Joseph ben Simeon Kara ( 1065 – c. 1135) (), also known as Mahari Kara, was a French Bible exegete who was born and lived in Troyes.
Biography
His uncle and teacher was Menachem ben Helbo, whom Ḳara often cites in his commentaries, these quotations being almost the only source of knowledge concerning Menahem's exegesis.
Ḳara frequented Rashi's house; it is even possible that he was Rashi's pupil,[Leopold Zunz, Z.G. p. 68.] though this is denied by A. Epstein. They each quote from the other.[Compare Joseph Ḳara on Proverbs 4:4, 5:14, 6:23, 18:22; Rashi on Judges 3:26; Numbers 17:5, 24:14; Isaiah 10:24] In Rashi's house Ḳara also made the acquaintance of Samuel ben Meïr.[Compare RaSHBaM on Gen. 37:13] They likewise quote each other.[Compare RaSHBaM on Genesis 24:60 and Numbers iv.10; Rosin, R. Samuel ben Meïr, pp. 12 et seq., 72 et seq.; Joseph Ḳara on Amos 3:12; Job 11:17; Gen. 10:15; Porges, in Monatsschrift, 1883, p. 169.]
Isaac Ḳara, of whose exegesis specimens are given in Monatsschrift, 1864, p. 219; 1865, p. 384,[Compare Rosin, l.c. pp. 24 et seq.] may be Joseph's son.
The surname "Ḳara" is usually taken to be a professional name, meaning "reader" or "interpreter of the Bible".[See Jew. Encyc. iii.168, s.v. Bible Exegesis] Adolf Jellinek points out, however,[ Commentarien zu Esther, Ruth, etc., p. vi, Leipzig, 1855.] that "Ḳara," as contrasted with "Darshan," means the representative of the "Peshaṭ" ("Pashṭan").
He was among the first French exegetes and the forerunner of the French school of exegetes later to come. They were all to some extent influenced by his works, most notably among them, the Rashbam. Rashi too was influenced by R. Yosef who repeated his teacher's comments to him and incorporated several of them in his commentary.[ The Rishonim, The Artscroll history series. Entry R. Yosef Kara.]
Works
Ḳara was a prolific exegetical writer. When he copied Rashi's commentary on the
Pentateuch he added numerous glosses and remarks in order to supplement and revise it; and these glosses were inserted by the scribes in the text of Rashi. They have been collected.
[By A. Geiger in Niṭ'e Na'amanim, i.1 et seq.; idem in Parschandatha, pp. 21 et seq.; and by Abraham Berliner in Pleitath Soferim (Hebr. part), p. 12.]
The original or independent Bible commentaries of Ḳara are:
-
Karo apparently wrote a commentary on the Torah which is almost completely lost; what remains has been reconstructed by alhatorah.org.
-
Karo wrote a commentary on the Nevi'im Rishonim which survived in a single manuscript (MS Kirchheim) until it was lost during World War II. A partial copy by Simon Eppenstein of MS Kirchheim, expanded by chapters preserved in MS Cincinnati JCF 1, has been published by alhatorah.org.
[See Samuel Poznanski in Zeit. für Hebr. Bibl. v.68] extracts from these commentaries were published by Wolf;[In Ha-Shaḥar, ii.289, iii.688, iv.55l see also, L. Dukes in Orient, Lit. 1847, p. 344] by Littmann[In Josef ben Simeon Kara, pp. 26–32] (from Isaiah and Ezekiel. Those on Samuel and most of the Minor Prophets are not genuine.[Porges, in Monatsschrift, 1883, p. 170; Rosin, l.c. p. 72, note 2] The Jeremiah commentary was published separately by Schlossberg;[( Commentaire sur Jerémie, Paris, 1881; comp. Brüll's Jahrb. vii.170 et seq.; see, also, Leopold Zunz, Z.G. p. 68; Geiger, l.c. i.18] that on Hosea, Breslau, 1861.
-
Commentaries on most of the Hagiographa, namely:
-
Proverbs; see the quotation in Ḳara's commentary on Eccl. 7:12.
-
Book of Job, published in Monatsschrift, vols. 5-7
[see also, S.D. Luzzatto in Kerem Ḥemed, vii. 61 et seq.; A. Geiger, l.c. Hebr., pp. 11 et seq.]
-
Shir HaShirim (1:1-7:13), published by Hübsch
[ Ḥamesh Megillot, Prague, 1866; see Salfeld, Das Hohelied Salomo's, p. 49]
-
Book of Ruth, published by Hübsch, l.c., and by A. Jellinek, l.c.
[compare A. Epstein in Ha-Ḥoḳer, i.31, note 2]
-
Lamentations, published in Naples in 1486, and by Hübsch (l.c.), Jellinek (l.c.), and E. Ashkenazi,
[ Divre Ḥakhamim, pp. 17 et seq., Metz, 1849] and by S. Buber in two different recensions.[In Kaufmann Gedenkbuch, pp. 8 et seq.]
-
Ecclesiastes, published by Hübsch (l.c.) and Einstein
[in Berliner's Magazin, xiii. ''Oẓar]
-
Book of Esther, published by Hübsch (l.c.), Jellinek (l.c.), and Berliner
[ib. 1878; compare ib. 1876, p. 158]
It is quite possible that Ḳara wrote also commentaries on Ezra and Nehemiah, but that the commentaries on these books as contained in MS. Saraval No. 27, and ascribed to Joseph Ḳara, are not genuine.[A. Geiger, in Oẓar Neḥmad, iv.43 et seq.] Some comments of Ḳara on Chronicles must have existed, as is proved by the quotations in pseudo-Rashi to those books (see II Chronicles 3:15, 5:9, 25:24). According to Epstein,[l.c. i.29 et seq.] Ḳara wrote additionally
Characteristics
While in his glosses on the Pentateuch and in his commentaries on the Prophets Ḳara depends upon Rashi to the greatest extent, his explanations of the
Hagiographa are more original. He quotes Menahem ben Saruḳ, Dunash ibn Labraṭ,
Judah ha-Darshan and
Moses ha-Darshan, Ḳalir, Meïr Sheliaḥ Ẓibbur,
Kalonymus, and others. In his commentary on
Book of Job he frequently uses the writings of Shabbethai Donnolo, and gives very valuable extracts from the lost
Baraita of Samuel with Donnolo's commentary (comp. Epstein, l.c. pp. 34 et seq.).
His grammatical standpoint is that of Rashi. Whole Hebrew sentences are sometimes translated into French language. In his expressions he is not as terse as Rashi. He is bold enough to express the opinion that the Book of Samuel was not written by the prophet himself, but later ( Commentary on I Samuel ix.9). He does not go into grammatical or philological research, and cares more for the sense of the whole sentence than for a single word. He shows more common sense than depth, and though he does not altogether hold aloof from aggadic interpretations, he takes a leading place among the exegetes of northern France, who in general preferred the rational exegesis.
