Although he highly praises Rashi’s Torah commentary, Nahmanides emphasizes that Rashi’s work is not beyond criticism. This article points out one aspect of Nahmandes’ disagreement with Rashi. Rashi, for his part, is willing to cite traditional Midrashic commentaries without significant additions, assuming that tradition is an effective tool for transmitting reliable information. Nahmanides argued with Rashi over this claim. Rather than sufficing to repeat exegetical traditions, in his Torah commentary, Nahmanides expands them and raises alternatives. In this way, he asserts the importance of analyzing all information critically. This article demonstrates how reservations regarding tradition stand behind several exegetical and halakhic disputes between Rashi and Nahmanides. Through analyzing this principle, the study demonstrates how Nahmanides, under the guise of a guardian of tradition, constructed an original, creative spiritual world in the areas of exegesis, halakha, and kabbalah.

纳曼尼德斯（Nahmanides）高度赞扬拉希（Rashi）的《摩西五经》（Torah）的评论，但他强调拉希（Rashi）的作品绝非批评。本文指出了纳曼德与拉希的分歧的一个方面。就拉希而言，他愿意引用传统的米德拉什克评论而无需大量添加，前提是传统是传递可靠信息的有效工具。纳曼尼德斯（Nahmanides）与拉希（Rashi）争辩了这一说法。纳曼尼德斯在《摩西五经》的评论中没有重复重复训ege的传统，反而扩大了传统并提出了其他选择。他以此方式主张对所有信息进行严格分析的重要性。本文说明了对传统的保留是如何在拉希与纳曼尼德斯之间发生的几个训诫和犹太纠纷背后的。通过分析这一原理，研究证明了纳赫曼尼德斯人如何