Solomon ibn Gabirol

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Solomon ben Jehuda ibn Gabirol , for short Solomon (Salomo) ibn Gabirol or Schlomo ibn Gevirol (born 1021 or 1022 in Málaga ; died around 1070 in Valencia ) was a Jewish philosopher and poet in Muslim Spain ( al-Andalus ). In the Latin-speaking Christian scholarly world he was known under the Latinized forms of the name "Avicebron" and "Avencebrol"; In Arabic his name was Abū Ayyūb Sulaimān ibn Yaḥyā ibn Ǧebīrūl. His Hebrew poetry in Arabic meters, largely characterized by a pessimistic, ephemeral mood, enjoyed high esteem among Jewish readers as early as the Middle Ages. It was considered masterful and found its way into prayer books. His philosophical teachings, on the other hand, received little attention from his Jewish contemporaries and not from the Muslims. However, the response to his main philosophical work The Source of Life , of which a Latin translation was available from the middle of the 12th century, was strong in the Christian world. There, his Neoplatonic view of the world contributed to the strengthening of the Neoplatonic current in the philosophy of scholasticism , but his Neoplatonic anthropology met with violent opposition from Aristotelian philosophers .


Little is known about ibn Gabirol's life; some of the information comes from himself and reflects his view in a stylized literary form. His family originally came from Córdoba (hence its Arabic nickname al-Qurṭūbī); probably because of the military conflict there, his parents fled to Malaga, where he was born in 1021/1022. Then they moved to Saragossa , where he grew up. He received a thorough education and already as a youth, at the latest by the age of sixteen, showed an extraordinary talent as a poet in his Hebrew mother tongue. His father died early, which led him to write mourning poems. In 1045 he also lost his mother. From his poems it is clear that from childhood he was often ill and of a weak constitution, also small and ugly in appearance; in particular, he suffered from a serious skin disease that disfigured him. These circumstances probably contributed to the fact that he remained unmarried and without descendants.

Since he only wanted to devote himself to philosophy and poetry, he was always dependent on support from wealthy patrons. However, his violent temperament, his inclination to ruthless criticism and his unconventional views often brought him into conflict with influential personalities and led to tensions with the Jewish community.

In Saragossa ibn Gabirol obtained the support of Jekutiel (Yequthiel) ben Isaak ibn Ḥassan, a Jew who apparently held a prominent position at the court of the Muslim ruler there. In 1039, after a violent change of power as a supporter of the overthrown and murdered ruler, Jekutiel was executed by his successor, allegedly in his hundredth year. For ibn Gabirol, the loss of his patron was a severe blow. In the following years his dispute with the Jewish community of Zaragoza intensified, which therefore denounced him to the Muslim authorities. Around 1045 he left the city in anger. He considered emigrating and going to the Middle East, but did not carry out that intention. Possibly he led a wandering life. In any case, he stayed in Granada for a long time . The Jewish Grand Vizier of the Muslim ruler there, Shmuel (Samuel) ha-Nagid , who was himself an important poet, became his new patron. At times there was alienation between them; ibn Gabirol criticized the poems of his patron and attacked him satirically.

What is certain is that ibn Gabirol was still relatively young when he died in Valencia. However, the time and circumstances of his death are unclear. A late legend about his alleged murder is beyond belief. According to a claim made by the writer Moses ibn Esra , he was only about thirty when he died. However, this cannot be true, as ibn Gabirol's remarks indicate that he still lived through the year 1068. This is why the statement by ibn Saʿīd al-Andalusī that ibn Gabirol died in 1057/1058, which has been adopted in many reference works, is also incorrect. Josef ibn Zaddik , who lived in the first half of the 12th century, put his death in 1070; this can be more or less true, because in the following years he is no longer attested as living.


In one of his poems ibn Gabirol claims to have written twenty books. Apart from his exclusively Hebrew poetry, his authorship is only secured for two originally Arabic prose philosophical writings, namely his main work The Source of Life and the ethical treatise Book of the Improvement of Soul Properties .


