SOURCE: Funkenstein, Amos. “Gersonides's Biblical Commentary: Science, History, and Providence (or: The Importance of Being Boring).” In Studies on Gersonides, edited by Gad Freudenthal, pp. 305-15. Leiden, The Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1992.

In the following essay, Funkenstein contends that Gersonides's undramatic style properly reflects his scholastic, logical nature.

1. Gersonides' biblical commentary does little to ingratiate itself to its readers—be they medieval or modern. It has nothing of Rashi's charm, his unique blend of correct grammatical readings with pedagogically instructive homilies.¹ It lacks the grammatical acumen of Ibn-Ezra, who taught us how always to interpret the biblical vocabulary and imagery in context.² It also lacks Ibn-Ezra's attractive speculative enigmas. It avoids two dimensions of exegesis which made Naḥmanides' commentary dear to its readers—the typological-historical hunt for prefigurations and their fulfillment (remez) and the allusions to kabbalistic-mystical symbolism (sod; derekh ha-emet la-amito).³ Nor was Gersonides endowed with...