Abstract
This chapter delves into the positions of R. Abraham Ibn-Ezra and R. Judah Halevi on the name YHWH. These two most influential early Jewish thinkers in medieval times held almost diametrically opposed views of the divine name. R. Abraham Ibn Ezra offered a widespread interpretation which placed the name YHWH at the center of a hierarchical metaphysical and cosmological picture, in which human possibility of addressing God personally was all but rejected. In contrast, R. Judah Halevi located in the Name an indication to the exclusive personal relationship of the people of Israel with God, and even stressed that the meaning of every proper name as such derives from a personal acquaintance of the speaker with the named person or entity. Influenced by the thought of Halevi and Ibn Ezra, later medieval treatments of the name YHWH continued to develop views of the Name as referring to God’s presence, in either personal or non-personal terms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Ibn Ezra’s thought and philosophical oeuvre have long been a subject of scholarly attention. Pioneering works include Steinschneider, “Ibn Esra”, 59–128; Friedländer, Essays; Rosin, “Religionsphilosophie”, 250–251; Husik, History, 184–194. More recent overviews of Ibn Ezra’s work are included in Twersky, Polymath. A comprehensive bibliography of Ibn Ezra’s scholarly writings can be found in Freudenthal & Sela “Ibn Ezra”, 13–55. Additional specific references appear later within their relevant context.
- 2.
Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, 419–438.
- 3.
Ibn Ezra, Secret of the Torah.
- 4.
Strickman & Silver, Commentary, 64–91. See, also, N. Sarna, “Abraham Ibn Ezra as an Exegete”, in: Twersky, Polymath, 1–21.
- 5.
Ibn Ezra, Shire-ha-kodesh, 1.27, 1.29–30, 1.76, 1.103, 1.137, 1.139, 1.155, 1.156, 1.288, 1.384, 2.134. Cf. Schwartz, Astral Magic, 9–26.
- 6.
For an elaborate exposition of the Tetragrammaton’s linguistic and numeric virtues, see Ibn Ezra, Yesod Mora, 50–54.
- 7.
See Simon, “Supercommentaries”, 370–406. Cf. D. Schwartz, “Philosophical Supercommentaries”. See also idem and Mordecai E. Comtino, Perush Kadmon.
- 8.
Dov Schwartz and Shlomo Sela (S. Sela, Abraham Ibn Ezra; idem, Astrologyah u-Farshanut; D. Schwartz, Astral Magic), for example, investigated the magical qualities that Ibn Ezra attributed to the Name and its place in his astrological-scientific worldview. Moshe Halbertal (Concealment and Revelation, 44–48) complemented their work with an analysis of the esoteric theory underlying the qualities of the Name in Ibn Ezra’s thought. Yosef Cohen and Uriel Simon (Kohen, Haguto; idem and U. Simon, Yesod Mora) offered important insights into the web of geometrical, mathematical, numerical, and linguistic structures that Ibn Ezra repeatedly associated with the Name and with each of its four letters. In addition, Howard Kreisel and Elliot Wolfson (Kreisel, “on Kol”; Wolfson, “Kol”) strongly debated the meaning of the Name in relation to God’s transcendence (or immanence). Also noteworthy is Afterman’s recent contribution to the study of the name YHWH, as part of his discussion of mystical unification in Ibn Ezra’s thought and its manifold connections to the divine names.
- 9.
Kohen and Simon examine the Name and its qualities as part of their exposition on Yesod Mora. Wolfson and Kreisel turn to Ibn Ezra’s interpretations of YHWH in order to shed light on his positions concerning divine transcendence and the existence of a demiurge. Sela and Shwartz confine their discussion to the scientific, magical, and astrological elements in Ibn Ezra’s position. Halbertal and Afterman turn to the name YHWH in order to better understand Ibn Ezra’s positions on mystical unification and esotericism.
- 10.
See Kreisel, “on Kol”, 37. See also Schwartz, Astral Magic, 9: “A caveat must precede any definitive statement about Abraham Ibn Ezra’s doctrine: his biblical commentary and his theological writings are couched in an enigmatic language that precludes clear-cut conclusions”.
