Citation of Non-Orthodox Scholars II

We have already seen how the responsum of R. Amram Gaon brought this matter, and its source in Avodah Zarah (35b), to the attention of Sephardic scholars. Ashkenazic (Franco-German) scholars, however, evidently never saw this responsum of R. Amram Gaon. However, while they did not utilize the passage in Avodah Zarah for this purpose (perhaps because tractate Avodah Zarah was not widely studied in Germany, at least among early rishonim), there is evidence that this concept was not foreign to them. Thus, Rashi in Gittin (15a sv. tikberem imam) states that Bnei Rokhel would not be quoted in the Beis Midrash because they were wicked. Similarly, Tosafos (Sotah 12a sv. aherim) quote a source (perhaps the Geonic work Toledos Tanna'im Ve-Amora'im 2:3) that the Tanna R. Meir would quote teachings from his wayward master Elisha ben Avuyah in the name of Aherim rather than in his teacher's name. All this indicates that the Ashkenazim intuited the concept of not quoting Torah from an impure source by name.

Similarly, the Sefer Hasidim writes: "We do not quote by name a good Torah explanation from someone who subsequently became an apostate "(938) and "A man who heard a good explanation or answer from an idolater, apostate or enticer to sin should not repeat it in his name" (977).

The Radbaz does not discuss the matter and, as an heir of the Spanish tradition (albeit in Egypt), he was certainly aware of the Ramban and his circle's discussion. In one responsum (vol. 4 no. 187), the Radbaz states in passing that one may not quote by name someone who has the halakhic status of a heretic.

Here ends our discussion of the matter from a pre-modern perspective. From the Ramban through the Ran, the matter revolves around the Aivu passage. According to some, one may not quote by name from a scholar who does not act according to his station while according to others, one may only not quote by name from a scholar who violates a prohibition, even of rabbinic origin. On the Ashkenazic side, there is a recognition that it is improper to quote by name someone wicked. This seems to be the position of the Radbaz as well, although it is not totally clear. All seem to agree, however, that one may quote the teachings of wicked scholars if one does not mention their names (although, presumably, one should not take credit for the teachings but should say "I heard it explained" or something similar).

(B"n, to be continued)