חדש באתר: עוזר בינה מלאכותית המבוסס על כתביו ושיעוריו של הרב מיכאל אברהם

Q&A: Is the Meiri’s view about gentiles false?

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

Is the Meiri’s view about gentiles false?

Question

What does the Rabbi say about Rabbi Zini’s new book, which claims to prove that the Meiri’s view regarding gentiles was stated under pressure from the gentiles? Here is the relevant paragraph from the article:

Regarding the words of “the Meiri,” according to which Christianity is not idolatry, Rabbi Zini says that “the Meiri wrote things that seemingly uproot the entire content of what is written in the Talmud about gentiles, by asserting that everything written in the Talmud about gentiles refers to idol-worshipping gentiles, lacking morality and lacking law, and so on. This trapped the great sages of Israel. With very great reverence, I must say that even Rabbi Kook fell victim to this when he thought that the Meiri’s words were well-founded and expressed his actual position. In the book I prove that this is a mistake, and that ‘the Meiri’ was forced to write this because of the reality in France in those days as a result of the Trial of the Talmud. He did not believe a single word written there.” “How did the great sages of Israel fall into the trap? It is important to know that very many in our generation rely on ‘the Meiri’ in order to draw conclusions regarding relations between Israel and the nations. But I do not understand them. Even if we assume that the Meiri believed what was written there, he is the only one who says this in the face of hundreds and thousands of halakhic decisors who say the opposite. Since when do people rely on one decisor against many others throughout the generations who contradict him? Rather, current modern reality creates a situation in which people are so influenced by foreign cultures and by things unrelated to Torah that they pounce, as though finding great spoils, on any position that blurs the distinction between Israel and the nations.”

Answer

I already explained that the discussion about the Meiri is unnecessary. Even without the Meiri, I would say the same thing.

Discussion on Answer

Yochai Orlan (2025-04-01)

But you use the Meiri as an example that such significant changes do happen in Jewish law. That’s not a fair example, because it isn’t correct. This example is meant to show that substantive conservatism exists in halakhic history on such fundamental issues.
The issue is not what your opinion is on the matter, but whether substantive conservatism exists in Jewish law. Why use this example if it isn’t correct? That’s manipulation.

Yochai Orlan (2025-04-01)

I’m referring to your eye-opening lecture from a few years ago that I saw on YouTube. The part that requires proof is that the halakhic decisors over the generations made use of this methodology of substantive rather than formal conservatism in cases that are genuinely Torah-level.

Michi (2025-04-02)

You decided it isn’t correct. Good for you. You’re also using terms that aren’t mine. Please don’t troll. There are of course many other examples, but I won’t bring them here for fear of feeding trolls. I’m stringent about that, though I have no clear halakhic source for it (aside from the responsa Besamim Rosh and the Jerusalem Talmud on sacred offerings).

Leave a Reply

Back to top button