- 11.
Langermann, “Some astrological themes in the thought of Abraham Ibn Ezra”, in: Twersky, Polymath, 65.
- 12.
See Wolfson, “Classification”, 263–267. For an updated appraisal of Aristotle’s Metaphysics in Arabic, see Bertolacci, “Arabic Translations”.
- 13.
"אהיה אשר אהיה" is translated in the Tafsir as "אלאזלי אלד’י לם יזל", meaning “the first who does not cease”. Cf. comment made by R. Abraham, son of Maimonides, who, in his own commentary to Exodus, compares Saádia’s interpretation to that given by his father in the Guide. Kohen and Simon are right, though, to note (Yesod Mora, 54) that whereas the name Ehyeh is understood here in metaphysical terms by Saádia, the name YHWH is consistently rendered as Allah throughout the Tafsir.
- 14.
See Wolfson, “Maimonides and Halevi”, 297–305.
- 15.
Bahya Ibn Paqudah, Duties of the Heart. See, also, Lobel, A Sufi-Jewish dialogue, 80–102.
- 16.
Shem ha-etzem (שם העצם) is commonly translated into modern Hebrew as “noun”, that is, a word denoting a certain class of lingual objects. Yet in translations of Ibn Ezra such as Silver and Strickman, the term is rendered as “proper name”. While Ibn Ezra does also use the term in its regular grammatical meaning as noun, he explicitly asserts that nouns in general, and God’s proper name in particular, somehow capture an important substantive aspect of the subject they name. To maintain this approach, I translate the term here as “substantive name”. Cf. Prijs, Terminologie, 104–105; cf. Rosenberg, “Significance of Names”, 263–269, esp. 269, “Wesentlicher Nahme”.
- 17.
Schwartz, Astral Magic, 81–91; Halbertal, Concealment and Revelation, 45–46.
- 18.
My translation, cf. Strickman, Secret of the Torah, 174–175. "ובעבור זה לא הזכיר משה לפרעה רק השם הנכבד, שהוא אלהי העברים, שיוכל המקבל כחו בארץ לחדש מופתים" (Kohen and Simon, Yesod Mora, 205). Cf. Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 91: “Now it is via this name that new signs and wonders come into this world. Therefore, this name is not found in the book of Koheleth, as this book speaks of things concerning which nothing can be added nor anything taken away.”
- 19.
Usage of letters in the creation is a recurring theme in Jewish esoteric theories from Sefer Yeẓirah onward. Its point of departure is the creation narrative in Gen. 1, where God speaks or “says” and reality is created by that speech. See Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, 428: “[A]nd how glorious are the words of our ancients who said that the upper world was created with half of the Name and the lowest world was created with half of the Name”. See, also, Ibn Ezra Shire ha-kodesh, 1.137; cf. Ben Sheshet, “Sefer ha-Emunah ve-ha-Bitachon”, 363, and especially Ben Sheshet’s reference to b Men. 29b ibid.
- 20.
Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, 427–428: "הנכבדים שאינם גופות".
- 21.
This position is in line with the general importance of astrology in Ibn Ezra’s entire oeuvre. See Sela, Astrologyah u-Farshanut, 172–173.
- 22.
Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 133–134. Changes were made in the translation to highlight the use of terminology regarding the name (shem). For a more elaborate discussion of astral domination and ways to overcome it, see Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary on Exodus 23.25–26; cf. Afterman, Devekut, 113–115.
- 23.
Cf. Afterman, ibid., who argues that every human cleavage to the world of kol with its multiple divine names has the power to overcome such astral domination.
- 24.
See Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary on Numbers 20.8. See, also, Jospe, “The Torah and Astrology”.
- 25.
Halbertal, Concealment and Revelation, 47; cf. Yesod Mora 12.1, Strickman, Secret of the Torah, 171–173. Kohen and Simon, Yesod Mora, 54, find in this paragraph testimony to the “direct relation of man to God, for it is impossible to give a proper name to that with which there is no relation”. In my opinion, no evidence for direct man-God relation is to be found in this citation from Ibn Ezra. Rather, it points to an analogy between the ontological status of the human soul (which exists, עומד) and that of God, who also “exists”. Accordingly, my understanding of Ibn Ezra’s position regarding YHWH minimizes any relation between man and God that is both mediated by the Name and unintellectual.
