JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

dunash ibn tamim
sponsa dealing with 50 items, which imitated Dunash’s poem
in their form. Dunash’s student, *Yehudi b. Sheshet, answered
sharply in the same manner. Rashi, who knew of the argument
between the school of Menahem and the school of Dunash,
quotes Dunash about 20 times, and many more times Menahem.
R. Tam wrote “decisions” on the disagreements between
Dunash and Menahem, and Joseph Kimḥi, in his Sefer
ha-Galui, wrote against these decisions in favor of Dunash.
Although Dunash was correct in many of the points under
discussion, his grammatical method is no more advanced
than that of Menahem. Both shared, for example, the search
for the “bases” of Hebrew words and verbs, a set of firm consonants
very different from the diachronic concept of “root”
used in later philology. However, while Menahem rejected
for ideological reasons the comparison of Hebrew with other
languages, Dunash accepted the comparatist method, in particular
in relation to Arabic.
The book Teshuvot ‘al Rav Sa’adyah Ga’on (“Responsa
on R. Saadiah Gaon”) is also attributed to Dunash, but many
scholars doubt if he was the author, since it is written in prose
full of Arabisms and, moreover, dissents on several points
from the opinion of Dunash in his dispute with Menahem and
recognizes that hollow roots are also triliteral. There are some
who believe that Dunash wrote this work when an old man,
perhaps after being influenced by Ḥayyuj, whom all consider
to be the founder of the new method in Hebrew grammar.
Dunash’s responsa were edited by Filipowski in 1855, and
in a critical edition with new materials by A. Sáenz-Badillos
in 1980; the arguments, written in verse by students of Menahem
and Dunash, were edited by S.G. Stern (1870); S. Benavente
published the answers of the students of Menahem
(1986); the replies by Yehudi ben Sheshet were published by
E. Varela (1981); the Teshuvot ‘al Rav Sa’adyah Ga’on, by R.
Shroeter (1866).
Dunash as an Exegete
Dunash did not write complete commentaries to biblical
books, but practiced, like Menahem, a kind of grammatical
analysis that was a true literal exegesis. For Dunash philology
was not an end in itself, it was an instrument for the adequate
comprehension of the Bible, the only correct way of interpreting
the Scriptures. Dunash was very respectful toward the
interpretations of the Targum and the Masorah, remaining
faithful to the literal meaning of the text. This did not mean
disregarding the fact that the Scriptures uses metaphors and
analogies that should be understood as such, above all in the
case of the anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms in
Scripture. Dunash applied linguistic knowledge to the interpretation
of the Scriptures, complementing it with “the 13 rules
by which most of the precepts, laws, norms, and instructions
are governed and measured.” He made moderate use of the
methods of permutation or metathesis applied by some traditional
interpreters, and continued the comparative methods
initiated by Saadiah and other grammarians in North Africa in
order to understand the most difficult words of the Bible.
Bibliography: W. Bacher, Die hebraeische Sprachwissenschaft…
(1892), 27–33; idem, in: ZDMG, 49 (1895), 367–86; idem, in:
MGWJ, 46 (1902), 478–80; H. Hirschfield, Literary History of Hebrew
Grammarians and Lexicographers (1926), 26–31; Davidson, Oẓar, 4
(1933), 378; Englander, in: HUCA, 7 (1930), 399–437; 11 (1936), 369–89;
12–13 (1937–38), 505–21; Brody, in: Sefer ha-Yovel… S. Krauss (1936),
117–26; Yellin, ibid., 127–35; idem, in: Sefer Zikkaron… Gulak ve-Klein
(1942), 105, 114; idem, Toledot Hitpatteḥut ha-Dikduk ha-Ivri (1945),
67–93; D. Herzog, in: Saadya Studies, ed. by E.J. Rosenthal (1943),
26–46; N. Allony, in: JQR, 36 (1945), 141–6; idem, in: Leshonenu, 15
(1946/47), 161–72; idem, in: Dunash ben Labrat, Shirim (1946), 5–46
(introd.); idem, Torat ha-Mishkalim (1951). Add. Bibliography:
E. Ashtor, The Jews of Moslem Spain, 1 (1973), 252ff.; Schirmann-
Fleischer, The History of Hebrew Poetry in Muslim Spain (Heb., 1995),
119–143; A. Sáenz-Badillos and J. Targarona, Gramáticos Hebreos de
al-Andalus (Siglos X–XII). Filología y Biblia (1988), 39–89; idem, Los
judíos de Sefarad ante la Biblia (1996), 55–76; A. Sáenz-Badillos, in:
M. Saebo et al. (eds.), Hebrew Bible. Old Testament. The History of Its
Interpretation. Vol. 1, Part 2 (2000), 96–109.
[Chaim M. Rabin / Angel Sáenz-Badillos (2nd ed.)]
DUNASH IBN TAMIM (c. 890–after 955/6), North African
scholar, known also as Adonim, the Hebrew form of Dunash,
and by the Arabic surname Abu Sahl. (The descriptive
adjective shaflagi appended to his name by Moses *Ibn Ezra
is inexplicable.) Dunash was from Kairouan, and studied with
Isaac *Israeli, to whom he undoubtedly owed the greater part
of his intellectual development. The philosophical and theological
parts of his commentary on the Sefer *Yeẓirah reflect
the neoplatonism of Israeli’s philosophical thinking. Dunash
probably also received from Israeli his medical knowledge,
displayed authoritatively especially in the last pages of his
commentary. Dunash also demonstrates a thorough knowledge
of certain theories of Arabic grammar, chiefly theories
of phonetics. In addition to astronomy, of which he had
made a special study, this commentary shows that he had
read treatises derived from Greek sources on physics and
the natural sciences. Dunash is thought to be the author of
several works (all probably in Arabic). The following three
are no longer extant: (1) a comparative study of Arabic and
Hebrew, in which the author tries to prove the antiquity of
Hebrew, and which is mentioned or quoted by Judah *Ibn
Bal’am, Abu Ibrahim Isak *Ibn Barun, Moses *Ibn Ezra, and
Abraham *Ibn Ezra, but in deprecatory terms; (2) a book on
Indian calculus, probably bearing the title Ḥisab al-Gubar;
and (3) a treatise on astronomy in three parts (structure of
the spheres, mathematical astronomy, and astrology, probably
critical). The last was written at the request of *Ḥisdai ibn
Shaprut; another edition or copy was dedicated by Dunash
to the Fatimid caliph al-Mansur Ismail ibn al Qayyim. Extant
in manuscript is a treatise on the armillary sphere, an astronomical
instrument, dedicated to a high Fatimid dignitary
and written in Arabic characters (as opposed to other Arabic
writings in Hebrew script; Hagia Sophia Ms. 4861). There
are vague allusions to a commentary on the first chapter of
Genesis. The Arab physician Ibn al-Baytar (d. 1248) refers to
48 ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA, Second Edition, Volume 6