OF MASuA'LLAn, 1971

Abu Ma'shar, The Abbreviation of the Introduction to Astrology, together with the Medieval Latin translation of Adelard of Bath, Ch. Burnett, K. Yamamoto, M. Yano (eds. and trans.), Leiden, 1994. Ptolemy's Almagest, translated and annotated by O.J. Toomer, London, 1984. AI-Biriini, The Book of Instruction in the Elements of the Art of Astrology, R. Ramsay Wright (ed. and trans.), London, 1934. O. Chaucer, A Treatise on the Astrolabe, in The Riverside Chaucer, Oxford, 1987, pp. 661-683. E.S.Kennedy and D. Pingree (eds. and trans.), The Astrological History ofMfishQ 'lIah, Cambridge, 1971

BIBLIOGRAPHY ASTRONO~CA,1977

BABYLONIAN TALMUD, 1938 BARAITA DE-MAzALOT BARAITA DE-SHMU'EL, 1901 BOOK OF JUDGES, 1963 BOOK OF KUZARI, 1946 BOOK ON ECLIPSES, BNF 1045 BOOK ON ECLIPSES, 1964 BOOK ON ECLIPSES, 1971 CARMEN ASTROLOGICUM, 1976 CENTILOQUfl]M, 1938 COMMENTARY ON ISAIAH, 1992 COMMENTARY ON JOB, 1973. CUSANUS, 1456

DEMAGNIS CONJUNCTIONIBUS, 1489 DIALOGI, 1996 'EMUNOTVEDE'OT,1970 EPISTLE TO JUDAH BARZILAI,1917 ETYMOLOGIAE, 1969 GUIDE DES EGARES, 1856

391

M. ManiIius, Astronomica, edited and translated by G.P. Goold, Loeb Classical Library, London, 1977. The Babylonian Talmud, translated into English with notes/glossary and indices under the editorship of Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein, London, The Soncino Press, 1939. Baraita de-Mazalot in Ozar Midrashim, edited with introductions and notes by J.D. Eisenstein, New York, 1928. Baraita de-Shmu'el ha-Qatan, commented by Leiv Lipkin, Pieterkov, 1901. The Code of Maimonides, The Book of Judges, trans. A.M. Hershman, New Haven and London, 1963. Book of Kuzari by Judah Hallevi, Translated from the Arabic by Hartwig Hirschfeld, New York, 1946. Sefer le-Mashii'lIiih be-kadrut ha-Iebana we-ha-shemesh, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1045, fols. 180b-183b. B.R. Goldstein (ed.), "The Book on Eclipses of Masha'allah", Physis, VI, 1964, pp. 205-213 Sefer le-Mashii'lIiih be-kadrut ha-Iebana we-ha-shemesh, in Me'ir Y~baq Bak'al (ed.), Sefer Mishpefei haKokhavim, Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 1-15. David Pingree (ed), Dorothei Sidonii Cannen Astrologicum, Interpretationem arabicam in linguam anglicam versam una cum Dorothei fragmentis et graecis et latinis, Leipzig 1976. Claude Ptolomee, Us Cent Sentences Astrologiques, Paris, 1938. M. Goshen-Gottstein (ed. and trans.), R. Judah Ibn Bal'am's Commentary on Isaiah, Ramat Gan, 1992. Saadia Gaon, Commentary on Job, edited and translated by David Kapab, Jerusalem, 1973. Nicolas Cusanus, Ubi est qui natus est rex: Iudaeorum? (Where is he that is born king of the Jews? (1456)), Translated by Clyde Lee Miller: http://www.sunysb.edulphilosophy/facultyllmillerIUBI.htm Albumasar, De magnis eotifunctionibu, anno1U1ll revolutionibus ac eo1U1ll profectionibus, Johannes Hispalensis (tmd), ~ 1489. Pedro Alfonso de Huesca, Dialogo contra los judios, Introducci6n de John Tolan, texto latino de Klaus-Peter Mieth, traducci6n de Esperanza Ducay, Huesca, 1996. Saadia Gaon, 'Emunot we-De 'ot, edited and translated by David Kapab, Jerusalem, 1970. Abraham Bar ijiyya, Epistle Addressed to Rabbi Judah Barzi/ai of Barcelona, published by Z. Schwarz in S. Kraus (ed.), Festschrift Adolf Schwarz, Berlin-Vienna, 1917. S. /sidon Hispalensis Episcopi Etymologiarum Libri AX; Migne J.P., ed, Patrologiae Latinae, Tomus 82, Turnhout, 1969. Le Guide des Egares par Moise Ben Maimoun dit Maimonide, publie pour la premiere fois dans l'original arabe par S. Munk, Reimpression photomechanique de l'edition 1856-1866, Osnabrock, 1964.

392

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Moses Maimonides, The Guide of the Perplexed, translated by Slunuel Ibn Tibon, Jerusalem, 1960. Moses Maimonides, The Guide of the Perplexed, translated with an Introduction and Notes by Shlomo Pines, Chicago, 1963. HAKuZARI, 1972 Judah haLevy, Sefer haKuzari, edited and translated by Judah Ibn Slunuel, Tel Aviv, 1972. ijESHBON MAHALAKHOT Abraham Bar ijiyya, Sefer l;leioon mahlekot ha-kokabim HAKOKHAVIM, 1959 (ed. Jose M. Millas Vallicrosa), Barcelona, 1959. ijIBUR BEijOKHMAT Moses Maimonides, l;Iibur be-l;Iokhmat ha- 'Ibbur, Paris, HA'IBBUR, BNF 1058 Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1058, fols. 40a-48b. Abraham Bar ijiyya, Sefer ha- 'Ibbur, ed. T. Philipobsky, 'IBBUR,1851 London, 185l. INTROOUCTORIUM IN Alburnasar, Introductorium in Astronomiam, Hermannus ASTRONOMIAM, 1489 Dalmata (trad.), Augsburg, 1489. KITAB AL-MADI;IAL, 1996 AbU Ma'shar aI-Balbi (Alburnasar), Kitab al-mad/;lal alkabir ila sina 'at a/;lkam al-nujum, Liber introductorii maioris as scientiam judiciorum astrorum, Edition critique par Richard Lemay, Napoli, 1996. KITABAL-UU1F,1968 D. Pingree, The Thousands ofAbu Ma 'shar, London 1968. MAIMONIDES'LETTERON A. Marx, The Correspondence between the Rabbis oj ASTROLOGY, 1926 Southern France and Maimonides about Astrology, New York,1926. MAIMONIDES'LETTERON Maimonides, Letter on Astrology, in R. Lerner and M. ASTROLOGY, 1963 Mahdi, eds., Medieval Political Philosophy: A Sourcebook, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1963, pp. 227-236. MEGILAT 'EICHA, 1839 A Commentary on the Book ofLamentations attributed to Abraham Ibn Ezra, in Kerem l;lemed, 4,1839, p. 100. MEGILAT HAMEGALEH, Abraham Bar Hiyya, Sefer Megillat ha-Megalle von 1924 Abraham bar Chija, published by A. Poznanski with introduction and notes by J. Guttman, Berlin, 1924. MEGILAT SETARIM, 1554 Shmuel Motot, Megilat Setarim, Perush 'al-Persuh ha/;Iacham Rabi Abraham Ibn Ezra be-Perush /;Iamisha /;Iumshei Torah, Venice, 1554. MEMORIAS OE 'ABo El siglo XI en la. persona. Las Memorias de 'Abd Allah, ALLAH,1980 ultimo Rey Ziri de Granada, destronado por los Alomoravides (1090), Traducidas, con introduccion y notas, por E Levi Provemyal y Emilio Garcia Gomez, Madrid, 1980. MISHNEH TORAH, 1927 Book of Mishnah Torah by Our Master Moses Son oj Maimon, translated in English by S. Glazer, New York, 1927. ON THE GREAT K. Yamamoto and Ch. Burnett (eds. and trans.), Abu CONJUNCTIONS, 2000 Ma'shar on Historical Astrology, The Book of Religions and Dynasties (On the Great Conjunctions), Leiden, 2000. OPUS ASTRONOMICUM, AI-Battani sive Albatenni, Opus Astronomicum, latine 1903 versum a Carolo Alphonso Nallino, Mediolani, 1903. RECKONING OF TIME, Bede: The Reckoning of Time, translated, with 1999 introduction, notes and commented by Faith Wallis, Liverpool, 1999. GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED, 1960 GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED, 1963

BIBLIOGRAPHY RESPONSA OF THE GE'ONlM,1887

393

Zichron la-Rishonim we-gam la- 'Aharonim, Responsa of the Ge'onim Rav Sherira and Rav Hay and Rav Isaac Alfasi, ed. E. Harkavi, Berlin, 1887. RUIZ GONZALEZ, 1987 G. Ruiz Gonzalez, Comentarios hebreos medievales al libro de Amos, Madrid, 1987. SANCTIFICATION OF THE The Code of Maimonides, Sanctification of the New NEW MOON, 1967 Moon, translated by S. Gandz, with an introduction by Julian Obennann and an astronomical commentary by O. Neugebauer, New Haven, 1967. SEFER HAMESHII;IAH, Abraham Bar ijiyya, Chibur ha-Meschicha weha1913 Tischboret, herausgegeben und mit Ammerkungen versehen von Dr. Michael Guttman, Berlin, 1913. SEFER HANISSYONOT, lV. Leibowithz and S. Marcus, Sefer haNissyonot, The 1981 Book of Medical Experiences attributed to Abraham Ibn Ezra, Jerusalem, 1981. SEFER HAPERI, BNF 1055 Sefer ha-Peri, ha-Niqrah Meah Diburim, translated by Kalonimus with a commentary of AbU Jaffar Abmad Ibn Ibrahim, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale de France, MS Heb. 1055, fols. 52a-72a. SEFER HARIQMA, 1930 Jona Ibn Ganah, Sefer Ha-riqma (Kitab al-Luma), Hebraice vertit Jehuda Ibn Tibbon, ad quattor versionis codicum fidem collatio ipso auctoris libro edidit praefatione notis indicibus auxit, Michal Wilensky, Berlin, 1930. SEFER YES IRAH, 1989 Sefer Ye$irah, Jerusalem, 1989. SHLOMO FRANCO, Ms Shlomo Franco's Super-commentary on Ibn Ezra's COLOMBIA Commentary on the Pentateuch, Colombia MS X893Ez74, fols. 1-32. SIMON,1989 U. Simon (ed.), Abraham Ibn Ezra's Two Commentaries on the Minor Prophets, Ramat Gan, 1989. $AFNATPA'ANEA1:I,1911 Joseph Bonfils, Sophnat Pane'ach, Ein Beitrag sur Pentateuchexegeses des Mittelalters von D. Herzog, Heidelberg, 1911-1930. Abraham Bar ijiyya, Sefer Surat ha- 'Are$, (ed. S. $URATHA'ARES, 1546 Munster), Basilea, 1546. TABAQAT AL-'UMAM, $ii'id al-Andalusi, Kitab Tabaqat al- 'Umam in Science in 1991 the Medieval World, "Book of the Categories oj Nations", by $ii'id al-Andalusi, Translated and Edited by Sema'an I. Salem and Alok Kumar, Austin, 1991. TABLAS DON PEDRO, Las Tablas Astronomicas del Rey Don Pedro el Ceremonioso, Edici6n critica de los textos hebraico, 1962 catalan y latino, con estudio y notas por Jose M. Milllis Vallicrosa, Madrid-Barcelona, 1962. Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos, edited and translated by F.E. TETRABIBLOS, 1980 Robbins, Loeb Classical Library, London, 1980. YEMEN EPISTLE, 1995 Yemen Epistle in Yi~baq Shilat (ed.), Maimonides Epistles, I, Jerusalem, 1995, pp. 77-158. YESODE HATEVUNA, 1952 La obra enciclopedica Yesode ha-Tebuna u-Migdal haEmuna de R. Abraham Bar Hiyya ha-Bargeloni, edici6n critica por Jose M. Millas Vallicrosa, Madrid-Barcelona, 1952.