- 26.
Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary on Exodus 3.15, Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 90 (with slight modification): “The highest world is the world of the holy angels who are incorporeal and, unlike the souls of men, do not inhabit bodies. Their importance is far and above the understanding of their insignificant counterparts. This entire world is glorious and unchanging. There is no change in its arrangement. [Yet] this world is not self-sufficient but its existence is dependent upon the Glorious Name.”
- 27.
Cf. Kohen, Haguto, 207, who argues that the ability to bring about wonders with the name YHWH exists only when using the name qua adjective or shem to’ar.
- 28.
On mystical cleavage to kol in Ibn Ezra and its magical potency, see Afterman, Devekut, 107–108; Halbertal, Concealment and Revelation, 46–47; Wolfson, “Kol”; Kreisel “On ‘kol’”.
- 29.
Kreisel, ibid., 39–42. Locating here a duality is in contrast to Wolfson, ibid., 110, who finds here proof that Ibn Ezra believed that God created an Active Intellect or demiurge. Our analysis of the ontological distinction between the linguistic, numerical, and concrete realms supports Kreisel’s claim, that for Ibn Ezra, God’s relation to reality is a combination of transcendence and immanence, and that this combination is reflected in His name. In each of these realms, God acts immanently, without compromising His oneness and transcendence.
- 30.
Afterman, ibid., 120–121.
- 31.
Cf. Ibn Ezra, Introduction to the Commentary on the Torah (the third way); cf. Lancaster, Introduction to the Torah, 158–162. See, also, Jospe, “The Torah and Astrology”, 17.
- 32.
As Jospe, Jewish Philosophy, 203–210 observes, Ibn Ezra holds in fact two different threefold cosmologies. The descending cosmology that appears in his commentary on the Book of Daniel is Neoplatonist in nature. It therefore begins with the One as the highest realm, presenting Angels as beings of the intermediate level. The ascending cosmology, figuring in Ibn Ezra’s commentary on Exodus, follows the spiritual path of the pious, by which the bodyless world of angels is the highest (and third) world, whereas God Himself transcends the entire cosmological order.
- 33.
Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, 419: "והנה חכמי המבטא הקימו שם העצם תחת העצם כאילו הוא עומד בעצמו, והוא נושא המקרים בדרך קצרה".
Cf. idem, Long Commentary on Exodus 3.15: “Because the substance exists in itself”.
- 34.
Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, ibid.: "והנה תחת האיש שידובר בו כאלו אלו האותיות מקום לעצמו ושָם יימצא". Cf. W. Bacher, Abraham Ibn Esra als Grammatiker, Strassburg, 1882, 73, n. 10.
- 35.
See Friedländer, Essays, 169. In this grammatical quality of proper names, Hebrew differs from most Greco-Latin languages and from other Semitic languages such as Arabic, in which use of definitive articles before a proper name is rather common. That said, names can be transformed into predicates in many languages; see Leckie, “Double Life”.
- 36.
Thus, while we can form constructs such as “the house of Jacob” (beit Ya’akov), we cannot form constructs such as “Jacob of the house” (Ya’akov ha-bayit). In contrast, general nouns can easily form such constructs, such as “the door of the house” (delet ha-bayit). See Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, 420–421; idem, Long Commentary on Exodus 3.15 (Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 66).
- 37.
Ibn Ezra, Sefer ha-Shem, ibid.: "והנה אחל לגלות קצת סוד השם הנכבד והנורא. כי הנה הנביאים שמו השם שהוא בן שתים אותיות [יה] ובן ארבע אותיות [יהו-ה] והשם שהוא אהי”ה שם עצם לעליון."
Note that Ibn Ezra does, indeed, acknowledge several occasions in which the Bible uses YHWH as an adjective or shem to’ar, in which case it functions as a modified noun. See Jospe, Jewish Philosophy, 206–210, for a lucid explanation of YHWH as an adjective or shem to’ar.
