Sometime in the 10th century, a gifted Jewish poet named Dunash ibn Labrat came to Cordoba from North Africa, after some years of study in Baghdad. He soon became embroiled in a fierce controversy over the structure of Hebrew roots with another prominent Hebrew poet and scholar, Menachem ben Saruk. Tamar Marvin tells their stories, and explains why this abstruse dispute was taken so seriously by their contemporaries:

Hebrew and Arabic are cognate languages. Arabic, however, was considered by the dominant Muslim culture to be the superior of all languages, uniquely pure and beautiful as it was used in the Quran. [Moreover], there was a fierce contest over the precise transmission of the biblical Hebrew corpus unfolding between Karaite and rabbinic Jews. [The former sect denied the authority of the Talmud and rabbinic tradition.] And if that weren’t enough, the actual meanings of biblical words had very real halakhic and cultural implications.

The rise of a literature of Hebrew grammar grew out of the achievements of the Masoretes [biblical scribes] in the 9th and 10th centuries and their elaborate system of encoding grammatical information into the Masoretic markings, including vowel points and cantillation marks. The first Hebrew dictionary and the first systemic linguistic treatise both came from the pen of [the Baghdad-based sage] Saadya Gaon. After him, medieval Hebrew linguistics flowered for a relatively brief time in Muslim Spain before being transmitted, though little transformed, into Hebrew-literate Christian Europe. The achievements of the Sephardi grammarians continue to reverberate in modern Hebrew.

Menachem ben Saruk holds the distinction of writing the first Hebrew-Hebrew dictionary: that is, one in which the definitions are given in Hebrew, as opposed to Arabic, like his colleagues’ offerings. . . . Dunash attacked Menachem for wrongful interpretations of words which, Dunash maintained, could lead people to mistakes in halakhic observance and even to heresy. The bitterness of the accusations has led to the question of whether Dunash was implicitly calling out Menachem as a Karaite.

If there’s one lesson to be learned from the history of the Israel-Arab conflict, it’s never to be confident that an end is in sight. Ehud Yaari nevertheless—and with all due caution—points to some noteworthy developments:

The absolute primacy of “armed struggle” in Palestinian discourse has discouraged any serious attempt to discuss or plan for a future Palestinian state. Palestinian political literature is devoid of any substantial debate over what kind of a state they aspire to create. What would be its economic, foreign, and social policies?

One significant exception was a seminar held by Hamas in Gaza—under the auspices of the late Yahya Sinwar—prior to October 7, 2023. The main focus of what was described as a brainstorming session was the question of how to deal with the Jews in the land to be liberated. A broad consensus between the participants was reached that most Israeli Jews should be eradicated or expelled while those contributing to Israel’s success in high tech and other critical domains would be forced to serve the new Palestinian authorities.

Yet, the ongoing aftershocks from the ongoing war in Gaza are posing questions among Palestinians concerning the viability of armed struggle. So far this trend is reflected mainly in stormy exchanges on social-media platforms and internal controversies within Hamas. There is mounting criticism leveled at the late Mohammad Deif and Yahya Sinwar for embarking upon an uncoordinated offensive that is resulting in a “Second Nakba”—a repeat of the defeat and mass displacement caused by launching the war in 1948.

To be sure, “armed struggle” is still being preached daily to the Palestinian communities by Iran and Iranian proxies, and at least half the Palestinian public—according to various polls—believe it remains indispensable. But doubts are being heard. We may be reaching a point where the Palestinians will feel compelled to make a choice between the road which led to past failures and an attempt to chart a new route. It will certainly require time and is bound to cause fractures and divisions, perhaps even a violent split, among the Palestinians.