394

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Secondary Sources A Allard, 'The Arabic Origins and Development of Latin Algorisms in the Twelfth CentuIy", Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, I, 1991, pp. 233-83. A 'Aqabi'a, "The Sefer ha- 'Ibbur by Abraham Ibn Ezra" 'AQABI'A,1953 (Hebrew), Tarbiz, 1953, pp. 304-316. The Planispheric Astrolabe, Greenwich, 1989. ASTROLABE, 1989 R. Barkai, "L'astrologie juive medievale: Aspects BARKAI, 1987 theoriques et pratiques", Moyen Age, 93, 1987, pp. 323348. R. Barkai, Les infortunes de Dinah: Le Livre de la BARKAI, 1991. Generation, Paris, 1991. R. Barkai, A History ofJewish Gynaecological Literature BARKAI, 1998 in the Middle Ages, Leiden, 1998. S. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews, BARON,1958 New York, 1958. E. Beller, "Ancient Jewish Mathematical Astronomy", BELLER, 1988 Archive for the History of Exact Science, 38, 1988, pp. 61-66. BEN-SHALOM, 1966 R. Ben-Shalom, The Image of Christian Culture in the Historical Consciousness of the Jews of Twelfth to Fifteen Century Spain and Provence (Hebrew), Dissertation submitted to Tel-Aviv University, 1966. NL Biggs, "The Roots of Combinatorics", Historia BIGGS, 1979 Mathematica, VI, 1979, pp. 109-136. H.J. Bomstein, "The Controversy between R. Saadia BORNSTEIN,1904 Gaon and Ben Me'ir in Fixing the Years 4622-4624 AM.: A Chapter in the History of the Calculation of Intercalculations among the Jews" (Hebrew) in the N. Sokolow Jubilee Volume, Warsaw, 1904, pp. 45-102. BOUCHE-LECLERCQ, 1899 A Bouche-Leclercq, L 'Astrologie Grecque, Paris 1899. C. Boyer, A History ofMathematics, New Jersey, 1985. BOYER,1985 F. Braudel, The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean BRAUDEL, 1996 World in the Age of Philip II, London, 1996. L. Charlap, Innovation and Tradition in Rabbi Abraham CHARLAP, 1995 Ibn-Ezra's Grammar According to his Grammatical Writings and to his Bible Exegesis (Hebrew), Dissertation submitted to Bar Han University, 1995. L. Cochrane, Adelard of Bath - The First English COCHRANE, 1994 Scientist, London, 1994. E. Datei, "Mantova, Ie torri del sole", Civilta Mantovana, DATEI,1993 XXVIII, 1993, pp. 57-65. DREYER, 1953 lL.E. Dreyer, A History of Astronomy from Thales yo Kepler, New York, 1953. DRORY, 1992 R. Drory, "'Words beautifully put', Hebrew versus Arabic in tenth-century Jewish Literature", in J. Blau and S. C. Reif (eds.), Genizah Research after Ninety Years: The Case ofJudeo-Arabic, Cambridge, 1992, pp. 53-66. DRUART, 1978 Therese-Anne Druart, "Astronomie et Astrologie selon Farabi", Bulletin de philosohie medievale, 20, 1978. pp. 43-37. ALLARD, 1991

BIBLIOGRAPHY EFROS, 1974 FISCHER, KUNITZSCH AND LANGERMAN, 1988 FLEISCHER, 1930 FLEISCHER, 1931 FLEISCHER, 1932 FLEISCHER, 1933 FLEISCHER, 1970

FONTAINE, 1995

FONTAINE,2000

FREUDENTHAL (ED.), 1992 FREUDENTHAL, 1993 (i) FREUDENTHAL, 1993 (ii)

FREUDENTHAL, 1995 FRIEDLANDER,1877 FRIEDLANDER, 1894 FUNKENSTEIN, 1986

395

I. Efros, Studies in Medieval Jewish Philosophy, New York, 1974. K. Fischer, P. Kunitzsch and Y.T. Langennan, ''The Hebrew Astronomical Codex Ms. Sasson 823", The Jewish Quarterly Review, LXXVIII, 1988, pp. 253-292 L. Fleisher, "Abraham Ibn Ezra in France", in Mizrab we-Ma'arab, IV, (1930). pp. 352-360; Y, (1932), pp. 38-46,217-224,289-300. L. Fleischer, ''The Literary Work of Abraham Ibn Ezra in England" (Hebrew), 'Olzar ha-/fayim, VII, 1931, pp. 69-76,107-111,129-133,160-168,189-203. L. Fleischer, ''The Literary Work of Abraham Ibn Ezra in Rome" (Hebrew), 'Olzar ha-/fayim, VIII, 1932, pp. 97100, 129-31, 148-150, 169-71. L. Fleischer, ''The Literary Work of Abraham Ibn Ezra in Rome" (Hebrew), 'Olzar ha-/fayim, IX, 1933, pp. 134136, 152-155. L. Fleischer, ''The Literary Work of Abraham Ibn Ezra in Lucca" (Hebrew), in Abraham Ibn Ezra, A Collection oj Articles on his Life and Work, Tel Aviv, 1970, pp. 107124. R. Fontaine, Otot ha-Shamayim. Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Hebrew Version of Aristotle's Meteorology. A Critical Edition with Introduction, Translation, and Index, Leiden, Brill, 1995. R. Fontaine, "Between Scorching Heat and Freezing Cold: Medieaval Jewish Authors on the Inhabited and Uninhabited Parts of the Earth", Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 10,2000, pp. 101-137. G. Freudenthal (ed.), Studies in Gersonides, A Fourteenth-Century Philosopher-Scientist, Leiden, 1992. G. Freudenthal, "Les sciences dans les communautes juives medievales de Provence: leur appropration, leur role", Revue des etudesjuives, CLII, 1993, pp. 29-136. G. Freudenthal, "Maimonides' Stance on Astrology in Context: Cosmology, Physics, Medicine, and Providence", in Moses Maimonides, Physician, &ientist, and Phi/ospher, eds. F. Rosner and S. Kottek, London 1993, pp. 77-90. G. Freudenthal, "Science in the Medieval Culture of Southern France", History of Science, XXXIII, 1995, pp. 22-58. M. Friedlander, Essays on the Writings of Abraham Ibn Ezra, London, 1877. M. Friedlander, "Ibn Ezra in England", in Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England, 2, 1894/5, pp.47-60. A. Funkenstein, "'Scripture Speaks the Language of Man': Uses and Abuses of the Medieval Principle of Accommodation", L'Homme et son Univers au Moyen Age, Actes du septieme congres international de philosophie medievale (30 aout-4 septembre 1982), 1986, pp. 92-101.

396 F~NSTEnN,

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1990

GIL,1985 GLASNER, 1998

GLASNER, 2000

GOLB,1976 GOLB,1998 GOITEnN, 1967 GOLDSTEIN, 1976 GOLDSTEnN, 1985 (i) GOLDSTEnN, 1985 (ii) GOLDSTEnN, 1996 GOLDSTEnN,2001 GOMEZ ARANDA, 1995 GRABOIS, 1983

GRAETZ, 1894 GREIVE, 1973 liALBRONN,1996 liALKIN, 1972 HARTNER, 1939 HARTNER,1968 HARVEY, 2000 HONIGMANN, 1929

A Funkenstein, Styles in Medieval Biblical Exegesis, An Introduction (Hebrew), Tel Aviv, 1990. J. Gil, La escuela de traductores de Toledo y los colahoradores judios, Toledo, 1985. R. Glasner, A Fourteenth-Century Scientific Philosophic Controversy: Jedaiah Ha-Penini's Treatise on Opposite Motions and Book of Confutation. Critical Edition, Introduction and Commentary (Hebrew), Jerusalem, 1999. R. Glasner, "The Question of Celestial Matter in the Hebrew Encyclopedias", in S. Harvey (ed.), The Medieval Hebrew Encyclopedias of Science and Philosophy, Dordercht, 2000. N. Golb, History of the Jews in the City of Rouen in Normandy (Hebrew), Tel Aviv, 1976. N. Golb, TheJews in Medieval Normandy, Cambridge, 1998. S.D. Goitein,A Mediterranean SOciety, Berkeley, 1967. B.R. Goldstein, "The Hebrew Astrolabe in the Adler Planetarium", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 35,1976, pp.251-260. B.R. Goldstein, The Astronomy of Levi ben Gerson (1288-1344), New York, 1985. B.R. Goldstein,"Star Lists in Hebrew", Centaurus, 28, 1985, pp. 185-208. B.R. Goldstein, "Astronomy and Astrology in the Works of Abraham Ibn Ezra", Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 6, 1996, pp. 9-21. B.R. Goldstein, "Astronomy and the Jewish Community in Early Islam", Aleph, 1,2001, pp. 17-57. M. Gomez Aranda, "Teorias astronomicas y astrologicas en el comentario de Abraham Ibn Ezra al Libro de Eclesiastes", Sefarad, LV, 1995, pp. 257-272. A Grabols, "Le non-conformisme intellectuel au XIIe siecle: Pierre Abelard et Abraham Ibn Ezra" in M. Yardeni (ed.), Modernite et Non-Conformisme en France atravers les ages, Leiden, 1983, pp. 3-13. H. Graetz, History of the Jews, Philadelphia, 1894. H. Greive, Studien zum jiidischen Neuplatonismus: Die Religionsphilosophie des Abraham Ibn Ezra, Berlin, 1973. J. Halbronn, "Le diptyque astrologique d' Abraham Ibn Ezra et les cycles planetaires du Liber Rationum", Revue desEtudesJuives,CLV, 1996,pp. 171-184. AS. Halkin, ''Translation and Translators", Encyclopaedia Judaica, XV, Jerusalem, 1972, cols. 1318-1329. W. Hartner, "The Principle and Use of the Astrolabe", 1939, in Oriens - Occidens, Hildesheim, 1968, pp. 287-311. W. Hartner, Oriens - Occidens, Hildesheim, 1968. S. Harvey (ed.), The Medieval Hebrew Encyclopedias oj Science and Philosophy, Dordercht, 2000. E. Honigmann, Die Sieben Klimata und die P61eis Episemoi, Heidelberg, 1929.

397

BIBLIOGRAPHY IDEL,1988 IDEL, 1997 ITZAHKI,2000 JACOBS, 1893 KENNEDY, 1958

KENNEDY, 1996

KENNEDY - VAN DER WAERDEN,1963 KLIBANSKYPANOFSKY, 1964 KREISEL, 1994 KUNITZSCH, 1981 KUNITZSCH, 1984 KUNITZSCH, 1993 LAISTNER, 1941 LANGERMAN,1991 LANGERMAN,1993

M. Idel, "Henneticism and Judaism", in Hermeticism and the Renaissance, I. Merkel and A. Debus (eds.),

Associated University Presses, 1988, pp. 59-76. M. Idel, "Sabbtay the Star and Sabbtay Tzvi - a New Approach to Sabbtay Tzvi's Movement" (Hebrew), Mad'aei haYahadut, 37,1997, pp. 161-184. M. Itzahki, ''Nouvelles tendances dans la poesie profane d'Abraham Ibn Ezra", in Abraham Ibn Ezra, savant universel, Bruxelles, 2000, pp. 53-59. J. Jacobs, The Jews in Angevin England, London, 1893. E. Kennedy, "The Sasanian Astronomical Handbook ZijI Shah and the Astrological Doctrine of 'Transit' (Mamarr)", Journal of the American Oriental Society, 78, 1958, pp. 246--262. E. Kennedy, "The Astrological Houses as Defined by Medieval Islamic Astronomers", in Astronomy and Astrology in the Medieval Islamic World, Aldershot, XIX, 1996, pp. 535-578. Kennedy, E. and Van der Waerden, "The World-Year of the Persians", Journal of the American Oriental Society, 83,1963,pp.315-327 R. Klibansky, E. Panofsky, and F. Saxl, Saturn and Melancholy, London, 1964. J. Kreisel, "Maimonides' Opinion of Astrology", in Xl

World

Writings

LANGERMAN,1999 LEJBOWICZ, 1985

Congress

of Jewish

Studies

Proceedings

(Hebrew), vol. 2, part 3, 1994, pp. 25-32. P. Kunitzsch, "Observations on the Arabic Reception of the Astrolabe" (1981), The Arabs and the Stars, Northampton, 1989, pp. 243-252. P. Kunitzsch, "Remarks regarding the Terminology of the Astrolabe" (1984), The Arabs and the Stars, Northampton, 1989, pp. 55--60. P. Kunitzsch, "AI-Nudjum" in Encyclopedia of Islam, Leiden, 1993, pp. 97-105. . M.L.W. Laistner, ''The Western Church and Astrology during the Early Middle Ages", Harvard Theological Review, 34, 1941, pp. 251-75. Y.T. Langermann, "Maimonides' Repudiation of Astrology", Maimonidean Studies, 2,1991, pp. 123-158. Y.T. Langerman, "Some Astrological Themes in the Thought of Abraham Ibn Ezra" in I. Twersky and 1. M. Harris (eds.), Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra: Studies in the

of a

Twelfth-Century Jewish

Polymath,

Cambridge, Mass., 1993, pp. 28-85. Y.T. Langerman, The Jews and the Sciences in the Middle Ages, Aldershot, 1999. Max Lejbowicz, "Posterite medievale de Ia distinction isidorienne astrologialastronomia: Bede et Ie vocabulaire de Ia Chronometrie", Documents pour I'histoire du vocabulaire scientifique, 7, 1985.

