Evidence from the Words of the Early Commentators
This question and answer were automatically translated using our trained AI and have not yet been reviewed by a qualified rabbi. Please treat this translation with caution.
go to original →
Question
In studying the sugyot, is it important to bring evidence from the languages of the early commentators who are not so well-known, meaning those who are not as recognized as the Rashba, Ritva, Ramban, etc., but rather like R"I Almadari or even the Meiri, in light of what is known in the name of the Chazon Ish that the Meiri should be considered as a later authority, and is there a source for this?
Answer
Shalom Rav
I did not understand the question 'is it important to bring evidence', of course, it is important to bring evidence from both early and later commentators.
Even if it is not the same level of importance as the well-known early commentators, they still hold great significance for understanding the sugya.