At Avot 6:6 the 48th and final element in the list of things one should acquire or practise in order to maximize one’s claim to be a true ben Torah is the habit of quoting the source of anything you say that does not originate from you but from some earlier source:
הָאוֹמֵר
דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ
One who says a thing in the name
of the person who says it.
This practice is said to bring the ultimate redemption:
הָא
לָמַֽדְתָּ, כָּל הָאוֹמֵר דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ, מֵבִיא גְאֻלָּה לָעוֹלָם,
שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וַתֹּֽאמֶר אֶסְתֵּר לַמֶּֽלֶךְ בְּשֵׁם מָרְדְּכָי
That’s what you have learned: One
who says something in the name of its speaker brings redemption to the world,
as it states: “And Esther told the king in the name of Mordechai”
(Esther 2:22).
Why should a person quote his sources? Within Avot one can
advance several reasons. For example:
·
The world is sustained by
three things—truth, justice and peace (Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, Avot 1:18).
Suppressing the identity of the person who first articulated one’s words can be
viewed as concealing the truth, or at least as being highly economical with it,
by creating the misleading impression that the words spoken were one’s own.
·
Masquerading as the
originator of a teaching is a form of self-promotion. Hillel warns at Avot 1:13
that a name made great is a name destroyed.
·
Rebbi, at Avot 2:1, asks
what is the path that a person should choose for himself and answers his own
question: it is the path that reflects creditably on himself and in the eyes of
others. Holding oneself out as the author of another’s words does not comply
with that proposition.
Even aside from these mishnayot, there are reasons for
quoting one’s sources. Thus
“…the Rambam understood that the
purpose of the directive of הָאוֹמֵר דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ is not in order to
prevent a person from falsely taking credit for someone else’s statement, but
rather to demonstrate the authenticity of a particular halachah” (Rabbi
Hershel Schachter, Rav Schachter on Pirkei Avos).
Frustratingly, Rav Schachter does not cite a source for this
proposition. It cannot have been from Rambam’s commentary on Avot, since הָאוֹמֵר
דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ is
in the sixth perek of Avot; this consists entirely of baraitot and was not
therefore part of his commentary on the Mishnah.
“Take note—the concepts stated in
this chapters and the forthcoming explanations are not new concepts that I have
invented/ They are, rather, an anthology of the words of our Sages …, the works
of philosophers of the early and late generations, and many other texts. Accept
the truth [regardless of] the person who said it”
So, having denied any sort of original input, Rambam might
be expected to produce a text that is literally bristling with sources. But he
does not:
“[I have chosen not to mention my
sources for two reasons:] a) because this prolongs the text without any
advantage. b) By mentioning the name of an author of whom a particular person
might not approve. I might cause him [to reject the concept, thinking] that it
is harmful and that it contains an undesirable intent. For this reason I have
chosen to omit the name of the author... ”.
Both of these propositions are debatable.
As for the first, how might any author know that there is no
advantage to be gained by not giving a source? Subsequent events have shown
rather the opposite: there has been something of a cottage industry in trying
to find the very sources that Rambam concealed, generally because of the advantage
that can be derived from gaining that information.
As for the second, Rambam has already told his readers that
they should accept the truth without regard for who said it. It seems
inconsistent then to withhold the identities of his sources in case his readers
do not follow his injunction.
If anyone can find a source for Rabbi Schachter’s proposition
that Rambam supported citation of sources in order to demonstrate the
authenticity of anything, can they please share it?
For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook,
click here.