398 LEJBOWICZ, 1988

LEMAY, 1987 LEVEY, 1971 LEVIN,1956 LEVIN,1985 LEVIN,1992 LEVY, 1927 LEVY,2000 LEVY, 1997 (i)

LEVY, 1997 (ii) LEVY, 2001 (i) LEVY, 2001 (ii)

LINDBERG, 1992 LIPHCHITZ, 1982 LLOYD,1973 LLOYD,1993 LOUIS, 1983 MAHONEY, 1978 MANDELBAUM,1975

BIBLIOGRAPHY Max Lejbowicz, "Le choc des traductions arabo-latines du XIIe siecle et ses consequences dans la specialisation semantique d'astrologia et d'astronomia: Dominicus Gundissalinis et la Sciencia Iudicandi", in Transfert de vocabulaire dans les sciences, volume prepare par Martine Groul!, Paris, 1988, pp. 213-261. Lemay, R, "The True Place of Astrology in Medieval Science and Philosophy", Astrology, Science and Society, P. Curry (ed.), Suffolk, 1987, pp. 57-73. M. Levey, "Abraham ibn Ezra", in Dictionary of Scientific Biography, vol. IV, 1971, pp. 502-503. I. Levin, Abraham Ibn Ezra, Hayav we-Shirato (Hebrew), Tel Aviv, 1956. Abraham Ibn Ezra Reader, Annotated texts with introductions and commentaries by I. Levin, New Yorlc-Tel Aviv, 1985. I. Levin, "Heachzi be-Sulam ha-ijokhmah" (Hebrew), in Researches in the Work of Abraham Ibn Ezra, Tel Aviv, 1992, pp. 41-86. R Levy, The Astrological Works of Abraham Ibn Ezra, Baltimore, 1927. T. Levy, "Abraham Ibn Ezra et les mathematiques; remarques bibliographiques et historiques" in Abraham ibn Ezra, savanat universel, Bruxelles, 2000, pp. 60-75. T. Levy, "Les Elements d'EucIide en bebreu (XIIIeXVIe siecles)", in Perspepectives arabes et medievales sur la tradition scientifique et philosophiqe greque, ed. Ahmad Hasnawi, Abdelali Elamrani-Jamal, Maroun Aouad, Leuven and Paris, 1997, pp. 79-94. T. Levy, "Une version bebrearque inedite des Elements d'Euclide", in Les voies de la science grecque, ed. Danielle Jacquart, Geneve, 1997, pp. 181-239. T. Levy, "Hebrew and Latin Versions of an Unknown Mathematical text by Abraham Ibn Ezra", Aleph, I, 2001, pp. 295-305. T. Levy, "Les debuts de la litterature mathematique hebraique: La geometrie d' Abraham Bar Hiyya (XIeXIIe siecle)", Micrologus, Nature, Sciences and Medieval Societies, IX, 2001, pp. 35-64. D. Lindberg, The Beginnings of Western Science, Chicago, 1992. A. Liphchitz, Studies in the Thought of Abraham Ibn Ezra (Hebrew), Jerusalem, 1982. G.ER Lloyd, Greek Science after Aristotle, London, 1973. G.ER Lloyd, Magic, Reason and Experience, Cambridge, 1993. P. Louis, "Astronomia et astrologia Ii I'epoque de Platon et d' Aristote", Documents pour [,histoire du vocabulaire scientifique, 4, 1983. M. S. Mahoney, "Mathematics", in D. Lindberg (ed.), Science in the Middle Ages, Chicago, 1978, pp. 145-178. H. Mandelbaum, "Four Ways of Calculating a Molad, an Interesting Play with Numbers of Abraham Ibn Ezra" (Hebrew), Torah u-Mada, 5,1975, pp. 29-35.

BIBLIOGRAPHY MARGALIOT, 1953 MATTHEW, 1996 MICHEL, 1947 MIQUEL, 1971 MONDSCHEIN,2001

MUNTNER, 1957 MUNTNER,1971 NALLINO, 1987 NEUGEBAUER, 1969 NORTH, 1974 NORTH, 1988 PEDERSEN, 1978 PINES, 1964 PINGREE, 1963 PINGREE, 1970 PINGREE, 1973 PINGREE, 1974 PLESSNER, 1960 RABIN, 1945 RASHED, 1984 ROSIN, 1882 ROSIN, 1898-1899

399

A. Margaliot, "Ha-yabas she-ben perush ha-Rashbam leperush ha-Rabah 'al ha-Torah", Sefer Asaj, Jerusalem, 1953, pp. 357-369. D. Matthew, Atlas ofMedieval Europe, New York, 1996. H. Michel, Traite de l'astrolabe, Paris, 1947. A. Miquel, "Iklim" in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leiden 1971, III, 1076-1078. A. Mondschein, "Concerning the Inter-Relationship of the Commentaries of Abraham Ibn Ezra and Samuel B. Me'ir to the Pentateuch: A New Appraisal" (Hebrew), Teuda (Tel Aviv University), XVI-XVll, 2001, pp. 15-45. S. Muntner, Introduction to the Book of Asaph the

Physician - the Oldest Existing Text of a Medical Book Written in Hebrew (Hebrew), Jerusalem, 1957. S. Muntner, "Shabettai Donnolo". Encyclopedia Judaica, VI, Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 168-169. C. A. Naliino, "Astrology", First Encyclopedia of Islam,

I, Leiden 1987, pp. 494-7. O. Neugebauer, The Exact Sciences in Antiquity, New York, 1969. 1. D. North, "The Astrolabe", Scientific American, 230, 1974, pp. 96-106. J. D. North, Chaucer's Universe, Oxford 1988. o. Pedersen, "Astronomy", Science in the Middle Ages, D. Lindberg (ed.), Chicago 1978, pp. 303-337. S. Pines, "The Semantic Distinction Between Astronomy and Astrology According to AI-B'irfm'i", Isis, 55, 1964, pp. 343-349. D. Pingree, "Astronomy and Astrology in India and Iran", Isis, 54, 1963, pp. 229-246. D. Pingree, "Abu Ma'shar AI-Balkhi, Jafar Ibn Muhammad", in Dictionary of Scientific Biography, I, New York, 1970, pp. 32-39. D. Pingree, "Astrology" in Dictionary of the History oj Ideas, New York 1973, I, pp. 118-126. D. Pingree, "Miishii'liiih", Dictionary of Scientific Biography, IX, New York, 1974, pp. 159-162. M. Plessner, "Batlmiyfis", Encyclopedia of Islam, I, Leiden, 1960, pp. 1100-1102. 1;1. Rabin, "R. Abraham bar l;Iiyya u-tebiyyat leshonenu bimei ha-beinayim" (Hebrew), in R. Rawidowicz (ed.), Me$uda, London, 1945,pp. 158-70. R. Rashed, Entre arithmhique et algebre. Recherches sur I'histoire des mathematiques arabes, Paris, 1984. D. Rosin (ed.), Perush haTorah asher katab haRashbam, Breslau, 1882. D. Rosin, "Die Religionsphilosophie Abraham Ibn Esra's", Monatsschrijt fUr Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums, 42 (1898): 17-33,58-73,108-115,154161, 200-214, 241-252, 305-315, 345-362, 394-407, 444-457,481-505; 43 (1899): 22-31, 75-91, 125-133, 168-184,231-240.

400 ROTH,1978 ROTHSCHILD, 1989

RUBIO, 2000

SABRA, 1984

SARFATI,1965 SARFATI,1968 SARFATI,1993 SARNA,1993

SCHRADER, 1970 SCHRECKENBERG,1996 SCHWARTZ, 1996 (i) SCHWARTZ, 1996 (ii)

SCHWARTZ,1999 SCHWARTZ,2001

SELA, 1996

SELA, 1997

BIBLIOGRAPHY N. Roth, "The 'Theft of Philosophy' by the Greeks from the Jews", Classical Folia, XXXII, 1978, pp. 53-67. J.P. Rothschild, "Motivations et methodes des traductions en hebreu du milieu du XIIe a la fin du Xve siecle" in G. Contamine (ed.), Traduction et traducteurs au Moyen Age (Colloque International du CNRS, IRHT, 26-28 mai 1986),Paris, 1989,pp.279-302. M. Rubio, ''The first Hebrew encyclopedia of science: Abraham Bar ijiyya's Yesodey ha-Tevuna u-Migdal haEmunah", in in S. Harvey (ed.), The Medieval Hebrew Encyclopedias of Science and Philosophy, Dordercht, 2000,pp.140-153. A.I. Sabra, ''The Andalusian Revolt against Ptolemaic Astronomy: Averroes and al-Bitrfiji", in E. Mendelshon (ed.), Transformation and Tradition in the Sciences, Cambridge, 1984, pp. 133-153. G. B. Sarfati, "Introduction to the Baraita de-Mazalot" (Hebrew), Bar llan, III, 1965, pp. 56-82. G. B. Sarfati, Mathematical Terminology in Hebrew Scientific Literature of the Middle Ages (Hebrew), Jerusalem, 1968. G. B. Sarfati, "Mishnat ha-Midot" (Hebrew), in H. BenShammai (ed.), /feqer 'Ever we- 'Arav, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, 1993, pp. 463-490. N. M. Sarna, "Abraham Ibn Ezra as as Exegete", in in I. Twersky and J. M. Harris (eds.), Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra: Studies in the Writings of a Twelfth-Century Jewish Polymath, Cambridge, Mass., 1993, pp. 1-27. D. Schrader, "Abmad b. Yusuf', Dictionary of Scientific Biography, I, New York 1970, pp. 82-3. H. Schreckenberg, The Jews in Christian Art, London, 1996. D. Schwartz, "The Philosophical Super-commentary on Abraham Ibn Ezra's Commentaries" (Hebrew), 'Alei Sefer, 16, 1996, pp. 92-114. D. Schwartz, "God Worship or Stars Adoration? The Polemic of R. Abraham Altabib Against Shlomo Franco" (Hebrew), in Kabbalah, Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts, 1, 1996, pp. 223-270. D. Schwartz, Astral Magic in Medieval Jewish Thought (Hebrew), Ramat Gan, 1999. D. Schwartz, "From Theurgy to Magic: The Evolution of the Magical-Talismanic Justification of Sacrifice in the Circle of Nahmanides and his Interpreters", Aleph, I, February 2001, pp. 165-213. S. Sela, "Contactos cientificos entre judios y cristianos en el siglo XII: El caso del Libro de las Tablas astron6micas de Abraham Ibn Ezra en su versi6n latina y hebrea", Miscelanea de Estudios Arabes y Hebraicos, 45, 1996, pp. 185-222. S. Sela, ''Puntos de contacto entre contenidos del Libro de las Tablas astron6micas en su versi6n latina y las obras literarias hebreas de Abraham Ibn Ezra", Miscelanea de Estudios Arabes y Hebraicos, 46, 1997, pp. 37-56.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

