Avicenna in Medieval Hebrew Translation: Ṭodros Ṭodrosi’s Translation of Kitāb al-Najāt, on Psychology and Metaphysics By Gabriella Elgrably-Berzin

Abstract

Avicenna made a late entry into medieval Hebrew philosophy; the Andalusian roots and Averroan orientation of most Jewish thinkers did not make for a sympathetic audience. Small portions of the Avicennan corpus were rendered into Hebrew by Samuel Ibn Tibbon and Shem Tov Falaquera. A good deal of Avicennan thought was accessible by way of citations in Averroes. In the beginning of the fourteenth century, Todros Todrosi decided to produce Hebrew translations of the sections on psychology and metaphysics from al-Najāt. His translations are the subject of the book under review by Gabriella Elgrably-Berzin. Hers is a study of the translation of philosophical texts, not one in the history of philosophy. There is an introductory survey of the Hebrew translation movement, and additional probes into the historical and philological circumstances of these translations. I call attention in particular to the fine essay on ‘The Hebrew Tradition of Literalism’, outlining the efforts made to produce translations that are as close as possible to the Arabic, beginning with Judah Ibn Tibbon, who had the advantage of growing up in an arabophone culture. The translations carried on with Judah’s descendants and their followers, who, however well they may have learned the Arabic language, were increasingly removed from an Arabic speaking environment and more likely to be led to inaccuracies. The bulk of the book, however, is taken up by critical editions of Todrosi’s translations and its philological analysis. The latter still relies a good deal, as it must, on the pioneering work of Moshe Goshen-Gottstein. Berzin amasses a veritable thesaurus of Arabic words, especially those considered to be ‘technical terms’, and their Hebrew equivalents. To her great credit, she includes Hebrew texts by Levi Gersonides, who though not a translator, was a brilliant philosopher and scientist, and someone who had closely examined Avicenna’s opinions.