About 400 lyrical poems by ibn Gabirol have come down to us. They are traditionally divided into “secular” and “religious”. However, such a division does not do justice to his concerns (and in general to medieval Hebrew poetry), because there are hardly any significant differences in terms of linguistic form and religious references can also be found in content in "secular" poems. It makes more sense, therefore, to divide it into liturgical (suitable for worship) and non-liturgical “social” poetry, depending on the occasion .

A large part of non-liturgical poetry is made up of poems of praise and friendship in honor of benefactors. The number of drinking and love songs that ibn Gabirol began to write as a teenager is relatively small. There are also complaints about the death of people close to him, puzzles and descriptions of nature and buildings (including a description of the Alhambra ). With increasing age, pessimistic motives come to the fore.

This Hebrew poetry is formally and in its subject matter based on Arab models. The treatment of the fabrics is very individual; it is shaped by the idiosyncratic personality of the poet, his dissatisfaction with his unpleasant fate, his changeable moods and the heavy tensions with his surroundings. Often there is talk of his expectation of an early death; he fears that he will not be able to complete his philosophical work. His pronounced self-confidence and the associated social isolation are clearly expressed. He often expresses himself contemptuously and derisively about poets whose abilities he thinks little. His remarks about people whom he accuses of incomprehension and whose behavior he disapproves are bitter and satirical. He complains about the futility of life and the worthlessness of earthly pleasures. He conveys the mostly gloomy contents linguistically masterfully, and he also proves to be confident in dealing with difficult verse forms. One of his two lamentations about the death of his executed benefactor Jekutiel is considered particularly successful. A series of poems in which he expresses himself about Shmuel ha-Nagid document the changeability of the relationship between the two, which fluctuated between a relationship between patron and sponsor and bitter rivalry.

The didactic poem The Necklace ( ha- a nāq ), which ibn Gabirol wrote when he was nineteen, offers Hebrew grammar in poetic form . In it he praised the superiority of the Hebrew language over all others and deplored its neglect by his contemporaries. Only around a quarter of the 400 double verses have survived.

In the religious hymns he expresses his passionate piety. His most famous hymn is the Crown of the Kingdom (Hebrew Keter malchūt ). It was not originally intended for worship, but was included in the liturgy of the Jewish Day of Atonement . In terms of shape, the crown is rhythmic rhyming prose without any reference to Arabic models. Ibn Gabirol presents a summary of his cosmology and his religious beliefs. He laments the imperfection from which the human soul cannot free itself.

Philosophical writings

Book of the Improvement of Soul Properties , page from a manuscript from 1546/47

Ibn Gabirol's main philosophical work The Source of Life (Arabic Yanbuʾ al-ḥayya , Hebrew Sēfer M e qōr Ḥajjim ) is mostly known under the title of the Latin translation Fons vitae . The title alludes to the praise of God in Ps 36,10  EU . The Arabic original is lost; Apart from the Latin translation from the mid-12th century, only an extract from Hebrew from the 13th century by Shem Tov ibn Falaquera has survived . It is a dialogue between a master and his student; the student asks and learns, he does not contribute to the argument. In the work cosmogony , cosmology, epistemology and the relationship between God and the world are discussed in a purely philosophical way, without taking biblical and theological aspects into account. The world of thought is Neoplatonic, the terminological instruments partly Aristotelian.

Ibn Gabirol deals with the theory of the soul from an ethical point of view in his treatise Book of the Improvement of Soul Properties . The original Arabic version is called Kitāb ʾiṣlāḥ al-aḫlāq , the Hebrew translation that Yehuda ibn Tibbon made in the 12th century, Sēfer Tiqqūn Middōt ha-Nefeš . Ibn Gabirol also quotes here from the Tanakh , so he is addressing religious Jewish readers. The text Perlenauslese (Arabic Muḫtār al-Ǧawāhir , Hebrew Mivḥār ha-P e nīnīm ), a collection of ethical sayings, which may be wrongly ascribed to ibn Gabirol, is dedicated to the same topic .


