א בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ HA-A-RETZ V’ETH HA-SHA-MA- YIM ETH E-LO-HIM BA-RA B’REI-SHITH
1. EARTH THE * AND HEAVENS THE * E-LO-HIM CREATING BEGAN WHEN
ב וְהָאָרֶץ הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ
VA-BHOH-HOO THO-HOO HA-Y’THAH V’HA-A-RETZ
2. INERT AND UNIFORM WAS EARTH THE AND
וְחֹשֶׁךְ עַל פְּנֵי תְהוֹם
T’HOHM P’NEI AL V’CHOH-SHEKH
MASS (ITS) THROUGHOUT OPAQUE AND
וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים מְרַחֶפֶת עַל פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם
HA-MA-YIM P’NEI AL M’RA-CHEH-FETH E-LO-HIM V’ROO-ACH
WATERS THE SURFACE ON DOWN BLOWING E-LO-HIM (OF) WIND AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
When E-LO-HIM initiated the processes that transformed earth and its celestial regions into a habitat for man, it was an inert, amorphous mass covered with ice and permeated by darkness. A “wind of E-LO-HIM” impelled particles toward its surface, their energy converted into heat to melt the ice layer.
This mechanism required a supernaturally induced pressure differential - the only way particles can be propelled straight down - that manifested the Divine acting in, and through, nature. Nothing in the text indicates how long this lasted, what had occurred before - whether in this locale or elsewhere in the universe - or how far back time reached. Nor are there references to the creation of the ice and water, the mass of material beneath them or the gases above them. Scripture’s lens is phenomenological, not ontological, conveying the impact of His actions, not His essential nature or that of any physical entities.
EXPOSITION
1. B'REI-SHITH (WHEN [HE] BEGAN): ROHSH (HEAD - root "Reish-Aleph-Shin") with suffix “Yud-Taph” is REI-SHITH (“start/onset” of a period or sequence). It does not mean “In the beginning”; that is BA-T'CHEE-LAH (cf. GENESIS 41:21; JUDGES 1:1; ISAIAH 1:26). Jeremiah railed against Elam (JEREMIAH 49:34 - 35 in the Hebrew) B'REI-SHITH MA-L'CHOOTH TZID-QEE-YA-HOO (AT THE START OF ZEDEKIAH'S REIGN); history did not begin when he took the throne. REI-SHITH GO-YIM A-MA-LEK (AMALEK WAS THE FIRST OF THE NATIONS - NUMBERS 24:20) does not mean it originated nationality; it was the first to attack the Israelites after their exodus from Egypt. The correct translation is “When [He] began” (see theisraelbible.com, Common English Bible). Those loath to give up the enshrined phrase propose variations like “In the beginning of…/when…”; these are fine as long as it is understood that the text posits no unique inception point to the unfolding events.
Some who insist B'REI-SHITH is an absolute noun (hence “In the beginning”) point to its “Tifcha” cantillation that a novice might see as a transcription error, for if this verse is a complete sentence with subject and predicate (which it must be if B'REI-SHITH is absolute), the first three words should be punctuated "Pashta-Zaqef-Qatan". The verse is instead split by a full stop "Ethnachta" on E-LO-HIM, making it not a sentence but an introductory composite phrase; to balance it, the "Ethnachta" separates the first three words from what follows and makes B'REI'SHITH a construct noun. Furthermore, an absolute B'REI-SHITH requires a “Qomatz" vowel on the “Beth” (cf. CHRONICLES I 16:7; CHRONICLES II 13:12 – or the more appropriate BA-RI-SHOH-NAH, cf. NUMBERS 10:14; JOSHUA 8:33; JEREMIAH 7:12); its "Sh’va" clearly makes it construct.
BA-RA (CREATING): The root "Beth-Reish-Aleph" is not “bring into existence” (that is HOH-TZEI – cf. EXODUS 8:18 {14 in the Hebrew}; NUMBERS 17:23; PSALMS 104:14) but extraction from a mixture or exposure by stripping away material (cf. JOSHUA 17:15, 18; EZEKIEL 23:47). ISAIAH 45:7 has Y-H-W-H YOH-TZER OHR U-BHOH-REI CHO-SHEKH OH-SEH SHA-LOM U-BHOH-REI RA (FASHIONS LIGHT AND CREATES DARKNESS, MAKES PEACE AND CREATES BAD). Peeling away light's components “creates” darkness. SHA-LOHM (PEACE) is cognate to SHA-LEIM (WHOLE); RA (BAD) is not “evil” but something which lacks a part or is broken. Peace is “made” by synthesis of the whole, bad “created” by an ingredient's removal, causing dysfunction. If BOH-REI is bringing into existence from nothing, the order of the two linked phrases in each pair of this verse would be reversed. When Korah and his followers were swallowed by an abyss (NUMBERS 16:30), the text doubles BOH-REI to B'REE-AH YIBH-RA (A CREATION HE WILL CREATE) but retribution came through abatement – the “creation” of a pit. BOH-REI thus suggests one or more eliminations. {The claim that BA-RA has dual meanings, one of which is “bringing into existence”, retroactively imputes a meaning it never had.} E-LO-HIM “created” by initiating stages of substance separation and purging by physical forces, like evolution by natural selection, with mutations, trait variations and environmental pressures impelling adaptations that shaped populations and yielded speciation. Cognates include BOH-REH (CHOOSE), BOH-RER (SORT) and BA-REE (HEALTHY - free of disease), and the Arabic BA-RA-A (EXCISION, RENUNCIATION). Goliath challenged Israel (SAMUEL I 17:8) to B'ROO (CHOOSE [a man]).
E-LO-HIM: This name is associated with the rule of law (it also means courts, judges or rulers - cf. EXODUS 21:6; SAMUEL I 2:25; PSALMS 82:1), including nature's. It is one of a handful of nouns that only take a plural form, like MA-YIM (WATER) and PANIM (FACE/FRONT), entities for which a distinction between singular and plural is inapplicable. E-LO-HIM, whether deity, court, ruler or sovereign, conveys authority. Some claim the plural evidences a pantheon in the Hebrew belief system and theologies that emerged in Roman Palestine and thereafter postulated a tripartite manifestation. Scripture abounds with the theme of His uniqueness and indivisibility, reinforced by the prophets for more than a millennium; by the time the Old Testament was canonized, this perception was firmly entrenched in the Hebrew psyche, as evidenced by passages throughout the Talmud and the works of Philo of Alexandria and Josephus. It is this community, the one which produced Scripture, that is our frame of reference for determining how its earliest readers understood it - and they would never countenance any hint of multiplicity or bifurcation in the Deity.
ETH HA-SHA-MA-YIM V'ETH HA-A-RETZ (THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH): ETH ("Aleph-Taph"), the most ubiquitous word in Scripture, is peculiar in that its omission would not alter the sense of the text {ETH HA-SHA-MA-YIM V’ETH HA-A-RETZ (THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH) could be HA-SHA-MA-YIM V’HA-A-RETZ}. Its intrinsic meaning, “with”, alludes to proximity (cf. GENESIS 13:5; EXODUS 1:1; JUDGES 1:16) but its primary role is designating nouns that follow it as direct objects. When used this way, we do not translate it but insert an asterisk in its place. HA-SHA-MA-YIM (THE HEAVENS) and HA-A-RETZ (THE EARTH) have denotative “Heh” prefixes. Their significance is illustrated if we imagine the lad, perched in the crow's nest of the Santa Maria as she neared the Western Hemisphere, yelling “Land!” He would not shout “the land”; that would mean it was a known destination. This verse tells of a particular “earth” and its “heavens”. Without the "Heh" and ETH, it would refer to the creation of the universe [a form used when heaven and earth are meant in a generic sense (cf. ISAIAH 65:17; JEREMIAH 33:25; PSALMS 121:2)]. With these modifiers, the text narrows the locale to where we find ourselves (cf. DEUTERONOMY 4:32; ISAIAH 45:18; HOSEA 2:20) and which has remained our sole venue.
2. V'HA-A-RETZ HA-Y'THAH (AND THE EARTH WAS): This verse relates our world's initial condition. This verse has been interpreted metaphorically, allegorically and mystically; these inevitably turn esoteric, with meanings only initiates are privy to. We do not dispute these but insist that, first and foremost, the text has a plain, overt meaning that was readily perceived by its early audiences.
TOH-HOO VA-BHOH-HOO (UNIFORM AND INERT): "Formless and void" is meaningless. That the earth’s shape did not conform to a specific configuration or condition tells us nothing, while “void” applies to a space emptied of what was there, not a pristine state. The possibility, premised on these words having different connotations in old English {but not supported by Hebrew grammar and syntax}, that the text refers, not to the earth, but what should be on it explains why some expositors resorted to “desolate/empty/waste/chaos” or similar bleak portrayals but their Hebrew analogues, SHOH-MEIM (ABANDONED/FORLORN - cf. ISAIAH 49:8; LAMENTATIONS 1:4), TZ'CHEE-AHCH (BARE - cf. EZEKIEL 24:7; NEHEMIAH 4:7), CHOR-BAH (RUINED - cf. LEVITICUS 26:31; ISAIAH 51:3;), HA-ROOS (DESTROYED – cf. KINGS I 18:30; JEREMIAH 1:10), NISH-MAHD (ANNIHILATED/LAID WASTE – cf. JOSHUA 11:20; ESTHER 3:6), REIQ (EMPTY – cf. GENESIS 37:24; JUDGES 7:16) and NIM-CHEH (BLOT OUT/ERASE – cf. EXODUS 17:14; PROVERBS 31:3), are far better suited then TOH-HOO VA-BHOH-HOO and still do not work because they relate to prior states or conditions that were destroyed or eroded, not those at the onset of creation. Such adverse situations, commentators aver, were meant to be brought to mind but Scripture does not indulge in circumlocutions - if that was its intent, the text would use unambiguous vocabulary rather than such obscurity.
TOH-HOO, the letter “Taph” (“spot/mark”) with HOO (IT), implies no point in a body or on its surface is distinguishable from another. In SAMUEL I 12:21, TOH-HOO appears as a noun and then an adjective. Samuel exhorted Israel to abandon alien practices, not because they no longer conferred benefits, but because they never did, which tells us how TOH-HOO differs from its extant translations. They all point to the past, recounting what destruction wrought; TOH-HOO looks to the future, one without prospects for recovery or restoration and tells us unequivocally there was no possibility of any change in the earth’s initial condition. This point was accentuated by Isaiah when he declared LOH THOH-HOO BH'RA-AH (ISAIAH 45:18), usually translated "He did not create it a waste", which is doubly flawed (besides the accusative object and prepositional phrase in reverse order) - it incorrectly turns an adjective into a noun and evaluates a condition which has no precedent for comparison. (Other renderings, like "in vain/to be empty", wander even further afield, since they require a dative "Lamed" prefix on TOH-HOO). Rather, He B’RA-AH (CREATED IT) by altering its state to LOH (NOT) TOH-HOO, making change possible.
Of its 19 appearances, TOH-HOO is paired with BOH-HOO again only when Isaiah’s QAV (LINE) TOH-HOO is weighted with ABH-NEI (STONES) BHOH-HOO (34:11 - JEREMIAH 4:23 reprises GENESIS 1:2). BOH-HOO, BOH (IN IT) and HOO (IT [IS]), suggests what is touched or felt is everywhere the same, affording no tactile recognition – “it is what it is”, homogenous and amorphous. The “weight” of any of Isaiah’s stones was “in it”, effectively making it weightless, with no heft to allow its use in a plumb line, making it useless. Similarly, the earth’s BOH-HOO characterized a body that was not “void” but “devoid”; as weightlessness precludes the natural impetus for motion, so the earth lacked the energy necessary for change or movement.
Embedded in TOH-HOO VA-BHOH-HOO is a modern concept - the earth was totally entropic; the energy E-LO-HIM infused negated TOO-HOO, its uniformity, and BOH-HOO, its dormancy. Those who read TOH-HOO as “waste/void” were influenced by ISAIAH 24:10, where QIR-YATH TOH-HOO is typically “city of destruction/waste”. This requires QIR-YAH (cf. ISAIAH 1:21; PROVERBS 11:10; LAMENTATIONS 2:11). With the construct QIR-YATH, Isaiah decried the city as morally vacuous due to its residents’ behavior. This was the pristine globe – not land areas, as the translators see it, for we have been told nothing about them, not their structure, composition or content. There can be no “desolation/waste” unless there is first an ordered state. The claim that this was the intent, that we are told our world was not like that at first, is a classic logical fallacy - circular reasoning - and there is no better way to say that then CHA-REIBH VA-REIQ (DESOLATE AND EMPTY - cf. JEREMIAH 33:10; EZEKIEL 29:10 – GENESIS 37:24; NEHEMIAH 5:13). Some treat this phrase as onomatopoeia, the second word a nonce term rhyming with, and reinforcing, the first. For that, the trope on these four words should be “Mahpakh-Pashta-Zaqef-Qatan.” In fact, “Pashta-Qatan” separates TOH-HOO from VA-BHOH-HOO, implying distinct meanings. The JEREMIAH 4:23 passage does the same, the “Tifcha” on TOH-HOO [rather than on V’HI-NEI {AND BEHOLD}] separating it from TOH-HOO.
V’CHOH-SHEKH AL P'NEI T'HOHM (AND OPAQUE THROUGHOUT ITS MASS): T’HOHM is not "the deep"; that is MA-A-MAH-QIM (DEPTHS – cf. ISAIAH 51:10, EZEKIEL 27:34; PSALMS 69:2 [3 in the Hebrew]). Other possibilities are M’TZOO-LAH (SUBMERGED – cf. EXODUS 15:5; JONAH 2:4; MICAH 7:19), TACH-TITH (BOTTOM – cf. DEUTERONOMY 32:22; LAMENTATIONS 3:55; NEHEMIAH 4:7) or MISH-QA (SUNKEN – cf. JEREMIAH 51:64; EZEKIEL 32:14; AMOS 8:8). Furthermore, "the deep" would then be HA-MA-YIM (“the water") at the verse’s end but biblical syntax would use the pronoun AH-LEH-HAH (UPON IT - cf. GENESIS 28:13; LEVITICUS 10:1; NUMBERS 19:2). The chief difficulty with the standard translation is the one that beset the conventional ones of the verse’s opening passage - it makes no sense. We were just told of the barren condition of the EH-REHTZ (“land”). If "darkness" sat astride something else called T'HOHM, what was the state of the region above land? And if T'HOHM is the whole planet’s surface, it should be AL KOO-LAH (UPON ALL OF IT - cf. EXODUS 14:7; SAMUEL II 2:9; EZEKIEL 29:2) or the more concise V'HA-AH-REHTZ HA-Y'THAH ... V'CHAH-SHOOKH (AND THE EARTH WAS... AND DARK – cf. AMOS 5:8; PROVERBS 22:29; DANIEL 2:22). A collateral problem is that CHOH-SHEHKH is the dark quality of other elements; darkness itself is AH-PHEI-LAH (cf. EXODUS 10:22; DEUTERONOMY 28:29; PSALMS 91:6).
