In this article I re-examine the question of which of Ibn Ezra's commentaries on Genesis was available to Nahmanides when he wrote his own commentary on the book. The consensus until now had been that Nahmanides was familiar with both the short commentary and the second recension. A comprehensive analysis of Nahmanides' commentary on Genesis demonstrates that this consensus is incorrect - Nahmanides was only familiar with Ibn Ezra's short commentary. This conclusion is based on our familiarity with Nahmanides' inclusive approach to his sources, as well as specific examples which prove that Nahmanides was not familiar with the second recension (and not even the 'third approach').
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
I wish to express my thanks to Dr Miriam Sklarz for her comments on this article prior to publication. The research was made possible by the generous funding of the Beth Shalom Foundation of Kyoto, Japan, and the Ihel Foundation of Bar-Ilan University, for which I am very grateful. Unless otherwise noted, all biblical citations in this paper refer to Genesis.
© Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies, 2019.