SELA, 1999 (i) SELA, 1999 (ii) SELA,2000

SELA, 2001 (i)

SELA, 2001 (ii) SELA, 2001 (iii)

SELA, 2001 (iv) SIMON,1964 SIMON, 1982

SIMON,1983 SIMON,1988 SIMON,1993

SIRAT,1990 SMITH AND GINSBURG, 1918 STEINSCHNEIDER,1870

STEINSCHNEIDER,1880

401

S. Sela, Astrology and Biblical Exegesis in the Thought ofAbraham Ibn Ezra (Hebrew), Ramat Gan, 1999. S. Sela, "EI papel de Abraham Ibn Ezra en la divulgaci6n de los 'juicios' de la astrologia en la lengua hebrea y latina", Sefarad, 59, 1999, pp. 159-194. S. Sela, "Encyclopedic Aspects of Abraham Ibn Ezra's Scientific Corpus", in S. Harvey (ed.), The Medieval Hebrew Encyclopedias of Science and Philosophy, Dordercht, 2000, pp. 154-170. S. Sela, "The Fuzzy Borders between Astronomy and Astrology as Reflected in the Thought and Work of Three Twelfth-Century Jewish Intellectuals", Aleph, I, February 2001, pp. 59-100. S. Sela, "Abraham Ibn Ezra's Scientific Corpus - Basic Constituents and General Characterization", Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, X, 2001, pp. 91-149. S. Sela, "Abraham Ibn Ezra's Special Strategy in the Creation of a Hebrew Scientific Terminology", Micrologus, Nature, Sciences and Medieval Societies, IX,2001,pp.65-87. S. Sela, "Abraham Ibn Ezra's Astrological Cosmological Exegesis" (Hebrew), Daat, 47, 2001, pp. 5-34. U. Simon, "Le-darckho ha-parshanit shel ha-rab'ah 'ai-pi shloshet be'urav le-pasuq 'ebad" (Hebrew), Bar llan, 3, 1964, pp. 92-138. U. Simon, Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms, From Saadya Gaon to Abraham Ibn Ezra (Hebrew), Including an unpublished frament of the "First Recension" of Ibn Ezra's Commentary on Psalms, Ramat Gan, 1982. U. Simon, "Spanish Commentators" (Hebrew) in Jewish Biblical Exegesis, Jerusalem, 1983, pp. 47--60. U. Simon, "Abraham Ibn Ezra - Between the Exegete and his Reader" (Hebrew), in IX World Congress oj Jewish Studies Proceedings, 1988, pp. 23-42. U. Simon, "Interpreting the Interpreter, Supercommentaries on Ibn Ezra's Commentaries" in Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra: Studies in the Writings of a Twelfth-Century Jewish Polymath, Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, 1993, pp. 86-128. C. Sirat, A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages, Cambridge, 1990. D. Smith and Y. Ginsburg, "Rabbi ben Esra and the Hindu-Arabic Problem", The American Mathematical Monthly, XXV, 1918, pp. 99-108. M. Steinschneider, "Zur Geschichte der Uebersetzungen aus dem Indischen ins Arabische und ihres Einflusses auf die arabische Literatur", ZeitschriJt der deutschen Morgenliindischen GeselschaJt [ZDMG], 24,1870. M. Steinschneider, "Abraham Ibn Esra (Abraham Judaeus, Avenare)", Supplement zur Zeitschriji fUr Mathematik und Physik, XXV, 1880, pp. 59-128 (=Gesammelte Schrijien, Berlin 1925, pp. 407-498).

402 STEINSCHNEIDER, 1925 STEINSCHNEIDER,1956 STERN, 1996 STERN, 1954 TENENBAUM,1996 TESTER, 1987 TOOMER, 1973 UNGARU, 1989 V ALLICROSA, 1938 V ALLICROSA, 1949

VALLICROSA, 1987

WALTER,2001 WASSERSTROM, 1993 WOLFSON, 1973

WOLFSON,1979 W6RTERBUCH OBER DIE T ALMUDIM, 1963 ZAFRAN,1979

BIBLIOGRAPHY M. Steinschneider, "Abraham Judaeus - Savasorda und Ibn Esra" in Gesamelte Schriften. Berlin, 1925, pp. 327387. M. Steinschneider, Die Hebreeischen Obersetzungen des Miltelalters und die Juden als Dolmescher, Berlin, 1893, reprinted at Graz, 19562. S. Stern, "Fictitious Calendars: Early Rabbinic Notions of Time, Astronomy and Reality", Jewish Quarterly Review, 87, 1996, pp. 103-129. S.M. Stern, "A Treatise on the Armillary Sphere by Dunas ibn Tamim", in Homenaje a Millils Vallicrosa, Barcelona, 1954-56, II, pp. 373-382. A. Tenenbaum, "Nine Spheres or Ten? A Medieval Gloss on Moses Ibn Ezra's 'Be-Shem EI Asher Amar"', Journal ofJewish Studies, 47,1996, pp. 294-309. S. Tester, A History of Western Astrology, Suffolk 1987 G. Toomer, "AI- Khwarizmi", Dictionary of Scientific Biography, VII, 1973, pp. 357-365. Sh. Ungaru, An Introduction to the History oj Mathematics (Hebrew), Tel Aviv, 1989. Jose M. Millas Vallicrosa, "Avodato shel R. Abraham Ibn Ezra bebokhmat haTekhuna" (Hebrew), Tarbiz, IX, 1938,pp.306--322 Jose M. Millas Vallicrosa, "EI magisterio astronomico de Abraham Ibn Ezra en la Europa latina", in Estudios sobre historia de la ciencia espanola, Barcelona, 1949, pp. 289-347. Jose M. Millas Vallicrosa, "La obra enciclopedica de R. Abraham bar l;Iiyya" in Estudios sobre historia de la ciencia espanola. a new facsimile edition, Madrid, 1987, I, pp. 219-262. S. Walter, "On the Third Chapter of Abraham Ibn Ezra's Sefer ha-'Ibbur" (Hebrew), fodei Binah, I, 2002, pp. 211-214. S.M. Wasserstrom, "Sefer Yesira and Early Islam: A Reappraisal", Journal ofJewish Thought and Philosophy, 3, 1993, pp. 1-30. H.A. Wolfson, "The Classification of Sciences in Medieval Jewish Philosophy" in Studies in the History oj Philosophy and Religions, Cambridge, Massachussets 1973,I,pp.493-560. H.A. Wolfson, Repercussions of the Kalam in Jewish Philosophy, Massachusetts and London 1979. J. Levy, Worterbuch iiber die Talmudim und Midsraschim, Darmstat, 1963. E. Zafran, "Saturn and the Jews", Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, XLII 1979, pp. 16--27.

GENERAL INDEX

A Treatise on the Astrolabe (Geoffrey Chaucer), 1,390 Abraham Bar ijiyya, 2,21, 31, 38,

41,42,47,57,68,96,102,103, 107, 114, 117, 132, 175,205,207, 215,220,225,227,262,274,278, 279,294,306,310,311,312,333, 358,391,392,393,398,400 astrological work, 101, 102, 103 astronomical work, 99 biography, 97 close association with C. Ptolemy,

307 Jewish calendar, 101 linguistic strategy, 98,107,114 mathematical work, 8 new Hebrew scientific vocabulary, 2, 96 scientifc work, 96-104 Abraham Ibn Daud, 117, 175,303 Abraham Ibn Ezra Abraham the Spaniard, 75, 77,

105,145,339,347 and Abraham Bar Hiyya, 47, 48,

99,103 and Abu Ma'shar, 68, 90, 166,

302 and Rashbam, 54 approach of compromise, 90, 150,

162, 168, 172 astrological encyclopedia, 57, 58-

74 attacks his predecessors, 41, 47,

68,90,247,253,254,277, 287,326,370,374

close association with C. Ptolemy,

16,91,92,241,324,325 didactic approach, 86, 236, 325 dual vision of history, 145-48,

156, 168 dual vision of medicine, 179 eclectic approach, 51, 89 empirical experiments, 88, 90,

253,254,326,368,370 emulating C. Ptolemy, 147,242,

256 encyclopedic approach, 9, 12, 13,

211,257 grammar, 12,36,104, 116, 128, 280,289 independent opinion, 90 involvement in Arabic civilization, 301 Italian and French periods of biblical exegesis, 9-12, 331-35 Latin language, 23, 25, 31 linguistic strategy, 75, 104, 105,

106,140,261 multiple versions of his works, 11,

78 poetry, 12 pro-Rabbanite, 89, 271, 287 satisfies the demand of his audience, 11,79,85,332 scientific textbook, 20, 58, 60, 85,

86,144,325 secrets, 12,52,100,116,132,

138, 185, 187, 190, 191, 197, 198,240,282,285,289,290, 296,298,305,319,341,352,

404

GENERAL INDEX

356,362,365,368,377,378 social mentality, 168 solved exercises, 73, 86, 317 super-commentaries, 9, 39, 138, 153 theological monographs, 12 theology, 12, translations, 75-78 Abraham Iudaeus, 23, 25 Abu al-Fadl I:Iasdai ibn Yusufibn I:Iasdai,6 Abu Ma'shar, 27, 28, 33, 67, 68, 90, 125,151, 153, 154, 155, 164, 166, 167,179,215,238,252,254,282, 284,293,302,303,325,390,392 Adelard of Bath, 21, 390, 394 abkam al-nujum, 117,302,392 Aijrnad b. Yusufal-Mi~ri, 241, 321, 322 al Nayrizi, 33 al-Andalus, 4,5,6,8,9, 10, 12, 17, 33,94,140,141,226,238,277, 301,311,331 al-Battani, 27, 99, 221, 238, 284, 367 AI-BWni, 152, 167,215,293,390, 399 Albumasar. See Abu Ma'shar al-Dabaran, 263, 264 AI-Farabi,204 al-Farghani, 238, 300, 366 Algeraphie (C. Ptolemy), 92, 240, 248 algorismus,21 al-Hakam ibn 'Abd-al-Rahman, 6 al-Khwarizmi, 18,20,21,24,27,75, 81,92,113, 126, 165,241,244, 249,282,284,300,304,365,366 al-Kindi, 87, 238, 367 Allard, A., 21, 394 Almagest (c. ptolemy), 83,92, 128,

204,212,219,234,240,241,244, 249,255,265,266,271,273,290, 299,300,302,305,307,325,366, 390 al-Mamun,5 al-Manazir (C. Ptolemy), 302 ai-Mansur, 4 al-Maqalat al-Arba, 302, See Tetrabiblos al-Marwadhi, 238 Almohades, 6, 94,140, 141 Almoravides, 6, 94 al-Nayrizi, 27 ai-Sufi, 27, 221, 238, 282, 284, 367 al-Zarqal, 238, 284, 285, 367, See Azarchie1 Andruzgar b. Saadi Faruch, 33 animal soul, 175, 176, 177,343 ansheiha-mebqar,48 anshei ha-tushiah, 48 apheta,34,171 Aqabi'a, A., 39, 394 aq/im, 76, 98, 107, 108, 110, 111, 114, 159,210 Arabic language a most comprehensive language, 141 built upon patterns of the holy tongue, 122 Judeo-Arabic,4 pre-eminence of, 114 works by Jewish scientists, 3-6 works on the astrolabe, 1 Aragon, 97 Aramaic language, 4 Arb 'a Ma 'amarot, 102, See Tetrabiblos arcs and cords, 43, 338 Aristotle, 174,226, 255, 304, 309, 371,380