- 38.
Ibn Paqudah, Duties of the Heart, 138–139. This view will later resonate powerfully with Maimonides in The Guide of the Perplexed, 1.61. See Schwartz, “Shelila”; Stern, Matter, and Form, 220–226.
- 39.
Presumably, this is also similar to Saádia Gaón’s approach (n. 28 supra). Rashbam’s commentary to Exodus 3.15: “That which is written about י-ה, I shall explain in Atbash: He calls Himself אהיה, while we call Him יהיה. As for the name י-ה-ו-ה, the letter vav substitutes for the letter yod, as in the phrase (Eccl. 2.22): ‘for what comes (הוה) to a man’.” Rashbam, Commentary on Exodus, 37–38.
- 40.
Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary on Exodus 3.15: "האחד על לשון המדבר".
- 41.
Ibid.: "לשון יחיד שאינו מדבר".
- 42.
Sefer ha-Shem, 427:"והנה כל העצמים והמקרים צריכים למעמידו, ושיהיה לנצח ככה בלא שינוי כי הוא היש באמת וכל זולתו הוא יש בעבורו. על כן ‘אהיה אשר אהיה’, כי למה נקרא בשם הזה, כי אין הווה נצח בעצמו בלא שינוי זולתו. ע’כ הוצרך לומר פעם אחרת ‘אהיה’ שלחני אליכם, ואח’כ הזכיר גם השם השני שהוא כתוב עם וי’ו והנה טעמו כראשון."
- 43.
On notions of perpetual emanation in Ibn Ezra’s theology, see Husik, History, 190–191.
- 44.
Ibn Ezra does not inform the reader why YHWH is the most common of these three names. He simply indicates with regard to Ehyeh that: “The first of these divine names is only found here”. Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 85.
- 45.
For an elaborate discussion on the influence of Pseudo-Dionysius on medieval theology, with specific focus on his influence on name-theology, see Westerkamp, “Naming and Tetragrammatology”.
- 46.
I believe that this position of Ibn Ezra’s was implied by Sela, Asṭrologyah u-Farshanut, 273: “[I]t has become clear then that Ibn Ezra expresses the key notion by which the Hebrew language, as it is manifest in the biblical text, encapsulated the very substance of the scientific concept”.
- 47.
Kohen and Simon, Yesod Mora, 57–58; Langermann, “Ibn Ezra”.
- 48.
Ibid.
- 49.
Kohen and Simon themselves add that “there is reason to assume that [Ibn Ezra] drew from this book [Yeẓirah] the idea that the Tetragrammaton is a wondrous combination of letters; that—in addition to the sense derived from the root hyh—also has a numeric and geometric-astronomic meaning”. Ibid., 54.
- 50.
Cf. a similar position in Judah Halevi, The Book of Kuzari 4.3.
- 51.
Ibn Ezra, Yesod Mora, 11.2, Strickman, Secret of the Torah, 151; cf. Dunash Ben Labrat’s acrostic: דונ"ש הלו'י אמ"ת כט"ב; Menachem Ben Saruk’s acrostic: שמלאכת"ו בינה. Ibn Ezra himself adds another acrostic elsewhere: או"ת מבי"ן השכ"ל.
- 52.
Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary on Exodus 3.15:"וראוי להיות האות הראשון גם החמישי גם הששי גם העשירי [= אהו"י] קלים במבטא וכבדים בטעם. ויהיו נמצאים עם התנועות עד שיהיו ארבעתם אותיות המשך, ויהיו פעם נראים ופעם נעלמים ופעם נוספים ופעם חסירים ופעם מובלעים בדגשות ופעם מתחלפים אלה באלה."
Cf. Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 75–76: “It is also fitting that the alef, he, vav, yod be easy to pronounce and have important meanings. These four letters are found in the vowels and are implied letters. These letters serve at times as consonants, at times as silent letters, and at times as paragogic letters. At times they drop out. At other times they are swallowed by a dagesh. Finally, at times they interchange with each other.”