Ibn Gabirol's teaching does not give the impression of a fully developed, self-contained system that is coherent in every respect. Individual ambiguities and contradictions have led to different interpretations in research. Possibly different stages of mental development are reflected in it. Since the main philosophical work has not been preserved in the original text, translation errors can also be considered as explanations of inconsistencies.

Metaphysics and cosmology

A main characteristic of ibn Gabirol's philosophy is the connection of the Neo-Platonic doctrine of emanation with a consistently consistent application of the Aristotelian concept of form and matter to the totality of created things ( hylemorphism ). He adopts the Neoplatonic basic idea of ​​emanation, according to which the world is hierarchically structured in stages of being ( hypostases ), one of which emerges from the other. The first and highest hypostasis of creation flowed directly out of God (the one of the Neoplatonists) or, according to the Jewish conception, was created by him out of nothing. The other hypostases have arisen from the next higher level and thus have their origin only indirectly in God. The lower a hypostasis is in the order of origin and ranking, the more complex it is. The upper areas of this level order are purely spiritual in nature, physical matter only exists in the lowest region of total reality. This matter is in itself pure potency . But since it is always actualized (passed into the act) through its always given connection with individual forms, it exists as a power only theoretically. Objects that can be perceived by the senses are only created through this connection of specific forms with matter. Form and matter can never exist separately from one another, but are only conceptually separated for the purpose of analysis. Ibn Gabirol rejects the notion that matter is quantized , rather he regards it as a continuum. He considers the real existence of the smallest, no longer divisible units to be impossible.

Ibn Gabirol also adopts the Neoplatonic concept of the world soul , in which the individual souls have their origin. The world soul emerged from the universal intellect, the nous of the ancient Neo-Platonists. Like the individual human souls, it consists of a rational soul, a sensually perceiving soul and a vegetative soul. Below the vegetative soul of the cosmos is nature as the next lower hypostasis, below nature follows the world of the physical body.

It was controversial among the medieval thinkers, who represented different variants of this model, whether the levels of being of the purely spiritual (“intelligible”) world also represent connections of forms with (in this case spiritual) matter or whether they are to be thought of as pure forms without a material substrate are. On this question, ibn Gabirol is an early champion of the ancient Neo-Platonist view that spiritual substances - especially the human soul - are composed analogously to the physical. With the exception of God, everything that exists consists of form and matter. The universal matter represents the principle of what remains, while the individual forms in the physical world, which are aspects of the primary universal form, arise and pass away and change incessantly, thus contributing the principle of change to world reality. God is the only substance that is not composed, but absolutely simple and unitary.

In late ancient Neo-Platonism, physical matter, as the ontologically lowest part of the cosmic order furthest from the divine, stands in sharp contrast to the spiritual (including spiritual matter). In this regard, ibn Gabirol deviates from tradition. Although he also regards the sensually perceptible world as the lowest and most unspiritual part of the cosmos, he emphasizes that one and the same matter flows through the entire universe, from the highest regions of the spirit to the lowest realm of the physical. For him the difference between spiritual and physical matter is therefore only of degree; in principle the material substrate is the same everywhere. In this way, physical matter as an aspect of universal primordial matter is even brought closer to God in the ontological order of precedence, since primordial form and primordial matter appear as the primary beings of creation, without which nothing can exist outside of God. With this concept of matter, the Neoplatonic hierarchy is actually broken. Isaak Israeli had already taken a similar view of archetypal form and primordial matter . Such thoughts also appear in writings that were wrongly ascribed partly to the ancient philosopher Empedocles and partly to Aristotle in the Middle Ages .

Ibn Gabirol emphasizes the value of self-knowledge. Like Isaac Israeli, he believes that knowledge of one's own soul implies knowledge of the whole universe, since everything is contained in the human soul.