GENERAL INDEX arithmetic, 13,20,21,37, 100, 104,

146, 191,273,314 Asaph ha-Rofe, 3 Ash, 258, 260,261, 262, 371, 372, 373 aspects (astrological), 28, 29, 30, 34, 70,74,82,83,102,120,130,135, 174,211,247,249 astral magic, 8, 64, 135, 184 astrolabe, 1 accuracy, 53, 248 and astronomical tables, 19,81, 82, 85 Arabic terms, 33 astrological procedures, 34, 83, 121 astronomical procedures, 29, 44, 72,138 description of, 107, 108, 137 heshev ha-'afudah, 137 history, 1,93,94 how to find out its exact age, 222, 223 mater, 108, 340 movable rete, 108, 137, 138,222, 223,346,361 plates, 108, 340 rete's list of stars, 28 seven climates, 108, 340 shabaka, 137,346 transmission from one language into another, 1,94 See also Keli ha-Nehoshet astrological houses, 27, 34, 62, 64, 70,71,74,82,83,86,102, 112, 122, 130, 135, 139,206 astrology ages of man, 87 Arabic, 58, 153,242,305,330 climates and planets, 112

405

climates and zodiacal signs, 112 elections, 58, 64, 171 genethlialogical, 62, 81, 102, 145,

147,175,214 Greek, 64, 204, 240, 321,330 history of religions and nations,

69, 151, 155, 165,292,293, 294,380 interrogations, 58, 64 medical, 66 moon, 82 ninths, 135 quantifiable power, 120, 122, 130 sun, 82 universal, 58, 81, 90, 102, 145, 147, 162, 163, 164, 167, 168, 213, 242, 307 versus astronomy, 3, 107, 191, 199-208,240,303,308 zodiac, 58, 74 See also mighty fardar, Lot of Fortune, mel'ekhet hanissayion, hokhmat hanissayion, maqom mesukan, paqid ha-hayim, triplicities, revolution of the world-year, biluq ha-mi$adim, hiluq hamishor, mel'ekhet hashamayim, ruler, koah hamishpatim, hokhmat mishpetei ha-mazalot, Saturn, conjunctions, horoscope, astrological houses, terms, lots, aspects, hakhmei ha-mazalot, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, mishpatim, iudicia, nihug hakokhav, mazal medinah, moon, salvation from the stars astronomical tables, 68 Abu Ma'shar's, 282

GENERAL INDEX

406

al-Battani's, 99 al-Khwarizml's,282 Bar Hiyya's, 99 Hindu, 27,68,282 Ibn al-Safiar's, 282 Masha'allah's,282 Maslama's, 282 of Arabic astronomers, 284 of the Christians, 282 Ptolemy's, 248 See also translation of Ibn alMuthanna's Commentary, See

Seier Ta 'amei ha-Luhot attributes of numbers, 36, 100 Augustine, 152 Avendehut Israelita, 117 Avennouausth Christianus, 33 Azarchiel, 27, 28, 238, 267, 282

ba 'alei ha-mishpafim, 119 ba 'alei ha-toledet, 132 Baghdad,5,166,321 Baml Sakir, 27, 28, 238, 282, 284 Baraita de-Mazalot, 3,104,109, 117,391,400 Baraita de-Shmu 'el, 3, 117, 125, 269,373,391 Barkai, R., 4, 5, 7, 8, 95, 202, 207, 294,394 Baron, S., 17,45,204,280,318,394 Balalmiyfis, 253, See Ptolemy, Claudius biblical commentaries by Abraham Ibn Ezra, 9-12 Amos 5:8,223,233,239,257-73, 304,371 astrology, 328 attack on Karaites, 280 calendaric issues, 38

closeness to C. Ptolemy, 239 Daniel 1:15,134 1:4,134 2:2,81, 146,329,383 7:14,219 8:9, 161 10:21,320 11:31,103,274 Deuteronomy 4:13,290 4:19,219,291,294,295,297, 298,305,312,379 32:9,291 dual celestial motion, 233 Ecclesiastes 1:12, 161 1:13,219,230,290,362 1:19,219 1:3, 264, 320 1:4,213,255,312 1:5,233 3:15,115 7:13,138 7:3,146,176 12:1,146 epicyclical spheres, 216 Esther 9:22,38 Exodus 1:12,161 1:7,274 2:2,329 3:13,318,320,383 3:15,37,186,219,317,318, 352 6:3,329 6:7, 149,294,329 7:11,135 8:18,161

407

GENERAL INDEX

8:8,134 12:2,38,52,82,275,276,287, 307,375 12:6, 127, 128 14:19,318 15:16,180 15:17,161 18:3,82 20:13,134, 157,219,228,329, 361 20:14,290 20:2, 134, 185, 189,353 21:19,180 23:20, 82, 134 23:25,81,131,134,136,137, 175, 176, 178, 329, 343 23:26, 134 25:3,134 26:1,135,161 28:30,135 28:6, 246, 368 28:8, 138, 207 28:9,135 30:23,25 31 :3, 138, 329 31:6,134 32:1,82 33:21,69, 112, 138, 149, 164, 219,240,255,288-323, 329,377 34:21,52,82 forty-eight constellations, 219 Genesis

1:1,213,233,255,312 1:11,105,131,343 1:14,38,215,217,219,320, 331-35,333,334,385,386 1:16,45,47,48,101,219 1:5,49, 54, 55, 56, 57, 337 1:6,127,215,333

2:1,219 2:4,130 4:14,41 5:29, 185,329 6:2,328 7:11,38,328 7:4,328 8:1,328 8:14,38 8:3,38,328 8:5,328 11:2,161 11 :7, 105 14:4,274 28:12,199 30:14,134 31:19,328,329 32:15,134 33:10,161 33:20,161 34:25,328 37:35,25 49:10,25 Hosea

2:1,219 6:3,199 Isaiah

3:9,134 13:1,264 27:1,124 38:10,25 38:17,134 49:15,134 Job

5:5,134 5:7,134 9:9, 262, 264, 373 26:13,124 36:16,115,341 37:10,115,341

408

GENERAL INDEX

38:15,161 38:31,263,264,373 38:33,198 38:38,115 38:5, 112 Joel 4:11,230,261,362 Leviticus 23:24,38 23:4,38,52 25:9, 38, 46, 82, 239, 273-88, 373 model of eight spheres, 215 Numbers 23:9,329 one hundred and twenty conjunctions, 320 physical properties of heavenly bodies, 255 preface to the commentary on the Pentateuch, 38, 216, 257, 275, 331-35 Psalms 1:3, 186,351 1:6, 185 6:10, 180 8:4,218,228,230,361 16:11,185 16:7, 134, 135 16:9,180 19:10,122,123,342 19:2,127,138,218 19:5,138 19:7, 134,233 19:9,233 22:16,134 32:11, 185 50:2, 161 73:17,185 73:24, 185

73:26,135 74:17,111,112,340 78:31,135 78:39,134 81:4,38 82:1,218 87:5, 161 89:12, 111, 112, 161 89:8,218 93:4,309 98:3,112 101:4,134 102:4,161 102:5,134 103:14,134 103:21, 129,209,215,218, 343 103:4,112 103:5, 180 104:19,38,134 135:7,134 136:4,218 139:15,135 139:17,134,135 139:5, 185 145:17, 134, 180 146:6,219 147:4,230 148:2,219 role of science, 12,325,331-35 short and long commentaries, 11 superior sphere, 230 the host of heaven, 218 Bede, 56,206, 392, 397 Beller, E., 3, 52, 394 Ben l;Iasan, 41 Ben Zutah, 41 Ben-Shalom, R., 303, 394 Beziers, 12, 36, 58, 68, 73, 79, 80 Biggs, N.L., 314, 394

GENERAL INDEX

Bonfils, Joseph, 22, 39,45,67, 118, 244,278,303,380,393 Book ofAbraham the Prince (A. Bar Hiyya),99 Book ofAddition and Subtraction by the Method of Calculation of the Hindus (al-Khwarizmi), 21 Book of Mash{z 'allah on Eclipses, 75, 76 Book of Secrets (Enoch), 166 Bomstein, H., 277, 394 Bouche-Leclercq, A., 29, 34, 64, 82, 109,125,171,172,204,250,251, 252,394 Boyer, c., 314, 394 Braudel, F., 95, 394 Burnett, Ch., 21, 390, 392 caput draconis et cauda, 43, 125, 244,245,339,363 Categories ofNations (Sa'id alAndalusi). See Tabaqat al-'Umam Centiloquium, 68, 241, 299, 321 Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer, 3, 47, 117 CharIap, L., 104, 394 Christian astronomical tables, 282 audience, 25, 39, 85 beginning ofthe day, 55 calendar, 24, 25, 39, 41, 46, 51, 52,275 countries, 17, 52 early literature, 152 founding of religion, 25, 151,294 languages, 7 Spain, 6, 280 tropical year, 46 Christians abandon Muslim Spain, 6 ascribed to Jupiter, 152

409

ascribed to Leo, 293 ascribed to Mercury, 153 ascribed to the Sun, 152,291,292, 293,379 astrological comparison with Jews and Muslims, 154, 155, 156 astrological opinion about the Jews, 153 contacts with Jews about the calendar, 39, 41, 46 controversy over the Easter, 41 under Islam, 4 circulus altissimus. See superior sphere circulus rectus. See upright sphere: climates, 49, 70, 76, 107, 108, 109, 110, Ill, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 173,175,210,211,270,336,340, 348,355,385 Cochrane, L., 21, 394 combinatorics, 36, 68, 69, 100, 104, 313,314,316,317,318,319,320, 321,322,323 computus iudeorum, 39, 285 conjunctions in the head of Aries, 164 of Saturn and Jupiter, 63, 68, 69, 102,104,110, 149, 150, 158, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 173,289,292,293,295,329, 340,347,350,379,380 of the moon and sun, 39, 40, 47, 52,61,82,376 of the planets, 90,130,216,217, 254,355 of the sun with the fixed stars, 283 one hundred and twenty, 68, 290, 313-23,378,381 rhythm of human history, 167 controversy

410

GENERAL INDEX

about the arrangement of the astrological houses, 74, 160 about the calendar between Jews and Christians, 41 about the calendar between the Rabbanites and Karaites, 41, 239 about the chronology of the world's creation, 46 about the length of the solar year, 40,41,51,280--86 about the obliquity of the ecliptic, 267 about the planetary terms, 250 about the position of the sun's orb, 66, 89 about the question whether the sun apogee is static or is moving, 89 about the slow motion of the host of heaven, 223 about the trepidation theory, 222 about the validity of the astrological system of quaestiones, 65 within the Christian camp over the date of Easter, 41 Copernicus, N, 94 Cor Leonis. See Lev ha-Aryeh Cusanus, N., 153,391 daily motion, 53, 224, 225, 234, 236 Datei, E., 36, 394 David Ben Joseph, 44, 46, 101 De Anima (Aristotle), 174 De Caelo (Aristotle), 309 De magnis conjunctionibus (AbU Ma'shar), 67 De proportione numerorum et figurarum geometricarum, 22

De temporibus (Bede), 56 decani,302 decimal positional system, 20, 21, 37,43,233 derekh ha-mishpafim, 119,200,201 dibuq, 104 dimyion, 72, 86 doctores ymaginun, 221 Donnolo, Shabbetai, 3, 399 Doronius, 27, 33, 65,166,238,253, 254,301,303,370,380 Dreux,10 Dreyer, J., 221, 394 Drory, R., 4, 394 Druart, Th., 205, 208, 394 ductus planetae, 33, 82, 83, 120, 122, 171,172 Dunash Ibn Tamim, 5 eclipses, 42, 43, 44,189,242,249, 339,353 Efros, I., 98, 395 ein mazalle-Yisra 'ei, 206, 295 Emunot ve-De'ot (Sa'adiah Ga'on), 140 England,9, 13, 17, 32, 34, 35, 36, 49,55,81, 112, 191,388,395, 397 Enoch,33, 90, 184 Epistle to Rabbi Judah Bani/ai of Barcelona (A. Bar Hiyya), 101, 205,391 eschatology, 102 Etymologiae (Isidore of Seville), 206 exegetical excursus, 259, 288-323 external sciences, 141, 191,257,307, 325,332,384 Eyn ha-Shor ha-Semoli, 263, 264, 373