- 53.
אדבר, ידבר, דברי, ראי.
- 54.
אמתה, קורבנו, שמי, חסידיו.
- 55.
Cf. Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 85:הנה הראיתי כי אלו הארבע אותיות הם אותיות המשך," על כן היו השמות נכבדים שהם שמות העצם מאלה האותיות."
- 56.
Idem, ibid.: "הקלות במבטא וכבדות בטעם".
- 57.
See Schwartz and Comtino, Perush Kadmon, 162–176; supercommentary to Ibn Ezra, in Mikra’ot Gedolot, Exodus; Simon, “Supercommentaries”, 86–128.
- 58.
See Kohen and Simon, Yesod Mora, 57; Kohen, Haguto, 219 and onward; Schwartz, Perush Kadmon, 156–176.
- 59.
According to Pythagorean views, numbers are actual entities embedded in a system of cross- relations. Concrete reality not only is governed by such mathematical relations but can also reveal them to the wise observer. See Sela, Scientific Corpus; Visi, Early Supercommentaries, 75–150.
- 60.
See Kreisel, “On ‘Kol’”, 41.
- 61.
Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary on Exodus 3.15; Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 69: "סוד כל המספר ויסודו".
- 62.
Strickman and Silver, Commentary, 71.
- 63.
See Ibn Ezra, Long Commentary to Exodus 33.22; see, also, A. Ibn Ezra and J. L. Krinski, Hamishah humshe Torah, 53–54.
- 64.
On the influence of Claudius Ptolemy on Ibn Ezra’s views regarding the powers of ten, see Sela, Medieval Hebrew Science, 316–323.
- 65.
Our discussion of Ibn Ezra’s position on the numerical values of the matres lectionis is but one part of his full exposition on the topic. Due to its complexity, I have chosen to omit his discussion on the geometrical qualities of these letters. For further elaboration, see Kohen, Haguto, 214; Kohen and Simon, Yesod Mora, 193–197; Schwartz. Perush Kadmon, 156–176.
- 66.
The rationale and epistemic value of these discussions have been defended by scholars such as Kohen and Simon, Yesod Mora, 57; and Kohen, Haguto, 214–215.
- 67.
Plato, Cratylus, 390d–390e: “Φύσει τα` oʼνόμα τα εἶναι τοῖς πράγμασι, καὶ οὐ πάντα δημιουργo`ν oʼνομάτων εἶναι, αʼλλα` μόνον ἐκεῖνον τo`ν αʼπο βλέποντα εἰς τo` τῇ φύσει ὄνομα ὂν ἑκάστῳ καὶ δυνάμενον αὐτοῦ τo` εἶδος τιθέναι εἴς τετα` γράμματα καὶ τα`ς συλλαβάς.”
- 68.
See discussion in Chap. 6 on links of this view with Wittgenstein’s Tractatus.
- 69.
See Lasker, “Judah Halevi as Biblical Exegete”, 190; Harvey, “Judah Halevi’s Interpretation of the Tetragrammaton”; Silman, Judah Halevi, 103–105, 173–182; 187–196.
- 70.
Kuzari, 4:3, 201–202. All citations in the book are from the H. Hirschfeld translation, London, Routledge; New York, Dutton, 1905.
- 71.
Silman, Judah Halevi, vii–ix.
- 72.
On Halevi’s Arabic sources, see Krinis, “Arabic Background”.
- 73.
See Silman, Judah Halevi, 134–136, 226, 326–328; Afterman, Devekut, 73–80.
- 74.
Silman, ibid., 327.
- 75.
Kuzari 4:3, 201.
- 76.
Ibid., 200.
- 77.
See Goldstein, “Astronomy”; Davidson, “Active Intellect”; Wolfson, Causality, and Miracles, 137–153.
- 78.
See Wolfson, “Maimonides and Halevi”, 297–337.
- 79.
