Rav Sherira Gaon was the first post-talmudic authority to deal systematically with the question of how the Mishnah, Tosefta, baraitot and Talmud were compiled. This section of his work deals with the Mishnah.

The days of Rabbi, 132 the son of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, were an opportune time. 133 Rabbi arranged 134 the Mishnah. The words of the Mishnah can be compared to the words of the Almighty to Moses; they were like a sign and a wonder. 135 Rabbi did not produce these words with his own mind; rather, they were the teachings of the early sages who preceded him. How do we know this?

The Mishnah says, “It once happened that Ben Zakkai examined [witnesses] regarding the stems of the fig.” 136 The Talmud suggests, 137 “This reference is probably to a different Ben Zakkai; for if Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai were meant, would Rabbi have called him merely ‘Ben Zakkai?’” [The Talmud now refutes the above statement by quoting a baraita which parallels the mishnah and which includes the title “Rabban”:] “Yet has it not been taught, ‘It once happened that Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai examined witnesses regarding the stems of the fig’?”

The Talmud now finds a different way to reconcile the Mishnah and baraita: “He [Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai] must therefore have been a disciple sitting before his master 138 when he made this suggestion. His reasoning was so acceptable to his master that he [the master] perpetuated the incident in his [the disciple’s] name.” 139 Thus, from the time of Hillel and Shammai, our sages had already taught this mishnah with the plain name “Ben Zakkai,” and Rabbi also taught it this way, without modifying it….

The Mishnah was even divided into tractates before the time of Rabbi; for Rabbi Meir told Rabbi Nathan, “Let us ask Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel to open [his lectures] with [Tractate] Uqzin, with which he is unfamiliar….” The story continues: “Rabbi Jacob ben Karshai went and sat by the upper room where Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel was studying, and he recited [Tractate] Uqzin again and again. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel thought, ‘Is someone asking questions about Uqzin?’ He turned his attention to it and studied it.” 140

There are places where Rabbi added commentary. For example, the mishnah says, “Boys may go out with garlands and royal children may go out with bells.” 141 This is the way the mishnah was taught by the early sages. 142 Then Rabbi added the following explanation: “Everyone else likewise may go out with bells, but the sages spoke in terms of the usual situation.” 143

An exception is those things which were taught in his day 144 and in the days after him, as we say: “This is what is taught in the early mishnah; but the later mishnah on the same subject says…”

Likewise, Eduyot was established 145 on the day that Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah was inaugurated as nasi, as we say: “Eduyot was also learned that day.” And we learn: “The term ‘that day’ always means the day Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah was seated 146 in the yeshivah.” 147

Rabbi afterwards included material which was taught in his father’s time. 148 For example: “Rabbi Yose says, ‘In six instances the House of Shammai holds the lenient opinion while the House of Hillel holds the stringent opinion.’” 149 Another example: “Rabbi Judah said, ‘God forbid that Akavyah ben Mehallalel was ever excommunicated, for no man of Israel is a better example of a bastion of wisdom and fear of sin than Akavyah ben Mehallalel.’” 150

However, with other tractates, even though their basic principles had already been taught by the early sages, Rabbi arranged their halakhot. Some of them he taught in the original wording, and others he worded as he saw fit. Every anonymous mishnah is the teaching of Rabbi Meir. But he did not create them from his own heart. Rather, Rabbi Meir had a certain way of teaching the mishnayot to his disciples, and Rabbi chose and established this way to teach the mishnayot to everyone. Rabbi Meir had received his way of learning the Mishnah from his teacher, Rabbi Akiva, and Rabbi Akiva had received it from his teachers, the earlier sages. Thus we say: “Rabbi Yohanan said, ‘An anonymous Mishnah is Rabbi Meir. An anonymous Tosefta is Rabbi Nehemiah. An anonymous Sifra is Rabbi Judah. An anonymous Sifre is Rabbi Simeon. And all of them taught in the way of Rabbi Akiva.’” 151

These baraitot of Tosefta, Sifra, and Sifre were all taught by the earlier sages. Then Rabbi Judah, Rabbi Nehemiah, and Rabbi Simeon came, and each made his own compilation of the baraitot. Sifra was compiled by Rabbi Judah; Tosefta, by Rabbi Nehemiah; and Sifre, by Rabbi Simeon; and the Mishnah, by Rabbi Meir. All of them follow the method of Rabbi Akiva, for all were disciples of Rabbi Akiva.

