Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Ruthy & Baruch" <alster AT comandcom.com>]

Jonathan wrote: 

> 
> Someone did write that this Yitzhaki was Rashi, but I can't remember
whom. It was
> because of reading this that I compared both Rashi and Ibn Ezra on Gen.
36:31. To me
> it appears very clear that Ibn Wzra is demanding that Yitzhaki's books be
burnt
> because of doubting  Mosaic authorship - or at least, for making this
statement
> openly.

I agree with you, that Ibn Ezra was opposed to openly stating doubts about
Mosaic authorship.
 
> As for Rashi=Yitzhaki, Rashi could, but need not be construed as implying
that the
> Edomite list dates from Jehoshafat's time. Could Ibn Ezra have had a
different version
> of Rashi? As you know, there are different versions of Ibn Ezra; but I'm
not up on
> Rashi studies.

Like I mentioned in an earlier post, Rashi was much more conservative on
matters like this than Ibn Ezra.  Of course it is theoretically possible
that Ibn Ezra had a different version.  Even today we know of dozens of
Rashi manuscripts - another of my teachers, Elazar Touitou, wrote something
about that once in _Tarbitz_.  I think the title was "`al gilgulei hanosach
shel perush rashi latorah", or something like that.  However in this case
it is ***extremely*** unlikely.  The verses Rashi ascribes to later times
are 1 Kings 22:48 and 2 Kings 8:20.  If you want the most accurate version
of Rashi (and Ibn Ezra) on Genesis today, look at Bar Ilan U.'s _Miqra'ot
Gedolot Haketer_.  They just published the second volume of Genesis last
week.
 
> Thanks for the Simon article.
You're welcome.

Kol Tuv,
Baruch Alster
Kochav Ya`akov, Israel