Narratives of Enlightenment 111
is“true” only to the extent that is rhetorically successful, that is, if it strikes its readers as persuasive. And in this case, some important readers of Rambam ’s words were not persuaded. One of these was R. David ibn Zimra(d. 1573), or Radbaz , also a notable Egyptian posek. In his commentary to the Mishneh Torah, included in the standard printed editions, he has this to say about Rambam ’s story:
The subject of the“captive infant” is discussed in tractate Shabbat . It would appear that Rambam wrote as he did in order to offer a legal defense(lelamed zekhut) for the Karaites . But those who live in our time are deserving of death(i.e., they are true heretics), for every day we attempt to persuade them to repent and to accept the Oral Torah, and they repay us with scorn and contempt. They are not to be judged as“coerced”(anusim) but rather as intentional deniers of the Oral Torah.®'
Radbaz engages here in the time-honored legal tactic called “distinguishing the precedent.”® An authoritative ruling has already declared that the Karaities are not heretics, and Radbaz for his part honors that decision. He does not, in other words, seek to disprove it (which would involve him in a head-on confrontation with a great predecessor) but simply to show that it does not apply to today’s Karaities, for much, it seems, has changed during the past four hundred years. Where Maimonides describes“his” Karaites as innocent victims of their arrogant forebears, whose rebellion left their descendants bereft of a proper religious upbringing, R. David portrays the Karaites of his time in very different terms.