stracting the practical Halachah from the Palestinian Talmud, with the intent of co-ordinating both. His further studies comprised a short treatise on the Jewish Calendar (Maamar ha-ibbur) written in- Hebrew (1158), which forms a clear scientific, systematic survey of the subject. At the same time he wrote a book on Logic (Milloth Higgayon), to which Moses Mendelssohn added a commentary. That year also saw the beginning of the first of his three great works— the Commentary on the Mishnah.. It was not finished till a late period in life, but the fact that it was planned and begun in his early manhood deserves special note. His purpose in taking up this great work is clearly outlined in his introduction. “Confusion,” he writes, “besets the student of the Mishnah. Until a man has closely read the Talmudical discussion, though he be the greatest of the Geohim, he cannot understand the Mishnah. Now, in the Talmud the discussion of a single halachah sometimes occupies four or five pages, for subject grows out of subject, with arguments, objections and replies; so that even when the Talmud is mastered the real significance of the Mishnah can only be grasped by a student skilled in clear thought. Moreover, for the explanation of one and the same halachah, the reader must often refer to two or more tractates.” The exposition of the text of the Mishnah was too often interblended with Talmudice dialects and only served to obscure the clearness and simplicity of its statements. This was a grave, critical mistake and Maimonides realized ‘that it was essential to treat the Misnah in and for itself if the Jewish tradition was to be based on a sound historical foundation.” The commentary originally bore the Arabic name Siraj, or “Light” (Maor) and was not completed till 1168.
There is a pathetic reference in his final words to the conditions under which it was begun. "While my mind was ever troubled amid the God-decreed expatriations from one end of heaven to the other, I wrote notes on many an halachah on journeys by land or while tossed on the stormy waves at sea."
For more than ten years, Maimon, like the dove sent forth from Noah's ark, was unable to find a resting place for his family. Little is known of their movements during that period, but there can be no doubt that it was full of peril and tribulations. "A Moslem state for Moslems," was the watchword of the day, and there were few parts in Spain where a Jew could live under the dispensation of the Almohades. The times were dark and troubled for Israel, and many were under the necessity of simulating an outward conformity with the dominant faith. Did Maimon and his son act the part of pseudo Moslems in those critical years? This question has been a great controversial point with Jewish writers. Geiger, Munk and Graetz, all three authorities of repute, maintain that they did. Dr. M. Friedlander, Prof. Margoliuth and others take the opposite view. A great deal of the evidence for the adoption of the former contention rests on the somewhat sweeping inferences drawn from the arguments of both father and son in their respective treatises, the "Letter of Consolation, and the "Letter Concerning Apostacy." These "Letters deal fully with the perplexing conscience-problems of their day. Could a Jew accept the Islmaic formula with pressure of force majore without violating his conscience? Was a Jew required when no other alternative remained, to give up his life rather than yield in subordinate principles affecting his faith? The question had not the same