around the meaning of "isti-ara" (borrowing), which is a word meaning something not known using something already known. This is Ibn Ezra's way of explaining the concept of God and God's existence. Maimonides similarly defines metaphor as temporarily “borrowing.” Maimonides’ source for his definition of metaphor is from al-Farabi's Short Treatise on Aristotle's De Interpretatione. This model defines metaphor as "saying X and really meaning Y"; hence, the claim "X is a metaphor" entails proving that it refers to Y and not to X. One of his criticisms of Ibn Ezra was that Ibn Ezra simply cited his forty biblical examples without elucidation, even though many of them are not readily referenced. The fact that these two philosophers differed so greatly is not much of a surprise since their agendas also differed. Ibn Ezra was predominantly interested in the poetic aspect of metaphor whereas Maimonides had a pure philosophical intent in his definition. His rhetoric Ibn Ezra's most successful work was the "Kitab al-Muḥaḍarah wal-Mudhakarah", a treatise on rhetoric and poetry written about the "Adab" writings of the Arabs. It is the only work of its kind in Hebrew literature. It was written at the request of a friend who had addressed to him eight questions on Hebrew poetry, and is divided into a corresponding number of chapters. In the first four chapters Ibn Ezra writes generally of prose and prose-writers, of poetry and poets, and of the natural poetic gift of the Arabs, which he attributes to the climate of Arabia. He concludes the fourth chapter with the statement that, with very rare exceptions, the poetical parts of the Bible have neither meter nor rhyme. The fifth chapter begins with the history of the settlement of the Jews in Spain, which, according to the author, began during the Exile, the word "Sepharad" used by the prophet Obadiah (verse 20) meaning "Spain." Then comes a description of the literary activity of the Spanish Jews, giving the most important authors and their works. In the sixth chapter the author quotes various maxims and describes the general intellectual condition of his time. He deplores the indifference shown by the public to scholars. This indifference, he declares, does not affect him personally; for he can not count himself among those who have been ill-treated by fate; he has experienced both good and bad fortune. Moreover, he possesses a virtue which permits him to