Rambam's Commentary on the Torah?

Question

In the Seder HaDoros, published by R' Yechiel Heilprin in 1747, the author describes the life and legacy of many Jewish historical personalities including Rambam.

I'm not sure how historically accurate this book is considered to be, as many of the stories I read through seemed exaggerated and unlikely to be an objective portrayal of what events actually occurred. One example is the description of the Rambam being a beaten child who left home and stumbled upon the Ri MiGash whereupon he became a light to the nation. The Ri Migash died when the Rambam was seven, not leaving much time to study together. Another example would be the attribution of the צוואת הרמב"ם to Rambam, whereas we now know this to be untrue.

Anyway, the author lists the Rambam's works, and writes at the bottom of the right-hand column on עמוד נד/ב:

פי' על התורה מובא בכנסת הגדולה

I am interested in following the trail behind this story. This line is a bit cryptic to me. Is the author saying that the commentary is brought down in a Sefer called כנסת הגדולה? If so, does anyone have information on this Sefer?

Furthermore, I have never seen this claim being made elsewhere. Are there any other references to a commentary the Rambam may have written on the Torah? There is a Sefer that claims to be the Rambam's commentary on Esther, but this is generally seen to be an unsubstantiated claim.

Answer 1

Rambam wrote a commentary on Tanach (which includes the Torah), though limited in scope and not a running commentary. It is the first volume of Guide for the Perplexed. As he describes it in his introduction:

My primary object in this work is to explain certain words occurring in the prophetic books. Of these some are homonyms, and of their several meanings the ignorant choose the wrong ones; other terms which are employed in a figurative sense are erroneously taken by such persons in their primary signification. There are also hybrid terms, denoting things which are of the same class from one point of view and of a different class from another. It is not here intended to explain all these expressions to the unlettered or to mere tyros, a previous knowledge of Logic and Natural Philosophy being indispensable, or to those who confine their attention to the study of our holy Law, I mean the study of the canonical law alone; for the true knowledge of the Torah is the special aim of this and similar works.

The object of this treatise is to enlighten a religious man who has been trained to believe in the truth of our holy Law, who conscientiously fulfils his moral and religious duties, and at the same time has been successful in his philosophical studies. Human reason has attracted him to abide within its sphere; and he finds it difficult to accept as correct the teaching based on the literal interpretation of the Law, and especially that which he himself or others derived from those homonymous, metaphorical, or hybrid expressions. Hence he is lost in perplexity and anxiety. If he be guided solely by reason, and renounce his previous views which are based on those expressions, he would consider that he had rejected the fundamental principles of the Law; and even if he retains the opinions which were derived from those expressions, and if, instead of following his reason, he abandon its guidance altogether, it would still appear that his religious convictions had suffered loss and injury. For he would then be left with those errors which give rise to fear and anxiety, constant grief and great perplexity.

This work has also a second object in view. It seeks to explain certain obscure figures which occur in the Prophets, and are not distinctly characterized as being figures. Ignorant and superficial readers take them in a literal, not in a figurative sense. Even well informed persons are bewildered if they understand these passages in their literal signification, but they are entirely relieved of their perplexity when we explain the figure, or merely suggest that the terms are figurative. For this reason I have called this book Guide for the Perplexed. (Friedlander translation)

(I am not specifically suggesting that this is what the Seder Hadoros meant. I am addressing the general question of whether Rambam wrote a commentary on the Torah. Alternatively, one could perhaps understand my answer as suggesting that the Seder Hadoros is incorrect because Rambam already described Moreh Nevuchim as his commentary on Tanach.)