T’HOHM (TOH-HOO with appended “Mem”) adds information about a quiescent earth. It is not the location of CHOH-SHEKH (DARKNESS); that requires MEI-AL (OVER - cf. GENESIS 1:7; EZEKIEL 1:19; ESTHER 3:1), MI-MA-AHL (FROM UPON - cf. GENESIS 22:9; EXODUS 20:4; KINGS I 6:3) or MI-L’MA-LAH (ABOVE - cf. EXODUS 25:21; NUMBERS 4:25; EZEKIEL 1:11), all indicators of position or areas of diffusion. Nor is its root “Heh-Vav-Mem” [“rushing sounds”]; that yields T’HOO-MAH (cf. SAMUEL I 4:5; MICAH 2:12; RUTH 1:19). Because T’HOHM is often used in conjunction with water, it is usually rendered “the deep/abyss”; that does not apply here. For depth (of water or otherwise), the text uses the root “Ayin-Mem-Qoph” (cf. PROVERBS 18:4; JOB 11:8; ECCLESIATES 7:24). T’HOHM is a large mass; it can be a body of water but not always - here it is an ice layer. When the Israelites praised Him at the sea crossing (EXODUS 15:8) with QO-PH’OO TH’HOH-MOHTH B’LEBH YAM (PILLARS CONGEALED IN THE HEART OF THE SEA), they saw a miraculous ice formation below the sea surface instead of its normal place on top. This is also a logical translation of some other passages (ISAIAH 51:10, EZEKIEL 26:9, PSALMS 104:6) and a more sensible reading of GENESIS 7:11, where rendering NIBH-Q’OO KOL MA-Y’NOHTH T’HOHM RA-BAH as “all the fountains of the great deep burst forth” makes no sense - the ancients did not think there were fountains in the seas. For bursting waters, the verb is NIPH-R’TZOO (cf. JUDGES 5:17; SAMUEL II 13:25; JOB 28:4). The “great” T’HOHM was a glacier that calved in a number of places to produce torrents to inundate surrounding areas. KOH-NEISS KA-NEID MEI YAM NOH-THEIN B’OH-TZA-ROHTH T’HOH-MOHTH (PSALMS 33:7) is normally translated “He gathers the waters of the sea; He sets the deep in storehouses” but the second phrase has a plural noun following a prepositional clause, a reversal of the proper order, which should be NOH-THEIN T’HOHM B’OH-TZ’ROH. The correct reading is “He congeals the waters of the sea like [into] a column and [then] deposits [them] as glaciers in His storehouse”. This stratum was everywhere impenetrable - indicated by AL P’NEI (ON THE FACES OF) - and covered the earth’s innermost material (cf. JOB 6:16, where ice presented total darkness even at its top, and JOB 38:29-30, where a like phenomenon is exhibited AL P’NEI [on the face of] ice formations). QEH-RACH is “ice” in modern Hebrew but biblical usage reserves it for climate (cf. GENESIS 31:40; JEREMIAH 36:30: PSALMS 147:17). AL P’NEI adds a dimension of observer or observed (cf. GENESIS 16:12; SAMUEL I 15:7; ECCLESIATES 11:1 - note that AL PAH-NEYE [EXODUS 20:3] is not “before Me” {physical proximity} but His omnipresence). “Darkness” was not a substance somewhere above the T’HOHM but the perception of a hypothetical observer.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The narrative opens with earth, of some material, covered with ice. It does not explain how it came to be. The Scholastics, trying to reconcile Greek translations of BA-RA (v. 1) with Hellenistic ideas, postulated CREATIO EX NIHILO (CREATION OUT OF NOTHING), later adapted by Jewish thinkers as YEISH MEI-A-YIN but we do not force a dogma into a text that neither needs nor sustains it. We cannot infer how far back time reaches. Creationists seek support in the “Big Bang” cosmic origin model but scientists’ use equations to extrapolate the universe's expansion rate to a singularity, which is not the same as a beginning. Nor can they assert that an induced quantum fluctuation triggered a burst; these are inherently random. Scripture focuses solely on how our locale was transformed into a habitat.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------V’ROO-ACH E-LO-HIM (AND [HIS] WIND): “Spirit of the Lord/Divine Presence” have overtones the text lacks; the more neutral “Mighty Wind” fails to capture it and such expressions omit divine names (cf. EXODUS 14:21, KINGS 1 19:11, JOB 1:19). ROO-ACH (WIND) is not an entity but a condition causing movement or a force that impels action. A husband has a ROO-ACH of jealousy (NUMBERS 5:14) when he sanctions a wife he suspects of infidelity. Caleb’s ROO-ACH (NUMBERS 14:24) moved him to praise the Promised Land. And His ROO-ACH spurs leaders or prophets (cf. JUDGES 6:34). When Pharaoh said (GENESIS 41:38) Joseph possessed ROO-ACH E-LO-HIM, he did not mean the divine was in him; no Egyptian then would say that. He praised his ability to find the right direction or direct others (cf. NUMBERS 27:18; SAMUEL I 16:12-22; PSALMS 51:10-11 [12-13 in the Hebrew]). ROO-ACH E-LO-HIM is the only feature in this chapter with a godly assignation, not an object but His manifestation deploying physical (and sometimes supernatural) mechanisms within nature to produce a phenomenon ordinarily impossible.
M’RA-CHE-FETH AL P'NEI HA-MA-YIM (BLOWING DOWN ON THE WATER [SURFACE]): This wind did not blow over the water; that is M’NA-SHEH-BHETH (cf. ISAIAH 40:7; PSALMS 147:18) or NOH-SHEIPH (cf. EXODUS 15:10; ISAIAH 40:24), with MEI-AL HA-MA-YIM as the prepositional phrase (cf. GENESIS 7:17; PSALMS 148:4; NEHEMIAH 12:37). {As in the preceding passage, AL P’NEI indicates an interaction, not just a location.} Some make do with the prosaic “moved” but NOH-DEID (ROVE - cf. JEREMIAH 49:5; HOSEA 9:17; JOB 15:23) or NOH-AH (MOVE - cf. NUMBERS 32:13; ISAIAH 6:4; LAMENTATIONS 2:15) is more suitable. “Hovering” is better but ruled out by the nature of wind. Helicopters and humming birds hover; wind is the effect of forcefully impelled particles. These interpretations also ascribe neither a purpose to this wind nor any outcome. The unusual diction had the precise meaning needed here. The root “Reish-Cheth-Pei” is associated with vibration (cf. JEREMIAH 23:9), like birds palpitating their wings over nests to create a downward draft (cf. DEUTERONOMY 32:11 – had that meant “hover”, it would be MEI-AL {FROM OVER}, not AL {UPON}, another example of academic lassitude reinforcing collective error). The ROO-ACH E-LO-HIM did exactly that, propelling particles downward to the earth's surface, their kinetic energy converted to heat on impact to melt the ice. This was no ordinary ROO-ACH, for only E-LO-HIM, acting through nature to power a physical phenomenon, could create a pressure gradient everywhere perpendicular to the earth's surface (winds, regardless of strength or origin, move across surfaces or in circular paths parallel to them).
There are passages that seem to imply ROO-ACH also means “spirit” or “soul” (e.g. ECCLESIASTES 12:7 – “the ROO-ACH returns to E-LO-HIM”). To see what this actually means, we look at ECCLESIASTES 3:21, where he asks, “Who knows the ROO-ACH of man [that] rises up and the ROO-ACH of the animal [that] descends”. MEE YOH-DEI-YA (WHO KNOWS) seems to pose a question but the “Heh” prefix on HA-OH-LAH (THAT RISES) and HA-YOH-REH-DEHTH (THAT DESCENDS) is not the interrogative but the indicative. Another riddle is that, throughout the book, the many references to individuals are singular [A-DAM, ISH (MAN), CHA-KHAM (SAGE) or K’THIL (FOOL)]; B’NEI A-DAM is a group to whom one ROO-ACH belongs. ECCLESIASTES is a skeptical, pessimistic polemic on the futility of human planning. Plucking this passage out of context to place it into a theological mode renders it totally dissonant with that section. The author questions whether human plans are of greater consequence than a cow's attention to her grazing area. All are driven by a ROO-ACH, a disposition to act. Who is to say whether the “loftier” one is of more importance or significance? This intrinsic meaning of ROO-ACH informs all its appearances in Scripture. When the Psalmist says B’YA-D’KHA APH-QID ROO-CHEE (PSALMS 31:5 [6 in the Hebrew]), he does not mean he is depositing his “soul” with the Almighty; such an interpretation is completely out of synchrony with that entire Psalm, in which David laments being beset by enemies. He will “invest” his actions in His hand, put at His disposal, guided by His direction. The post-biblical ROO-ACH HA-QOH-DESH is associated with a “holy spirit” but that, in biblical parlance, is ROO-ACH QOH-DESH (HOLY WIND) or HA-ROO-ACH HA-QOH-DESH (THE HOLY WIND). ROO-ACH HA-QOH-DESH is a wind of that which is holy (motivated by holiness). ROO-ACH QOD-SH’KHA (PSALMS 51:11 – 13 in the Hebrew) is not “Your Holy Spirit” but the “wind of your holiness”, i. e. inspired by You. “Inspiration”, from the archaic “in-spirited”, means exactly that; people actuated to behave in a certain way were “in-spirited”. This led to “inspiration” as an agency of human endeavor or animation. In Indo-European languages, the word retained its original connotation of breath, later transferred to the more abstract “spirit” but deemed to be real. In ancient Palestine, the word retained its meaning of “wind” as a force prodding human movement; it never became an independent entity.
ג וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי אוֹר וַיְהִי אוֹר
OHR VA-Y’HEE OHR Y’HEE E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
3. LIGHT BECAME AND LIGHT BECOME E-LO-HIM SAID AND
ד וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאוֹר כִּי טוֹב
TOHBH KEE HA-OHR ETH E-LO-HIM VA-YAHR
4. GOOD WHEN LIGHT THE * E-LO-HIM SAW AND
וַיַּבְדֵּל אֱלֹהִים בֵּין הָאוֹר וּבֵין הַחֹשֶׁךְ
HA-CHOH-SHEKH U-BHEIN HA-OHR BEIN E-LO-HIM VA-YABH-DEIL
DARKNESS THE BETWEEN AND LIGHT THE BETWEEN E-LO-HIM DISTINGUISHED AND
ה וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לָאוֹר יוֹם וְלַחֹשֶׁךְ קָרָא לָיְלָה LA-Y’LAH QA-RA V’LA-CHOH-SHEKH YOHM LA-OHR E-LO-HIM VA-YIQ-RA
5. NIGHT CALLED HE DARKNESS THE TO AND DAY LIGHT THE TO E-LO-HIM CALLED AND
וַיְהִי עֶרֶב וַיְהִי בֹקֶר יוֹם אֶחָד
EH-CHAHD YOHM BHOH-QER VA-Y’HEE EH-REBH VA-Y’HEE
ONE DAY EMERGENCE BECAME AND MIXTURE BECAME AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM directed light to form. When it became useful as a source of energy and illumination, He demarcated it from darkness, designating it to invigorate daytime processes and darkness for repose and recuperation at night. Space, matter (in three forms: solid, liquid and gas), energy and time - intermingled and emerged as our physical system, a synthesis defining period [day] one.
Light opens the creation order but its designation as the central feature of “day” and darkness of “night” belong in the fifth PAR-SHA, which records the emergence of flora and fauna that react to alternating periods of light and darkness. This passage being in the first PAR-SHA tells us light is an energy manifestation independent of its source, a remarkably prescient insight. There is no growth without energy and no sense of time without light. At a time when all creation myths evinced no awareness of light’s centrality, Genesis posited it, not as a deity, but as the first creation, which then powered the emergence of life, a view promulgated millennia before it became conventional scientific doctrine.
EXPOSITION
3. VA-YOH-MER E-LO-HIM (AND E-LO-HIM SAID): This couplet appears nine times in the chapter and ushers in “utterances” that were not metaphorical but triggered real causes and effects. The root "Aleph-Mem-Resh" (SAY) goes beyond rhetoric. DEUTERONOMY 26:5 asks the bearer of First Fruits V’A-NEE-THA V’A-MAR-TA (RAISE YOUR VOICE AND SAY), raising up his gift, while 26:17-18 recounts that Y-H-W-H and Israel vouch to HEH-EH-MEER (EXALT) each other. An Emir {Arabic} is a commander whose dicta are obeyed. A general does not directly control each cog in his military machine; nor does E-LO-HIM micro-manage His world. This may conflict with dogmas that He controls every detail in the universe, a view which had vehement dissenters. Scripture does not insist on His constant, pervasive supervision; it grants Him the same power we have of making “machines” that can operate independently.
VA-Y'HEE OHR (AND LIGHT BECAME): VA-Y’HEE (root "Heh-Yud-Heh") is not immediate appearance [it is the incomplete past]. The frequent VA-Y’HEE A-CHA-REI (IT CAME TO BE AFTER - e. g. GENESIS 22:20) suggests a duration the reader must gauge. VA-Y’HEE BEE-MEI (IT HAPPENED IN THE DAYS OF - e. g. ESTHER 1:1) chronicles a span of years or decades. For incidents that just took place or already occurred, the text uses the completed HA-YAH (WAS – cf. v.2, HA-Y’THAH, the feminine form). When lice infested Egypt (EXODUS 8:13), KOL A-FAR HA-A-RETZ HA-YAH KEE-NIM (ALL THE DUST OF THE LAND WAS LICE). And in 16:13 there, HA-YAH OHR (LIGHT WAS for Israel during the plague of darkness) - and what would be written here had the light appeared at once. We are not told light’s source or how long it took to attain its present form and character. Traditional scholars posited that He also created the sun on the first day! Its placement took place on the fourth day, the sun, moon and stars tucked away in a remote region until then. Why He created things not to be used until He was half-way through the creation process, or what the light created on the first day was doing until then, is not addressed - nor how vegetation sprouted on earth before sunlight powered its growth, something early readers, who knew sunlight is needed for plant growth, might have wondered. Mystics cast this primordial light as a “higher enlightenment”, which, in history's first irony, had to become occult lest it be abused, though exactly why and how this should occur is not disclosed. Contrivances that can only make the verse intelligible by subverting its plain meaning must be rejected.
4. VA-YAHR… KEE TOHBH (AND SAW… WHEN IT [BECAME] GOOD): As in English, “see” can mean "discern/assess” (cf. GENESIS 38:14; EXODUS 2:2; DEUTERONOMY 11:26). TOHBH (GOOD) can refer to goodness, a well-behaved child or pleasant entertainment, but usually evaluates functional utility (When two of the spies [NUMBERS 14:7] praised the Promised Land as TOH-BHAH {the feminine form}, they meant it would support residents. When Laban [GENESIS 29:19] declared that giving his daughter Leah to Jacob was TOHBH, he foresaw a fortuitous union); that is how it is used here, not as a superfluous assessment but an essential appraisal. Light dispels darkness and enables perception. How well it does this depends on its amount and intensity, not its quality. Many Hebrew words have multiple meanings and KEE is a semantic chameleon. One of its meanings is “when” (cf. DEUTERONOMY 26:1; JUDGES 2:18; KINGS I 8:42) - He “saw the light when it (had become) good”. “That the light was good” is KEE TOHBH HA-OHR (cf. GENESIS 40:16; EXODUS 2:2; PROVERBS 31:18 - In English, “I saw a red car” is the same as “I saw a car that was red”; in Scripture, a different word order changes meaning). The direct object indicator ETH and the inverted order tells us He checked if the light was “good”, whether it had developed into the form necessary before He would take the next step.
VA-YABH-DEIL (AND [HE] DISTINGUISHED): “Separate” is rooted in "Peh-Reish-Daled" (cf. GENESIS 13:9; JUDGES 4:11; NEHEMIAH 4:13) or the Aramaic "Peh-Reish-Shin" ("part" - cf. EZEKIEL 34:12; a PAR-SHA is a distinct paragraph). VA-YABH-DEIL (root "Beth-Daled-Lamed" - cf. NUMBERS 8:14; DEUTERONOMY 29:20; KINGS I 8:53) focuses on the divergent elements (as in the next verse), hence we render it “He distinguished”. Separating light from dark is unnecessary; light dispels darkness. The ancients also felt the warmth of the sun’s rays, saw them foster plant growth and knew they were not exclusive to the sun, that fire can illuminate and heat. They understood His “utterance” initiated a process that drew light out of material and refined it for man’s use. Some academics opine this passage refuted sun worship, just as myths of deities fabricating man out of primordial substances were controverted by the biblical creation account. If these are the reasons for these sections, Scripture would not be eternal, for those passages are no longer needed to combat ideas long discarded by that segment of humanity in which it circulates. What parts of it will become antiquated next? If it is eternal, everything in it is always relevant, meaningful and instructive.
5. VA-YIQ-RA… (AND [HE] CALLED…): If the object of QOH-REI (CALL) is indirect (it has a dative “Lamed” [“to”] prefix all five times in this chapter), it was “called” to a mission (in SAMUEL II 5:9, the fortress was not renamed but “called” [VA-YIQ-RA LAH] to be “David’s city”). Light was “called” to tasks, and their set times, for growth and development - “day”; darkness informs periods of recuperation, intervals that are “night”. These cycles comprise our days and nights, not the creation stages.
VA-Y’HEE EH-REBH VA-Y'HEE BHOH-QER (AND [THERE] BECAME MIXTURE AND [THERE] BECAME EMERGENCE): Evening lasts about an hour after sunset begins, morning a like period after sunrise. These non-contiguous intervals are not a day. EH-REBH (root Ayin-Reish-Beth) is “mix” (cf. EXODUS 12:38; LEVITICUS 13:48; PSALMS 78:45), borrowed for “evening”, a mingling of light and darkness but used here in its original meaning – a “mixture” of materials and forces. BOH-QER, adopted for “morning”, is to “discern” an entity or shape (cf. LEVITICUS 27:33; KINGS II 16:15; EZEKIEL 34:12) and occurs when day “breaks”; in the creation saga, it denotes the resultant of that “day’s” development.