GENERAL INDEX

Fatimid dynasty, 5

Fi al-qiriiniit wa 'I-adyiin wa '1milal, 151, 165 First Crusade, 102 Fleischer, J.L., 10, 13, 18,26,32,49, 55,59,60,65,66,67,69, 191, 194,218,388,389,390,395 Fontaine, R., 8, 107, 395 forty-eight constellations, 218, 219, 229,290,299,305,357,361,378 France, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 17,26,58,73, 79,80,97, 118, 139, 140, 174, 217,331,332,333,334,335 Franco, Sh., 138, 393, 400 Freudenthal, G., 7, 207, 395 Friedlander, M., 11, 13,25, 32,49, 55,388,395 Funkenstein, A., 257, 395, 396 Gabirol, Shlomo ibn, 4, 6, 103, 140 galgal ha- 'elyion. See superior sphere Gandz, S., 393 gematria, 273, 274, 366 Genizah, 169,280,394 Gentiles, 41,50,89, 103, 142,306, 308,309,310,381 Geoffrey Chaucer, 1,2,93,94, 390, 399 geometry, 13,21,97, 100, 138, 146, 191, 197, 199,212,244,246,273, 274,282,300,356,366,368,377 Gersonides, 7, 395

gevul. See gevulot 'ares gevulot 'are$, 107-12 Gil, J., 117, 396 Glasner, R., 8, 396 Goitein, S.D., 169,276,277,279, 280,396

411

Golb, N., 10, 26, 49, 54, 55, 64, 73, 218,396 Goldstein, B.R., 3, 4, 5, 7,17,18,24, 31,75,77,113,222,262,264, 388,391,396 Gomez Aranda, M., 113, 387, 396 Grabois, A, 9, 396 Graetz, H., 49, 55, 396 grammar, 9, 36, 104, 116, 140,257, 280,288,326 Greek language, 302 in early Hebrew literature, 3 scientific terminology, 107, 109, 171,204,273,366 works on the astrolabe, 1 Greek science astrology, 64, 151, 153, 171, 173, 204,238,240,305,321 astronomy, 38, 40, 46, 77,82,83, 113,204,231,238,240,278, 284,310 criticism of, 90 geometry, 244, 273, 366 integration in Arabic culture, 1, 4, 77,91,94,107,113,256,324 integration in Jewish culture, 91, 142,239,256,273,279,288, 324 integration in Latin culture, 17, 84,94,243,307,324 theft of science from the Jews, 305,306,308,309,312 Greive, H., 13, 396

Guide ofthe Perplexed (Maimonides), 114, 132, 142, 215,227,308,309,391,392 Gundisalvi, D., 204 gzerot ha-kokhavim, 118

ha- 'Agalah, 260, 371

412

GENERAL INDEX

Habash the Arab, 87,238,367 bad. See tenns ha-Dov, 258,260, 371 /fadrei Teiman, 258, 260, 261, 262, 372 bakhmei ha-beshbon, 314 bakhmei ha-mazalot, 45, 48, 53, 81, 82,219,230,301 bakhmei ha-midot, 45 Halbronn, J., 59, 396 Halkin, A.S., 7, 396 ha-Qosem ha-Qatan, 241 Hartner, W., 93,108,125,396 Harvey, S., 8, 396,400,401 ijasdai ibn Ishaq. See Hisdai ibn Shaprut Hebrew language. See linguistic strategy of Abraham Bar Hiyya, See linguistic strategy of Ibn Ezra Abraham Bar Hiyya, 97 astronomy, 8 creation of a scientific vocabulary, 93-96 divine language, 311 division of functions, 4 encyclopedias, 8, 57, 97 gynecology and obstetrics, 8 Maimonides,96,141 mathematics, 8 mathematics, 7 names of stars, 261, 262 reflects physical world, 129,261 the first and most comprehensive, 106, 140,261,311,312,339 transition from Arabic, 7 works on the astrolabe, 1 hefekh ha-toledet, 133,201 Henry Bate, 59, 62, 63 Hennes,27,33,63,90, 165, 184, 185,221,238,303,329

Hennetic sources, 27, 166 Heshbon Mahalakhot ha-Kokhavim (A. Bar Hiyya), 99, 101 beshev ha- 'afudah, 137, 138, 139 Hibbur ha-Meshiha veha-Tishboret (A. Bar Hiyya), 97, 100 Hilkhot Kidush ha-Hodesh (Maimonides), 141,278 biluq ha-mi$adim, 160 biluq ha-mishor, 160 Hindu science, 20, 27, 68, 77, 83, 113,164,207,238,243,245,246, 267,302,365,366,367,401 Hipparchus,27,203,220,238,272, 304,307,308,381 ijisdai ibn Shaprut, 5 I;okhmat ha-heshbon ha-midot weha- 'arakhim, 13 bokhmat ha-bizzayion, 205 bokhmat ha-kokhavim, 99,101,205 I;okhmat ha-mazalot, 13, 119, 123, 145,179,191,201,203,206,295 hokhmat ha-mivt'a (logic), 13 I;okhmat ha-nefesh, 13 bokhmat ha-nissayion, 205 bokhmat ha-refu 'ot. See medicine hokhmat ha-toledet (natural science), 13,132,136 bokhmat mishpetei ha-mazalot, 119, 145 bokhmat toledet ha-shamayim (cosmogony),13 bokhmot bi$oniyot, 191,239 bokhmot nokhriyot, 191,239 Honigmann, E., 107,396 horoscope, 64, 102, 112, 135, 136, 145, 158, 161, 162, 165, 169, 170, 171,173,176,179,180,182,183, 190,211,250,329,345,347,348, 349,350,383

GENERAL INDEX annual, 181 computing, 34, 72 houses, 72,83,112,122,139,160 interrogations, 64 ninth house, 151, 155, 156 of a Christian, 156 ofa Muslim, 155, 156 of an Ethiopian, 159, 162, 168, 348 of an Israelite, 148, 149, 151, 156, 158 scale of powers, 250, 252, 369 social rank, 168 universal, 166 host of heaven, 214, 218-24, 236, 357,362 Hovot haLevavot (Behyah Ibn Paquda), 141 Hugo Sanctallensis, 113, 388 Iberian Peninsula, 6, 8, 17 Ibn al-'Isti, 238, 367 Ibn al-A'lam, 238, 367 Ibn al-Muqaffa, 238, 284, 367 Ibn al-Muthanna, 7, 18,20,24,27, 28,75, 76, 77, 81, 87, 89,92, 113, 114, 126, 165,203,219,238,241, 244,249,273,274,290,300,304, 316,340,341,346,365,366,367, 388 Ibn al-Safiar, 27, 28, 238, 282, 284 Ibn Dawud al-Yahiidi, 5 Ibn Hibintii, 151, 165 Ibn Sma, 27, 28, 238, 283, 284 Ibn Tibbon, Judah, 132, 140, 393 admiration for the Arabic language, 140 Ibn Tibbon, Samuel, 114, 132, 395 Ibn Yiinus, 27, 28, 238, 282, 284 Idel, M., 153, 185,397

413

Igeret ha-Shabbat (Abraham Ibn

Ezra), 46, 49-57,81,89,198, 222,233,275,278,281,336,337, 342,388 Ihsli al- 'ulum (AI-Fiiriibi), 204 intercalation, 41, 51, 52, 274, 285, 286,359,374 iqlim, 76, 98, 107, 111, 114 Isaac Ben Baruch, 41 Isaac ben Solomon ha-Yisraeli, 5, 175 Ishaq ibn Qistar, 6 Ishaq ibn Sulayman. See Isaac ben Solomon ha-Yisraeli istagninut, 173, 206, 308 Italy, 3, 6, 9, 11, 17, 19,22,28,31, 35,36,39,44,45,70,84,139, 150,331,332,335 Itzahki, M, 12, 397 iudicia (astrological judgments), 33, 82, 116-23, 132, 143, See mishpatim Jacobs, J., 49, 397 Jerusalem, 23, 25, 141, 161,275, 277,297 Jesus, 69,102 Jewish calendar, 38, 39-57, 273-88 Jewish disciplines, 13 Jewish history, 102 courtiers, 150 departure from Egypt, 293 exile, 105, 149, 150, 158,295, 310, 329, 339 Jews and the sciences ancient Jewish science, 306, 310 Andalusian Jewish intellectuals, 5 astronomy, 7 early Hebrew scientific literature, 2-3

414

GENERAL INDEX

in Southern France, 7 in the Iberian Peninsula, 8 legitimization of the 'external sciences', 307, 309 rise of medieval Hebrew science,

6-9 severed their links with the Arabic language, 7 under the rule ofIslam, 3--6 Joseph Jacob of Modeville, 25 Judah ha-Parsy, 41, 273-88, 374, 375,376 Judah Ibn Bal'am, 262 Julian calendar, 51 Jupiter, 26, 34, 125, 130, 134, 139, 166,226,253,254,315 admixed constitution, 254, 370 allotted to Sagittarius and Pisces, 292 and second climate, 110, 160, 211 favorable star, 169, 170, 171,349 in charge of vegetative soul, 175, 178 planet of the Christians, 152 role in horoscope, 155 Kalonimus ben Kalonimus, 322, 393 Kanka, 20, 238, 365 Karaites, 41, 239, 273-88, 374 Keli ha-Nehoshet (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 2, 28-36, 39, 58, 60, 62, 68, 70, 71, 79, 83, 84, 100, 105, 107, 108, 109, 118, 121, 137, 138, 139,222,223,230,232,264,271, 300,312,339,340,346,362,389 Kennedy, E., 160, 163, 165,390,397 Kesil, 257-73, 371, 372, 373 Khima, 257-73, 371, 372,373

Kitiib al-madhal al-kabir ila sinii 'at ahkiim al-nujum (AbU Ma'shar),

117,153,179,302,392

Kitiib al-qiriiniit (Abu Ma'shar), 67, 68,90,154,164,166,293,302 Kitab ai-Tamara, 241, 321 Klibansky, R., 153, 154,397 koab ha-mishpatim, 120, 121 koab ha-toledet, 135, 136 Kreisel, J., 207, 397 Kunitzsch, P., 8, 74, 93, 395, 397 Kuzari (Judah ha-Levy), 4, 106, 140, 175,189,280,310,311,391 Laistner, M., 204, 206, 397 Langerman, Y.T., 8, 74, 128, 188, 196,207,395,397 Languedoc, 10 Latin civilization reception of Arabic science, 117 Latin language. See Liber de

rationibus tabularum works on the astrolabe, 1 latitude, 27, 29, 43, 52, 72, 73, 99, 107,108,138,159,160,161,217, 222,248,338,386 Lejbowicz, M., 117,206, 397 Lemay, R., 117,241,322,392,398 Lev ha-'Aqrav, 263, 373 Lev ha-Aryeh, 259, 271 Levey,M,17,398 Levin, I, 12, 199,297,388,389,390, 398 Levy,R.,18,58,59,63,398 Levy, T., 8, 398 Liber 4 capitulorum, 83, 135, 240,

See Tetrabiblos Liber de nativitatibus (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 26, 62, 63, 64, 117, 156, 292,294,388

Liber de rationibus tabularum (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 20, 22-27,

GENERAL INDEX 22,26,29,31,32,33,37,39,46, 51,63,64,77,79,82,83,92, 121, 123,131,133,134,150,207,215, 221,233,238,240,241,242,243, 244,246,248,267,272,278,281, 284,285,286 Liber Fructus, 241 Lindberg, D., 204, 398 Liphchitz, A., 301, 398 list of stars, 29, 30, 31, 83, 212, 219, 222,223,230,260,290 Lloyd, G., 204, 398 logic, 6, 9, 13, 191,257,288,309, 326 Lot of Fortune, 247, 251 lots, 58, 73, 74, 232, 250, 251, 252, 355,363,369 Louis, P., 204, 398 Lucca, 10, 11, 12, 19,22,26,28,30, 48,56,70,72,79,118,331,332, 395 Luhot ha-Nasi (A Bar Hiyya), 99 lunar month, 375 beginning of, 39 Jewish, 41 length, 40, 307 twelve, 276 Luzzato. S.D., 49, 388 mabaf ha-meshartim. See aspects (astrological) magistri probationum, 24, 27, 33, 39, 221,243,244,248,267 maQberet, 104, 130, 164 Mahoney, M.S., 21, 398 Maimonides, 38,41,46,114,132, 141,142,174,175,206,207,215, 226,273,274,278,306,307,308, 309,310,351,364,391,392,393, 395,397

