Did Maimonides Recommend Reading Averroes' Commentaries on Aristotle?

An article published in 2016 by Doron Forte claimed that the universally cited version of the concluding bibliographical section of Maimonides' letter to the translator of the Guide of the Perplexed, Samuel Ibn Tibbon, is both late and corrupt (Jewish Studies Quarterly 23). This claim entails t...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Harvey, Steven 1949- (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publicado: Mohr Siebeck 2021
En: Jewish studies quarterly
Año: 2021, Volumen: 28, Número: 2, Páginas: 159-190
Otras palabras clave:B Letter
B Terminology
B Ibn Tibbon
B Traslado
B Manuscripts
Acceso en línea: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descripción
Sumario:An article published in 2016 by Doron Forte claimed that the universally cited version of the concluding bibliographical section of Maimonides' letter to the translator of the Guide of the Perplexed, Samuel Ibn Tibbon, is both late and corrupt (Jewish Studies Quarterly 23). This claim entails that Maimonides did not recommend Averroes' commentaries on Aristotle in the letter. The current paper argues against this claim. It comprises seven considerations: two philological (based on testimonia Forte chose to ignore), two terminological and three just common sense. I present these considerations as complementary, one supporting the other, that together make clear that the most-often cited version of the letter is very old, the most reliable and likely the most authentic version. In fact, current evidence now points to Ibn Tibbon as the translator of this version, which shows that Maimonides indeed recommended Averroes' commentaries in this letter.
ISSN:1868-6788
Obras secundarias:Enthalten in: Jewish studies quarterly
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1628/jsq-2021-0009