YOHM (DAY): The words for time have distinct connotations. PA-AHM (OCCASION - cf. GENESIS 29:34; LEVITICUS 25:8; DEUTERONOMY 16:16) is a specific, often recurring, event, not necessarily at a fixed time. EITH (SEASON/ERA - cf. GENESIS 38:1; DEUTERONOMY 3:23; ECCLESIASTES 3) and Z’MAHN (INTERVAL - cf. ESTHER 9:27; EZRA 10:14; NEHEMIAH 2:6) are definite times. None of these hint how the length of a period or process is measured. REH-GA (MOMENT - cf. EXODUS 33:5; NUMBERS 16:21; ISAIAH 54:7) is an instant too quick to calibrate. The Aramaic SHA-AH (HOUR - DANIEL 3:6, 4:16) was a brainchild of the Babylonians, who originated the 12-hour day and 60-minute hour - and the notion of time's constant pace, with standard units to compare interval lengths and provide endogenous days with a fixed number of equal periods. The biblical perspective, shared by prominent philosophers and scientists like Albert Einstein and Ernst Mach, predicates time as that which separates events; a time standard is a derivative concept not intrinsic to nature. Time is adduced by what occurs in an interval, not by its elapsed “units”. If a “day” envelops an event, process or development, it makes no difference if the units within it number a few seconds or billions of years – it is one “day”. The days that populate our affairs may be numbered sequentially (cf. NUMBERS 7:12-78, Ch. 29) but are still delineated by their inception at sunrise and departure at sunset, not by a sequence of units adding to a designated sum. Even these vary according to what takes place within them. The 24-hour day used to organize ritual or ceremonies began and ended at sunset (LEVITICUS 23:32), whereas a day within the sanctuary or temple began at daybreak but could end at different points – mid-afternoon, late afternoon, nightfall or the next daybreak, depending on the service to which it was attached (e. g. LEVITICUS 7:15-16) - even simultaneous days with varied end points for offerings brought on behalf of different individuals.
A day is defined by its content, not duration. It may host a metamorphosis, like those in the creation era; we would not know its length as we measure time. It may be abstract, associated with an activity or phenomenon, like the punishment exacted B'YOHM PO-Q'DEE (EXODUS 32:34), usually translated “the day of My visitation” but more accurately “Whenever I visit retribution”, not limited to one “day”. The text here does not state there was night and day or evening, night, morning and day; there were no distinct intervals between E-REBH and BOH-QER. The creation “broke through” after its ontogenesis each “day”. The first “day” is numbered cardinally - One Day (the others numbered by ordinals), telling us these “days” were defined by the transformations occurring in each, beginning as a mixture of ingredients, through intermediate steps powered by energy to an “emergence”. This YOHM is defined by its content, not standard units. A long summer day and a short winter one are both defined by the rising and setting sun; the first “day” in Scripture was defined by the formation of usable energy and light. We do not know how long each creation day lasted as we quantify time. That each day’s PAR-SHA is, in the Torah scrolls, separated at its beginning and end by a full space suggests these days did not follow one another in sequence (cf. NUMBERS 29:12-30:1) - they overlapped!
PAR-SHA SUMMARY
Verse 1 introduced “the heavens and the earth”, the local regions with the first requisite, space. {This is why SHA-MA-YIM [HEAVENS] is mentioned first, although the PAR-SHA contains nothing regarding its makeup or fashioning.} The second verse describes three regions of material, each in one of three states - solid, liquid and gas. Energy is alluded to by E-LO-HIM’s wind but light, embodying a pure form, was the first “creation”. With it, we apprehend time. All the elements of a physical system were in place, synthesized and emerging in Day One. Creation began with light because it was crucial for powering development; without it, our world would have remained dormant. Light’s centrality was recognized in Scripture long before it became general knowledge. Other cultures were ignorant of this, as evidenced by their creation myths; even those who sensed its importance treated it and its solar source as gods. Those seeking evidence of the divine in Scripture could do no better than to this PAR-SHA.
ו ַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי רָקִיעַ בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּיִם
HA-MA-YIM B’THOHKH RA-QEE-YA Y’HEE E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
6. WATER THE WITHIN RANGE A BECOME E-LO-HIM SAID AND
וִיהִי מַבְדִּיל בֵּין מָיִם לָמָיִם
LA-MA-YIM MA-YIM BEIN MABH-DIL VI-Y’HEE
WATER TO WATER BETWEEN DIVIDER BE IT AND
ז וַיַּעַשׂ אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָרָקִיעַ
HA-RA-QEE-YA ETH E-LO-HIM VA-YA-AHSS
7. RANGE THE * E-LO-HIM MADE AND
וַיַּבְדֵּל בֵּין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מִתַּחַת לָרָקִיעַ
LA-RA-QEE-YA MI-TA-CHATH A-SHER HA-MA-YIM BEIN VA-YABH-DEIL
RANGE THE BELOW WHICH WATER THE BETWEEN DIVIDED AND
וּבֵין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מֵעַל לָרָקִיעַ וִיהִי כֵן
KHEIN VA-Y’HEE LA-RA-QEE-YA MEI-AL A-SHER HA-MA-YIM U-BHEIN
IS IT AS BECAME IT AND RANGE THE ABOVE WHICH WATER THE BETWEEN AND
ח וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לָרָקִיעַ שָׁמָיִם
SHA-MA-YIM LA-RA-QEE-YA E-LO-HIM VA-YI-Q’RA
8. HEAVEN (BE TO) RANGE THE TO E-LO-HIM CALLED AND
וַיְהִי עֶרֶב וַיְהִי בֹקֶר יוֹם שֵׁנִי
SHEI-NEE YOHM BHOK-QER VA-Y’HEE E-REBH VA-Y’HEE
SECOND DAY EMERGENCE BECAME AND MIXTURE BECAME AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM directed a range to divide terrestrial waters from those in the upper regions, like the clouds. Not relying on natural processes, He made the atmosphere, calling it to be part of the heavens. It was in place by the end of the second period.
The RA-QEE-YA is the earth's climate system and air layer through which water, rising from the planet, precipitates to irrigate land and replenish rivers, lakes and aquifers. A full “day” was required to form and install a global system; hence, E-LO-HIM did not just “speak” but “made”. This explains why TOHBH (GOOD) is not in this PAR-SHA. His evaluation was unnecessary - He controlled the entire process.
EXPOSITION
6. RA-QEE-YA… MABH-DIL (RANGE… DIVIDER): “Firmament/dome” reflects ancient beliefs that the heavenly bodies are embedded in a celestial vault (a view erroneously ascribed to the Israelites due to poetic imagery in prophetic passages); others use “space/expanse”. It is actually something “beaten” and “stretched” but retaining contiguity (cf. NUMBERS 17:3; EZEKIEL 1:22; JOB 37:18) so it could be a MABH-DIL (DIVIDER) between two aqueous regions.
7. VA-YA-AHSS (AND [HE] MADE): MAKE (root “Ayin-Sin-Heh”) implies direct involvement (cf. GENESIS 18:17; EXODUS 18:17; DEUTERONOMY 21:12). What is “made” is defined, not by the tasks necessary for its construction, but by its achieving a state at which it can function as intended (cf. GENESIS 27:17; DEUTERONOMY 21:12; ESTHER 1:9). To illustrate how OH-SEH (MAKE) differs from BOH-REH (CREATE), Y-H-W-H declared EH-EH-SEH NIPH-LA-OHTH (I WILL MAKE WONDERS – EXODUS 34:20) which were never NIBH-R'OO (CREATED). The first verb is active first person future; the second past passive. What He will perform cannot be “created” by forces or human actions. Only He can “make” them, which is why they are “wonders”. The PAR-SHA opened with His utterance but He directly rmade the RA-QEE-YA.
VA-Y'HEE KHEIN (AND IT BECAME AS IT IS): Usually translated “and it was so”, the less popular “and it became thus” is better; neither conveys it fully (see v. 3 - VA-Y'HEE). KEIN (KHEIN here for syntactic reasons) has a number of meanings associated with correctness, uprightness or congruence (cf. EXODUS 10:14; NUMBERS 9:16; KINGS I 6:26). Two-consonant words do not lend themselves to etymological analysis (see Introduction); KEIN is an exception due to our familiarity with the gamut of its usage. It Is most likely KA-HEIN (“As these”), which became “It is as you see” or simply “Yes”. Here, VA-Y’HEE KHEIN does not mean things materialized the way He ordained [it would not occur otherwise to the Israelites] but became as you see them, remaining as it had then become. What follows in the text refers to subsequent developments; what had “become” was completed before the next stage began.
8. VA-YI-Q’RA E-LO-HIM LA-RA-QEE-YA SHA-MA-YIM (AND E-LO-HIM CALLED TO THE RANGE [TO BE] HEAVEN): The RA-QEE-YA became objectified as SHA-MA-YIM, the “heavens” of verse 1. The Psalmist reminds us (PSALMS 19:1 [2 in the Hebrew]) that the heavens may tell of His Honor but the RA-QEE-YA relates what “His Hands Made”. If a precocious youngster, reading verses 14-19 about the sun, moon and stars, were to ask, “What are those white and gray things that seem close and move so unpredictably – and none of them look alike? Why are they not in this PAR-SHA that tells of the other heavenly bodies?”, the answer is that he will already know them as the clouds introduced on the second day.
VA-Y'HEE E-REBH... YOHM SHEI-NEE (AND IT BECAME A MIXTURE… A SECOND DAY): This period is “a second day” not because it followed the first [it is not YOHM HA-SHEI-NEE - the second day]; it was the next layer in the habitation-building strata. The “mixture” of the two regions of water and the interfacing gaseous substance “emerged” as atmosphere and climate.
ט וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יִקָּווּ הַמַּיִם מִתַּחַת הַשָּׁמַיִם
HA-SHA-MA-YIM MI-TA-CHAHTH HA-MA-YIM YI-QA-VOO E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
9. HEAVENS THE BENEATH WATERS THE CONFINED BE E-LO-HIM SAID AND
אֶל מָקוֹם אֶחָד וְתֵרָאֶה הַיַּבָּשָׁה וַיְהִי כֵן
KHEIN VA-Y’HEE HA-YA-BA-SHAH V’THEI-RA-EH E-CHAD MA-QOHM EL
THUS BECAME IT AND (LAND) DRY THE SEEN BE LET AND ONE PLACE TO
י וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לַיַּבָּשָׁה אֶרֶץ וּלְמִקְוֵה הַמַּיִם
HA-MA-YIM U-L’MI-Q’VEI E-RETZ LA-YA-BA-SHAH E-LO-HIM VA-YIQ-RA
10. WATER (OF) BODIES THE TO AND EARTH (LAND) DRY THE TO E-LO-HIM CALLED AND
קָרָא יַמִּים וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים כִּי טוֹב
TOHBH KEE E-LO-HIM VA-YAHR YA-MEEM QA-RA
GOOD (WAS IT) WHEN E-LO-HIM SAW AND OCEANS CALLED HE
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM directed the earth's waters to coalesce into separate bodies. The land appearing in areas the waters vacated He charged to foster life, calling on oceans, seas and lakes to augment this habitat. This process reached a point He deemed good when it provided functional utility to support vegetation.
EXPOSITION
9. YI-QA-VOO HA-MA-YIM (BE CONFINED THE WATERS): “Gathered” can be AH-SAPH (ASSEMBLE - EXODUS 23:16), I-GUD (UNION - GENESIS 49:19), QA-HAHL (CROWD - NUMBERS 8:9), QOH-BHEITZ (GROUP - ESTHER 2:3), AH-GAHR (ACCUMULATE - DEUTERONOMY 28:19), LO-QAHT (COMPILE - RUTH 2:7), KO-NEIS (CONVENE - ESTHER 4:16), HA-EIZ (STORE - EXODUS 9:19), CHOH-BHEIR (JOIN – CHRONICLES II 20:36) or YA-AHD (CONGREGATE - NUMBERS 10:4). QA-VAH (COLLECT, root “Quph-Vav-Heh” – cf. ISAIAH 60:9; JEREMIAH 3:17; CHRONICLES II 1:16) adds containment [QAV is a “line” connecting fixed points]. This day’s “creation” did not continue the previous day's, which established the atmosphere. Nor did it divide water and land; that would be done as in the first days or by a directive to YI-BO-D'LOO (MOVE APART - cf. NUMBERS 16:21; EZRA 10:16; NEHEMIAH 9:2). YI-QA-VOO was a directive preparatory to land exposure by confining waters in defined bodies (YI-QA-VOO is plural).
EL MA-QOHM E-CHAD (TO ONE PLACE): One huge body is B'MA-QOM E-CHAD (IN ONE PLACE – cf. LEVITICUS 6:9; NUMBERS 19:9; ISAIAH 22:23). E-CHAD here is “distinct” (cf. JUDGES 19:13; KINGS II 6:10; ECCLESIASTES 3:20). Stationary bodies of water [unlike rivers] converged "beneath the heavens"; those above do not remain in place - clouds move, rain descends).
HA-YA-BA-SHA (THE DRY LAND): YA-BA-SHA (root “Yud-Beth-Shin”) is not Y'BHEI-SHAH (DRIED OUT – cf. NUMBERS 11:6; EZEKIEL 37:2; NAHUM 1:10); it is land dry enough to support large creatures. The Israelites crossed the sea (EXODUS 14:10) upon YA-BA-SHA – cf. EXODUS 4:9; JOSHUA 4:22.
10. VA-YIQ-RA… E-RETZ (AND [HE] CALLED… EARTH): The dry land is “called” to be E-RETZ (v. 1), suitable for human domicile.
U-L’MI-Q’VEI (AND TO THE COLLECTIONS): The word is plural – multiple, separated bodies of water.
YA-MEEM (OCEANS): This includes seas and lakes.
KEE TOHBH (WHEN IT BECAME GOOD): The “day’s” first creation phase was “good”; geological forces forged mountains and valleys, around which bodies of water and areas of habitable land emerged.
יא וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים תַּדְשֵׁא הָאָרֶץ דֶּשֶׁא
DEH-SHEH HA-A-RETZ TAD-SHEI E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
11. HERBAGE EARTH THE SPROUT E-LO-HIM SAID AND
עֵשֶׂב מַזְרִיעַ זֶרַע עֵץ פְּרִי עֹשֶׂה רִי מִינוֹ
L’MEE-NOH P’REE OH-SEH P’REE ETZ ZEH-RA MAZ-REE-YA EI-SEBH
KIND ITS TO FRUIT MAKES (WHICH) FRUIT TREE SEED PLANTING GRASS
אֲשֶׁר זַרְעוֹ בוֹ עַל הָאָרֶץ וַיְהִי כֵן
KHEIN VA-Y’HEE HA-A-RETZ AL BHOH ZA-ROH A-SHER
THUS BECAME IT AND GROUND THE ON IT IN SEED ITS WHICH
יב וַתּוֹצֵא הָאָרֶץ דֶּשֶׁא עֵשֶׂב מַזְרִיעַ רַע לְמִינֵהוּ
L’MEE-NEI-HOO ZEH-RA MAZ-REE-YA EI-SEBH DEH-SHEH HA-A-RETZ VA-TOH-TZEI
12. KINDS ITS TO SEED PLANTING GRASS HERBAGE EARTH THE OUT BROUGHT AND
וְעֵץ עֹשֶׂה פְּרִי ֲשֶׁר זַרְעוֹ בוֹ לְמִינֵהוּ
L’MEE-NEI-HOO BHOH ZA-ROH A-SHER P’REE OH-SEH V’ETZ
KINDS THEIR TO IT IN SEED ITS WHICH FRUIT MAKES (THAT) TREE AND
וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים כִּי טוֹב
TOHBH KEE E-LO-HIM VA-YAHR
GOOD WHEN E-LO-HIM SAW AND
יג וַיְהִי עֶרֶב וַיְהִי בֹקֶר יוֹם שְׁלִישִׁי
SH’LEE-SHEE YOHM BHOH-QER VA-Y’HEE E-REBH VA-Y’HEE
13. THIRD DAY EMERGENCE BECAME IT AND MIXTURE BECAME IT AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM directed flora to form on earth – herbage spontaneously formed from inert raw material, then seed bearing grasses and grains, followed by trees, whose fruit contained seeds to reproduce by species and kind. A replicative mechanism He embedded in nature empowered diverse species of flora to cover land masses, eventually reaching a condition of TOHBH (GOOD) when the developed biosphere became functionally optimal and marked the end of the third creation period ["day"].
EXPOSITION
11. TAD-SHEI HA-A-RETZ DE-SHEH (SPROUT THE EARTH HERBAGE): The "R'bhee-ee" trope on DEH-SHEH, not the expected "Qatan", separates the first three words from those relating to the next two phases - His utterance first launched germination from earth's raw materials, the now accepted view that life arose spontaneously from inert matter. TAD-SHEI (“turn into herbage”) applied only to organisms that ingested material from their surroundings, not the flora of the ensuing phases.
EI-SEBH MAZ-REE-YA ZEH-RA (GRASS THAT PLANTS SEED): In the second phase, He insinuated a replicating seeding mechanism. Early readers farmed and knew this required sunlight. In the last PAR-SHA, the day was YOHM SHEI-NEE (A SECOND DAY - not the second day), consistent with periods encompassing developments that overlapped – sunlight from the fourth day was available during the third. MAZ-REE-YA (THAT WHICH SEEDS) characterized the flora in this phase, reproduction through buds coming off a stem, unlike the DEH-SHEH of the previous stage that grew innately [through cell growth and mitosis].
ETZ P'REE... AL HA-A-RETZ (FRUIT TREES… ON THE GROUND): This entire passage relates to phase three’s fruit trees. The "Gershayim" trope on the first P'REE and "Ethnachta" on HA-A-RETZ make this passage self-contained but it should be OH-SEH P'REE A-SHER ZA-ROH BHOH L'MEE-NOH (MAKES FRUIT WITH ITS SEEDS IN IT TO ITS KIND – cf. v. 12). The first P'REE designates the trees as fruit bearing [not all are, else ETZ alone would suffice] but is redundant, for we are told these were to “make” fruit, itself problematic, as OH-SEH (MAKE) implies conscious intent [the previous two flora categories grew from ingested material or blossomed from parents]. The trees are further distinguished in that their fruits are L'MEE-NOH, usually rendered “according to its kind” (although no reader would contemplate any flora producing plants unlike itself). That would be B'MEE-NOH (WITH – “within” its form/shape – cf. NUMBERS 12:6; PSALMS 106:20; DANIEL 10:1) or K'MEE-NOH (the comparative “Kaph” prefix indicates likeness – cf. LEVITICUS 13:43; JUDGES 13:6; EZEKIEL 1:26). The "Lamed" prefix is dative, indicating direction toward a person or place or orientation to a goal or objective. The stage was set for the specie proliferation and dispersion in verse 12 - OH-SEH P'REE L'MEE-NOH tells us, not what was made, but why. Bearing fruit was not the trees' purpose; the fruit was L'MEE-NOH (this prefix indicates function – cf. HOSEA 9:13; PSALMS 49:14 [15 in the Hebrew]; ESTHER 1:17), for reproduction, not to supply food for creatures. E-LO-HIM delineated a reproductive pathway different from those of other flora. Certain trees “make” seed receptacles, “containers” that separate from the trees, hence found AL HA-A-RETZ (ON THE GROUND), sometimes far from their sources (which explains the inverted word order). Something this improbable and counterintuitive could only be effected by His utterance. Teleologies were projected into these passages by later commentators; where Scripture intends a purpose, it is explicitly stated (see Exposition v. 29-30).
12. L'MEE-NEI-HOO (TO ITS KINDS): This is not L'MEE-NOH (TO ITS KIND – v. 11) but a singular noun of intrinsic multiplicity. Organisms of one kind may have differing groups. Emmer and einkorn are wheat variants; their seeds bloom into copies of each [subject to natural mutations]. His utterance diversified them, remarkably like natural selection as an adaptive mechanism fostering speciation. Many will protest that this detracts from the Creator's glory as sole architect and builder of the universe and denies the biblical narrative. To the contrary - an insightful probe of Scripture and nature leads to appreciation of the tremendous creativity and versatility He embedded, a system of astounding simplicity that innately yielded millions of organism variants. The marvel is not in creating one of each “kind” but a template that can generate myriads.
Another contentious point is that the theory of the origin of species by natural selection posits that genetic mutations and environmental pressures randomly modify populations, a doctrine conflicting with dogmas asserting design by a creator. (Some apologists propose that evolution was part of His design. This is fallacious - the point of natural selection is the absence of design and the redundancy of a creator.) Scripture is at odds with science only if one clings to the axiom that man was His “purpose” in creation, that He made the world to shower man with “goodness” or “salvation”. This idea is post-biblical; Scripture sees man as His agent and partner in achieving His purpose but that purpose was the goal, as outlined in TORAH (INSTRUCTION). PSALM 104, which seems a paean to the His world, contains no teleology or ontology; the moral is spelled out in the last three verses, where His true “purpose” – and man's duty - is explicit. This may jolt many readers, for it means the “miracle” of creation is that, whatever nature served up, when He “saw” something good, including man, He put it to use or modified it – “Evolution” did not diminish Him. There may be creatures elsewhere unlike any on earth, produced through the same forces that begot those here – and as useful and vital to Him as we are.
יד וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי מְאֹרֹת בִּרְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמַיִם
HA-SHA-MA-YIM BI-R’QEE-YA M’OH-ROHTH Y’HEE E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
14. HEAVENS THE (OF) RANGE THE IN ILLUMINATORS [THERE] BE E-LO-HIM SAID AND
לְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַיּוֹם וּבֵין הַלָּיְלָה
HA-LA-Y’LAH U-BHEIN HA-YOHM BEIN L’HABH-DIL
NIGHT THE BETWEEN AND DAY THE BETWEEN DIFFERENTIATE [TO ALLOW] TO
וְהָיוּ לְאֹתֹת וּלְמוֹעֲדִים וּלְיָמִים וְשָׁנִים
V’SHA-NIM U-L’YA-MIM U-L’MOH-A-DIM L’OH-THOHTH V’HA-YOO
YEARS AND DAYS AND ASSEMBLY (OF TIMES) AND SIGNS FOR BE SHALL THEY AND
טו וְהָיוּ לִמְאוֹרֹת בִּרְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמַיִם
HA-SHA-MA-YIM BI-R’QEE-YA LI-M’OH-ROHTH V’HA-YOO
15. HEAVENS THE (OF) RANGE THE IN LUMINARIES AS SERVE [TO COME SHALL] THEY AND
לְהָאִיר עַל הָאָרֶץ וַיְהִי כֵן
KHEIN VA-Y'HEE HA-A-RETZ AL L'HA-EER
THUS BECAME IT AND EARTH THE UPON LIGHT CAST TO
טז וַיַּעַשׂ אֱלֹהִים אֶת שְׁנֵי הַמְּאֹרֹת הַגְּדֹלִים
HA-G’DOH-LIM HA-M’OH-ROHTH SH’NEI ETH E-LO-HIM VA-YA-AHSS
16. LARGE THE ILLUMINATORS THE TWO * E-LO-HIM MADE AND
אֶת הַמָּאוֹר הַגָּדֹל לְמֶמְשֶׁלֶת הַיּוֹם
HA-YOHM L’MEM-SHEH-LETH HA-GA-DOHL HA-MA-OHR ETH
DAY THE GOVERNING THE FOR GREATER THE ILLUMINATOR THE *
וְאֶת הַמָּאוֹר הַקָּטֹן לְמֶמְשֶׁלֶת הַלַּיְלָה וְאֵת הָכּוֹכָבִים
HA-KOH-KHA-BHIM V’ETH HA-LA-Y’LAH L’MEM-SHEH-LETH HA-QA-TOHN HA-MA-OHR V’ETH
STARS THE * AND NIGHT THE GOVERNING THE FOR LESSER ILLUMINATOR THE * AND
יז וַיִּתֵּן אֹתָם אֱלֹהִים בִּרְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמָיִם לְהָאִיר עַל הָאָרֶץ
HA-A-RETZ AL L’HA-EER HA-SHA-MA-YIM BI-R’QEE-YA E-LO-HIM OH-THAM VA-YEE-TEIN
17. EARTH THE ON LIGHT CAST TO HEAVENS THE RANGE THE IN E-LO-HIM THEM GAVE AND
יח וְלִמְשֹׁל בַּיּוֹם וּבַלַּיְלָה וּלֲהַבְדִּיל
U-L’HABH-DIL U-BHA-LA-Y’LAH BA-YOHM V’LIM-SHOHL
18. DEMARCATE AND NIGHT THE DURING AND DAY THE DURING FORCES [EXERT] TO AND
בֵּין הָאוֹר וּבֵין הַחֹשֶׁךְ וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים כִּי טוֹב
TOHBH KEE E-LO-HIM VA-YAHR HA-CHOH-SHEKH U-BHEIN HA-OHR BEIN
GOOD WHEN E-LO-HIM SAW AND DARKNESS THE BETWEEN AND LIGHT THE BETWEEN
יט וַיְהִי עֶרֶב וַיְהִי בֹקֶר יוֹם ְרבִיעִי
R’BHEE-EE YOHM BHO-QER VA-Y’HEE E-REBH VA-Y’HEE
19. FOURTH DAY EMERGENCE BECAME AND MIXTURE BECAME AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM ordered celestial “illuminators” 1] to let flora and fauna distinguish day from night; 2] to serve for demarcating seasons and time intervals and for navigation; and 3] to be “luminaries” radiating light for energy. He Himself completed the sun and moon, integrating the sun into the matrix of forces in effect by day and the moon among those by night. The stars and planets have no influence on earth or its inhabitants but aid navigation and time measure at night. E-LO-HIM placed the sun and moon in their courses to project light, energy and natural forces, like gravity, that influence our environment but which man can understand and harness. This aspect of man's world was developed and brought to its current “good” state, stable and useful, in the fourth creation period or “layer”.
EXPOSITION
14. L'HABH-DIL… (TO DIFFERENTIATE…): The syntax supports those contending the M'OH-ROHTH (ILLUMINATORS) were positioned the fourth day, not created then (cf. the repeated Y’HEE [v. 6] as the RA-QEE-YAH was made and installed the second day]. The singular Y'HEE modifying the plural M'OH-ROHTH, followed by an infinitive, points to their placement L'HABH-DIL, "to [allow to] differentiate" (cf. LEVITICUS 10:10, 11:47; EZEKIEL 42:20) day from night.
L'OH-THOHTH (FOR SIGNS): Rendering OH-THOTH as “omens/portends” would have Scripture begin its list of periodic occurrences with spectacles whose “meanings” depend on oracular pronouncements, prognostications decried by the prophets (cf. ISAIAH 44:25; JEREMIAH 10:2; PSALMS 74:4); while predicted OH-THOHTH can confirm divine visitations (cf. EXODUS 4:9; NUMBERS 14:11; JOSHUA 24:17), random incidents are not signs. Other prophetic signs authenticate communications in which they are embedded [they do not validate a seer's position or authority]; they never attribute significance to transpired happenings (cf. EXODUS 3:12; KINGS II 20:9; ISAIAH 37:30). Objects or ceremonies are signs that serve as symbolic reminders (cf. GENESIS 9:12; EXODUS 12:13; NUMBERS 17:25) or ritualistic insignia of observance or commitment (cf. GENESIS 17:11; EXODUS 13:9, 31:17). These obviously bear no relation to the signs in this verse. The only ones that fit its context are universal symbols (cf. NUMBERS 2:2; ISAIAH 8:18) that harbored meanings understood by all its users (cf. GENESIS 4:15; NUMBERS 2:2; KINGS II 20:8) and cyclical ones crucial for planning.
U-L'MOH-A-DIM (AND [TIMES OF] ASSEMBLY – cf. EXODUS 33:7 [OH-HEHL MOH-EID– MEETING TENT]): These may be based on regularities; once man learned nature’s patterns, he could schedule rites, and substantiates OH-THOTH (SIGNS) as foreseen and recognized by all, not unusual happenings. The text should be MOH-A-DIM YA-MIM; the "Vav" and "Lamed" prefixes make these independent categories.
U-L'YA-MIM V'SHA-NIM (AND FOR DAYS AND YEARS): These words are coupled [SHA-NIM has a “Vav” prefix but no “Lamed”]; the passage’s quartet is really a trio, this pair the third member. YA-MIM joined to SHA-NIM makes these different “days” than those (v. 5, 8, 12) that enveloped processes; these are our consecutive nights and days, YA-MIM (DAYS) that aggregate into SHA-NIM (YEARS).
15. V'HA-YOO LI-M'OH-ROHTH (AND SERVE AS LUMINARIES): This seems to reprise verse 14 but M'OH-ROHTH has a “Vav” vowel indicator (Mem-Aleph-Vav-Reish-Taph), which prompted unnecessary esoterics; the words were originally pronounced differently because their meanings diverged.
L'HA-EER AL HA-A-RETZ (TO CAST LIGHT ON THE EARTH): “To light the earth” requires ETH HA-A-RETZ; it is “to cast light upon the earth”. Our ancestors felt warm sunlight (the maiden [Song of Songs 1:6] attributes her dark skin to the sun) and knew it was needed to grow crops. The first M'OH-ROHTH were “illuminators”, providing light for observation and measurement; the “luminaries” supplied energy.
16. VA-YA-AHSS... (AND [E-LO-HIM] MADE…): Verse 15 ends VA-Y’HEE KHEIN (AND IT BECAME SO), the state we find today (see v. 6) - and obviating the usual meaning of VA-YA-AHSS; it is clarified in the ensuing passages (cf. GENESIS 27:17; DEUTERONOMY 21:12; ISAIAH 66:2).
HA-G'DOH-LIM (THE LARGE [ONES]): The word's “Ethnachta” trope divides the verse, the modifiers on the second mention of these bodies pointing to a different “making”, else these passages are redundant {we cannot know when He intervened}. E-LO-HIM calibrated their sizes and composition.
L'MEM-SHEH-LETH HA-YOHM… (TO THE DAY’S GOVERNANCE…): “To rule the day” implies that the sun exercises control. That would be LIM-SHOHL BA-YOHM (cf. GENESIS 45:26; KINGS I 5:1; JOEL 2:17; see v. 18 below). MEM-SHEH-LETH, the construct of MEM-SHA-LAH (GOVERNMENT – cf. EXODUS 19:6; KINGS II 20:13; JEREMIAH 34:1), is “the government of”. The same goes for the moon.
V'ETH HA-KOH-CHA-BHIM (AND THE STARS): Unlike the first two luminaries, Scripture imputes no stellar “influence” (Isaiah mocks star-gazers’ prognostications - ISAIAH 47:13; cf. DEUTERONOMY 4:19) nor did this idea take root until the Greeks, long after the biblical period, transmuted astrological inanities into personal horoscopes. The ancients used stars to predict seasons (or the annual Nile flooding), later to mark nightfall (NEHEMIAH 4:15) and navigate (JEREMIAH 31:35) – not for baseless prognostications.
Verses 17-18 seem to restate 14-16, a repetitiveness spawning much discussion, most concluding the passages in these two verses all refer to the two bodies that “ruled” over days and nights precisely because they supplied light and in a way which separated periods of light and darkness. The syntax does not support this; besides, the one who brings a lamp into a dark room is acting, not the candle[DB1] !
17. VA-YEE-TEIN OH-THAM E-LO-HIM (AND E-LO-HIM GAVE THEM): The unnecessary repetition of the subject E-LO-HIM with the predicate VA-YEE-TEIN OH-THAM (cf. GENESIS 40:3; EXODUS 18:25; NUMBERS 7:6) tells us the pronoun OH-THAM (THEM), which usually refers to the last mentioned noun, here pertains to the earlier nouns in this passage. We also expect VA-YA-SEIM (AND [HE] PLACED - cf. GENESIS 28:11; KINGS I 2:19; CHRONICLES II 33:7) or V'HEE-NEE-CHAM (AND [HE] PUT THEM - cf. LEVITICUS 16:23; ISAIAH 14:1; EZEKIEL 44:30). LA-THEITH (TO GIVE) is more malleable. [Not limited to physical displacement, it can be transfer of ownership, control or general conveyance.] The KO-KHA-BHIM (v. 16), stars, planets and comets, are the M'OH-ROHTH (ILLUMINATORS – cf. DEUTERONOMY 4:19; JEREMIAH 31:35; PSALMS 148:3) of verse 14. Here, two earlier ones are “given” to the “range of the heavens”; they were not “set/placed” but move in paths within the matrix of “governing” forces.
L'HA-EER AL HA-A-RETZ (TO CAST LIGHT ON THE EARTH): As in verse 15, this is light’s energy.
18. V'LIM-SHOHL BA-YOHM U-BHA-LA-Y'LAH (AND TO RULE BY DAY AND BY NIGHT): This does not repeat verse 16. The singular verb applies to both time periods - the sun and moon “rule” jointly. The influence of sunlight on the weather coincides with that of the moon on the tides, natural effects - not those of “rulers” over “subjects”. The resultants of the forces they project are natural outcomes of physical laws.
U-L'HABH-DIL BEIN HA-OHR U-BHEIN HA-CHO-SHEKH (AND TO DEMARCATE BETWEEN THE LIGHT AND THE DARKNESS): The commingled impact of sun and moon extends to light and darkness but, unlike verse 14, which references days and nights in the context of timekeeping and navigation, this verse deals with light as a phenomenon independent of time measurement, as exemplified by the long periods of light and darkness in the polar regions.
VA-YAHR E-LO-HIM KEE TOHBH (AND E-LO-HIM SAW [THEM] WHEN [THEY] WERE GOOD): The sun and moon reached the stage where their projected forces within an ensemble shaped phenomena man could observe, measure and eventually control. They are not objects of reverence or worship. When He “saw” this stage of development, He determined it to be “good”, everything functioning harmoniously, well-integrated and at the staging point for the next layer.
19. VA-Y'HEE... (AND BECAME…): The E-REBH (MIXTURE) of all bodies in this layer became the BOH-QER (EMERGENCE) it remains to this day.