But other baraitot do not interest us, because these just mentioned were selected and compiled by leading sages who were the foremost disciples of Rabbi Akiva. Thus, Rabbi Simeon told his students: “My sons, learn my principles, for my principles are the cream of the cream of Rabbi Akiva’s principles.” 152 We say: 153 “The hearts of the early ones are like the entrance to the great hall of the Holy Temple, and the hearts of the later ones are like the entrance to the antechamber.” And the Talmud goes on to explain: “The early ones means Rabbi Akiva.” 154

Our sages explain that even Adam, the first man, rejoiced in the wisdom of Rabbi Akiva when the Holy One, Blessed is He, showed Adam the sages of each generation. 155 And in Tractate Yevamot Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said to Rabbi Akiva, “Are you Akiva ben Joseph, whose name goes from one end of the world to the other?” 156

The greatest of all Rabbi Akiva’s students was Rabbi Meir, as we learn in Tractate Eruvin: “Rav Aha ben Hanina said, ‘It is revealed and known before Him Who spoke and the world came into existence that in the generation of Rabbi Meir there was none equal to him. Then why was not the halakhah fixed in agreement with his views? Because his colleagues could not fathom the depths of his mind, for he would declare the ritually unclean to be clean and the ritually clean to be unclean and he would supply plausible proof.’” 157 Therefore Rabbi Akiva was fond of him and ordained him in his youth.

In his halakhot Rabbi chose the way of teaching of Rabbi Meir, which was the way of Rabbi Akiva, because Rabbi saw that Rabbi Meir’s way was succinct and easy to teach. His statements were well composed, each topic placed with that which was similar to it. His teachings were more exact than any of the other tannaim, without superfluous language. Each word makes a vital point without unnecessary exaggeration. Nothing was missing or extra, except in a few instances. The way of presentation was concise. Great and wondrous things were included in every single word. Not everyone who is learned knows how to create such a composition, as it is said: “A man may arrange his thoughts, but what he says depends on God” (Prov. 16-1). All the Rabbis shared the same underlying principles; nevertheless, since Rabbi Akiva possessed a broad heart 158 and his disciple Rabbi Meir also possessed a broad heart, they arranged the material in an excellent manner, and they were preferable to all the other tannaim.

Therefore, Rabbi gathered their arrangement. To it he added halakhot that were formulated in his time. He arranged it as he saw fit. He also explained the essence and the main principles behind disputes of the Rabbis. Since there were Rabbis who had heard from great sages a different opinion from that in the Mishnah or who taught minority opinions anonymously, if someone heard about this he could become confused when studying the Mishnah. But when Rabbi explained the matter, no doubt regarding the halakhah could set in. Thus we learn in the Mishnah: 159 Rabbi Judah said, “Why is the opinion of the minority recorded along with the majority? In order to nullify it, so that if a man says this, one can say to him, ‘Where did you hear this?’ If he replies, ‘I received it as a tradition from my teachers,’ one can say to him, ‘Perhaps what you heard was the opinion of so-and-so.’” 160 When everybody saw the form of the Mishnah, the truthfulness of its teachings, and the exactness of its words, they abandoned their previous formulations and compilations. These halakhot were disseminated throughout the Jewish people while the other halakhot were shunted aside and became like a baraita. They are utilized as a commentary or for their more elaborate style. However, the Jewish people gave only these halakhot binding authority. They accepted it faithfully when they saw it, and no one has disputed its authority.

Using this approach of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Meir, Rabbi arranged the six orders of the Mishnah. This does not mean that the more numerous earlier sages were abandoned for the later ones. Rather, the earlier sages had no need for compiled material and the things that we learn by memory. Every single one of the earlier Rabbis knew these things through a chain of transmission. They had no need to compile them and write them down among themselves until the Temple’s destruction. Then came these earlier sages’ students, who were not as knowledgeable, and found it necessary to make compilations….

Therefore, Rabbi had to compile and arrange the six orders of the Mishnah after a respite of two generations from the persecutions that took place during the Temple’s destruction….

When Rabbi arranged the Mishnah, he did not place the tractates in a specific order, one after another. Rather, he arranged and taught each tractate separately in whatever order was convenient for him. We do not know which he taught first. However, the halakhot in each chapter and the chapters of each tractate were arranged in a specific order. Thus Rav Huna said: “In one tractate we do not say, ‘There is no order to Mishnah,’ but regarding two tractates we do say, ‘There is no order to Mishnah.’” 161 One could say about either of the two tractates that Rabbi might have taught it first.

Sometimes we find a mishnah on a certain halakhic topic which gives only one opinion (stam) without attributing it to a specific tanna or mentioning any tanna who disagrees. Later in the same tractate we may find another mishnah on the same topic which presents the opinion of the earlier Mishnah as subject to dispute. In such a case, referred to as “stam and later disputed,” the halakhah does not follow the earlier stam mishnah. On the other hand, if the reverse situation is found within one tractate, “disputed and later stam,” we say that the halakha follows the stam mishnah. However, if the two mishnayot in question are found in two different tractates, the above rules do not apply; for the tractates have no order. 162 Rav Joseph also agrees with these rules, except he says that the three Bavas of Order Neziqin are to be considered one tractate.