“The Creator was as wise in arranging this relation between the exterior senses and the things perceived, as He was in fixing the relation between the abstract sense and the incorporeal substratum. To the chosen among His creatures He has given an inner eye which sees things as they really are, without any alteration. Reason is thus in a position to come to a conclusion regarding the true spirit of these things. He to whom this eye has been given is clear-sighted indeed. Other people who appear to him as blind, he guides on their way.” Kuzari, ibid., 207.
- 80.
Kuzari 1:87, 60–61.
- 81.
Ibid., 4:15, 222. On the mystical nature of the prophetic intuition, see ibid. Cf. Afterman, Devekut, 106–109; S. Pines, “Spirituality”. Idem, Pines, “Doctrine de la prophétie”, 253–260.
- 82.
In the original: פסמי יי עלי אלכצוץ. Accordingly, to each divine name, YHWH and Elohim, there corresponds a different epistemological method. Elohim is the object of qiyas, logical or deductive knowledge; and YHWH is the object of dhauq, “taste” or experiential knowledge. See Schweid, T.aʻam v·a-hak·ashah, 37–80.
- 83.
Kuzari, 4:1, 199.
- 84.
Ibid. Change in translation is mine. Hirschfeld’s rendition: “This is as if one asked: Which God is to be worshipped, the sun, the moon, the heaven, the signs of the zodiac, any star, fire, a spirit, or celestial angels, etc.; each of these, taken singly, has an activity and force, and causes growth and decay? The answer to this question is: ‘The Lord’, just as if one would say: A. B., or a proper name, as Ruben or Simeon, supposing that these names indicate their personalities.” Whether the name YHWH was coined by humans, as implied from section IV of the Kuzari, or rather is a transcendental name coined by God Himself remains an open question. Cf. Kuzari 2:2, 83: “All names of God, save the Tetragrammaton, are predicates and attributive descriptions, derived from the way His creatures are affected by His decrees and measures”.
- 85.
Ibid., 4:3, 202. See, also, Harvey, “Judah Halevi’s Interpretation of the Tetragrammaton”, 127: “Halevi speculates here that the name Ehyeh is derived from the Tetragrammaton and from the verb ‘hyh’”. It follows that the Tetragrammaton itself is also derived from the verb “hyh”.
- 86.
Ibid., 4:2, 199.
- 87.
See Lobel, Sufi Language, 101–102 on Ibn Sina’s view that prophetic testimonies can serve as proof of God’s existence.
- 88.
Kuzari, 4:3, 202.
- 89.
Perhaps it’s similar to what Russell would call a logically proper name, as opposed to regular names, which are all disguised descriptions. I thank Dr. Lebens for this insight.
- 90.
Ibid.
- 91.
The Midrash Rabbah: Exodus, translated by S. M. Lehrman, London, Soncino Press, 1951, vol. 2, 65: “R. Jacob b. Abina in the name of R. Huna of Sepphoris: God Said to Moses: ‘Tell them that I will be with them in this servitude, and in servitude will they always continue, but I will be with them!’”.
- 92.
Originally חקיקה אלד’את. See Blau, Dictionary, 230.
- 93.
Originally אלחאצ’ר.
- 94.
Kuzari, 4:3, 202.
- 95.
Ibid.
- 96.
Ibid., 201.
- 97.
See Lasker, “Proselyte Judaism, Christianity, and Islam”.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Halevi, J 1946, Book of Kuzari, trans. H Hirschfeld, New York: Pardes.
Abraham Ibn Ezra 1995, The Secret of the Torah: A Translation of Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Sefer Yesod Mora Ve-sod Ha-Torah, trans. H.N. Strickman, Northvale, NJ.
Ibn Ezra, A 1985, Yalkut Abraham Ibn Ezra, ed. I Levin, New York-Tel Aviv.
Ibn Ezra, A 1976, Shire ha-kodesh shel Abraham Ibn Ezra, ed. I Levin, Jerusalem.
Ibn Ezra, Abraham, and Israel Levin. Shire ha-kodesh shel Abraham Ibn Ezra. Jerusalem, 1976.
Ibn Ezra, A 2011, Shirim, ed. I Levin, Tel-Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press.
Ibn Ezra, A 2007, Yesod mora ve-sod Torah, eds. Y Cohen & U Ben Simon, Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University.
