הקדמת הרמב"ם לפירוש המשנה - חלקי תושבע"פ

(1) And when Yehoshua bin Nun, peace be upon him, died, he taught the elders that which he received of the [Torah's oral] explanation; and the laws that they extrapolated during his time about which no disagreement occurred; and [those] about which there occurred a disagreement [and] they decided the law according to the majority of the elders. And about them the verse states (Joshua 24:31), "and all the days of the elders who had length of days after Joshua." And afterward, these elders taught that which they received from Yehoshua to the prophets, peace be upon them. And the prophets learned, one from another.

(2) And there was no time that there was not contemplation and innovation of the matters. And the sages of each generation would make the words of the predecessors the main thing, and they would learn from them and innovate matters. And there was no disagreement [about] the fundamentals passed on.

(3) Until came the time of the men of the Great Assembly – and they were Chaggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Daniel, Chananiah, Mishael, Azariah, Ezra the Scribe, Nechemiah ben Chakhaliah, Mordechai, Zerubavel ben Shaltiel; and accompanying these prophets were the remainder of the hundred and twenty elders, from 'the craftsmen and sentry' and similar to them. And they also contemplated [the laws] as had done their predecessors, and they decreed decrees and ordained ordinances. And the last of this holy fellowship was the beginning of the sages mentioned in the mishnah – and that is Shimon the Righteous. And he was high priest in that generation.

(4) And after them, when the time arrived for our Holy Rabbi, peace be upon him, [he organized the Mishnah]. He was unique in his generation – a man that had all of the graces and the good character traits in him; to the point that through them, he merited to be called our Holy Rabbi by the people of his generation. And his name is Yehudah.

(5) And he was complete in wisdom and virtue, as they said (Gittin 59.), "From the days of Moshe, our teacher, and until Rabbi, we did not see Torah and grandeur in one place (man)." And he was complete in piety and humility and distancing from the [physical] delights, as they also said (Sotah 49b), "From when Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin have ceased."

(6) And he was eloquent and above all men in the holy tongue, to the point that the sages – peace be upon them – would learn the meaning of that which was garbled from the letters of Scripture (the meaning of unclear words) from the words of his slaves and servants, and this is made famous in the Talmud (Rosh HaShanah 26a).

(7) And he had the wealth and assets and broad means, about which it is said (Bava Metzia 85a), "The stable overseer of Rabbi was wealthier than Shavur Malka (the king of Persia)." And so, he made men of wisdom – and those that sought it – comfortable, and he spread Torah in Israel. And he gathered the laws and the words of the sages and the received disagreements [dating] from the time of Moshe, our teacher, until his [own] days.

(8) And he himself was [part of the transmission], as he received [the tradition] from Shimon, his father. And Shimon [received it] from Gamliel, his father; and he from Shimon; and he from Hillel; and he from Shemaya and Avtalyon, his teachers; and they from Yehudah ben Tabai and Shimon ben Shetach; and they from Yehoshua ben Prachiah and Natai of Arbel; and they from Yose ben Yoezer of Tsereidah and Yose ben Yochanan; and they from Antigonos of Sokho; and he from Shimon the Righteous; and he from Ezra – who was from the remnants of the Great Assembly; and Ezra, from Baruch ben Neriah, his teacher; and Baruch from Yirmiyah.

(9) And so [too] Yirmiyah received [it] from those before him of the prophets, without a doubt – one prophet from another – [back] until the elders that received [it] from Yehoshua bin Nun, and he from the mouth of Moshe.

(10) And when he gathered all of the thoughts and statements, he began to compose the Mishnah, which includes the explanation of all of the commandments that are written in the Torah. Some of the them are traditions received from the mouth of Moshe – peace be upon him. And some of them are teachings that they extrapolated by way of reason, about which no disagreement happened; and [still] some are teachings wherein disagreements occurred between two reasonings. And he wrote those with their disagreements – x says like this and y says like that.

(11) And if there was [only] one who argued on the many, he would write them [as] the words of the one and the words of the many. And this thing was done for useful matters, and they are mentioned in the mishnah (Mishnah Eduyot 1), and I will mention them.

(12) But [I will do this] after [writing about] a fundamental principle which I saw fit to mention. And that is that a person could say, if the explanation is, like we have established it, received from the mouth of Moshe – as we have said from their words, the whole Torah, its general principles, its details and its inferences were said from Sinai – if so, what are these specific laws about it is said that they are 'laws of Moshe from Sinai?'

(13) And [about] this fundamental principle, you must understand its secret. And that is that the explanations that were transmitted from the mouth of Moshe have no disagreement about them in any way. As behold, from then until now, we have not found a disagreement occur among the sages at any time, from the days of Moshe and until Rav Ashi, such that one say, "They take out the eye of one who has taken out the eye of his fellow, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 19:21), 'an eye for an eye'"; and the second one say that it is only indemnity that he has to pay.

(14) And we have also not found a disagreement in that which the verse states (Leviticus 23:40), "the fruit of a beautiful tree," such that one would say it is a citron (etrog), and the other say it is quinces or pomegranates or other [fruit] beside it. And we have also not found a disagreement about a "leafy tree" that it is [anything but] a myrtle.

(15) And we have not found a disagreement about the statement of the verse (Deuteronomy 25:12), "And you shall cut off her hand," that it is [anything but] indemnity. And not about that which the verse stated (Leviticus 21:9), "When the daughter of a priest defiles herself through harlotry, etc. she shall be put to the fire," that, nonetheless, we only make this decree when she is married.

(16) And so [too], we have not heard of anyone, from Moshe until now, disagreeing about the decree of Scripture (Deuteronomy 22:21) that they should stone a maiden the virginity of whom was not found, with the one that said that is only if she was married, and witnesses testified that she strayed after the betrothal – with witnesses and a warning.