415

Manahym ibn al-Fawwal of Zaragoza, 6 Mandelbaum, H., 40, 398 Mantova, 30, 35, 36, 79,389,394 maqom mesukan, 34,170,171,247 Mar Samuel, 41, 46, 47, 51, 288 Margaliot, A, 54, 399 Mars, 34, 130, 134, 139, 180, 181, 183,226,315,350,382 a maleficent planet, 179 and third climate, 110, 160,211 assigned to Islam, 156 assigned to Mazdaism, 155 hot, 182,254,370 in charge of the 'hard' version of medicine, 179 in charge of the yellow bile, 182 lord of triplicity, 253 planetary houses, 292 role in horoscope, 172, 180, 350 Marx, A, 392 Mashli'allah, 4, 27, 28, 33, 75, 76, 90,151,159,165,238,247,253, 256,282,284,370,371,390,399 Masiljawyh al-Tabib, 4 Maslama, 27, 28, 238, 282, 284 mathematics, 2, 7, 9, 15, 19,37,81, 85,98, 104, 119, 123, 144, 199, 203,212,242,257,288,309,313, 326 Matthew, D., 72, 73, 399 mazal medinah, 26, 294, 305 mean motion, 368 astronomical tables, 99 of the moon, 40, 52, 248, 376 of the planets, 68, 90, 365 ofthe sun, 52 medicine, 6, 133, 136, 140, 179, 184, 190,201,202,345,357,385 Megilat ha-Megaleh (A Bar Hiyya),

416

GENERAL INDEX

102, 103, 307 mel'ekhet ha-nissayion, 205, 207 mel'ekhet ha-shamayim, 138 Mercury, 34 assigned to Taurus and Gemini, 292 in charge of the wise soul, 175, 178 inverts its natural constitution, 254,370 planet ofthe Christians, 153, 155 role in horoscope, 158, 162, 169, 348 sphere of, 67, 226 merkaz, 76, 77, 98,114 meshartim, 120, 129-30, 142,208, 209,211,255 Metaphysics (Aristotle), 226 metereology, 8 metonic cycle, 51 Michel, R., 108,399 mighty /ardar, 293 Millas Vallicrosa, Jose M., 17, 18, 22,23,24,29,31,32,34,35,57, 64,77,97,99,100,387,388,392, 393,402 Miqra 'ot Gedolot, 9, 297, 387, 388, 389 Miquel, A., 107,399 mi$ 'adim, 232 Mishnat ha-Midot, 2, 400 Mishneh Torah (Maimonides), 141, 206,215,226,278,364 mishpatim, 33, 116--23, 125, 132, 143,200,201,221 Mishpetei ha-Mazalot (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 60, 69-74, 80, 84, 118, 130,139,148,194,201,245,247, 250,300,338,388 mishpetei ha-mazalot (astrology), 13,

118, 119,201 Mivhar ha-Peninnim (Solomon Ibn Gabirol),140 molad, 39, 47, 52, 398 determination of, 39, 52 mean, 52 true, 52 Mondschein, A., 54, 55, 390, 399 moon, 27,47,48, 130,334,337,353, 359, 376, 385, See visibility, See lunar month, See molad cold and wet, 254, 370 complained about its status relative to the sun, 48, 101 diameter, 45, 48 distance from the sun, 112,251, 252 human health, 66 infancy, 87 lot of, 369 mansions of, 61 mean motion, 287 motion, 22, 216, 227, 241, 310, 365 nodes, 125,245 phases, 167,276 planetary house, 292 Moses, 69, 178, 184,274,276,286, 293,297,353,374,376 Motot, Sh., 392 Muhammad, 69, 110,292 Muntner, S., 3, 399 mU$aq,45, 70, 76,113-16,122,209, 210,282,341 Muslim Spain. See al-Andalus Muslims ascribed to Venus, 110, 155,292, 340 compared with Jews, 151, 154, 155, 156

GENERAL INDEX influenced by Saturn, 151,348 openness, 4 nai;lash bariai;l, 78, 124-26, 142,342 Nabshon Ga'on, 45 Nallino, C., 117, 181,392,399 neo-platonic, 4, 177 neo-Pythagorean arithmetic, 37, 317 Neugebauer, 0., 204, 307, 393, 399 nihug ha-kokhav. See ductus planetae nihugim,99, 139

Normandy, 10,64,73,218,396 North, J., 93, 108,251,252,399 northern Christian kingdoms, 6, 94 oria. See terms

Ptolemy, C., 27, 35, 99, 203, 204, 207,220,221,230,238-323,362, 366, 367, 368, 369, See Tetrabiblos, See Almagest, See Centiloquium

astrological work, 147 closeness to Jewish science, 39, 239,273,274,281,285,286, 287,374,377 criticized by Ibn Ezra, 91, 92, 247, 370,371 high opinion of, 23, 91, 243, 244, 273,274,366 King, 65,221,240, 252,281,285, 296-313,359,369,376,380 main source of Ibn Ezra, 91, 239 prince of the Greek scholars, 102, 243,376 scientific methodology, 246 thief, 240, 296-313 two primary motions, 231 Panofsky, E., 153, 154,397 paqid ha-hayim, 34, 170, 171

417

parts of Israel, 307 Pedersen, 0., 85, 94, 204, 399 Persian science, 28, 30, 46, 83, 88, 126,243,250,275,282,284,286, 293,307,329,346,365,368,374, 377 Petrus Alphonsi, 21 Philoponus, 93 physics, 8, 86 Pines, Sh., 204, 208, 392, 399 Pingree, D., 5, 64, 163, 165, 166, 171,390,391,392,399 Pisa, 26, 79,150 Plato, 174, 196,233 Plessner, M., 241, 322, 399 Provence, 12,22,30,31,36,39,45, 58, 68, 73, 74, 84, 97, 139, 174, 308,394,395 Pythagoras, 309 qadrut (eclipse), 42, 43, 44

Rabbanites, 38, 41,52,89,178,240, 271,276,277,278,279,286,287 Rabin, H., 98, 399 raqi'a, 126, 127,333,334 Ras wa dhanav al-tinnin. See caput draconis et cauda

Rashbam, 54, 55, 57 Rashed, R., 21, 399 ratio of the circumference to its diameter, 12,89,242 Rav Adda Bar' Ahabah, 41, 47, 51, 281,288 religious commandments, 13, 195, 228,276,295 Reshit Hokhmah (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 18,31,33,58-59,58,59, 60,61,66,68,69,70,73,80,82, 83,84,86,87,88,90,110,112,

418

GENERAL INDEX

115, 116, 119, 120, 125, 133, 134, 135, 139, 148, 152, 154, 159, 160, 165,169,171,174,175,179,182, 187, 188, 190, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198,200,209,210,211, 212,213,219,220,229,232,241, 243,247,250,251,252,253,255, 260,261,264,290,291,302,354, 355,356,361,362,389 rete. See astrolabe revolution of the world-year, 162, 163, 165, 166, 167, 173, 181,348, 350 Rodez,lO Rome, 9, 10, 11, 12,20,67,71,72, 296,388,389,395

rosh ha-teli. See caput draconis et cauda Rosin, D., 10, 13,54,55,58,399 Roth, N., 306, 400 Rothschild, J.P., 7, 400 Rouen, 10,26,54,55,56,64,72,73, 74,80, 118, 139,218,331,332, 396 Rubio, M., 100, 400 ruler of a certain hour of the day, 136 of horoscope, 158,348 oflife, 170, 349 of some astrological house, 136, 169 of triplicity, 253 Sa'adiah Ga'on, 10,25, 175,262, 277,334,385,391,394 Sa'id al-Andalusl, 5, 6 Sft'id al-Andalusl, 301, 393 Sabra, A., 226, 400 Safah Berurah (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 104, 105

Safnat Pa 'aneah (Joseph Bonfils), 22,23,25,39,45,48,67, 118, 138,244,278,303,304,380,393 Sahllbn Bushr ibn Habib al-YahUdl, 5 Sahot (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 104, 116, 341,389 Sftid al-Andalusl, 77 salvation from the stars, 14, 136, 171,174,181,187,188,195,196 Samuel b. Naghrillah ha-Nagid, 150 Sanad Ibn 'All, 5 Sarfati, G.B., 2, 3, 7, 20, 37, 76, 98, 113, 142,400 Sarna, N., 11,400 Saturn, 130 and Aquarius, 293, 329, 379 assigned to Capricorn and Aquarius, 292 associated to first climate, 160, 211 cold, 86, 254, 370 planet of the Jews, 151-58,291, 292,379 Shabbat, 329 sphere of, 11 0, 340 Savasorda. See Abraham Bar Hiyya Schrader, D., 321, 322, 400 Schreckenberg, H., 153, 154,400 Schwartz, D., 8, 9, 13, 153,207,400

Sefer Abu Mashar ba-maQbarot, 166 Sefer ha- 'Ibbur (A. Bar Hiyya), 97, 101,226,278,307 Sefer ha- 'Ibbur (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 20,22,28,29,30,36,39-44,45, 46,47, 51, 52, 79, 82, 84, 89, 101, 221,275,278,281,284,285,286, 287,288,300,333,338,339,376, 381,388,392,394,402 Sefer ha- 'O/am (Abraham Ibn Ezra),

GENERAL INDEX

24,46,51,60,61,67-69,73,80, 84,90,99, 118, 139, 148, 164, 166,167,193,214,230,240,242, 248,249,281,291,292,294,295, 300,303,304,314,315,316,317, 319,323,350,362,379,381,389 Seier ha- 'Arba 'ah She 'arim, 240 Seier ha- 'Ehad (Abraham Ibn Ezra),

36-37,80, 100,232,318,363, 388 Seier ha- 'Jlan, 241, 299, 321 Seier ha-Ki$im, 103 Seier ha-Luhot (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 24,25,30,31,61,84,278 Seier ha-Mal;barot, 60, 67 Seier ha-Me 'orot (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 62, 66-67, 80, 230, 247, 300,388 Seier ha-Midot we-hu Seier haMispar,21 Seier ha-Mirka/;1ot, 3 Seier ha-Mishpatim, 30, 71, 74, 84, 118 Seier ha-Mispar (Abraham Ibn

Ezra), 18, 19-21,20,21,22,37, 43,44,79,84,100,232,300,314, 363,389 Seier ha-Mivharim (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 64-66, 68, 80, 90, 187, 198,303,352,389 Seier ha-Moladot (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 22, 26, 30, 46,51,59,60, 62-64,65,68,71,74,80,83,84, 86,87,88,91, 139, 145, 146, 147, 148,149,150,155,162,174,177, 178,180,184,187,188,196,197, 211,213,240,241,242,247,249, 255,256,281,284,292,347,389 Seier ha-Peri, 241, 321, 393 Seier ha-Rikmah (Jonah Ibn Janah),

419

140 Seier ha-She 'elot (Abraham Ibn

Ezra), 64-66, 65, 80,139, 187, 301,303,352,380,390 Seier ha-Shem (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 12,36,37, 124, 127, 128, 185, 300,318,319,320,342,351,388 Seier ha-Shorashim (Jonah Ibn Janah),140 Seier ha-Te 'amim (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 18,46,51,59-62,66,67, 69,80,84,86,87,91,99, 110, 134, 139, 148, 152, 154, 160, 174, 192, 193, 194, 197, 198,211,213, 217,219,220,222,230,240,245, 246,247,249,250,251,252,253, 254,255,256,264,272,281,291, 292,300,303,335,340,355,356, 379,390 Seier ha-Toledet, 8 Seier ha-Yesod (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 10, 104 Seier Mishpetei ha- 'Olam, 67, 118 Seier Moznayim (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 10,104 Seier Relu'ot (Asaph ha-Rofe), 3 Seier Sahut (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 36 Seier Surat ha- 'Ares (A. Bar Hiyya), 97,205,358 Seier Ta 'amei ha-Luhot (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 20, 22-27, 22, 28, 29, 30,33,39,45,64,77,79,84,100, 150,238,278 Seier Ye$irah, 3, 125, 232, 363, 393 Sephat Yeter (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 10,104 Septuagint, 297, 303, 325 seven planets, 27, 68, 112, 129, 160, 208,209,211,213,214,217,219, 229,235,255,289,313-23,333,

