<html>
<body>
<font size=3>At 04:42 PM 2/15/2009, T613K@aol.com wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">One of Hirsch's purposes in
writing his magnificent Commentary on Chumash was to answer the Reformers
and the Bible Critics, the promoters of the Documentary Hypothesis.
<br>
<br>
He did not deign to actually name or quote any of those heretics -- why
give them such credibility, and why immortalize their names in a work of
Torah that he hoped would prove timeless? However, throughout his
Commentary there are many subtle arguments against the heretics, and this
example is typical. </font></blockquote><br>
I recall him mentioning Naphtali Herz Wessely at some point in his
commentary. He refers to him only as Wessely. From
<a href="http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/639985/Naphtali-Herz-Wessely" eudora="autourl">
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/639985/Naphtali-Herz-Wessely<br>
<br>
</a><font size=3>Jew” who had embraced Western culture, Mendelssohn’s
message to his own community was to become Westerners, to seek out the
culture of the Enlightenment. To that end he joined with a poet, Naphtali
Herz (Hartwig) Wessely (1725–1805), in translating the Torah into German,
combining Hebrew characters with modern German phonetics in an effort to
displace Yiddish, and wrote a modern... <br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""> <br>
He is pointing out, in case anybody buys into the theory that Moshe
Rabbeinu himself made up the Torah, that Moshe was incapable of creating
such a complex system himself. He could not even think of a
hierarchical system of judges, how could he ever have thought up the
whole system of laws in the Torah? </font></blockquote><br>
All of this is certainly true. Nonetheless, I find it surprising that he
wrote in terms which I think many would consider not very flattering to
Moshe Rabbeinu in order to make a point against the reformers. <br><br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3>Yitzchok Levine</font></body>
</html>