(17) And similar to this, in the general category of [the Torah's] commandments, there is no disagreement about them, since the explanations of all of them are received from the mouth of Moshe. And about them and about what is similar to them, they said, "The whole Torah was said – its general principles, its details and its inferences – from Sinai."

(18) But even though they are transmitted and there is no disagreement about them, we can – with the wisdom of the Torah that is given to us – extrapolate these explanations [from the Torah] by one of the ways of reasonings, or [from] the associations, proofs or hints found in Scripture.

(19) And when you see in the Talmud [that] they are investigating and disagreeing with one with another in the pattern of investigation and bringing proofs for one of these explanations, and similar to these – for example, that which the statement of the verse stated, "the fruit of a beautiful tree," maybe it will be pomegranates or quinces or other [fruits] besides them, until (Sukkah 35a – Chapter 3) they bring a proof about it from that which it stated, "the fruit of a beautiful (hadar) tree," and [one teacher] said it is a tree the taste of its fruit and its [bark] which are the same; and another said, it is a fruit that resides (hadar) in its tree from one year to the next; and [yet] another said, it is a fruit that dwells upon all waters – they did not bring these proofs because the matter had become garbled for them, until it became known to thee from these proofs. But [rather] without a doubt, we have seen from Yehoshua until now that they would hold a citron with the palm branch (lulav) every year. And there is no disagreement about it, but [rather] they were probing for the hint that is found in Scripture for this transmitted explanation [that the fruit in question is a citron].

(20) And so [too], their proof about the myrtle (Sukkah 32b); and their proof about the laws of [destroying various] bodily organs (Bava Kamma 83b), and that is what one is obligated to his fellow, whose limb he has destroyed; and also their proof that the daughter of a priest which was mentioned there is married (Sanhedrin 52a); and all that is similar to it – is [all] according to this principle.

(21) And this matter is that which they said, "its general principles and its details," [by which] they meant to say matters that we can extrapolate by 'the general principle and the detail (klal uprat)' and the rest of the thirteen [hermeneutical] principles, but they were [also] transmitted from Moshe. And about all of these – even though they are transmitted from the mouth of Moshe – it is not said [that it is] a 'law of Moshe from Sinai,' as it should not be said that "the fruit of a beautiful tree" is a citron, is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai'; or that one who injures his fellow pays money, is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(22) As it has already become clear to us that all of these explanations are from the mouth of Moshe, but [also] have hints to them in the verse, or they extrapolated them by one of the ways of reasoning, as we mentioned. And therefore, only about anything that does not have a hint in Scripture and is not connected to it and it is impossible to extrapolate by one of the ways of reasoning, is it said [that it is a] 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(23) And because of this, when we said, "Sizes are a law of Moshe from Sinai," they challenged us and said (Berakhot 40a), "Why do you say they are a 'law of Moshe from Sinai,' and behold, sizes are hinted about in the verse, when it stated (Deuteronomy 8:8), 'A land of wheat and barley'"; the answer will be that it is 'a law of Moshe from Sinai,' and the sizes do not have a source from which to extrapolate them by one of the ways of reasoning, and they do not have a hint in all of the Torah, but [rather] this commandment was associated with this verse as a [mnemonic], so that it will be known and remembered, but it is not the subject of the verse.

(24) And this is the [meaning] of what they said, "The verse is [only] a general association," in every place they mentioned it.

(25) And I include in this most of the laws about which it is said [that it is] a 'law of Moshe from Sinai' – and it is possible that it be all [of them]. And the truth of what I said is elucidated for you, as there is none of them – not even one – that they extrapolated by a way of reasoning, and it is impossible to associate [any one of them] with a verse, except by way of [general] association, as we have elucidated. And we do not ever find that they investigated them with reasonings or brought proofs about them, but rather they took them from the mouth of Moshe, as the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded him:

(26) A half log of oil for a thanksgiving offering, and a quarter of (wine) [oil] for a Nazirite; eleven days between one menstruation period (niddah) and another; and extending [the height of a partition], joining [two surfaces] and [considering an unfit portion of a sukkah covering as] a bent side are [each one] 'a law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(27) Sizes, obstructions and partitions are a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(28) Tefillin on klaf, mezuzah on dokhsostos and Torah scrolls on gvil (different types of parchment) is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(29) The [letter,] shin of the tefillin; the knot of the tefillin and the black straps; square tefillin; and the sleeve (maabarta) of the tefillin is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(30) They are wrapped in their hair and sewed in tendons is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(31) We write a Torah scroll with ink and lined is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(32) The intercourse of a [girl] less than three years old is not intercourse, is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(33) One who [plants] his field with two types of wheat gives one corner [of his field if] he makes one threshing floor and two corners [if] he makes two threshing floors, is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(34) Garden plantings that are not [systematically] eaten, join [with grain to create a forbidden mixture (kilayim)] when [they are] one twenty-fourth of that which falls into a field of a seah, is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(35) For the sake of ten trees scattered in a field of a seah, we can plow the whole field of a seah [on the seventh year], is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(36) [For a] cake of dried figs, part of which has become impure, we tithe the terumah tithe from the [section] of it that is pure is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(37) The sexton may see from where the young children are reading [on Shabbat night by the light of the candle], is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(38) A woman may don an apron whether it is in front of her or whether it is in back of her [on Shabbat], is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(39) They permitted the mixing of harsh and mellow wines, is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(40) We tithe the poor tithe in Ammon and Moav on the seventh year, is a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.'

(41) And every place that one of these laws will come up in that which we will explain of the Mishnah, I will explain it there in its place, with God's help.

(42) Therefore the types of laws that were established in the Torah, upon these principles that we have prefaced, are divided into five divisions: