## Gevia Kesef Chapter 8

###### Gevia Kesef 8:1
[Gevia Kesef 8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gevia%20Kesef/r/8:1)

אמרו הנבחרים והיותר חכמים רז״ל ״משה כתב ספרו וספר איוב.״ ואמרו במקום אחר ״לא היה ולא נברא אלא משל היה.״ כונו בזה כי ספר איוב חבר משה רבינו ע״ה בחכמתו להודיע לנו אמיתות גדולות, כמו שנאמר שנהגו הקודמים מן הפילוסופים כמו בספר שעשה אבן צר במשל ספור מחלוקת האדם עם שאר בעלי חיים, שדרך ספור מה שעבר כאלו היה ממש למדנו מן הויכוח ההוא כמה ענינים מן הפילוסופיא המעשית, וכמה סגולות מחכמת הטבע ותכליתו, פינת שלימות הנפש והשארת הנפש. וכן היה ספר איוב שוה בשוה.

**Trans. by Basil Herring, New York, Ktav, 1982:**
The elect and most wise sages, may their memory be blessed, said that “Moses wrote his book and the Book of Job.”¹ 14b. Elsewhere they said that “Job never existed, for he was but a parable.”² Their intention was to say that Moses composed the Book of Job, in his wisdom, to inform us of great truths,³ III:22–23) for leaving the question of Job’s existence unresolved. Kaspi insists on the literal comprehension of “There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job” (Job 1:1), for “if we doubt the existence of Job … we could doubt the existence of all the personalities in the Bible … and if some of our ancestors did not know his time and place, that is not important, for I believe that he existed as recorded …” similar to what is said of the earliest philosophers. Such is the work written by Ibn Zur‘a that tells the parable of the argument of man with the rest of the animals.⁴ used logic and philosophy in studying the Bible, like Kaspi. Cf. *Encyclopedia of Islam*, s.v. “Ibn Zur‘a.” His writings are mostly lost. When a story is told as if it actually happened, one can learn from the dialogue several matters in practical philosophy, as well as precious things regarding natural science, whose goal is the attainment of the perfection and immortality of the soul. This is true of the Book of Job in every respect.

footnotes:
¹ 1. BT Bava’ Batra’
² 2. Ibid. 15a. A casual comparison might lead one to conclude that neither Job nor the patriarchs existed. See above Chapter 1 regarding allegorical exegesis.
³ 3. In his commentary to the Book of Job (AS I 137), Kaspi takes issue with Maimonides (Guide
⁴ 4. This tenth-century translator of Aristotle’s Historia Animalium


###### Gevia Kesef 8:2
[Gevia Kesef 8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gevia%20Kesef/r/8:2)

ואין ספק | שאדם הראשון היה ונברא ואף כי נח והאבות והשבטים, וחלילה שכונו כי ספר תורתינו בכללו היה שמצד זה חברו שני הספרים האלה ויחסום למשה. אבל כונתם בזה לומר כי ספר תורה כולל ג״כ פינות הפילוסופיא המעשית והעיונית. וגם הוא לומר שיש בתורה בקצת מקומות משלים ודמיונים, וזה בענין אברהם בעגלה ועז ואיל וכל המשל ההוא, ובענין סולם יעקב וזולת זה. ובפרט בחומש אשר לכלל זה הספר אז״ל לפי דעתי מעשה בראשית. ואם היותר עמוק ממנו הוא סדר בראשית ר״ל שסיים ״ונח מצא חן בעיני יי׳.״ אבל בכלל זה החומש הוא החלק היותר נכבד מכלל התורה וכולו כולל מה שעבר קודם שנברא משה. וזה היה ענין אחד מגדולת זה החלק, כי חומש ״ואלה שמות״ וכן משם והלאה, היה דבר קל לכתוב כי הכל ראה בעיניו. אבל מה שעבר אלף ואלפים מן השנים זה היה חמור. אמנם לגבי משה ״מלת׳ זוטרתי היא״ ואין דבר גדול אצלו לכתוב מה שעבר, אלפים מן השנים, יותר מלכתוב מה שעתיד להיות שתים מן השנים כמו שאבאר במקום אחר. ובכלל כל מה שכתב שהיה ושיהיה, הכל ידע משה רבינו וכתב על פי הדבר והכל נמסר לו מהשם ית׳, ואם תרצה אמור מן השמים. ובפרט מן הסיפורים שהיו כבר, הכתובים בחומש בראשית כי זה החלק כולו הוא מן האמר הגוזר והוא סיפור והרבה מענינים לפניו. ומדעתי אע״פ שאמרו הנבחרים ז״ל כי התורה נתנה בסיני נכתב אש שחורה על גבי אש לבנה, הנה העקר בזה על חומש בראשית, כי הוא הנכבד בכלל, והוא ״תפוחי זהב במשכיות כסף.״ | גם עיקר כונתו בפרט לפי דעתי על זה החומש בכלל, כי בו הפלגת הסודות וסתרי תורה, וגם כל המצוות הלכיות שבאו אחר כך בתורה דרך אחר בלתי גוזר, כמו ״אנוכי״, ו״לא יהיה לך״ וכן ״שמע ישראל יי׳ אלוקינו יי׳ אחד,״ וכן ״ואהבת״ ״ויראת״, הכל בא דרך הגדה וסיפור בזה החומש. לכן נשאו ז״ל זה החומש ר״ל באמרם ״מעשה בראשית״ כמו שכתבנו.