Ibn Paqudah, B 2017, Duties of the Heart, trans. Y. Sebag, CreateSpace.
Krinski, JL 1928, Abraham Ibn Ezra: Hamishah humshe Torah ʻim Hamesh Megilot (Exodus), Vilna.
Freedman, H 1961, Midrash Rabbah: Translated into English with notes, glossary and indices. London: Soncino Press.
Plato 1925, Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 9, trans. HN Fowler, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd.
Ben Meir, S 1989, Rabbi Samuel Ben Meir’s commentary on Torah: An annotated translation, trans. C Lockshin & MI Lockshin, Lewiston [NY], Lampeter [Wales], Queenston [Ontario]: Edwin Mellen Press.
Strickman, H, & Silver, MA 1996, Ibn Ezra’s Commentary on the Pentateuch: Exodus (Shemot), New York.
Secondary Sources
Afterman, A 2011, Devekut: Mystical intimacy in medieval Jewish thought, Los Angeles: Cherub Press (in Hebrew).
Afterman, A 2016, “And They Shall Be One Flesh”: On the language of mystical union in Judaism. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
Bertolacci, A 2005, ‘On the Arabic translations of Aristotle’s Metaphysics’, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 15, 241–275.
Blau, J 2006, Dictionary of mediaeval Judaeo-Arabic texts, Jerusalem: Academy of the Hebrew language.
Davidson, H 1972, ‘The active intellect in the Cuzari and Halevi’s theory of causality’, Revue des Études Juives, vol. 131, pp. 351–396.
Sela, S & Freudenthal, G 2006, ‘Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Scholarly Writings: A Chronological Listing’, alef, 6, 13–55.
Friedländer, M 1877, Essays on the writings of Abraham Ibn Ezra, London.
Harvey, WZ 2012, ‘Judah Halevi’s interpretation of the Tetragrammaton’, in Word fitly spoken, 125–132.
Husik, I 1948, A history of mediaeval Jewish philosophy, Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America.
Jospe, R 2009, Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages, Boston, MA: Academic Studies Press.
Jospe, R 1993, ‘The Torah and astrology according to Abraham Ibn Ezra’, Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies, 11, pp. 17–24.
Kohen, Y 1996, The philosophy of R. Abraham Ibn Ezra, Rishon le-Tsiyon: Shay Publishing (in Hebrew).
Kreisel, H 1994, ‘On the term kol in Abraham Ibn Ezra: a reappraisal’, Revue des études juives, 153, 29–66.
Krinis, E 2013, ‘The Arabic Background of the Kuzari’, Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, 21.1, pp. 1–56.
Lancaster, I 2003, Deconstructing the Bible: Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Introduction to the Torah, London: Routledge.
Langermann, T 2014, ‘Abraham Ibn Ezra’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), URL http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/Ibn Ezra/.
Lasker, DJ 2007, ‘Rabbi Judah Halevi as a biblical exegete in the Kuzari’, in A Word Fitly Spoken: Studies in Mediaeval Exegesis of the Hebrew Bible and the Qur’an presented to Haggai Ben-Shammai, ed. M. Bar-Asher et al., Jerusalem, pp. 179–192 (in Hebrew).
Lasker, DJ 1990, ‘Proselyte Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in the thought of Judah Halevi’, The Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. 81, no. ½, pp. 75–91.
Leckie, G 2013, ‘The double life of names’, Philosophical Studies, 165.3, 1139–1160.
Lobel, D 2007, A Sufi-Jewish dialogue: Philosophy and mysticism in Bahya Ibn Paqūda’s ‘Duties of the Heart’, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Lobel, D 2000, Between mysticism and philosophy: Sufi language of religious experience in Judah Ha-Levi’s Kuzari, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Pines, S 1957, ‘Notes sur la doctrine de la prophétie et la réhabilitation de la matière dans la Kuzari’, Mélanges de Philosophie et de Littérature Juives, 1, 253–260.
Pines, S 1988, ‘On the term “spirituality” and its sources and on the teachings of R. Judah Halevi’, Tarbiz, vol. 54, pp. 511–540 (in Hebrew).
