Contradictions Between Ibn Ezra`s Two Commentaries to Minor Prophets

In addition to Abraham Ibn Ezra’s written commentary to Minor Prophets, a so-called “oral commentary” – apparently written by a student of Ibn Ezra – has been published in recent years. It was composed over a decade before Ibn Ezra wrote his own commentary.

My lecture explores several cases in which the oral and written commentaries interpret the same verse in different ways. I will examine the following hypothesis:

1. In many cases of disagreement, the oral commentary adopts the views of earlier sages, while the written commentary reflects Ibn Ezra’s original views. The written commentary’s increased independence could be attributed to one of two factors:
   1. Chronology: Perhaps Ibn Ezra became more independent between the composition of the oral and written commentaries. Hence, Ibn Ezra might have developed some interpretations only after the oral commentary’s composition, or – at a minimum – he might not have been confident enough in those interpretations to present them to his student as the definitive interpretation.
   2. Pedagogy: Perhaps Ibn Ezra subscribed to his independent views all along but expressed himself differently as a teacher than as a writer. Accordingly, when he taught the author of the oral commentary, he presented this student with certain standard views of the Spanish peshat with which he personally disagreed.
2. In order to assess the merits of each aforementioned factor, I will seek cases in which the dispute between the oral and written commentaries to Minor Prophets also appears in other early writings of Ibn Ezra.