grammar dikduk - Question regarding ונביא גדול הוא קרוב ממשה רבנו in Rambam's Hilkhos Teshuva

Here is some text from Rambam's Hilkhos Teshuva:

לפי שבאותן הימים תרבה הדעה והחכמה והאמת...מפני שאותו המלך שיעמוד מזרע דויד בעל חכמה יהיה יתר משלמה ונביא גדול הוא קרוב ממשה רבנו ולפיכך ילמד כל העם ויורה אותם דרך ה׳

I checked an early manuscript (p. 32, right page, right column) from the Jewish National University Library and the text as quoted above seems close, except that it omits the pronoun הוא before קרוב:

I placed an ellipsis where Rambam proceeds to cite pesukim for his statement. You can see the entire text if you want.

My question concerns the phrase ונביא גדול הוא קרוב ממשה רבנו and Eliyahu Touger's English translation of -קרוב מ as "close to."

It seems to me that "close to" is untenable. Now, I know Rambam isn't writing in biblical Hebrew, but I researched the usage of קרוב in the Tanakh anyway. Whenever it is employed to express the sense of proximity to someone, it is either קרוב אל or -קרוב ל.

Edit: I know the supposed idea is similarity, not necessarily physical proximity. But, one would think Rambam would express both thoughts the same way. That is, moshiach ben David is close to [the prophetic degree] of Moshe, and thus, קרוב אל משה.

קרוב אל: cp. Gen. 45:10; Exo. 12:4; Lev. 21:2-3; Num. 27:11; Deut. 4:7, 13:7, 21:3, 21:6, 22:2, 30:14; 2 Sam. 19:42; 1 Chr. 12:40; Est. 1:14; Eze. 43:19.

-קרוב ל: cp. Ruth 2:20; Ps. 34:18, 85:9, 145:18.

Not only did I not encounter the phrase -קרוב מ used to express proximity or similarity, I didn't encounter it at all. (If someone has encountered it used in that sense, please post the pasuk.)

Here is my question: what grammatical basis is there for translating -קרוב מ as "close to"?

Answer

Because the RaMBa"M spoke Arabic (for those who read Arabic, a closer example is in the first usage example here: "Japan is close to China").

Yes, he wrote in Hebrew, and he was very skilled in his Hebrew grammar. That does not mean, however, that he was not influenced by his Arabic language background. Given that he used this term regularly, I think it is fair to assume that this was his personal writing style, if not the common usage employed by his contemporaries (rabbinic and/or lay Arabic/Hebrew speakers).

Tzarich 'Iyun on that last point, but it is most definitely a grammatically correct expression in the language he used in every day speech and most of his writings.