כ וַיֹּאמֶר ֱלֹהִים יִשְׁרְצוּ הַמַּיִם שֶׁרֶץ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה
CHA-YAH NEH-PHESH SHEH-RETZ HA-MA-YIM YISH-R’TZOO E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
20. VOLITION(AL) ALIVE MOVER(S) WATERS THE OUT TURN E-LO-HIM SAID AND
וְעוֹף יְעוֹפֵף עַל הָאָרֶץ עַל ְּנֵיִ רְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמָיִם
HA-SHA-MA-YIM R’QEE-YA P’NEI AL HA-A-RETZ AL Y’OH-PHEIPH V’OHPH
HEAVENS THE (OF) RANGE THE (OF) FACE THE ON GROUND THE NEAR FLY FLIERS AND
כא וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת הַתַּנִּינִם הַגְּדֹלִים וְאֵת כָּל נֶפֶשׁ
NEH-PHESH KOL V’ETH HA-G’DOH-LIM HA-TA-NEE-NIM ETH E-LO-HIM VA-YIBH-RA
21. LIFE ALL * AND WHALES THE * E-LO-HIM CREATED AND
הַחַיָּה הָרֹמֶשֶׂת אֲשֶׁר שָׁרְצוּ הַמַּיִם לְמִינֵהֶם וְאֵת כָּל
KOL V’ETH L’MEE-NEI-HEM HA-MA-YIM SHO-R’TZOO A-SHER HA-ROH-MEH-SETH HA-CHA-YAH
EVERY * AND KINDS THEIR TO WATERS THE OUT TURNED WHICH CRAWLS THAT VOLITION(AL)
עוֹף כָּנָף לְמִינֵהוּ וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים כִּי טוֹב
TOHBH KEE E-LO-HIM VA-YAHR L’MEE-NEI-HOO KA-NAPH OHPH
GOOD WHEN E-LO-HIM SAW AND KINDS ITS TO WING (OF) BIRD
כב וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם אֱלֹהִים לֵאמֹר פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ
U-R’BHOO P’ROO LEI-MOHR E-LO-HIM OH-THAM VA-Y’BHA-REKH
22. NUMBERS RAISE AND FRUIT CREATE SAYING E-LO-HIM THEM BLESSED AND
וּמִלְאוּ אֶת הַמַּיִם בַּיַּמִּים וְהָעוֹף יִרֶב בָּאָרֶץ
BA-A-RETZ YEE-REHBH V’HA-OHPH BA-YA-MIM HA-MA-YIM ETH U-MI-L’OO
LAND THE ON MULTIPLY BIRDS THE AND SEAS THE IN WATERS THE * FILL AND
כג וַיְהִי עֶרֶב וַיְהִי בֹקֶר יוֹם חֲמִישִׁי
CHA-MEE-SHEE YOHM BHO-QER VA-Y’HEE E-REBH VA-Y’HEE
23. FIFTH DAY EMERGENCE BECAME IT AND MIXTURE BECAME IT AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM directed the waters to turn out self-driven, mobile creatures, low-flying ones – small birds, insects, gliders and bats – and high-fliers capable of spreading over land masses. The water produced whales and other marine life that swim and crawl in aquatic regions and winged creatures that fly over, and cover, vast land areas - all forming a biosphere He deemed of satisfactory functional utility. His blessing instilled in them a drive to reproduce, enlarge their numbers and diversify, so that they would fill the pathways of the seas and oceans while the avian creatures spread over the earth.
Scripture does not connect breathing with life, a vital force or soul. Nor is there stasis; the supposition that His creations all sprang up as mature, completed forms, so to perpetually remain, does not reflect a text which sees populations continuously adapting to mutations and external pressures.
EXPOSITION
20. YISH-R'TZOO (TURN OUT): "Shin" prefixing the root "Reish-Vav-Tzadiq" (RUN) forms SHEH-RETZ, a creature that “runs”. YISH-R'TZOO directed the waters to turn out swift animals. A REH-MESS (root "Reish-Mem-Samech", TREAD/TRAMPLE - cf. LEVITICUS 11:44; ISAIAH 63:3; HOSEA 2:20) crawls. In between are creatures that HOH-LEKH (WALK – cf. LEVITICUS 11:20). The standard “swarm/teem/bring forth abundantly” presume myriads of small wiggling creatures. Scripture is explicit with large numbers (verse 23 implies small numbers, else why the blessing?). His embedded replicative process, bolstered by a blessing, is what enlarged populations and stimulated speciation. Those who have KOL NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH A-SHER YISH-ROHTZ (EZEKIEL 47:9) as “All living things that move/all swarming creatures” force YISH-ROHTZ to be a prepositional adjective or adverb. It is a verb; the prophet encouraged a “leap” into life-giving waters. The spurious association of YISH-R'TZOO with large numbers may be traced to its use in connection with humans (GENESIS 9:7), when man was told SHI-R'TZOO BA-A-RETZ, translated as “proliferate on the earth”. But the verb is separated from the preceding phrase, P'ROO U-R'BHOO, “Be fruitful and increase numbers” and coupled with a second U-R'BHOO. The first phrase is a charge to increase population, the second to enlarge the area of habitation. Similarly, EXODUS 1:7 is assumed to reference the swelling numbers of the children of Israel. That would be PA-ROO V'RA-BHOO V'O-TZ'MOO V'SHO-R'TZOO (WERE FRUITFUL, INCREASED NUMBERS, GAINED STRENGTH AND EMERGED). Instead, VA-YISH-R'TZOO is between PA-ROO and VA-YIR-BOO, with VA-YA-A-TZ'MOO at the end and only PA-ROO in the completed past. The first verb refers to population size, the others to the Israelites’ diffusion and rise to prominence.
SHEH-RETZ NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH (LIVELY VIGOROUS MOVERS): Singular nouns in sequence denote classes (cf. GENESIS 32:5, DEUTERONOMY 8:8; EZEKIEL 26:10). A SHEH-RETZ can move of its own volition. The root "Peh-Vav-Shin" (“spread/scatter” - cf. NAHUM 3:18; HABAKKUK 1:8, MALACHI 4:2 [3:20 in the Hebrew]) with added "Nun" yields the more exuberant NEH-PHESH ([A] LIFE) - not related to “breath” or “soul”; Indo-European associations of breath with soul survive in the Hindi “Mahatma”, a combination of “Maha” (GREAT) and "Atma" (SOUL), the latter a cognate of “breath” still present in some Western languages [e. g. the German “atmen” - “breathing”]. The only whiff of this in Scripture is JEREMIAH 15:9, where he bemoans a woman that NO-PH’CHA NAPH-SHAH, which many translate “her soul exhaled” and presume refers to her death. If this is accurate, the rest of that verse makes no sense. Jeremiah was talking about depression, a reading which fits and is consistent with NEH-PHESH as “life”. Scripture views blood as the carrier of “life”, the NEH-PHESH. This is explicit in DEUTERONOMY 12:22, 23, a passage that cannot be more unequivocal, and directly motivates the sprinkled blood on the altar as the indispensable sacrifice validation. CHA-YAH is usually translated “life/living” or something suggesting the creatures were alive. This is redundant; NEH-PHESH by itself refers to the entire class of living organisms (cf. GENESIS 12:5 and 40:27, where the singular NEH-PHESH is an entire group). CHA-YAH has extended meanings construed from context. ISH CHAI (SAMUEL II 23:20) is a “vigorous man”. When Isaac’s servants dug a well of MA-YIM CHA-YIM (GENESIS 26:19), its waters were fresh and clear; the same phrase in NUMBERS 19:17 refers to pure, unadulterated waters. The text is actually portraying volitional, “lively” marine creatures.
V'OHPH Y'OH-PHEIPH (AND FLIERS FLY): OHPH is any flying creature. To indicate flight, the second word would be YA-OOPH (cf. ISAIAH 6:6; PSALMS 91:5; JOB 20:8). Y'OH-PHEIPH denotes migration or a specific destination (cf. ISAIAH 6:2, HOSEA 9:11 and note the “flying” sword of EZEKIEL 32:10). “Flyers” were to spread beyond the seas and coasts of their native regions, as specified next.
AL HA-A-RETZ (NEAR THE GROUND): Not on top of it but over it [Israel’s national airline is EL AL {“To Above” – cf. HOSEA 11:7}], though at low altitudes. Of short flight range, insects, bats and gliding mammals are to proliferate over extended areas.
AL P'NEI R'QEE-YA HA-SHA-MA-YIM (ACROSS THE HEAVENS): AL P'NEI is an orientation, not a location (see v. 2). Flying creatures other than those in the previous passage ranged globally. {Conspicuously absent here is VA-Y'HEE KHEIN (AND IT BECAME THUS – see v. 7). The conditions that took effect did not remain static; not all species made it into succeeding epochs, while others evolved later.}
21. VA-YIBH-RA... HA-TA-NEE-NIM HA-G'DOH-LIM (AND [HE] CREATED… THE WHALES): VA-YIBH-RA is used again only with man’s creation (v. 27; BA-RA [CREATED – v. 1] is a general introduction). Struggling to explain its presence here, commentators suggest it points to the uniqueness of the large TA-NEE-NIM, ignoring the fact that it modifies the entire verse. Nor is there a consensus as to what a TA-NEEN is. When Aaron's rod turned into one (EXODUS 7:9-10), it is translated “serpent”, confirmed by early filmmakers who found it easier to transform a long stick into a snake then a Komodo dragon. But only Aaron's became a TA-NEEN; Moses’ staff (EXODUS 4:3) became a NA-CHASH, “snake/serpent”, so TA-NEEN must be another animal. Similarly, Isaiah turns from the “Leviathan serpents” (ISAIAH 27:1) to the TA-NEEN “in the sea”, implying it is not a serpent and not all are aquatic, for he does not call it TA-NEEN HA-YAM (THE SEA TA-NEEN) but adds A-SHER ["which"] - it is a marine variant in a larger class; Ezekiel does the same when he labels Egypt’s ruler the "TA-NEEM in the river" (EZEKIEL 29:3), typically rendered “dragon”. These are probably crocodiles, omnipresent in the Nile region. [It is indisputable that TA-NEEN in DEUTERONOMY 32:33, PSALMS 91:13 and LAMENTATIONS 4:3 is a land animal.] If the only species besides man was singled out due to its size, there were others of its kind that were small, else it would have its own name; so there were at least two variants. Yet, the text omits L'MEE-NOH (TO ITS KIND), used with the other creatures in the verse. This means the smaller versions were included in the group of the next phrase, those the waters “turned out” – and that the “large TA-NEE-NIM” were whales [not “great whales” {King James Bible}]. What was it about them that the text set them apart? Nothing! – And that is the point. The largest animals were produced by the same conditions and forces as the others. They are listed first to tell us there was no order to speciation. Standard size TA-NEE-NIM - dolphins and reptiles - were all part of the group in this verse, the “large” ones not necessarily related to them taxonomically. The mechanism He implanted yielded a diversity transcending time and boundaries.
L'MEE-NEI-HEM (TO THEIR KINDS): If these were fully formed by type when they were turned out, the text would be KOL MEE-NEI... (ALL KINDS... – cf. GENESIS 9:2; NUMBERS 11:22; EZEKIEL 38:20). This qualifier consigns the process to the creatures themselves (see v. 1). By detaching the word from HA-ROH-MEH-SETH (THAT CRAWLS), which it should have followed, the text combines dative and ablative forms, indicating extensive creature development after the initial “turning out”.
L'MEE-NEI-HOO (TO ITS KINDS): Unlike the “double” plural in the last phrase, this is a “singular” plural. Scripture views all air-borne travelers as one type, as it does marine life; land creatures are categorized.
VA-YAHR... KEE TOHBH (AND [HE] SAW… WHEN [IT WAS] GOOD): Marine and avian life, spread over extensive regions of vegetation and forest, progressed to a satisfactory stage.
22. VA-Y'BHA-REKH (AND HE BLESSED): B'RA-KHA (BLESSING - root "Beth-Resh-Kaph") is cognate to B'REI-KHAH (POOL), typically an elevated cistern (cf. KINGS II 18:17, ISAIAH 36:2, NEHEMIAH 2:14). A blessing is a reservoir put at a recipient’s disposal, resources to be drawn on to overcome obstacles or limitations – even to flourish. Like stores, blessings are tapped; they are not innate in the person. A divine B'RA-KHA can ensure success provided the recipient’s efforts are directed along a proper path, as a B'REI-KHAH's waters follow courses nature dictates. After He “saw” that the panorama of marine and avian life “became good”, He conferred a benediction of great specificity. VA-Y'HEE KHEIN (AND IT BECAME THUS – v. 7) is again omitted; this sphere's development never ceased. The period's objectives were met but its full flowering had only begun, obstructions surmounted with the blessing enunciated in the ensuing passage.
P'ROO (REPRODUCE): The root "Peh-Reish-Heh" (FRUIT) signifies a miniature that will grow to maturity. It is itself not the goal but a receptacle for seeds. Organisms are fruitful, not when they produce edible, nutritious pods but when they reproduce. His blessing empowered these organisms to procreate in a manner surpassing the replicative potency of flora.
U-R'BHOO (AND MULTIPLY): Animals were to copy themselves, impelled by a drive today recognized as central to biological systems, although there is no obvious reason why proteins, nucleotides, enzymes and organelles in a cell or multicellular organism should be seized with a compulsion to make duplicates. Trees are far more efficient; they occasionally export seeds but continually absorb nutrients and can grow for centuries. This “ghost in the machine”, missed by theologians and biblical apologists, is a mighty argument for Scripture’s divine origin. This robust procreative force was enunciated in a text over three thousand years ago among a tiny group in a spot on a major crossroads - and defied all the intellectual and cultural currents of the powers and agents of empire and commerce that traversed it by postulating a unique vision of how life unfolded, one not remotely like any lore, mythology or creation saga anywhere else, not then – not for three millennia. Is there a stronger argument that the biblical narrative’s provenance had to be external to the collective human intellect?
23. VA-Y'HEE... YOHM CHA-MEE-SHEE (AND THERE WAS… A FIFTH DAY): The emergent animals turned out by the waters and those in the air reproduced, multiplied, diversified and filled oceans, seas and avian reaches, the scope of layer five.
כד וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים תּוֹצֵא הָאָרֶץ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה לְמִינָהּ
L’MEE-NAH CHA-YAH NEH-PHESH HA-A-RETZ TOH-TZEI ELO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
24. KIND ITS TO VOLITION(AL) LIFE EARTH THE OUT BRING E-LO-HIM SAID AND
בְּהֵמָה וָרֶמֶשׂ וְחַיְתוֹ אֶרֶץ
E-RETZ V’CHAI- Y’THOH VA-REH-MESS B’HEI-MAH
EARTH OF (IS) LIFE WHOSE (THOSE) AND CRAWLERS AND GRAZERS
לְמִינָהּ וַיְהִי כֵן
KHEIN VA-Y’HEE L’MEE-NAH
THUS BECAME IT AND KINDS (THEIR) ITS TO
כה וַיַּעַשׂ אֱלֹהִים אֶת חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ לְמִינָהּ
L’MEE-NAH HA-A-RETZ CHA-YATH ETH E-LO-HIM VA-YA-AHSS
25. KIND BY EARTH THE OF DWELLERS * E-LO-HIM MADE AND
וְאֶת הַבְּהֵמָה לְמִינָהּ וְאֵת כָּל רֶמֶשׂ
REH-MESS KOL V’ETH L’MEE-NAH HA-B’HEI-MAH V’ETH
CRAWLERS THE ALL * AND KIND BY GRAZERS THE * AND
הָאֲדָמָה לְמִינֵהוּ וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים כִּי טוֹב
TOHBH KEE E-LO-HIM VA-YAHR L’MEE-NEI-HOO HA-ADA-MAH
GOOD WHEN E-LO-HIM SAW AND KINDS BY GROUND THE (ON)
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM directed terrestrial areas to bring forth animals - sedentary grazes, roamers foraging for edible flora and carnivores at the top of the food chain. From this last group He fashioned proto-human "hominids", who consumed diverse plants and animals and, by developing other uses for them, flourished in many sectors. These creatures all coexisted with those that evolved naturally.
EXPOSITION
To enable readers to appreciate the content of this section's Exposition, we catalog variations of a two-word phrase pivotal to this chapter to show how subtle differences change the meaning of a text.
HEBREW (transliterated) ENGLISH (translation) INTENDED MEANING*
1. CHA-YATH EH-RETZ LIFE OF LAND A creature living on land
(Not avian or marine);
Life in the land
(Land that can sustain
living beings and plants);
A rural style of life
(not urban)
2. CHA-YATH HA-A-RETZ LIFE OF THE LAND The land’s life, i. e. its vigor,
fecundity, resources;
The lives on earth;
The lives on the land
(i. e. occupants of an area)
A rural style of living
(in any setting)
3. CHA-YOHTH EH-RETZ LIVING CREATURES (on) LAND Creatures living on land;
(plural of 1)
Creatures exhibiting
territoriality
4. CHA-YOHTH HA-A-RETZ LIVING CREATURES (of a) LAND The creatures on earth;
(plural of 2)
The animals of a region;
Creatures that dwell on land
5. CHA-Y’THOH EH-RETZ HIS (ITS) LIFE (is from) EARTH (LAND) Creature who makes its
home primarily on land;
Creature who obtains all its
needs from its environment
*Intended meaning is determined by context; further nuances or subtleties are derived from syntax.
