Rambam: On Not Citing Sources

Originally published in January 2009, in a cruder form. Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Artwork: Arcane Lighthouse, by Igor Kieryluk

Rambam: On Not Citing Sources

ha'Omer Davar b'Shem Omro

The braisa in Avos 6:6 [1] enumerates 48 qualities that are necessary for "acquiring Torah." The 48th quality on the list is "ha'omer davar b'shem omro" - one who says something in the name of the person who [originally] said it. The braisa goes on to explain that whoever does this "brings redemption to the world, as it is stated, 'And Esther said to the king in the name of Mordechai' (Esther 2:22)." This virtue of ha'omer davar b'shem omro is lauded by Chazal (the Sages) in other places as well (Megilah 15a, Chulin 104b, Nidah 19b - just to name a few). 

According to Chazal, not only is it good and proper to say something in the name of the original speaker, but it is bad and improper to not say something in the name of the original speaker. Chazal teach: "Concerning one who doesn't say something in the name of the original speaker, the verse states, 'Do not steal from the poor, because he is poor' (Mishlei 22:22)" (Tanchuma Bamidbar 27). Similarly: "One who says something in the name of someone who didn't say it brings a curse upon the world" (Yalkut Shimoni, Mishlei 247).

Rambam's Anonymity Policy

Based on these sources one might think that it is never acceptable to cite another person's idea without proper attribution. Yet, in his preface to Shemoneh Perakim the Rambam [2] writes: 

It is important to know, though, that I did not originate the ideas expressed or the explanations offered in these chapters or in my commentary [to Pirkei Avos]; rather, they have been collected from the words of the Sages in midrashim, the Talmud, and in their other works, as well as from the words of earlier and later philosophers [Jewish and non-Jewish], and from the works of many others. Accept the truth from whoever utters it.

Once in a while, though, I will quote verbatim from a well-known work [without indicating that it is a quotation]. There is nothing wrong with this, since I am not taking credit for what someone else already said, and because I hereby acknowledge [at the outset that I will be doing this].

I will also not say, "So-and-so said this" or "So-and-so said that" because that would be unnecessarily wordy. Furthermore, it might make a reader who does not accept the author think that what he said is harmful or has a sinister intent that he is unaware of. Therefore I decided to leave out the author's name, for my aim is to help the reader and explain what is hidden away in this tractate.

The question is: How can we reconcile Chazal's position on ha'omer davar b'shem omro with the Rambam's practice in Shemoneh Perakim? Surely the Rambam was aware of the principle of ha'omer davar b'shem omro which is stated in the braisa of Avos - the very tractate about  which these words of the Rambam were written! How can he not cite his sources? 

Illicitly Taking Credit

The Rambam justifies his policy of not citing sources by saying: 

Once in a while, though, I will quote verbatim from a well-known work [without indicating that it is a quotation]. There is nothing wrong with this, since I am not taking credit for what someone else already said, and because I hereby acknowledge [at the outset that I will be doing this].

In other words, it would appear that the Rambam does not interpret ha'omer davar b'shem omro to mean that one must attribute statements to their original source, but rather, that one must not claim credit for the ideas of others. Thus, the Rambam has satisfied the guideline of ha'omer davar b'shem omro simply by acknowledging at the outset that he will be using the ideas of others in his treatise, and that he does not claim credit for these ideas. According to the Rambam, it would only be a violation of ha'omer davar b'shem omro if he presented someone else's ideas as his own. 

But one might raise another objection to the Rambam's practice: If the Rambam is quoting the words of an authority figure, isn't it important to mention that authority's name? Sure, it's nice that the Rambam doesn't claim authorship for ideas that are not his own, but how will the reader be able to judge the truth of the statement if he doesn't know who said it? How can the Rambam dismiss the citation of sources as being "unnecessarily wordy"? 

Authority and Truth

The answer to this question is contained in address by what is one of the most oft-quoted sayings of the Rambam: "Accept the truth from whoever says it." The Rambam elaborates on this principle in the Mishneh Torah in the laws of sanctifying the new moon. After several chapters of complex astronomical calculations, the Rambam [3] concludes:

As regards the logic for all these calculations – why we have to add a particular figure or deduct it, how all these rules originated, and how they were discovered and proved – all this is part of the science of astronomy and mathematics, about which many books have been composed by Greek sages – books that are still available to the scholars of our time. But the books which had been composed by the Sages of Israel, of the tribe of Yissachar, who lived in the time of the prophets, have not come down to us. But since all these rules have been established by sound and clear proofs, free from any flaw and irrefutable, we don’t care about the identity of their authors, whether they were Jewish prophets or Gentile sages. For regarding any matter whose rationale is evident and whose truth has been verified by sound proofs: we do not rely on the person who said it or taught it, but on the proof that has been demonstrated and the reasoning that we know.

For example, if the Rambam wrote "2+2=4," he would not need to cite a mathematician to support his point. Why not? Because the truth of 2+2=4 does not rest on authority. Its truth is evident to the mind. This is what the Rambam means by the last sentence in the aforementioned passage: when it comes to a statement, the truth of which has been demonstrated by proof and reasoning, authority has no place. We do not accept such a statement because it was stated by an authority. We accept it because our minds see the truth.

