The Rashbam Authorship Controversy Redux: On Sara Japhet's The Commentary of Rabbi Samuel Ben Meir (Rashbam) on the Book of Job (Hebrew)

For over a quarter century, Sara Japhet has investigated the exegetical works of the northern French rabbinic masters. Her publications have advanced our understanding of the history of their exegesis and have illuminated the development of their version of peshat methodology. ¹ Japhet has devoted particular attention to the exegesis of arguably the French school's greatest representative, Rabbi Samuel ben Meir, or Rashbam. Her initial studies were devoted primarily to Rashbam's commentary on Koheleth,² which she eventually published together with Robert Salters, while in more recent ventures she focused on Rashbam's commentary on Job.³ These latter efforts have culminated in the volume herein reviewed, Japhet's edition of Rashbam's commentary on Job. Her signal achievement has enabled contemporary readers to open a commentary from the northern French school that had lain dormant for over eight hundred years. The joy attending this publication should not be overshadowed by any measure of scholarly controversy. The attribution of this commentary to Rashbam (alone) has been fraught with contention almost since the discovery of the manuscript that underlies this edition. Japhet has argued powerfully in support of Rashbam's authorship, and has responded with great erudition to the skepticism of critics who find the commentary to be other than pure Rashbam. Below I will consider the alternative positions staked out by the various parties involved in the debate.

Let us first direct our attention to the fruit of Japhet's labor. Rashbam's commentary (or, more neutrally, "the commentary attributed to Rashbam") itself runs ninety-seven pages and is accompanied by Japhet's erudite annotations. It is based primarily on a manuscript in the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Lutzki MS 778 (hereafter L778).⁴ While the commentary is, of course, the centerpiece of the volume, Japhet's brilliant scholarship is particularly evident in her nearly 350 pages of introduction! A glance at the table of contents reveals the comprehensive nature of the introduction. Japhet begins her analysis with a history of the discovery of the commentary;⁵ included in this chapter is Japhet's discussion of the relationship between the Job commentary of Rashbam and the one attributed to R. Yosef Kara. Following this, she has devoted chapters to: a description of the character of the commentary, including its understanding of peshat and its relationship to Rashi's commentary; theological considerations that emerge from Rashbam's reading of Job; and Rashbam's understanding of literary dimensions in Job. This chapter, in which Japhet demonstrates how finely attuned Rashbam was to literary forms and techniques, will appeal in particular to readers interested in synchronic studies of biblical composition. She offers copious examples of Rashbam's attention to order and structure, various types of biblical parallelism, literary and philological determinations based on context (pitrono lefi 'inyano), anticipatory information (hakdamah), and other subjects. Following a chapter on "Rashbam's linguistic theory as reflected in his commentary on Job," Menahem Banitt has contributed a chapter on the Old French glosses contained in the commentary. To complete the introduction, Japhet explains the sources and method of her edition and tops it off with an apparatus of variant readings and an analysis of the dissertation on L778 by Michael Rosen.⁶

The commentary itself is a delight, offering many insights into the literary dimensions of the Book of Job. An example is Rashbam's comment on Job 3.3 (p. 351). The verse begins Job's initial lament with the resounding cry, "Perish the day on which I was born, and the night that said, 'A male has been conceived'!" Rashbam glosses the words "and the night that said" with the following observation: "with a brief expression does he curse here the day of his birth and the night of his conception; afterwards he recapitulates and elaborates his curse with regard to each of them (i.e., day and night) separately." Rashbam's astute comment guides the reader to consider verses 4–5 as an elaboration of...