Meanings change by inversion (e. g. EH-RETZ CHA-YAH - "fertile/virgin land") and analogs (e. g. CHA-YATH HA-SA-DEH - "animals of the field", both different than phrase 2 above). Exact meanings are determined by prefixes, suffixes and vowels, modified by context, syntax and the order of phrase variants in a passage, aspects that cannot be treated cavalierly.
24. TOH-TZEI HA-A-RETZ (THE EARTH [SHALL] BRING OUT): The root “Yud-Tzadiq-Aleph” (GO/COME OUT) refers to things leaving, or extracted from, a specific place (cf. EXODUS 12:46; JEREMIAH 32:21; RUTH 2:18), not development or manufacture. The opposite applies when it is a metaphor [Jacob's descendants are YOH-TZ’EI Y’REI-CHOH (ISSUE OF HIS LOINS – GENESIS 46:26); Job says of the earth MI-MEH-NAH YEI-TZEI LEH-CHEM (FROM IT ISSUES FORTH BREAD – JOB 28:5)]. A literal TOH-TZEI means fully-formed animals cracked through the earth’s crust to clamber onto land, with no account of how they came to be, heretofore explicit (v. 11, 20). It is more reasonable that TOH-TZEI is figurative - “products” of the land.
L’MEE-NAH (TO ITS KIND - see v. 11): When a “Lamed” prefix (“to”) does not put a noun into the dative case, it indicates a transition or process - the later animal types differed from the earlier. Had all species appeared simultaneously, the text would read TOH-TZEI HA-A-RETZ KOL NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH (THE EARTH SHALL BRING FORTH ALL THE LIVING – cf. GENESIS 9:12; EXODUS 1:5; LEVITICUS 24:17). The “Lamed” prefix implies phylogeny, each area on earth producing variations among classes.
B’HEI-MAH VA-REH-MESS V’CHAI-Y’THOH E-RETZ (GRAZERS AND CRAWLERS AND [THOSE] WHOSE LIFE [IS] OF EARTH): No "Vav" ("and") prefix to B’HEI-MAH makes this phrase a subset of NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH (LIVING [MOBILE] BEINGS) but the “Vav” on REH-MESS (usually omitted on nouns within a sequence) tells us these were not sharp divisions; the categories shared traits (convergent evolution). Scripture does not classify animals by anatomy, physiology or taxonomy but by how they relate to man. The precise meaning of B’HEI-MAH is unclear (most render it “beast” but it has no exact English equivalent). Generally, it is an ungulate living off regional flora (cf. EXODUS 12:29; LEVITICUS 19:19; JONAH 3:7). When He threatens V’SHEIN B’HEI-MOHTH A-SHA-LACH (TEETH OF B’HEI-MOHTH I WILL DISPATCH – DEUTERONOMY 32:24), the terror comes from fear these placid consumers [not “wild” beasts] will invade homes seeking food. The REH-MESS crawled or crept (cf. LEVITICUS 20:25; HOSEA 2:20; PSALMS 148:10 - see v. 21) in search of food and mates. The CHA-Y’THOH E-RETZ (No. 5 above) are not grazers or roamers, nor is their E-RETZ ground but a defined area they inhabit. They lived off whatever was available, including other animals (cf. PSALMS 79:2). The text does not preclude the emergence of carnivores with, or soon after, herbivores. The assumption that flesh consumption, for man or animals, was interdicted before the Deluge is based on faulty readings of GENESIS 1:29-30 and 9:3-4.
25. VA-YA-AHSS E-LO-HIM… (AND E-LO-HIM MADE…): VA-YA-AHSS is a finishing or completion (see v. 7); since VA-Y’HEE KHEIN (AND IT BECAME THUS – v. 24) states these creatures had already attained the forms we would recognize {VA-YA-AHSS (HE MADE) following TOH-TZEI (BRING FORTH – v. 24) allows no interpretation but that the events in verse 24 preceded those of verse 25}, what was now “made” must be a further unfolding. Phrase 2 of our catalog appears here after phrase 5, hence it is a subset, while L’MEE-NAH/L’MEE-NEI-HOO (TO ITS KIND) following every category indicates speciation within each.
ETH CHA-YATH HA-A-RETZ (DWELLERS ON LAND): This highlights three more differences between the verses: 1] CHA-YATH HA-ARETZ comes first, not at the end. 2] The generic CHA-Y’THOH E-RETZ (No. 5) became the specific CHA-YATH HA-A-RETZ (No. 2), a subset of number 5. 3] The “Heh” definite article prefix and direct object indicator ETH convert this to a singular group containing different types.
Verse 24 lists three forms of NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH (the extra L’MEE-NAH [TO ITS KIND] separates these passages) in a logical sequence - grazers, roamers and foragers, then carnivores. By contrast, E-LO-HIM focuses attention on the CHA-YATH HA-A-RETZ in verse 25, evidenced by their heading this list and no generic NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH. A singular noun used for a class, as in verse 24, being abstract, cannot be modified by ETH unless KOL (ALL) or another inclusive is added. When ETH reinforces a definite article “Heh” prefix, it adjusts that noun’s character, dimensions and aspects like gender and number. The ETH preceding CHA-YATH HA-A-RETZ tells us it is not a class noun but one of these creatures that had a number of types, as indicated by the next phrase, L’MEE-NAH (TO ITS KIND). Its placement in verse 25 also tells us that it is within the CHA-Y’THOH E-RETZ of verse 24 but our catalog shows these two have incongruent meanings. To see what beings these were, whose development required intervention, we turn to the next categories in the verse.
V’ETH HA-B’HEI-MAH (AND THE GRAZERS): B’HEI-MAH is singular but the "Heh" prefix preceded by ETH makes it, not a class (as in v. 24), but specific types. As the CHA-YATH HA-A-RETZ (LAND DWELLERS) were a subset of the CHA-Y’THOH E-RETZ (THOSE WHO LIVE ON THE LAND) – hunters and predators, so these were types of grazers domesticated by the CHA-YATH HA-ARETZ to be stable sources of food and perhaps motive power.
V’ETH KOL REH-MESS HA-A-DA-MAH (AND ALL GROUND CRAWLERS): E-LO-HIM turned to crawlers on A-DA-MAH, a word used but once in the chapter and referencing land in its relation to, and use by, man. There has been much speculation as to the etymology of A-DAM (“man”); it is the masculine of A-DA-MAH – and bespeaks a reciprocal relation. In its category, only the REH-MESS HA-A-DA-MAH (LAND ROAMERS), those in proximity to A-DAM, received divine attention. These formed variants - only here in this Parsha does the text use the plural L’MEE-NEI-HOO (BY KINDS) - that evolved in different A-DA-MAH regions (and diverged as species). These “roamers”, with the “grazers”, were “made” to support, with vegetation, that group of the CHA-YATH HA-A-RETZ subset of CHA-Y’THOH E-RETZ, carnivores taking advantage of all their vicinities offered. A-DAM and A-DA-MAH are two sides of a coin - there is no A-DA-MAH without A-DAM. The CHA-YAH of verse 25, who converted E-RETZ to A-DA-MAH, is the class of the first hominids. This is not Primordial Adam (2:7 - the “Adam HaRishon” of post- biblical literature) nor the successor (v. 26) but the CHA-YOHTH HA-A-RETZ (No. 4 in the catalog) “made” by E-LO-HIM.
VA-YAHR E-LO-HIM KEE TOHBH (AND E-LO-HIM SAW WHEN [IT BECAME]GOOD): E-LO-HIM did not evaluate His own handiwork (see v. 4); He appraised earth's issuance (v. 24). Why, then, is this not at the end of verse 24? A more pertinent query, missed by all commentators, is why verses 24 and 25 are not in the last PAR-SHA. The emergence of terrestrial and marine life should be juxtaposed (especially since they intersect, e. g. amphibians). If disparate activities shared “day” three, why not complementary ones in “day” 5? If E-LO-HIM consigned an entire “day” to bring forth light and another to separate the two aqueous regions, did not the “Crown of Creation” deserve the same?
Nature generated variations (v. 12 - e. g. the extinct Burgess Shale “types”); when useful ones emerged, they sometimes needed “adjustments”. The ancients had no inkling of the mechanics but intuited that E-LO-HIM interposed Himself when necessary, the text only reporting His acts and their outcomes, notably those lavished on proto-humans and those sharing their environs. The world at large developed without guidance. Whether these spheres were compatible He now had to “see”, for that combination provided the setting for A-DAM – and is why this entire creation segment was part of layer six.
כו וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ
BI-TZAL-MEI-NOO A-DAM NA-A-SEH E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
26. FORM OUR USING HUMANS MAKE WILL WE E-LO-HIM SAID AND
כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף
U-BH’OHPH HA-YAM BHI-D’GATH V’YIR-DOO KI-D’MOO-THEI-NOO
BIRDS AND SEA THE (OF) FISH THE EXPLOIT WILL THEY AND IMAGINE (TO ABILITY) OUR WITH
הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל הָאָרֶץ
HA -A-RETZ U-BH’KHOL U-BHA-B’HEI-MAH HA-SHA-MA-YIM
EARTH THE (OF RESOURCES) ALL AND GRAZERS THE AND HEAVEN THE OF
וּבְכָל הָרֶמֶשׂ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל הָאָרֶץ
HA-ARETZ AL HA-ROH-MEISS HA-REH-MESS U-BH’KHOL
EARTH THE ON CRAWL THAT CREEPERS THE ALL AND
כז וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ
B’TZAL-MOH HA-A-DAM ETH E-LO-HIM VA-YIBH-RA
27. FORM THAT IN HUMAN THE * E-LO-HIM CREATED AND
בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ
OH-THOH BA-RAH E-LO-HIM B’TZEH-LEM
HIM CREATED HE E-LO-HIM (OF) PROJECTION THE WITH
זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם
OH-THAM BA-RA U-N’QEI-BHA ZA-KHAR
THEM CREATED HE FEMALE AND MALE
כח וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם אֱלֹהִים וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם אֱלֹהִים
E-LO-HIM LA-HEM VA-YOH-MER E-LO-HIM OH-THAM VA-Y’BHA-REKH
28. E-LO-HIM THEM (REGARDING) SAID AND E-LO-HIM THEM BLESSED AND
פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ וּמִלְאוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְכִבְשֻׁהָ
V’KHI-BH’SHOO-HAH HA-A-RETZ ETH U-MI-L’OO U-R’BHOO P’ROO
IT CONQUER AND EARTH THE * FILL AND NUMBERS INCREASE AND REPRODUCE
וּרְדוּ בִּדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם
HA-SHA-MA-YIM U-BH’OHPH HA-YAM BI-D’GATH U-R’DOO
HEAVENS THE OF BIRDS AND SEA THE OF FISH EXPLOIT AND
וּבְכָל חַיָּה הָרֹמֶשֶׂת עַל הָאָרֶץ
HA-A-RETZ AL HA-ROH-MEH-SETH CHA-YAH U-BH’KHOL
EARTH THE ON TREADS THAT LIFE ALL AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
E-LO-HIM directed hominids to produce offspring, with their physical forms and imaginations, to exploit their surroundings. He enhanced a group of these with consciousness, allowing them to adapt nature to themselves instead of their adapting to nature. His blessing powered their proliferation and enabled them to modify environments into suitable habitats, as well as to vanquish all opposition.
“Conquer” suggests confrontation between groups vying for territorial control, a recurring feature of human behavior which Scripture recognizes. It is no accident that A-DAM’s strain of humanity is the only one populating the whole planet, unlike other creatures, which are confined to bounded territories.
EXPOSITION
26. VA-YOH-MER E-LO-HIM NA-A-SEH (AND E-LO-HIM SAID WE WILL MAKE): This would be another “utterance” setting events in motion if not for the plural NA-A-SEH (“We will make”) soliciting others to join Him but no indication who was tapped or how they responded. Traditional answers offer stylistic or exegetical hermeneutics that may be homiletically gratifying but do not explain the verse in context and fail to address another difficulty. OH-SEH (MAKE/DO) is a completion or perfection of something already existent and would follow BOH-REH (CREATE). Here, it precedes VA-YIBH-RA (HE CREATED - v. 27)! While Scripture does not adhere to strict ordering of time intervals associated with events or processes, successive ones in a single passage are always chronological. NA-A-SEH is jussive but its first-person “Nun” prefix alerts the reader of E-LO-HIM’s selective participation in the ensuing process; His order was directed to the group best situated and most capable of carrying it out.
A-DAM: This is a class noun (V’YIR-DOO [AND THEY WILL EXPLOIT], in the same verse, is plural).NA-A-SEH (WE WILL MAKE) embraced the hominids (see v. 25 – V’ETH KOL REH-MESS HA-ADA-MAH) who were to bring forth a new type, the only creation whose form, capabilities and future behavior patterns were outlined in the text. NA-A-SEH summons a collective; it does not require all parties to act simultaneously or be aware of the goal (cf. GENESIS 11:4; EXODUS 19:8; SONG OF SONGS 8:8).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the next chapter, the story narrows, as one A-DAM assumes a more complex personality than his fellows. Other humans existed contemporaneously with the Eden couple (postulated in a number of Talmudic passages (cf. Babylonian Talmud, Chagiga 13b-14a; Midrash Genesis Rabbah 19:5).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B'TZAL-MEI-NOO (USING OUR [PHYSICAL] FORM): TZEH-LEM (root "Tzadiq-Lamed" [“shadow/shade”]) is not “image” but a projection forming a physical embodiment of a template (cf. NUMBERS 33:52; EZEKIEL 7:20; DANIEL 3:1). Visual representation is T’MOO-NAH (cf. NUMBERS 12:8; DEUTERONOMY 4:12; PSALMS 17:15). The simile in PSALMS 39:6 [7 in the Hebrew] is to a hollow corporeality, with a nod to T. S. Eliot; a metaphor requires a “Kaph” prefix, not a “Beth”. A comparison of the A-DAM to the Divine needs "Yud-Tzadiq-Reish" (INCLINATION/NATURE - cf. GENESIS 6:5; DEUTERONOMY 31:21; CHRONICLES I 28:9) or "Mem-Shin-Lamed" (LIKEN/RESEMBLE - cf. ISAIAH 46:5; PSALMS 28:1; JOB 30:19) and would never be a physical reflection, anathema to the Israelites. Suggestions that it mirrored celestial beings postulate dimensions to which physical models cannot apply. Some interpretations refer to intellectual talents, skills or morals; while these provide homiletic stock, their connections to the text are tenuous. When He bestows intellectual or aesthetic gifts, Scripture spells them out (cf. EXODUS 31:3, 35:35; KINGS I 3:12, 5:9). Attributing this meaning here is discordant with Chapters 2-3, where “knowledge” is exterior to man [else what need for the tree?] and notably lacking prior to the acts of humans. Scripture does not couch terms so obliquely their plain meaning is obscured. TZAL-MEI-NOO is the first person plural possessive of one TZEH-LEM common to a group (cf. AMOS 5:26). Biblical syntax ascribes a possessive to the last preceding noun where applicable; this was the TZEH-LEM of the hominids directed to use their physical forms for a new A-DAM type. Nor is it incongruous that they were unwitting actors; NA-A-SEH (WE WILL MAKE) following VA-YOH-MER (AND HE SAID) indicates only an initiated process. When Joseph suggested YA-A-SEH PAR-OH (PHARAOH SHALL MAKE - GENESIS 41:34), the stockpiling done by others, who may not have known why they were doing it, was attributed to the king. The laborers who erected the tower were not all aware they were furthering V'NA-A-SEH LA-NOO SHEM (AND WE WILL MAKE A NAME FOR OURSELVES - GENESIS 11:4). Populations “made” the A-DAM type via their procreative proclivities. Including Himself in this did not require He share this TZEH-LEM. When the tribes who asked to remain in trans-Jordan agreed to accompany their brethren into Canaan for battle, they stipulated that TA-PEI-NOO NA-SHEI-NOO (OUR CHILDREN, OUR WIVES) would remain behind (NUMBERS 32:26). Of their thousands, some certainly had neither wives nor children; this did not preclude their joining in the declaration.