A basic question of the Neoplatonic ontology is how the emergence of multiplicity from absolute unity is to be explained when multiplicity and unity are radically different in nature. Here ibn Gabirol - referring to the creation concept of the Jewish religion - accepts the divine will as a mediating authority. By assigning this will a central role in creation, he escapes a deterministic interpretation of the origin of the world. On the one hand he considers the divine will to be one with the divine being and thus assigns it to infinity, on the other hand he also ascribes to it the property of being creative in the realm of the finite, of penetrating the created things and thus of being associated with finitude connect. This double aspect of the will becomes an opportunity for people. As man in the limited world in which he lives, through devotion, gains access to the will of God that is active there in finitude, he can connect with this will and thus ultimately also approach its infinite aspect, the Godhead. With death the soul frees itself from the body. With this she ends her exile in the earthly world and returns to the spiritual world. However, there is always an insurmountable borderline between the simple and fundamentally unknowable divine being and the creatures composed of matter and form.

The creative character of the divine will is expressed in the form. Form emerges from God's will, matter from his being. Thus the duality of form and matter can be traced back to the deity, without prejudice to the absolute unity of God.

The question discussed in research remains to what extent ibn Gabirol has succeeded in building a bridge between multiplicity and unity, finitude and infinity with his understanding of the divine will and thus at the same time achieving a coherent harmonization between the Neoplatonic philosophy of emanation and Jewish creation theology. Connected with this is the question of whether he was primarily a Neoplatonic metaphysician or a Jewish theologian and to what extent he recognized the breakpoints between these two elements of his world interpretation.


The book of the improvement of soul properties offers an original attempt to describe and classify ethical behavior on the basis of natural philosophy. Ibn Gabirol does not use the four cardinal virtues that are popular in Islamic and Christian ethical literature .

Ibn Gabirol assumes twenty character traits (ten virtues and ten vices), which he assigns to the five senses. Every sense organ is connected with two virtues and two vices, in that, through its special kind of perception, it becomes a tool for their operation. He also postulates a connection between the virtues and the four properties of heat, cold, moisture and dryness, the four elements (earth, water, air and fire) and the four juices of humoral pathology , to which the four temperaments have traditionally been assigned since ancient times .


Ibn Gabirol's philosophical teachings were largely ignored by his Jewish contemporaries and completely ignored by the Muslims. On the other hand, the reception among Christian scholastics of the Middle Ages was strong and persistent . As a poet in Hebrew, he found recognition in medieval Judaism.

Jewish philosophy

Ibn Gabirol's philosophical legacy found little support in medieval Judaism. Since he neither cites biblical passages in the Lebensquelle nor does he refer to theological authorities, his main work did not appeal to conservative Jews, and the compatibility of his Neoplatonism with the religious tradition of Judaism seemed at least doubtful. In addition, the Neoplatonic current was supplanted by the Aristotelian in the late Middle Ages . His poetic achievement, however, was valued, and the liturgical portion of his poetry was found to be suitable for use in worship. As a result, his philosophical ideas remained at least partially known among the Jews, because the famous, liturgically used hymn Crown of the Kingdom outlines his world of ideas. This hymn is still in prayer books for the Day of Atonement .

The poet and philosopher Moses ibn Esra is the first Jewish writer to mention ibn Gabirol. He extensively praises his character as well as his poetic and philosophical achievements and often cites the source of life in his treatise Arugat ha-Bosem . The Neoplatonic-oriented thinker Josef ibn Zaddik also uses this script. The learned writer Abraham ibn Esra is apparently influenced by the source of life , but rarely makes explicit reference to ibn Gabirol.

Traces of ibn Gabirol's thinking can be found in works of late medieval cabalistic literature. He is usually not mentioned there by name.

The first prominent Jewish critic of ibn Gabirol's philosophical ideas is Abraham ibn Daud , an Aristotelian. In 1144 he attacked the source of life in his treatise The sublime faith , written in Arabic , which was later translated into Hebrew in the 14th century under the title Ha-Emunah ha-Ramah . In it, he claims, among other things, that ibn Gabirol's treatment of the subject is lengthy and that his reasoning has flaws in logic. Maimonides does not mention ibn Gabirol at all.

During the Renaissance , the Neo-Platonist Leone Ebreo (Jehuda Abravanel, Judah Abrabanel) professed the teachings of ibn Gabirol.