What is true for arithmetic is true for the concepts taught in Avos (i.e. ideas of philosophy and ethics) as well. If a philosophical or ethical idea has been validly demonstrated with clear evidence, proofs, and reasoning, then it doesn't matter who said it - prophet or gentile, old or young, expert or layman. The truth speaks for itself, and is not dependent on the affirmation of any authority.

Indeed, the Talmud is filled with instances in which the question is raised, "What is the source for this idea?" and the Gemara answers "sevara hee" (lit. "it is rational idea") which means "the truth of this statement is evident, and does not require a source." The Sefer ha'Chinuch [4] takes this further in the introduction to his book. He raises the question, "Why doesn't the Torah discuss the fate of the soul after death and the World to Come?" and answers:

Such matters do not require the support of proofs and testimony [from the Torah], for they are their own proof and testimony; they are first principles (i.e. ideas whose rationale is evident to the mind). Therefore, the Torah never goes on at length about matters that can be known through human reasoning [alone], just as the Sages have said in so many places, "sevara hee" - meaning, no Scriptural proof is necessary in that which reason dictates.

The Rambam intended that the content of Shemoneh Perakim be assessed on its own merit. He expected the reader to think about the ideas and proofs contained therein, to determine with his or her own mind whether or not they make sense, and to accept or reject them on that basis, and on that basis alone.

When Attribution is Necessary

Needless to say, there are valid reasons for citing one's sources. If the truth of a statement rests on facts which can only be obtained through specialized observation or can only be understood through a specialized branch of knowledge, then a layperson shouldn't accept the statement as true without the endorsement of a qualified expert. For instance, it is unwise for a layperson to rely on statements about medicine unless those statements have been vetted by medical experts. Likewise, the merit of a halachic statement often hinges on its source(s).

Sometimes it is necessary to know who authored a particular statement in order to ensure that it is consistent with other statements made by the same author. For this reason the Gemara endeavors to record the source of every halachic statement therein. When an apparent contradiction arises between two statements by the same author, it becomes necessary to explain the contradiction by analyzing each statement in an attempt to arrive at a consistent position.

Another reason to cite sources is to facilitate further research on the part of the reader. For example, someone who reads this post might want to read the text of the Rambam in context to see whether I have accurately conveyed his view. Had I not mentioned the source of the text, it would be difficult for the reader to investigate the material on his or her own. [5]

Another reason to attribute a statement to the original speaker is for rhetorical purposes. There are people who won't accept a rational, validly demonstrated idea unless they see it written in the name of an authority figure whom they respect. To convince such people of the truth of these ideas, it may be necessary to invoke authority.

However, as the Rambam points out, attribution might backfire if the authority doesn't find favor in the eyes of the reader. For example, many of the concepts that the Rambam mentions in Shemoneh Perakim have their origin in the writings of Aristotle. Had the Rambam attributed these ideas to Aristotle explicitly, they might be rejected by someone who feels that it is wrong to study Greek/secular philosophy.

As a great chacham once said, "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of the truth," and unthinking rejection of truth because of the authority who stated it is just as bad.

Conclusion

In truth, there are two possible ways to reconcile the Rambam's practice in Shemoneh Perakim with the braisa in Avos. One possibility is as we have explained: that the Rambam maintains that the ikkar (essence) of ha'omer davar b'shem omro is to not take credit for someone else's ideas, and since the Rambam gave due credit at the beginning of Shemoneh Perakim, then there is no virtue in citing specific names - especially when dealing with a subject matter in which the truth can speak for itself.

The other possibility is that the Rambam held that there are other beneficial reasons for ha'omer davar b'shem omro, but the most important consideration is the acceptance of the truth by those who hear it. Since the Rambam was worried that people would reject these ideas based on their source, then it would be better to forego citation and state the ideas anonymously rather than uphold ha'omer davar b'shem omro and risk turning people away from the truth.

Either way, we see that the Rambam did not view the citation of sources as an absolute requirement. The irony is that we needed to cite our sources in this post to support our view.

[1] Technically speaking, this braisa is from Avos d'Rebbi Nosson. However, it has become a widespread practice to refer to this section as "the sixth chapter of Pirkei Avos" - even though Avos only has five chapters.

[2] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides), Commentary on the Mishnah: Introduction to Avos (a.k.a. Shemoneh Perakim), Preface

[3] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides), Mishneh Torah: Sefer Zmanim, Hilchos Kidush ha'Chodesh 17:25
[4] Sefer ha'Chinuch, Introduction
[5] In a letter to his pupil Rav Yosef, the Rambam expressed his regret for not writing a bibliography for the Mishneh Torah: 

Because of this, I regret that I did not compose along with my composition a separate volume whose content I will now explain to you and which I still hope to compose, if God will decree that I will be able to do it, even though it is a very demanding task and effort - that is, a source book to my composition which will cite the source for every halacha whose origin is not evident ... This source book would be a separate companion volume to my composition, since I obviously cannot incorporate it into the body of the work, because the nature of its subject conflicts with the structure and style of a monolithic code, as I explained to you previously.