Prijs, L 1950, Die Grammatikalische Terminologie des Abraham Ibn Ezra, Basel.
Rosenberg, S 1977, ‘Signification of Names in Medieval Jewish Logic’, Iyyun, vol. 27, pp. 105–144.
Rosin, D 1898, ‘Die Religionsphilosophie Abraham Ibn Esra’s’, Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums, 42.
Schwartz, D 2005, Studies on Astral Magic in Medieval Jewish Thought, trans. D. Louvish & B. Stein, Leiden.
Schwartz, D 1999, ‘From theurgy to magic: The formation of the magical-talismanic view of sacrifice among Nahmanides and his interpreters’, Kabbalah, vol. 4, pp. 387–411 (in Hebrew).
Schwartz, D 1998, ‘The magical meaning of the Divine Name: On poetry and thought in R. Abraham Ibn Ezra’, Criticism and Interpretation, vol. 32, pp. 39–51 (in Hebrew).
Schwartz, D & Comtino, M 2010, Perush kadmon le-Sefer Yesod Mora, Ramat-Gan: Bar Ilan University (in Hebrew).
Schwartz, Y 1997, ‘Ben Shelila le-Shetika: Ha-Rambam ba-Ma’arav ha-Latini’, Iyyun, 45:1, pp. 386–409 (in Hebrew).
Sela, S 1999, Astrology and exegesis in the thought of Abraham Ibn Ezra, Ramat-Gan: Bar Ilan University.
Sela, S 2003, Abraham Ibn Ezra and the rise of medieval Hebrew science (Brill Series in Jewish Studies 32), Leiden: Brill.
Schweid, E 1970, Ṭaʻam v·a-hak·ashah: pirk·e ʻiyun be-sifrut-ha-maḥshavah ha-Yehudit bi-Yeme-ha-benayim, Ramat Gan: Massada.
Sela, S 2001, ‘Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Scientific Corpus: Basic Constituents and General Characterization’, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 11.01, 91–149.
Silman, Y 2012, Philosopher and Prophet: Judah Halevi, the Kuzari, and the Evolution of His Thought, New York, SUNY.
Simon, U 1993, ‘Interpreting the interpreter: Super commentaries on Ibn Ezra’s commentaries’, in Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra: Studies in the writings of a twelfth-century Jewish polymath, eds. I Twersky & JM Harris, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 370–406.
Steinschneider, M 1880, ‘Abraham Ibn Esra (Abraham Judaeus, Avenare)’, Supplement zur Zeitschrift für Mathematik und Physik, 25, 59–128 (reprint, Gesammelte Schriften [Berlin, 1925], 407–498.
Stern, J 2013, The Matter and Form of Maimonides’ Guide. Cambridge, MA.
Twersky, I & Harris, JM (eds.) 1993, Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra: Studies in the Writings of a Twelfth-Century Jewish Polymath, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Visi T, 2006, ‘The Early Ibn Ezra Super commentaries’, PhD diss., Central European University.
Westerkamp, D 2012, ‘Naming and Tetragrammatology: Medieval apophatic philosophy and its double helix’, in Jewish lifeworlds and Jewish thought, pp. 111–123.
Wolfson, HA 1966, ‘Judah Halevi on Causality and Miracles’, in Meyer Waxman Jubilee Volume, Jerusalem-Tel Aviv, 137–153.
Wolfson, HA 1925, ‘The classification of the sciences in medieval Jewish philosophy’, in Hebrew Union College Jubilee Volume, Cincinnati, OH, pp. 263–267.
Wolfson, HA 1912, ‘Maimonides and Halevi: A study in typical Jewish attitudes towards Greek philosophy in the Middle Ages’, The Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. 2, pp. 297–337.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ben-Sasson, H. (2019). Personal and Non-personal Divine Presence: The Name YHWH in the Thought of R. Abraham Ibn Ezra and R. Judah Halevi. In: Understanding YHWH. Jewish Thought and Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32312-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32312-7_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32311-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32312-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)