Christian philosophy

In Latin-speaking Christian Europe, ibn Gabirol became known from the middle of the 12th century through the Latin translation of the source of life under the title Fons vitae . This translation came from Johannes Hispanus and Dominicus Gundissalinus . Gundissalinus also contributed to the spread of ibn Gabirol's teaching in his own works. Ibn Gabirol was called "Avicebron" or "Avencebrol"; his Jewish religion was unknown; some saw him as a Christian philosopher. A zealous follower of ibn Gabirol was the philosopher Wilhelm von Auvergne , who considered him to be an Arab Christian and the “most noble of all philosophers” and who particularly valued his doctrine of the divine will.

In the late Middle Ages, ibn Gabirol's doctrine of form and matter became the starting point of a long-running controversy. His hypothesis of the existence of a spiritual matter and the composition of spiritual substances from form and matter was represented by the "Franciscan School" ( Alexander von Hales , Bonaventure , Johannes Duns Scotus ) with reference to him . This position of the more or less Neoplatonic oriented Franciscans was opposed by the Aristotelian tendency among the Dominicans , whose main representative was Thomas Aquinas ( Thomism ). The Dominican Albertus Magnus had already taken a position in this regard. The conflict related on the one hand to the question of whether the soul has its own spiritual matter, and on the other to the question of whether the soul is the only form of the body, as the Thomists said, or whether the body also has its own “form of corporeality ”and thus a plurality of forms is present in it. Ibn Gabirol also represented the doctrine of the plurality of forms in the body.

One of the authors who studied ibn Gabirol's source of life and quoted it with approval was Meister Eckhart .


Head of a statue made by Hamilton Reed Armstrong in 1969 ibn Gabirols in Málaga (fantasy)

A 16th century legend about ibn Gabirol's death says that an envious enemy lured him into his garden, murdered him there and buried him under a fig tree. The tree then bore such extraordinarily beautiful and sweet fruits that it aroused general astonishment. Even the king was made aware of this. He asked the owner about the reason for this striking phenomenon. The interviewee became involved in contradictions and an investigation was conducted. The crime was exposed, the killer confessed to torture and was executed; it was hung on the fig tree. According to another legend, ibn Gabirol made a golem out of wood , the form of a woman who then served him (like a robot); when he was reported for it, he dismantled it again into its original components.

Modern research

In 1846, Salomon Munk published a groundbreaking finding. He had found in the Paris National Library a Hebrew translation of extracts from the original Arabic version of the source of life made by Šem-Tob ben Josef ibn Falāqīra in the 13th century . Thanks to this find, he recognized the identity of the Jewish author ibn Gabirol with the author of the Fons vitae , known since the Middle Ages as Avicebron or Avencebrol , who had previously been taken to be a Christian scholastic. It was only this insight that gave research an overall impression of this writer personality. Jakob Guttmann contributed significantly to illuminating the Neoplatonic background. The view put forward in the 20th century by David Neumark and later by Ernst Bloch that ibn Gabirol was not actually a Neoplatonist - Bloch included him in the Aristotelian tradition - is no longer supported today.

Text editions and translations


  • Clemens Baeumker (Ed.): Avencebrolis (ibn Gebirol) fons vitae ex Arabico in Latinum translatus from Iohanne Hispano et Dominico Gundissalino. Aschendorff, Münster 1995 (reprint of the 1895 edition), ISBN 3-402-03166-3 (critical edition of the medieval Latin translation of the source of life ; digital copies: part 1/2 , part 3 , part 1–3 ).
  • Sabine S. Gehlhaar (ed.), Orm Lahann (translator): Salomon ibn Gabirol: The source of life. Junghans-Verlag, Cuxhaven 1989, ISBN 3-926848-02-2 (translation without edition)
  • Ottfried Fraisse (ed.): Salomon ibn Gabirol: Fons vitae. Source of life. Chapters I and II. Herder, Freiburg 2009, ISBN 978-3-451-28704-6 (Latin text and translation)
  • Salomon Munk (Ed.): Extraits de la Source de vie de Salomon ibn-Gebirol. In: Salomon Munk: Mélanges de philosophie juive et arabe. 2nd edition, Vrin, Paris 1988, ISBN 2-7116-8169-6 (text of the Hebrew translation of the source of life made by Shem Tov ibn Falaquera at the end of the volume and French translation of the Hebrew version pp. 1-148).
  • Stephen S. Wise (Ed.): Solomon ibn Gabirol: The Improvement of Moral Qualities. An ethical treatise of the eleventh century. Columbia University Press, New York 1902; Reprinted by AMS Press, New York 1966 (edition of the Arabic text with English translation. Online ; PDF; 5.9 MB).
  • Abraham Cohen (translator): Solomon Ibn Gabirol's Choice of Pearls. Bloch Publishing Company, New York 1925 (English translation of the font Perlenauslese ascribed to ibn Gabirol ).