KI-D'MOO-THEI-NOO (WITH OUR [ABILITY TO] IMAGINE): Those translating this "like us/to resemble us/according to our likeness" rely on the King James "after our likeness", not appreciating that "after" in Stuart England was adverbial, not prepositional (“she takes after her mother" does not imply a replica but some resemblance). The Kaph prefix suggests a comparison less precise than the "Beth" prefix on TZEH-LEM (cf. GENESIS 18:10; NUMBERS 9:15; JOSHUA 11:6). The root "Daled-Mem-Heh" (“compare/liken” - cf. ISAIAH 1:9; PSALMS 17:12; SONG OF SONGS 2:9) alludes to internal perception. TZEH-LEM is an objective shape, D’MOOTH a subjective reaction, like an Impressionist painting. {EZEKIEL 1 is replete with this word, visions not real but ideations.} The conventional view that His “likeness”, as spiritual ideal, was imbued into A-DAM is wrong. The meaning of KI-D’MOO-THEI-NOO must be gleaned from its two other occurrences. In PSALMS 58:4 [5 in the Hebrew], an enemy’s “venom” is KI-D’MOOTH CHA-MAHS NA-CHAHSH (LIKE A SNAKE’S POISON), not a physical comparison but the perceived effect of hateful words. In DANIEL 10:16, KI-D’MOOTH B’NEI A-DAM is usually translated “one who looked like a man”. B’NEI A-DAM is plural (SONS OF MEN - cf. DEUTERONOMY 32:8; PSALMS 36:7 [8 in the Hebrew]; ECCLESIASTES 3:19); while some render it that way, it does not fit this context. The singular is BEN A-DAM (cf. ISAIAH 51:12; EZEKIEL 3:1; PSALMS 8:4 [5 in the Hebrew]) but when the comparative is intended, the simpler K’A-DAM (cf. HOSEA 6:7; PSALMS 82:7; JOB 31:33), K’ISH (LIKE A MAN [PERSON] – cf. ISAIAH 66:3; ZECHARIAH 4:1; NEHEMIAH 8:1) or K’GEH-BHER (LIKE A MAN[LY one] – cf. JEREMIAH 23:9; PSALMS 88:4 [5 in the Hebrew]; JOB 38:3) suffices. These, with V’HI-NEI (see v. 29), point to the correct translation, “as people suppose [angelic apparitions to appear]” – so KI-D’MOO-THEI-NOO is a shared attribute like its TZEH-LEM companion. These instances of D’MOOTH, a cognitive estimation, further modified by the comparative “Kaph”, intimate a common mental aptitude. As the physical contours of the A-DAM prototype were provided by his ancestors, so their mental acuities were transferred, with inherent flexibility for him to develop that faculty indispensable to human progress and success – imagination.
V'YIR-DOO (AND THEY WILL EXPLOIT): Rendering this “They shall rule/have dominion over” is technically defective but a simple objection refutes it - man has yet to “rule over the fish of the sea and birds of the air”. The radical “Reish-Daled” is not mastery or reign but taking tribute, on a national scale (cf. DEUTERONOMY 20:20; ISAIAH 45:1; PSALMS 144:2) or a personal one (cf. LEVITICUS 25:43; EZEKIEL 34:4; JEREMIAH 5:31). The A-DAM was to exploit - the words not addressed to him but inform the directive NA-A-SEH, for he was to develope skills to survive – and thrive – all over the planet.
27. VA-YIBH-RA...: This verse has three independent sentences (they are not connected by a “Vav” ["and"]).
VA-YIBH-RA E-LO-HIM ETH HA-A-DAM B’TZAL-MOH (AND E-LO-HIM CREATED THE A-DAM IN HIS [A-DAM’S] FORM): VA-YIBH-RA (AND [He] CREATED) should precede NA-A-SEH (WE WILL MAKE – a finishing or completion [v. 26]). The order is reversed because this TZEH-LEM indirectly motivated a collective “making” through a BOH-REH (CREATE – see 1:1, BA-RA) process. Translators assumed the possessive “his” referred to E-LO-HIM and the next passage, B’TZEH-LEM E-LO-HIM BA-RA OH-THOH (IN THE IMAGE OF E-LO-HIM HE CREATED HIM) is an emphatic appositive; that would be B’TZAL-MOH B’TZEH-LEM E-LO-HIM (cf. GENESIS 37:1; LEVITICUS 6:9; ESTHER 9:1). The added BA-RA OH-THOH makes these four words an independent sentence and, in biblical syntax, the possessive noun of the verse’s first sentence relates to the last mentioned noun in that phrase, the TZEH-LEM of the A-DAM. The first sentence of this verse, with the definite article prefix “Heh” and direct object indicator ETH modifying A-DAM, refers to the TZEH-LEM of the hominid community that physically forged the A-DAM.
B'TZEH-LEM E-LO-HIM BA-RA OH-THOH (WITH E-LO-HIM’S PROJECTION HE CREATED HIM): This permutation of the last sentence confused commentators; a changed word order changes meaning. An opening prepositional phrase tags this a second TZEH-LEM (cf. SAMUEL I 9:20; KINGS I 1:26; ISAIAH 7:24). To illustrate: ROO-ACH E-LO-HIM (1:2) is not a prepositional possessive but an adjectival construct [a “supernatural wind”, not “His wind”]; so this TZEH-LEM is not an objective projection but a numinous one. The A-DAM was imbued with the faculty to integrate experience and imagination - consciousness, the only divine trait which could be His TZEH-LEM (“projection”) used to “create” the A-DAM.
ZA-KHAR U-N'QEI-BHA BA-RA OH-THAM (MALE AND FEMALE HE CREATED THEM): The critical schools see this as proof of multiple sources, for it seems to contradict the Eden story (2:21-22) in which Eve was “built” out of Adam, but they ignore the puzzle this presents. The procreative blessing bestowed on marine and avian life (v. 22) makes no mention of a male/female dichotomy, although readers certainly knew these creatures came in two genders, as did land animals. What need to state this pattern would serve for the A-DAM? Traditionalists maintaining this refers to the Eden couple must also confront this question. Their most popular answer, that “His image and likeness” informed both sexes, is not tenable; Adam himself recognized the woman as his clone (2:23). A more egalitarian variant, that these words promote sexual equality, is a modern sensibility. Such an assertion belongs in Chapter 3, following the woman's "trespass". Furthermore, Old Testament women were not that subordinate; starting with Eve, they are as assertive and independent as men - sometimes more so. Certainly women often suffered discrimination but the idea that a Scriptural snippet would alleviate this – or that early readers would even have caught on to it - is fanciful apologetics; had Scripture intended that, it would have read ZA-KHAR U-N’QEI-BHA B’RAH-AHM (cf. GENESIS 5:2, 6:19, 7:3). The plural pronoun after two singular class nouns indicates reversion to the group with which the section began, the A-DAM – the assemblage of males and females.
28. VA-Y'BHA-REKH (AND HE BLESSED): Unlike verse 22, this blessing was confined to one type. The reasons proposed for this are unnecessary; it is an example of Scripture’s remarkably sophisticated insight. Hierarchies in any biosphere consist of increasingly smaller groups ascending the pyramid, for each animal needs a greater population of supporting organisms on the level below it. A blessing granting numerical parity to all creatures is a recipe for ecological disaster. Only man, who would need to find sustenance and succor all over the globe, received it.
V’KHI-BH’SHOO-HAH (AND CONQUER IT): “Subdue” is TAKH-NEE-YA (LOWER/HUMBLE – cf. JUDGES 4:23; ISAIAH 25:5; CHRONICLES II 28:19) or TAKH-REE-YA (BOW/CROUCH – cf. JUDGES 11:35; PSALMS 18:39 [40 in the Hebrew]; JOB 31:10); like KEE-BOOSH, these impact human adversaries, not environmental challenges, perhaps why others chose “master” but that is TISH-LOHT (MASTER/CONTROL – cf. GENESIS 42:6; NEHEMIAH 5:15; ESTHER 9:1) or TIM-SHOHL (RULE/MANAGE - cf. GENESIS 4:7, 37:8; PROVERBS 12:24) – not to mention that taming nature is stipulated in the second half of the verse. If this relates to extending man’s habitat into hostile territories, the order of the verbs should be reversed; subjugation precedes occupation and would be articulated with P’QOHD (ORDER/DIRECT – cf. GENESIS 39:4; NUMBERS 27:16; JEREMIAH 1:10), T’NA-HEIG (DRIVE/CONDUCT - cf. GENESIS 31:26; EXODUS 3:1; ISAIAH 11:6) or T’NA-HEIL (MANAGE/GUIDE – cf. GENESIS 33:14; EXODUS 15:13; ISAIAH 49:10). KI-BOOSH (BEAT/FLATTEN - root “Kaph-Beth-Shin”) has a transcending scope. Transgressions Y-H-W-H will YIKH-BOHSH (MICAH 7:19 - the one time it is used in connection with sin) are not subdued but annulled, as if never committed. Sling-stones (ZECHARIAH 9:15) are “conquered” in that, once deviated from their paths, cease to be weapons and revert to being rocks. More amusing (ESTHER 7:8) was the king, on returning to the feast to find Haman prostrate before Esther, exclaiming that he tried LIKH-BOHSH the queen, translated “assault/violate/force/ravage” and adding a sexual tinge. This requires TOH-PHEIS (ENTWINE/FORCE – DEUTERONOMY 22:28) or T’A-NEH (DISTRESS – cf. GENESIS 34:2; SAMUEL II 13:12). Ahasuerus used “vanquish” for he recognized that Haman was trying to convince Esther to retract her accusation. More telling is Jeremiah's outrage at the re-enslavement of the recently liberated (JEREMIAH 34:11, 16), their personas as free men and women again extinguished. The same holds when KI-BOOSH is linked to invasion (cf. NUMBERS 32:22, CHRONICLES I 22:18),the survivors’ national identity obliterated. When Cyrus permitted subject peoples to retain expressions of nationality, he was said (ISAIAH 45:1) to L-RAHD… GO-YIM (TO SUBDUE… NATIONS). The common theme in these is the eradication of a prior condition, wresting areas from others vying for it. The only tenable translation of V’KHIBH-SHOO-HAH is “and conquer it” (cf. NUMBERS 32:29; JOSHUA 18:1; NEHEMIAH 5:5), areas A-DAM would settle, driving out or subsuming other hominids there and eliminating them as separate, identifiable societies. This may distress those accustomed to think of A-DAM as the first human. That special A-DAM we meet in the next chapter - and after a passage of time which may have lasted tens of thousands of years. Nothing in the texts requires the A-DAM of the next chapter to be the first human. The existence of pre-historic populations was likely common knowledge among Scripture’s early readers. Later generations, dissociated from this awareness, projected their creation models into the text, filling a void that came of ignorance, as they lacked modern tools and techniques of archaeology and history. This does not mean they forgot; some of it remained in collective memories which were not reduced to writing or were submerged in lore. A later, imagined history cannot supersede one which is not only supported by recent discoveries but by the Scriptural text as well.
U-R'DOO... (AND EXPLOIT…): This looks like an abridged verse 26 but there are differences. The fish and birds are there but “crawlers” are now “every being that crawls”. “Tread” is here better for ROH-MESS, referring to all wildlife man will encounter, including large herbivores and carnivores. The directive empowered the A-DAM with the ability to exploit these wherever he came across them (unlike other creatures who thrive only in their sectors), enabling his sprawl over the earth. The grazers and plant life transferred to verses 29 and 30 get special attention.
כט וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים הִנֵּה נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כָּל עֵשֶׂב
EI-SEBH KOL ETH LA-KHEM NA-THAH-TEE HI-NEI E-LO-HIM VA-YOH-MER
29. GRASS ALL * YOU TO GIVEN HAVE I VERILY E-LO-HIM SAID AND
זֹרֵעַ זֶרַע אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי כָל הָאָרֶץ
HA-A-RETZ KOL P’NEI AL A-SHER ZEH-RA ZOH-REI-YA
EARTH THE ALL (OF) FACES ON WHICH SEED FORMING
וְאֶת כָּל הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ פְרִי עֵץ
ETZ P’REE BOH A-SHER HA-ETZ KOL V’ETH
TREE OF FRUIT IT IN WHICH TREE EVERY * AND
זֹרֵעַ זָרַע לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה
L’OKH-LAH YI-H’YEH LA-KHEM ZO-RA ZOH-REI-YA
SOURCE FOOD BECOME SHALL YOU FOR SEED CONTAINING
ל וּלְכָל ַיַּת הָאָרֶץ וּלְכָל עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם
HA-SHA-MA-YIM OHPH U-L’KHOL HA-A-RETZ CHA-YATH U-L’KHOL
30. HEAVENS THE OF BIRDS ALL FOR AND EARTH THE OF ANIMALS ALL FOR AND
וּלְכֹל רוֹמֵשׂ עַל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה
CHA-YAH NEH-PHESH BOH A-SHER HA-A-RETZ AL ROH-MEISS U-L’KHOL
VITAL LIFE IT IN WHICH EARTH THE ON TREAD THAT ALL FOR AND
אֶת כָּל יֶרֶק עֵשֶׂב לְאָכְלָה וַיְהִי כֵן
KHEIN VA-Y’HEE L’OKH-LAH EI-SEBH YEH-REQ KOL ETH
IS IT AS BECAME IT AND SOURCE FOOD FOR GRASS STALKS DRIED ALL *
לא וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים אֶת כָּל אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה וְהִנֵּה טוֹב ְאֹד
M’OHD TOHBH V’HI-NEI A-SAH A-SHER KOL ETH E-LO-HIM VA-YAHR
31. VERY GOOD LO AND MADE HE THAT ALL * E-LO-HIM SAW AND
וַיְהִי עֶרֶב וַיְהִי בֹקֶר יוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי
HA-SHEE-SHEE YOHM BHOH-QER VA-Y’HEE E-REBH VA-Y’HEE
SIXTH THE DAY EMERGENCE BECAME IT AND MIXTURE BECAME IT AND
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
Man was allotted seeds and fruit containing seeds, from among the grasses, grains and trees, to store, consume, transport and plant in regions where he migrated. This incipient agriculture was part of E-LO-HIM’s agenda, not something that evolved, and remained a permanent subsistence tool for man, which also let him take animals to new habitats by providing fodder and husks for temporary forage. Man’s growing proficiency in animal husbandry and agricultural skills enabled him to settle diverse environments. Near the end of the sixth creation “day”, E-LO-HIM appraised those features of our world which resulted from His direct involvement to gauge how they integrated with those that naturally emerged. Seeing harmony, He deemed it “very good”, for everything necessary to perpetuate man's existence and give him the resources to carry out His plan was in place.
EXPOSITION
29. VA-YOH-MER E-LO-HIM HI-NEI NA-THA-TEE... (AND E-LO-HIM SAID VERILY I HAVE GIVEN…): If this recounts the final creation phase, it needs only VA-YEE-TEIN E-LO-HIM ETH KOL EI-SEBH HA-A-RETZ V'KHOL ETZ PREE L'A-DAM L'OKH-LAH (AND E-LO-HIM GAVE ALL GRASSES OF THE EARTH AND ALL FRUIT BEARING TREES TO A-DAM FOR FOOD - cf. v. 17) - eleven words, not twenty-seven! VA-YOH-MER E-LO-HIM as utterance (see v. 3) makes NA-THA-TEE (I HAVE GIVEN) problematic; no directive was fulfilled - it was a conveyance, not a development - and the passage is out of place, for nothing as yet addressed any creature's needs. If we are told the arrangements made for A-DAM, why not for other creatures as their appearances were recorded? VA-YOH-MER (AND HE SAID) as communication explains the past tense NA-THA-TEE and plural LA-KHEM (TO YOU) but this relates to post-creation, man and animals told what was provided for them - and belongs in the next chapter! Scripture also obscures how the animals were informed. Verses 29 and 30 are addressed to man, nothing about passing it on. Finally, and most definitively, verse 30 ends VA-Y'HEE KHEIN (AND IT BECAME AS IT IS) - the passage presaged a development, not just a provisioning. HI-NEI, an elastic exclamatory usually rendered “here/behold”, can also stress the reality, importance or verity of what was said in the face of doubt or skepticism (cf. GENESIS 20:16; EXODUS 4:14; JUDGES 7:13). When coupled with NA-THA-TEE, a wrong is redressed (cf. GENESIS 20:26; EZEKIEL 3:8; ESTHER 8:7), a promise or expectation fulfilled (cf. JUDGES 1:2; KINGS I 3:12; EZEKIEL 4:8) - or persons enabled (cf. EXODUS 31:6; NUMBERS 18:21; JEREMIAH 1:9), here the A-DAM going forth to “populate” the earth.
KOL EI-SEBH ZOH-REI-AH ZEH-RA (ALL GRASS FORMING SEED): Man could not risk finding insufficient means in realms he settled. He had to be assured he could bring what he needed until his skills and knowledge in the new matched that in the old. For this, he was given portable granaries. EI-SEBH is any grass or grain (cf. EXODUS 10:12; PSALMS 105:35; JOB 5:25). ZOH-REI-AH ZEH-RA (FORMING SEED) seems unnecessary; man knew how these propagated. The doubled “Zayin-Resh-Ayin” root limits it to seeds which separate from the plant and can be stored until consumed or planted in different soils and climes.
A-SHER AL P’NEI KOL HA-A-RETZ (WHICH IS ON ALL THE EARTH): This does not mean all vegetation. All grains of the type described, wherever they grew, were put at his disposal.
