1

Are there classic Commentators who took a non-Aggadic view of Biblical characters?

There are certain people mentioned in Tanach who look one way according to a simple reading of the "Biblical text," and another way when viewed according to the derashos of Chazal.

For example, Shimshon Hagibor. A simple reading of the text would lead one to think that he was a great fighter, but not much a tzaddik, whereas Chazal saw him as a tzaddik.

Another example is Avraham Avinu. Chazal say that he fulfilled all the mitzvos, that he came to believe in Hashem on the basis of his own understanding, that he taught the world to believe in G-d. Many sources depict him as the pillar of chesed. Yet, all this is pretty scarce based on a simple reading of the Biblical text.

Are there some classical Commentators who viewed such characters in a way that is close to the Biblical text, or did all of them view these characters as they are depicted in the Midrashim and Aggados of Chazal? How did the Rambam view Biblical characters such as Avraham Avinu?

shmu
  • 752
  • 4
  • 8
  • 1
    The chesed bit at least is fairly well attested to by the events of the beginning of Parshas Vayerah (including advocating for Sodom) – AKA Dec 17 '23 at 10:02
  • 1
    Okay, I concede the point regarding chesed. If Encylopedia Britannica can see the chesed, it must be pretty blatant: "Abraham is pictured with various characteristics: a righteous man, with wholehearted commitment to God; a man of peace (in settling a boundary dispute with his nephew Lot), compassionate (he argues and bargains with God to spare the people of Sodom and Gomorrah), and hospitable (he welcomes three visiting angels);" https://www.britannica.com/biography/Abraham – shmu Dec 17 '23 at 10:37
  • How did Rambam view Avraham - https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Foreign_Worship_and_Customs_of_the_Nations.1.3?vhe=Torat_Emet_363&lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en – Dov Dec 17 '23 at 11:29
  • @Dov That is an enlightening source. Thank you. – shmu Dec 17 '23 at 12:00
  • 1
    Presumably they thought we all were doing this. You can't actually appreciate the agada without first understanding what's there to build on – Double AA Dec 17 '23 at 12:41
  • @DoubleAA This is a good point. The underlying issue is like this: since there is a machlokes about the authority of Aggadah, see https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/4037/does-one-have-to-take-a-midrash-aggadah-literally, I am wondering how this plays out in peirush hamikra. – shmu Dec 17 '23 at 13:45
  • I think the Ramban, and to a further extent the Abarbanel, treat aggada with a much bigger pinch of salt than Rashi when commentating on the torah – Lo ani Dec 17 '23 at 23:52
  • The Rashbam's commentary sticks closely to peshat. But I don't know if this describes how the Rashbam viewed the people in Tanakh. When it comes to halachic derashos, he makes it clear he isn't disagreeing; he is explaining an earlier layer of the text. The same may be true of aggadic stories as well. – Micha Berger Dec 18 '23 at 10:13

0 Answers0