**Trans. by Basil Herring, New York, Ktav, 1982:**
There is no doubt | that the first man existed, as did Noah, the patriarchs, and the (twelve) tribes. God forbid that the (sages), in attributing both (the Torah and Job) to Moses, meant thereby that the Torah is similar to Job in this respect. Their intention, rather, was to state that the Torah, like (Job), contains fundamental aspects of practical and theoretical philosophy. (Their statement) also teaches us that in the Torah some places contain parables and metaphors, including the episode (in the life) of Abraham regarding the heifer and the she-goat and ram, as well as that entire parable, and the incident of Jacob’s ladder,⁵ etc. This is especially true of this book (of Genesis) in the Torah, for in my opinion it is this book which the sages referred to as “the work of Creation.”⁶ 25a, *Genesis Rabbah* 1. The most profound part of (Genesis) is the section concluding, “But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.”⁷ The book (of Genesis), containing in its entirety all that transpired before the birth of Moses, is the most important book in the Torah. This fact (of it having taken place prior to the birth of Moses) constitutes one of the special aspects of Genesis, for the Book of Exodus, and the following books, were easy (for Moses) to write, having seen everything with his own eyes. It was difficult, however, (to write) of what had occurred thousands of years earlier. Nevertheless, for Moses it was “but a small thing,”⁸ 33b. for nothing in the past was beyond Moses’ ability to write, even that which occured thousands of years previously. (It was no more difficult) than writing of what was to occur in years to come, as I will explain elsewhere. As a rule, whatever Moses wrote regarding past and future (events), he knew and wrote in accordance with the word (of God), for everything was conveyed to him from the Lord, or if you will, from heaven.⁹ This is especially true of those stories in Genesis referring to the past, for they are all categorical, i.e., anecdotal,¹⁰ (MK I 1) Kaspi divides the Torah into two kinds of statements: (a) *’Omer gozer* (narrative), (b) *’Eino gozer* (prescriptive). Only the former affirms some truth, for a command does not state any facts. He discusses this further in the *Ṣeror Ha-Kesef* (fol. 231b). Kaspi’s position here is similar to that of Alfarabi in *Five Chapters of Logic* (MS Vatican 49, fol. 106a), stating: “the philosophical narrative is that which is called demonstrative, and its purpose is to teach the truth and to cause to understand …” This is quoted in Mesch, *Studies*, p. 86. See also H. Blumberg, “Alfarabi’s Five Chapters on Logic,” *PAAJR* VI (1934), pp. 119–121. statements. This is true of many preceding matters. Even though the sages said, “the (entire) Torah given at Sinai was written in black fire upon white fire,”¹¹ 6:1, *Canticles Rabbah* 5:9. The statement does not distinguish between different books of the Torah. my opinion is that they were referring primarily to Genesis, for it is the most important (of all), being “apples of gold in settings of silver.”¹² in reference to the exoteric and underlying esoteric levels of Scripture. | This (last verse) is especially true of Genesis, as it contains the exalted secrets and mysteries of the Torah, as well as the commandments of the heart¹³. Kaspi divides the commandments into three classes (of the heart, of action, of the tongue). All are necessary, yet the first of these is the most important. As he puts it, “were we angels we would need only the commandments of the intellect [i.e., of the heart] (MK I 6). This classification follows Ibn Ezra’s *Yesod Mora’* (Prague, 1833), pp. 27–32, which is referred to in *‘Ammudei Kesef* (AM 134). Cf. Mesch, *Studies*, pp. 84 ff. that subsequently occur in the Torah in the form of nonanecdotal statements,¹⁴ such as “I am the Lord thy God,”¹⁵ “thou shalt have no other Gods,”¹⁶ and “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.”¹⁷ (This is also true of) “thou shalt love …”¹⁸ and “thou shalt fear.”¹⁹ All these (commandments) come in the book (of Genesis) in narrative and anecdotal form.²⁰ III:50): “Either they give a correct notion of an opinion that is a pillar of the law, or they rectify some action so that wrongdoing and aggression should not occur between men.” For this reason the sages praised this book by referring to it as “the work of Creation,” as stated above.

footnotes:
⁵ 5. Gen. 28:12.
⁶ 6. BT Megillah
⁷ 7. Gen. 6:8. He means that the “work of Creation” refers essentially to the chapters preceding the flood in Gen. 6. On the importance that Kaspi attaches to the various divisions of the Scriptures, see above Chapter 2.
⁸ 8. BT Berakhot
⁹ 9. Kaspi insists that all of the Torah is from heaven, including all of Deuteronomy, “as those of us who philosophize know” (MK I 110). The final verses of Deuteronomy were likewise included, for “those things that relate to future events are no different from (future predictions in) the rest of the Torah” (MK II 310).
¹⁰ 10. In Ṭirat Kesef
¹¹ 11. JT Shekalim
¹² 12. Prov. 25:11, which is quoted in the Introduction to the Guide
¹³ 13. In Hebrew miṣvot libbiyot
¹⁴ 14. He is referring to commandments, which are as a class prescriptive, as opposed to the narrative statements which are categorical.
¹⁵ 15. Exod. 20:2.
¹⁶ 16. Exod. 20:3.
¹⁷ 17. Deut. 6:4.
¹⁸ 18. Deut. 6:5.
¹⁹ 19. Lev. 19:14, 32; 25:17, 36, 43.
²⁰ 20. Cf. above n. 10. Maimonides also explains that Scriptural narrative is a necessary utility for the law, when he says (Guide