Rav Saadia Gaon in his Judeo-Arabic Targum on the Chamisha Chumshe Torah, Sefer Bereshit 12:9
תם רחל אברם כל מא מר רחל אלי אלקבלה
Tsumma rachala Abram kulla ma marra rachala ila al-Qiblah
“And Abram journeyed, going and journeying towards the Qiblah.”
“Abram partit ensuite, allant et se deplacant vers le Qiblah.”
The readers may refer to the Sefer Bereshit Lech Lecha 12:9), R. Saadia Ben Iosef Al-Fayyoumi. Volume premier. Version arabe du pentateque (Paris: Ernest
In the Chamisha Chumshe Torah: Bereshit. The Pentateuch: Translated & Explained. Genesis, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch also said:
“the South of Palestine was by no means the most flourishing part, the whole district from Jerusalem southwards is called in the book of Zacharia ערבה (‘Araba), meaning “Wilderness” (London: L. Honig & Sonss Ltd., 1963), p. 235.
The whole district from JERUSALEM SOUTHWARDS is called in the book of Zacharia ערכה (‘Araba), meaning WILDERNESS. What does it mean? THE SOUTH of Palestine is not JUDEA, but ערבה (‘ARABA) itself, and Jerusalem is not a part of ערבה (‘ARABA). Jerusalem as the (future) holy place is not a part of ערבה (Araba), and according to Rabbi Somson Raphael Hirsch it means that Jerusalem is not the South, Jerusalem is not the Neqba, Jerusalem is not the Qiblah. Obviously, Jerusalem is not a part of Araba.
Jerusalem is not a part of the South, and Jerusalem is not a part of the Neqba. Hirsch’s commentary refers to the Genesis 12:9 which the verse also refers to the Genesis Rabbah 39:16
“And Abram journeyed, going on still toward THE SOUTH (xii,9): he drew a course and journeyed “TOWARD THE (FUTURE) SITE OF THE TEMPLE.”
Which temple is it? Of course the temple site of the South, the temple site of Neqba, the temple site of ARABA. Now we understand that THE QIBLAH which was meant by Saadia’s must be the future temple site of Araba, not in Jerusalem.
So, what is the reason to think that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch’s commentary and Bereshit (Genesis) Rabba 39:16 contradict Saadia’s Judeo-Arabic Targum?
Nothing at all