 |
| An early manuscript of Meirat Einayim by the 14th century R. Yitzchak of Acre |
This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Eitan Fishbane[1]—examines the rabbinic notion of the authenticity of a teaching or text being reliant on the perceived authority of its transmitter or originator. In other words, the greater the rabbi the more authentic the teaching, regardless of the intrinsic value, nature and validity of the actual teaching itself.
As a test case, we analyse the writings of a fourteenth-century Kabbalist, R. Yitzchak ben Shmuel of Acre in his Meirat Einayim which is a supercommentary (i.e., a commentary on a commentary) on Nachmanides’ Commentary on the Torah. Interestingly, R. Yitzchak of Acre—who lived at the same time as R. Moshe de Leon who had claimed to have discovered the ancient Zohar—questioned the attribution of the Zohar to the second-century Tanna, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, who lived a thousand years earlier.[2]