As for your question why Tractate Kippurim (Yoma) was placed before Shekalim: We in our bet midrash 163 study Sheqalim before Kippurim, but certainly we study Sukkah before Yom-Tov (Bezah). This is followed by Rosh ha-Shanah. However, perhaps in Rabbi’s day they studied them in the opposite order. However, it can be reasoned that Shabbat should be first since it is so important, 164 followed by Tractate Eruvin which is similar to Shabbat and on the same subject. 165 Then follows Tractate Pesahim, since Passover is the first of all the festivals; this is followed by Sheqalim, the subject matter of which comes directly before that of Pesahim and is one of its aspects. After Sheqalim we study Seder Yoma, which is similar to Shabbat. After Seder Yoma we study Tractate Sukkah because it follows Yom ha-Kippurim 166 and is a major festival. After Tractate Sukkah we study Tractate Yom-Tov (Bezah) because it is on the same subject. After Yom-Tov we study Tractate Rosh ha-Shanah so that we can study Tractate Ta’anit right after it, since after Rosh ha-Shanah is the time of the first rainfall and the time of sowing, and it is like the same subject.

This is how the Rabbis usually study; but if someone finds it convenient to follow a different order, he may do so, even though we see in certain tractates that we say: “Now that the tanna finished Tractate….” For example, in Tractate Sotah: “Now that the tanna has finished Tractate Nazir….” And in Tractate Shevu’ot: “Now that the tanna has finished Tractate Makkot….” These passages prove that there is a specific order.

131. Trans. Rabinowich,The Iggeres of Rav Sherira Gaon,pp. 20-32.

132. Rabbi Judah the Prince.

133. The end of a period of persecution.

134. This text is available in two versions. The Spanish recension does indeed claim here that the Mishnah was written down, but virtually all scholars acknowledge the primacy of the French recension which sees the editorial and transmissional activity of Rabbi as oral.

135. Rav Sherira Gaon isdrawing a parallel between the divine inspiration of Moses and that of Rabbi.

136. Mishnah Sanhedrin 5-2- Witnesses testified that someone had committed murder under a certain fig tree. To test the validity of their testimony, Ben Zakkai questioned them about the appearance of small details such as the stems of the figs.

137. Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 413.

138. Probably Hillel.

139. The Mishnah used the plain “Ben Zakkai,” since he had not yet been given the title “Rabban.” “our teacher.” But in thebaraita, which was composed later, the title “Rabban” is used.

140. Babylonian Talmud Horayot 13b.

141. This mishnah concerns the prohibition of carrying from the private to the public domain on the Sabbath. Since garlands and bells were usual items of clothing for boys, wearing them is not considered carrying.

142. Those who first formulated the halakhot of the Mishnah.

143. Mishnah Shabbat 6-9- Since it is usually royal children who go out with bells, the sages put the mishnah in these terms.

144. Teachings which were formulated as mishnayot only in Rabbi’s day. In fact, there are mishnayot which incorporate decisions by his sons and even by his grandsons.

145. This could mean that the mishnayot were given their final form at this time, or that individual mishnayot were first organized into a tractate.

146. As Rosh Yeshivah, Head of the Academy.

147. Babylonian Talmud Berakhot 28a.

148. The following statements by Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Judah were made by Rabbis who were contemporaries of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, Rabbi’s father.

149. Mishnah Eduyot 5-2.

150. Mishnah Eduyot 5-6.

151. Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 86a.

152. Babylonian Talmud Gittin 67a.

153. Using the following passages, Rav Sherira Gaon describes the greatness of Rabbi Akiva and his disciple, Rabbi Meir, in order to explain why Rabbi chose their way of teaching the Mishnah over that of other tannaim.

154. Babylonian Talmud Eruvin 53a.

155. Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 38b.

156. Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 16b.

157. Babylonian Talmud Eruvin 13b.

158. The capacity to understand and remember.

159. Mishnah Eduyot 1-6.

160. I.e., the minority.

161. Babylonian Talmud Bava Qamma 102a.

162. There is no way of verifying which was arranged first, the disputed or the stam opinion, and therefore we cannot establish preference.

163. House of study.

164. Shabbat introduces the topic of forbidden types of labor, most of which are also forbidden on the holidays.

165. Eruvin discusses laws pertaining to carrying on the Sabbath. From here on, Rav Sherira Gaon tries to link the different tractates in some logical order, relating each to the one previous and the one after.

166. The Day of Atonement.