Poetry collections

  • Shlomo ibn Gevirol: shirei ḥol , ed. Haim Brody, Jefim Schirmann, Schocken Institute for Jewish Research, Jerusalem 1974 (edition of non-liturgical poems)
  • The Liturgical Poetry of Rabbi Solomon Ibn Gabirol , ed. Dov Jarden, 2nd edition, 2 volumes, Jerusalem 1977–1979 (edition of the liturgical poems)
  • The Secular Poetry of Rabbi Solomon Ibn Gabirol , ed. Dov Jarden, 2nd edition, 2 volumes, Jerusalem 1984 (edition of the non-liturgical poems)
  • Salomo ibn Gabirol: East-Western Poetry , trans. Frederick P. Bargebuhr, Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden 1976, ISBN 3-447-01658-2 (poems in German translation with introduction and detailed commentary)
  • Selected Poems of Solomon Ibn Gabirol , trans. Peter Cole, Princeton University Press, Princeton 2001, ISBN 0-691-07031-8 (poems in English translation with commentary)
  • Selected Religious Poems of Solomon ibn Gabirol , ed. Israel Davidson, trans. Israel Zangwill , Arno Press, New York 1973 (reprinted 1923 Philadelphia edition; Hebrew text and English translation; online )

Individual poems

  • Solomon ibn Gabirol: The Kingly Crown. Keter Malkhut , ed. Bernard Lewis , Andrew L. Gluck, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame 2003, ISBN 0-268-03303-X (edition of the Hebrew text with English translation)
  • Solomon Ibn Gabirol: Crown of royalty , ed. Eveline Goodman-Thau , Christoph Schulte , trans. by Christoph Correll, Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1994, ISBN 3-05-002513-1 (edition of the Hebrew text with German translation)
  • Johannes Maier: The "royal crown" of Solomon Ben Jehuda Ibn Gabirol . In: Judaica 18, 1962, pp. 1-55 (German translation with commentary, not superseded by the new translation by Correll)
  • Ibn Gabirol's ʿAnaq , ed. Ernst Neumark, Leipzig 1936 (Edition of the didactic poem The Necklace )


  • Fernand Brunner : Métaphysique d'Ibn Gabirol et de la tradition platonicienne. Ashgate, Aldershot 1997, ISBN 0-86078-654-4 .
  • Lenn E. Goodman: Neoplatonism and Jewish Thought. State University of New York Press, Albany 1992, ISBN 0-7914-1339-X (contains several articles on ibn Gabirol).
  • Jakob Guttmann : The philosophy of Salomon ibn Gabirol. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1889, reprint Olms, Hildesheim 1979 ( online )
  • Raphael Loewe: Ibn Gabirol. Grove Weidenfeld, New York 1989, ISBN 0-8021-1133-5 .
  • Sarah Pessin: Ibn Gabirol's Theology of Desire. Matter and Method in Jewish Medieval Neoplatonism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2013, ISBN 978-1-107-03221-7
  • (Chajjim) Jefim Schirmann : תולדות השירה העברית בספרד המוסלמית [ The History of Hebrew Poetry in Muslim Spain ], ed. Ezra Fleischer, Magnes, Jerusalem 1995, pp. 257-345, ISBN 965-223-914-3 (Hebrew).
  • Jacques Schlanger: La philosophie de Salomon Ibn Gabirol. Étude d'un neoplatonisme. Brill, Leiden 1968.

