מתוך ספרים-בלוג:
בהקדשה בשפה האנגלית, מדובר על "תרגום לראשונה":
R. Shlomo Korah should not be confused with R. Ezra Korah who is the translator of a new edition of Maimonides' Commentary on the Mishnah that was published in 2009. The new translation is not very different than R. Kafih's translation and is obviously based on the latter. It is also not an improvement on what R. Kafih provided us with. What makes this edition valuable is that each page is full of helpful notes compiled by a team of scholars. In fact, I don't think anyone can seriously study Maimonides' Commentary on the Mishnah without making use of this new edition.
Yet there is something deeply problematic about this edition. As is well known, R. Kafih's translation of Maimonides' Commentary sparked a new interest in study of this work, and for decades was the text that everyone used.[4] R. Korah's new edition, which as already indicated is based on that of R. Kafih, only mentions R. Kafih once in the lengthy introduction.[5] Throughout the notes to the Commentary, R. Kafih is not mentioned, but is referred to as יש מי שכתב or יש מי שתרגם.
When will these people ever grow up and realize that just because you don't agree with someone's outlook doesn't mean you can't be a mensch and give him the scholarly credit he deserves? To give an idea of who R. Kafih was, R. Mordechai Eliyahu went so far as to state that was greater than R. Abraham Maimonides![6]
אנו, שאנו מכירים את הרב יוסף קאפח, הוא יותר טוב מבנו של הרמב"ם, איזה בקיאות יש לו בדברי הרמב"ם, הבן שלו לא ידע והוא ידע.
Here is the English dedication page of the new translation and the Hebrew title page. Look at what it says in the dedication page. Is it possible that they told the donor that the translation that he was funding would be the first time that the Commentary on the Mishnah would be translated into Hebrew?
[4] I should say ''almost everyone''. See Mesorat Moshe, p. 612, that R. Moshe Feinstein only used the old translation because he (mistakenly) assumed that the translators were ''geonim'' and thus superior to any modern translator. In Iggerot Moshe, Yoreh Deah, vol. 1, no. 63, R. Moshe assumes that the word ''wine'' in Maimonides' Commentary on the Mishnah is a later ion. Yet examination of R. Kafih's edition shows that Maimonides indeed wrote this word. According to R. Yisrael Genos, R. Velvel Soloveitchik used to consult with R. Kafih as to the correct translation of Maimonides' Commentary. See his haskamah to R. Kafih's She'elot u-Teshuvot ha-Rivad (Jerusalem, 2009). See also R. Joseph Karo, Beit Yosef, Orah Hayyim 26, who assumes that a passage in the Commentary on the Mishnah was put in by an ''erring student''. Yet this is incorrect. See R. Kafih's note to Commentary on the Mishnah, Menahot 4:1. [6] ''Ma'alat Beuro shel Mahar''i Kafih al ha-Rambam,'' Masorah le-Yosef 8 (2014), p. 16.
http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2014/06/assorted-comments.html
 |
|
|
