since the torah of nazikin centers on adam, i.e., he is responsible for himself and his possessions, why not start with that essential principal at the beginning of the mesechta rather than waiting till the end of the second perek? what rishon discusses nazikin from this perspective?
raphael ruderman, jerusalem
(1) This is an important question and Rashi 2a (in the Mishna) DH ha'Shor hints at an answer when he points out that according to the order that the Nezikin are stated in the Torah, so too are they arranged in the first Mishnah.
(2) Before we go further, I would like to explain a little why it is important that the Mishnah should follow the order of the Torah. In the Sefer Tzidkas ha'Tzadik #10 by Rabbi Tzadok HaCohen, he describes beautifully how Shas follows the Chumash. In the first Masechta in Shas the Gemara in Berachos 2a starts off by asking why the Tana of the Mishnah discussed reading Shema at night before reading Shema in the morning. The Gemara gives a crucial answer "Tana a'Kra Ka'i" - the Tana is basing himself on the verse in the Torah (Devarim 6:7) "when you lay down and rise up". We learn right at the very beginning of Shas that the Torah shebe'Al Peh is a continuation and explanation of the written Torah. It is for this same reason that Rashi explains that the four "father" Nezikin are listed in the Mishnah in the same order that they appear in the Torah. (Why they appear in the Torah in this particular order is a different question which I am not going to attempt to discuss at the moment).
(3) It should be pointed out however that according to Rav, Adam is in fact mentioned in the first Mishnah. See the Gemara below 3b which asks what is "Ma'veh", which is the third Av Nezikin mentioned in our Mishnah. The Gemara answers that according to Rav, Mav'eh refers to a person who damages (while according to Shmuel, Mav'eh refers to Shen - an animal who damages by eating with its teeth).
(4) Tosfos 2b DH ha'Shor cites Rashi that the Tana follows the order of the verses in the Chumash but he points out that according to Rav this principal does not seem to be true because a person damaging is only mentioned in Vayikra 24:21, "And someone who strikes an animal must recompensate the owner", which is after the other damages mentioned in Shemos 21 & 22, so why is Adam mentioned before fire in the Mishnah according to Rav? Tosfos answers that because Vayikra 24 is far away from Shemos 22, the Mishnah does not attempt to keep Adam in order.
(5) Tosfos also cites Rabeinu Tam who asserts that Adam is actually mentioned in the Chumash shortly after Shor and Bor, because Shemos 21:37 states, "When a man steals an ox or a sheep", which is a kind of Adam ha'Mazik.
(6) I will conclude with a different explanation of the order of the Mishnah given by the Rashba 2a DH Arba'ah who writes that the Tana was not particular about which order the different Avos Nezikin were mentioned in the Mishnah, but instead he placed the most common Nezek first. The Rashba writes that damage by the ox mentioned in the Mishnah is more frequent than a person who damages because the Shor referred to by the Mishna is Mu'ad which frequently damages, while it is only the way of an Adam to damage when he is asleep. The Rashba adds that according to Shmuel - that Mav'eh is Shen - the Mishnah is easier to understand because according to this it does not mention Adam at all, since it is less frequent that he damages.
KOL TUV,
Dovid Bloom