Web links


  1. For the origin and the date of the birth see Raphael Loewe: Ibn Gabirol , New York 1989, p. 17 f .; Frederick P. Bargebuhr (translator): Salomo ibn Gabirol: Ostwestliches Dichtertum , Wiesbaden 1976, p. 53 f .; Ermenegildo Bertola: Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebron). Vita, Opere e Pensiero , Padova 1953, p. 7 f.
  2. Ermenegildo Bertola: Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebron). Vita, Opere e Pensiero , Padova 1953, p. 10.
  3. ^ Raphael Loewe: Ibn Gabirol , New York 1989, p. 23; Frederick P. Bargebuhr (translator): Salomo ibn Gabirol: Ostwestliches Dichtertum , Wiesbaden 1976, pp. 89–98.
  4. ^ Raphael Loewe: Ibn Gabirol , New York 1989, p. 54 f.
  5. Ermenegildo Bertola: Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebron). Vita, Opere e Pensiero , Padova 1953, p. 14 f.
  6. Ermenegildo Bertola: Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebron). Vita, Opere e Pensiero , Padova 1953, p. 10 f.
  7. ^ Jacques Schlanger: La philosophie de Salomon Ibn Gabirol. Étude d'un neoplatonisme , Leiden 1968, p. 16.
  8. ^ Raphael Loewe: Ibn Gabirol , New York 1989, p. 52.
  9. Colette Sirat: A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages , Paris / Cambridge 1985, p. 71 f.
  10. On this teaching see Colette Sirat: A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages , Paris / Cambridge 1985, pp. 73, 78 f.
  11. Karl Erich Grözinger : Jewish thinking. Theology - Philosophy - Mysticism , Volume 1, Frankfurt / Main 2004, pp. 534-536.
  12. Raphael Loewe: Ibn Gabirol , New York 1989, pp. 32-38.
  13. ^ Documents from Ermenegildo Bertola: Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebron). Vita, Opere e Pensiero , Padova 1953, p. 15 f.
  14. Salomon Munk: Mélanges de philosophie juive et arabe , Paris 1955, pp. 262–266.
  15. ^ Hermann Greive : Studies on Jewish Neo-Platonism , Berlin 1973, pp. 15-18.
  16. Colette Sirat: A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages , Paris / Cambridge 1985, pp. 79-81; Salomon Munk: Mélanges de philosophie juive et arabe , Paris 1955, p. 266; Hermann Greive: Studies on Jewish Neo-Platonism , Berlin 1973, pp. 123–128.
  17. Salomon Munk: Mélanges de philosophie juive et arabe , Paris 1955, pp. 275-291.
  18. Salomon Munk: Mélanges de philosophie juive et arabe , Paris 1955, pp. 268-273; Frederick P. Bargebuhr (translator): Salomo ibn Gabirol: Ostwestliches Dichtertum , Wiesbaden 1976, p. 84 f.
  19. Ermenegildo Bertola: Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebron). Vita, Opere e Pensiero , Padova 1953, p. 194 f.
  20. On the late medieval reception see Ermenegildo Bertola: Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebron). Vita, Opere e Pensiero , Padova 1953, pp. 195-199.
  21. On the arguments of these scholastics see Salomon Munk: Mélanges de philosophie juive et arabe , Paris 1955, pp. 293-300.
  22. On Eckhart's relationship with ibn Gabirol see Fernand Brunner: Métaphysique d'Ibn Gabirol et de la tradition platonicienne , Aldershot 1997, Part A No. VII.
  23. Karl Dreyer: The religious thought world of Salomo ibn Gabirol , Leipzig 1930, p. 21 f.
  24. Salomon Munk: Mélanges de philosophie juive et arabe , Paris 1955, p. 152 f.
  25. See on this question Felix Klein-Franke: On the position of the philosophy of Salomon Ibn Gabirol within the Jewish philosophy of the Middle Ages . In: Freiburg journal for philosophy and theology 13/14, 1966/67, pp. 153–160.
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on May 14, 2009 .