420

GENERAL INDEX

337,354,355,357,364,378,381, 386 Shabbat grievance of the, 49,54,55 Saturn the star of, 152 the commandment about the, 329 shamayim, 124, 126---29 sifrah,20 Silberberg, M., 17,20,21,389 Simon, U., 9, 11,54,55,57,258, 387,393,401 Sirat, C., 97, 175,401 slow motion, 214, 218-24, 226, 229, 230,234,236,271,272 solar year, 39, 40, 42, 43, 46,51, 233,240,276,280,281,282,284, 285,286,293,310,374,375,376 sphere, 124 apogee of, 113,341 armillary, 127 concentric, 215 divided into 360 degrees, 60,193, 201 eccentric, 40, 283, 359 eighth, 40, 211, 218, 221, 224, 225,226,228,229,230,231, 236,299,355,361,364 epicyclical, 201, 215, 359 ninth, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230,231,232,234,236,363, 364, See superior phere of inclination, 78, 126,347 of Saturn, 215, 329, 340 of the dragon, 359 of Venus, 340 planetary, 82, 112, 113, 160,210, 211,224,340,346 poles, 50, 258, 337, 359 position of the Sun, Venus and Mercury, 89

science of the, 189,353 seven, 129, 130,214-18,343, 357,361,364 single, 216, 217, 334, 386 solar, 282, 286 superior, 236 tenth, 228 the girdle of the, 139,346 two superior, 124, 126, 127,282, 285,342,363 upright, 231, 235, 357, 362 zodiacal, 90, 116, 137,203,208, 212,232,235,242,259,268, 270,273,290,333,340,347, 360,363 Steinschneider, M., 7, 17,20,22,23, 31,36,45,58,60,69,75,77,97, 194,390,401,402 Stem, S., 3, 5, 402 Suhay~258,260,262,372

Sulayrnan ibn Yahya. See Gabirol, Shlomo ibn sun's declination, 24, 43, 89, 338 superior soul, 65, 176, 178, 183, 186, 187,343,352 superior sphere, 208, 209, 210, 212, 214,224-33,259,261,265,266, 270,355,357,361,362 Ta 'di/ Zij al-Khuwarizmi, 77 Tabaqat al- 'Umam (Sa'id alAndalusi), 4,5,6,65, 77, 185, 301,302,393 Tacitus, 152 Talmai. See Ptolemy, Claudius temperament, 134, 136, 159, 161, 172, 181,344, 348, 350, See toledet Temple, 102, 161,308 Tenenbaum, A., 228, 402

GENERAL INDEX tequfah, 40, 43, 50, 51,53,273,281, 288,377 tequfah ofR. Adda, 288, 377 tequfat ha- 'emet, 42, 43 tequfat ha- 'olam. See revolution of the world year tequfat ha-shanah, 73, 172, 180 tequfat ha-shanim, 62, 63 tenns, 109, 120,250,251,292,329, 383 Tester, S., 34, 64, 125, 171, 181,204, 250,251,330,402 Tetrabiblos (C. Ptolemy), 87,102, 151,153,159,171,204,207,208, 240,242,247,249,251,254,255, 294,302,305,321,370,371,393 Tetragrammaton secret meanings behind its letters, 12, 100, 146, 185, 190,289, 317,318,319,320,321,323, 327,382,383 Thiibit b. Qurra, 27, 28, 87, 238, 282, 283,284,285,367 Theon, 238, 367 Three responsa (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 44-49,80,101,278,281 Tiamat, 125 Tikkun Middot ha-Nefesh (Solomon Ibn Gabirol), 140 Timaeus (Plato), 175,233 Tolan, J., 391 toledet, 13, 130-37, 142, 159, 170, 175,181,201,202,211,255 Toledo, 6, 117, 396 Toomer, G., 21, 390, 402 Torri del Sole, 36 translation ofIbn al-Muthanna's Commentary (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 7,18,20,24,75,77,81,87,92, 113,126,165,238,241,244,249,

421

273,300,304,365 translations astronomical texts into Hebrew, 7 by Abraham Ibn Ezra into Hebrew, 75-78 difficulties when translating into Hebrew, 105 Graeco-Arabic scientific world view into Hebrew, 1,7 Greek scientific corpus into Arabic, 1 into Latin, 62, 116 into medieval French, 18 loan translation of Arabic words, 70, 76, 109, 143 medical works, 4 of the Pentateuch into Greek, 297, 304 Treatise on Calculation with the Hindu Numerals (al-Khwiirizmi), 21 trepidation theory, 25, 40,221,359, 360 trigonometry,27,34,82 tripartite soul, 135, 174, 176, 177, 187, 190 physical seat, 175 triplicities, 104, 164,253,254,370 tropical year correct value for, 41 erroneous, 46 length of, 41, 46, 51, 82, 83, 88 of 365 \4 days, 41 reckoning of, 40 twelfth century scientific renaissance, 17 two primary motions of the heavens, 50,53,214,231,233-36,242, 265,266,268,336

422

GENERAL INDEX wise soul, 172-78, 183, 184, 186,

Ungaro, Sh., 314,402

(fshu, 258, 260, 261, 372 Van der Waerden, 163, 165,397 vegetative soul, 175, 176, 177, 178,

190,196,343,352 Wolfson, H.A., 208, 232, 402 world's creation, 46, 47, 49, 56, 57, 125,130, 161, 164, 181,226,270, 332,334,364,385

343 Venus, 120, 134,226,253,254,292,

315,349 'soft' version of medicine, 179 and fifth climate, 110,340 favorable star, 170, 171 in charge of the animal soul, 175,

178 never get very far from the sun, 35 planet ofthe Muslims, 152, 153,

155,291,292,379 role in horoscope, 158, 348 sphere of, 67 Verona, 20, 22, 28, 30, 35, 36, 39,

70,79,118 visibility of the lunar crescent, 27, 40, 41 of the moon, 42 of Venus, 29 Walter, S., 42, 402 Wasserstrom, S.M., 3, 402

Yabyii b. Abi

Man~ur,

238, 267, 284,

367 Yesod Mor 'ah (Abraham Ibn Ezra), 12, 13,37, 115, 119, 124, 132, 133, 134, 138, 161, 175, 177, 180, 191,198,199,213,215,239,255, 291,312,318,320 Yesodey ha-Tevuna u-Migdal ha'Emuna (A. Bar Hiyya), 97,100, 400 Yonah Ibn Djanah, 262 Z"T TRMB, 46, 47 Zacuto, Abraham, 31 Zafran, E., 153, 154,402 Zaragoza, 6 zero use of, 20, 21, 43, 233 zij, 27, 366, 367 Zly al-Sfibi (AI-Battiini), 102

BRILL'S SERIES IN JEWISH STUDIES 1. Cohen, R. Jews in Another Environment. Surinam in the Second Half of the Eighteenth Century. 1991. ISBN 9004 093737 2. Prawer, S.S. Israel at Vani!JI Fair. Jews and Judaism in the Writings of WM. Thackeray. 1992. ISBN 9004094032 3. Price,JJ. Jerusalem under Siege. The Collapse of the Jewish State 66-70 C.E. 1992. ISBN 90 04 09471 7 4. Zinguer, I. L'hebreu au temps de la Renaissance. 1992. ISBN 90 04 09557 8 5. Gutwein, D. The Divided Elite. Economics, Politics and Anglo:Jewry, 1882-1917. 1992. ISBN 90 04 09447 4 6. Eraqi Klorman, B.-Z. The Jews of Yemen in the Nmeteenth Century. A Portrait of a Messianic Community. 1993. ISBN 90 04 09684 1 7. Ben-Dov, N. Agnon's Art of Indirection. Uncovering Latent Content in the Fiction of S.YAgnon. 1993. ISBN 90 04 098631 8. Gera, D.Judaea and Mediterranean Politics, 219-161 B.C.E. 1998. ISBN 90 04 09441 5 9. Coudert, A.P. The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century. The Life and Thought of Francis Mercury van Helmont (1614-1698). 1999. ISBN 90 04 09844 5 10. Gross, A. Iberian Jewry.from Twilight to Dawn. The World of Rabbi Abraham Saba. 1995. ISBN 90 04100539 12. Ahroni, R. The Jews of the British Crown Colony of Aden. History; Culture, and Ethnic Relations. 1994. ISBN 90 04 lOIlO 1 13. Deutsch, N. The Gnostic Imagination. Gnosticism, Mandaeism and Merkabah Mysticism. 1995. ISBN 9004102647 14. Arbel, B. Trading Nations. Jews and Venetians in the Early Modern Eastern Mediterranean. 1995. ISBN 900410057 1 16. Menache, S. (ed.). Communication in the Jewish Diaspora. The Pre-Modern World. 1996. ISBN 90 04101896 17. Parfitt, T. The Road to Redemption. The Jews of the Yemen 1900-1950. 1996. ISBN 90 04 10544 1 18. Assis, YT.Jewish Economy in the Medieval Crown of Aragon, 1213-1327. Money and Power. 1997. ISBN 90 04106154 19. Stillman, YK. & Stillman, N.A. (eds.). From Iberia to Diaspora. Studies in Sephardic History and Culture. 1999. ISBN 90 04107207 20. Barkai, R. A History of Jewish Gynaecological Texts in the Middle Ages. 1998. ISBN 90 04 10995 1 21. Heller, MJ. Printing the Talmud. A History of the Individual Treatises Printed from 1700 to 1750. 1999. ISBN 90 04112936 22. Deutsch, N. Guardians of the Gate. Angelic Vice Regency in Late Antiquity. 1999. ISBN 90 04 10909 9 23. Ratzabi, S. Between Zionism and Judaism. The Radical Circle in Brith Shalom 1925-1933.2000. ISBN 90 04 11507 2 24. Brasz, C. & Kaplan, Y (eds.). Dutch Jews as Perceived l!J Themselves and l!J Others. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on the History of theJews in the Netherlands, 22-25 November 1998. 2000. ISBN 9004 117059

25. Drory, R. Models and Contacts. Arabic Literature and its Impact on Medieval Jewish Culture. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11738 5 26. Lamdan, R. A Separate People. Jewish Women in Palestine, Syria and Egypt in the Sixteenth Century. 2000. ISBN 90 04 117474 27. Hary, B.H., Hayes, Hayes,j.L. & Astren, F. (eds.). Judaism and Islam: Boundaries, Communication, and Interaction. Essays in Honor of William M. Brinner. 2000. ISBN 90 04119140 28. Kaplan, Y An Alternative Path to Moderni!JI The Sephardi Diaspora in Western Europe. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11742 3 29. Israel, j. & Salverda, R. (eds.) Dutch Jewry: Its History and Secular Culture (15002000).2002. ISBN 9004124365 30. Israel, j. Diasporas within a Diaspora. Jews, Crypto:Jews and the World Maritime Empires (1540-1740).2002. ISBN 9004127658 31. Shoham, R. Poetry and Prophecy. The Image of the Poet as a Hero, a "Prophet" and an Artist in Modern Hebrew Poetry. 2002. ISBN 90 04 127399 32. Sela, S. AbralUlm Ibn Ezra and the Rise qf Medieval Hebrew Science. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12973 1 33. Heller, MJ. The Sixteenth Century Hebrew Books. An Abridged Thesaurus. 2003. ISBN 90 04 1297 6 34. Zinguer, I.Y & Bloom, S.W L'Antisemitisme Belaire. Inclusion et Exclusion depuis l'Epoque des Lumieres juqu'a I'Affaire Dreyfus. Inclusion and Exclusion: Perspectives onJews from the Enlightenment to the Dreyfus Affair. 2003. ISBN 90 0412972 3