KOL HA-ETZ A-SHER BOH P’REE ETZ ZOH-REI ZO-RA (EVERY TREE WHICH HAS SEED-BEARING FRUIT): This is not all fruits [the “Heh” definite article prefix {HA-ETZ} is restrictive] but those containing seeds and meat. These could be stored and their seeds planted. {Today’s fruits are the result of millennia of breeding; pristine fruits looked very different, containing nowhere near the bulk of their modern analogues.}
LA-KHEM YI-H’YEH (IT SHALL BE FOR YOU): The verse’s second LA-KHEM (TO YOU) adds nothing. It actually references another group [evidenced by the inversion of the words LA-KHEM YI-H’YEH (TO YOU IT SHALL BE) and the “Ethnachta” trope on ZEH-RA, setting apart these last three words]. This LA-KHEM is “to you” - the readers, who are told that this mechanism is still operative - a precious tool.
L’OKH-LAH (FOR [A] FOOD SOURCE): “For food” is L’OH-KHEL (cf. GENESIS Ch. 42-44). The root “Aleph-Kaph-Lamed” in feminine noun form OKH-LAH is something to be turned into food or a commissary (cf. GENESIS 6:21, when Noah stocked the ark). Purists might argue that OKH-LAH is the stressed form of OH-KHEL resulting from a “Sohph-Pasuq” or “Ethnachta” (strong pausal punctuations); these have the opposite effect, turning OKH-LAH into the pre-stressed OH-KHEL. Here, OKH-LAH is a “food repository” containing the items mentioned in the verse (cf. EXODUS 16:15; LEVITICUS 25:6; EZEKIEL 34:8). E-LO-HIM directed A-DAM’s acquaintance with rudimentary agriculture - it did not evolve.
30. U-L’KHOL CHA-YATH… (AND FOR ALL ANIMALS,,, ): This continuation of verse 29 still speaks to A-DAM. When NOH-THEIN (TO GIVE) has more than one indirect object, it is repeated for each to avoid ambiguity (cf. GENESIS 24:53; DEUTERONOMY 3:12-13, 15-16, 11:13-14); its omission [it should precede ETH] means everything “for” the animals was actually given to man! There is no indication other creatures received, or needed, instruction on obtaining food; why was A-DAM told this?
A-SHER BOH NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH (WHICH HAS VITAL LIFE): This follows the enumeration of three animal categories but is not a fourth (that would be U-L’KHOL NE-PHESH CHA-YAH [AND TO ALL VITAL LIVING THINGS - cf. LEVITICUS 11:46]). “The breath of life/life in them” is redundant. NEH-PHESH CHA-YAH speaks to the vitality of the animals (see 1:20-21) culled from those that exhibited the elan vital to survive arduous treks and establish viable populations.
YEH-REQ EI-SEBH (DRIED GRASS STALKS): Most render this “green herbs/plants”. YA-ROQ (root “Yud-Reish-Qoph”) is “withered/dried out/colorless” (VEE-RAQ DEH-SHEH [ISAIAH 37:27] is “withered remains of herbage”, not “green herbage”, a translation error repeated in JOB 39:8; faces turned L’YEI-RA-QON [TO GREEN – JEREMIAH 30:6] actually paled). As a noun, it does not necessarily connote the color green, a mistake arising from its frequent association with vegetation (cf. DEUITERONOMY 1;10; KINGS I 21:2; PROVERBS 15:17). EI-SEBH is “grass” and most are not green, especially if grains are included, as Scripture does. The most common greenery is leaves, the provender of many herbivores and insects. These are not EI-SEBH, which is exclusive to growth straight up from the ground. As the ancients knew more animals consume leaves than herbage, the text is strange. Balaq likened the Israelites to “an ox licking up field YEH-REQ” (NUMBERS 22:4), perturbed by their swiftly overpowering his neighbors. Grazing animals are generally described as “eating grass” (cf. DEUTERONOMY 11:15; PSALMS 106:20; DANIEL 4:30). If they are exceptionally destructive, uprooting vegetation, the verb is BEE-EIR (CONSUMED - cf. EXODUS 22:4; KINGS I 14:10; ISAIAH 3:14). So Balaq’s ox “licking up” loose tufts was not a terrifying metaphor. As applied to vegetation, its symbolism is adduced from U-KH’YEH-REQ DEH-SHEH YI-BOH-LOON (AND LIKE YEH-REQ HERBAGE THEY WILL WITHER – PSALMS 37:2) or YEH-REQ LOH YI-H’YEH ([EVEN] YEH-REQ WILL NOT BE – i. e. no trace shall remain – ISAIAH 15:6). Now Balaq makes sense; Israel dispatched the opposition as easily as an ox licks up emaciated plant residue. This explains his desperation but makes our verse difficult, for it consigns His creatures, other than man, to live on shriveled remnants, a prospect hardly consistent with the narrative's spirit.
The conventional view is that primeval man was vegetarian, bolstered by GENESIS 9:1-3, where Noah and his family ostensibly got permission to eat flesh. Prophetic visions of a world without predator and prey (e. g. ISAIAH 11:6) and their occasional disparagement of blood sacrifice (e. g. ISAIAH 1:11; HOSEA 5:6; MALACHI 1:7) contributed to the vegetarian ideal but then it should have a more pronounced presence in prediluvian Genesis. If the Eden story records man's succumbing to temptation, as commonly {and erroneously} perceived, why contrive a prohibition when one was in place? The story would have greater impact if man violated a recognized propriety. And should one argue that is why it was enjoined - man could justify the injunction against eating flesh but saw no reason not to eat from the tree, no punishment was prescribed for the former, whereas one eating from the tree would forfeit his life! Similarly, Abel's offering (GENESIS 4:4) only had meaning if congruous to Cain’s, so animals must have served as food; if they were only kept for their products, those should have been presented, not the “fattest sheep”. As for the wickedness that brought the Deluge (GENESIS 6:11), if man scorned all ethical imperatives, he would think nothing of consuming other creatures. Yet, Scripture does not mention it, though this is the only one our text intimates.
MITZ-VOHTH (COMMANDMENTS) are explicit, those pertaining to diet unequivocal, the first one conveyed to A-DAM and restated almost verbatim by his wife (GENESIS 3:2-3). Those imputing food restrictions must posit that NOH-THEIN (GIVE) carried the same connotations, that when things were “given” to man, that granted permission to consume. NOH-THEIN implies conveyance, physical or conceptual (see v.17), not permission but custody, control or access (cf. GENESIS 10:3; NUMBERS 32:40; DEUTERONOMY 3:12 and note its use in LEVITICUS 19:14). [Modern Hebrew has the idiom TEIN LEE {“Allow Me”} but it is not biblical.] At first glance, NUMBERS 21:23 looks like “giving” can be “permitting”; when Sihon denied Israel access to his territory, the text states V’LOH NA-THAN SEE-CHOHN ETH YIS-RA-EL A-BHOR (AND SIHON DID NOT GIVE ISRAEL PASSAGE). A closer look reveals otherwise. ETH YIS-RA-EL makes Israel the direct object of the transitive verb “gave”, while A-BHOHR is gerundial instead of infinitive. Sihon denied Israel through passage – he rejected their “visa” application. It was not a prohibited action but a refusal to grant them visitor status. The same applies to NUMBERS 20:21, while similar constructs (cf. GENESIS 20:6, 31:7; EXODUS 3:19) refer to physical restraints, not prohibitions, and DEUTERONOMY 18:14 divination faculties withheld from Israel.
The Natufians, Canaan’s pre-historic residents, hunted. Their descendants domesticated animals for food by the time Abraham got there; when he made his shopping trip to Egypt (GENESIS 12:10), the great pyramids were over 500 years old, prediluvian by a couple of centuries. Records show plenty of beef and lamb was lavished on their building crews. Given their importance in Egypt’s belief system, their builders would never contaminate them by feeding the laborers forbidden foods. Pristine man exploited animals for food – and was entitled to (v. 26)! Verse 30, like 29, is part of the migration blue-print. Verse 29 outlined means for transferring agriculture to new regions, verse 30 how this applied to animals brought along. That is why REH-MESS HA-A-DA-MAH (LAND CRAWLER – v. 25) here became ROH-MEISS AL HA-A-RETZ ([ONE] WHO TREADS UPON THE [ENTIRE] EARTH).
L’OKH-LAH (FOR [A] FOOD SOURCE): As man had resources enabling him to migrate, his animals, domesticates or “fellow-travelers”, would be sustained by husks and remnants of field produce. And as seeds and fruits stood humans in good stead until they could establish themselves in new territories, these dried stalks and forage material would do likewise for their animals.
VA-Y’HEE KHEIN [see v. 7]: The development of agriculture and animal husbandry was indispensable to man's progress. It was not an adaptationman had His assistance to become farmer and herder.
31. VA-YAHR… KOL A-SHER A-SAH (AND SAW… ALL THAT HE MADE): He did not inspect everything; that would be KOL A-SHER BA-RA (ALL HE CREATED – cf. 1:1; DEUTERONOMY 4:32; PSALMS 102:18 [19 in the Hebrew]) or KOL A-SHER BA-SHA-MA-YIM U-BHA-A-RETZ (ALL WHICH [IS] IN HEAVEN AND EARTH – cf. DEUTERONOMY 3:24; PSALMS 135:6; CHRONICLES I 29:11). He scrutinized what A-SAH (HE MADE), the atmosphere, sun and moon, creatures of “day 6” and the A-DAM communities.
V’HI-NEI TOHBH M’OHD (AND LO [IT WAS] VERY GOOD): HI-NEI (see v. 29) draws attention - this “goodness” warranted mention. It was not the things themselves; the evaluation was only of entities other than those He “made” [see Decompressed Translation, v. 6-8]. The HI-NEI interjection was motivated, not by TOHBH, but by the adverb M’OHD (VERY), a superlative. What drew His “approbation” was the harmonious integration of that part of creation He had forged with the sector that emerged naturally.
YOHM HA-SHEE-SHEE (THE SIXTH DAY): The indicative “Heh” (“the”) on SHEE-SHEE (the only “day” so prefixed, which inspired countless homilies) serves a simple, yet essential, purpose – it marks that day as the last, not of a sequence, but one completing and closing all layers. The activities in the “days” extended over long, overlapping periods. The six creation days as prelude to the seventh is a conceptual template commemorated in a chronological mode but not originating in one. This is seen in EXODUS 31:17, which states SHEI-SHEHTH YA-MIM A-SAH…, usually translated “in six days He made…”; that would be BH’SHEE-SHAH YA-MIM. SHEI-SHEHTH is in construct form and lacks a preposition, so the verse translates “For He made the heavens and the earth (as) a sextet of days”. More correct grammatically is KEE A-SAH… SHEI-SHEHTH YA-MIM but that would have obscured the significance of that set as the basis for the Sabbath.
CHAPTER 2
א וַיְכֻלּוּ הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ וְכָל צְבָאָם
TZ’BHA-AHM V’KHOL V’HA-A-RETZ HA-SHA-MA-YIM VA-Y’KHOO-LOO
1. ARMY THEIR ALL AND EARTH THE AND HEAVENS THE READY WERE AND
ב וַיְכַל אֱלֹהִים בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה
A-SAH A-SHER M’LAKH-TOH HA-SH’BHEE-EE BA-YOHM E-LO-HIM VA-Y’KHAL
2. MADE HE WHICH PLAN HIS SEVENTH THE DAY ON E-LO-HIM FINISHED AND
וַיִּשְׁבֹּת בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי מִכָּל מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה
A-SAH A-SHER M’LAKH-TOH MI-KOL HA-SH’BHEE-EE BA-YOHM VA-YISH-BOHTH
MADE HE WHICH PLAN HIS ENTIRE FROM SEVENTH THE DAY ON CEASED HE AND
ג וַיְבָרֶךְ אֱלֹהִים אֶת יוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי וַיְקַדֵּשׁ אֹתוֹ
OH-THOH VA-Y’QA-DEISH HA-SH’BHEE-EE YOHM ETH E-LO-HIM VA-Y’BHA-REKH
3. IT SANCTIFIED AND SEVENTH THE DAY * E-LO-HIM BLESSED AND
כִּי בוֹ שָׁבַת מִכָּל מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים לַעֲשׂוֹת
LA-A-SOHTH E-LO-HIM BA-RA A-SHER M’LAKH-TOH MI-KOL SHA-BHATH BHOH KEE
DO TO E-LO-HIM CREATED WHICH WORKINGS HIS ALL FROM CEASED HE IT IN FOR
DECOMPRESSED TRANSLATION
The biosphere’s components were ready for deployment. On the seventh day, E-LO-HIM completed His abstract design but ceased exercising direct control over physical elements and forces. He blessed the seventh day, conferring perpetual time on that epoch and sanctifying it over the other eras, setting it aside for man's control and his pursuit of fulfillment of the objective inherent in the divine plan.
EXPOSITION
1. VA-Y'KHOO-LOO (AND WERE READY): “Completion” requires HISH-LIM (COMPLETED, root “Shin-Lamed-Mem” - cf. GENESIS 15:16; KINGS I 7:51; AMOS 1:6) or GA-MAHR (FINISH - cf. PSALMS 12:1 [2 in the Hebrew], 77:8 [9 in the Hebrew], 138:8), while the root "Taph-Mem-Mem" bespeaks an entire collection (cf. LEVITICUS 23:15; DEUTERONOMY 31:24; JOSHUA 4:10). VA-Y'KHOO-LOO seems rooted in KA-LA ("Kaph-Lamed-Aleph" – “restrain/withhold”), limited to incarceration, situations of ruin or winding down an activity [cf. GENESIS 21:15; EXODUS 36:6; KINGS II 25:27]), or KA-LAH ("Kaph-Lamed-Heh" - “conclude”), also alluding to extinction, destruction, the end of a time period (cf. GENESIS 41:53; JEREMIAH 8:20), culmination of a project or task (cf. EXODUS 39:32; SAMUEL I 18:1; EZRA 1:1) or resource exhaustion [cf. GENESIS 21:15; JOB 7:9; LAMENTATIONS 3:32]). Neither entails closure of anything that remains intact after the processes or actions except VA-Y’KHOO-LOO here and KA-LAH HA-BA-YITH (KINGS I 6:38), usually translated “the house was finished” [Solomon's Temple], a problematic reading, for the verb is active, not passive. Some may object that it must be passive because the active form is typically the "Pee-ehl", as in KA-A-SHER KEE-LAH (WHEN HE FINISHED - GENESIS 18:33). This fails to distinguish between the intense form denoting an abrupt termination of activity and the regular “qal” form in KINGS 1, which connotes gradual cessation. The verb is also the last in a series that refer to Solomon (the unstated subject, common in biblical style). If it were passive, the prefixes in the next phrase would be "Beth", not "Lamed". It is “… he completed the preparations (for the purposes) intended for the House”; the verb is active – which makes VA-Y’KHOO-LOO the only passive one in Scripture, an untenable conclusion. It is actually based on KOL (ALL/EVERY - radical root “Koph-Lamed”), which is always contextually qualified (cf. GENESIS 46:1; EXODUS 12:29). When Abraham was blessed with KOL (GENESIS 24:1), it was everything he desired; when Jacob told Esau that he had KOL (GENESIS 33:11), it was all he needed. Within the multitude in the heavens and earth, E-LO-HIM found all the things necessary, and standing ready, for what was to follow - and explains why this declaration opens the PAR-SHA (obviating a curiosity overlooked by the savants, for it should logically begin verse 1:31).
TZ-BHA-AM (THEIR ARMY): “Their hosts/array” is faulty. “Array” is MA-A-RA-KHA, an ordered assemblage, typically for a planned use or choosing from among its members (cf. EXODUS 39:37; SAMUEL I 17:2; CHRONICLES I 12:39). It is not suitable for a universal set, neither “array” nor TZ'BHA-AM. “Hosts” has greater flexibility but is still inaccurate – and would be TZIBH-OH-THAM (cf. EXODUS 6:26, 12:51; NUMBERS 1:3, 2:24). TZ'BHA-AM is the plural possessive of TZA-BHA (ARMY – cf. NUMBERS 31:21; DEUTERONOMY 24:5; ISAIAH 34:2), itself singular but referring to a group - a collection with two “owners”, heaven and earth (see Decompressed Translation).
2. VA-Y'KHAL E-LO-HIM BA-YOHM HA-SH'BHEE-EE M'LAKH-TOH A-SHER A-SAH (AND IN THE SEVENTH DAY E-LO-HIM FINISHED THE PLAN HE MADE): M'LAKH-TOH as “His work” or the less accurate “the work He had been doing” was presumed completed by the onset of the seventh day. That required only U-BHA-YOHM HA-SH'BHEE-EE KEE-LAH E-LO-HIM M'LAKH-TOH VA-YISH-BOHTH ME-MEH-NAH for the entire verse (cf. GENESIS 18:33; LEVITICUS 16:20; RUTH 3:18 – JOSHUA 5:12; HOSEA 7:4; PROVERBS 22:10). The text is more complex and subtle. VA-Y'KHAL is not based on the same root as VA-Y'KHOO-LOO (v. 1); it is third person active and references a specific completed act (cf. EXODUS 40:33; DEUTERONOMY 32:45; KINGS I 7:1). But if all was finished by the end of the sixth day (1:31, 2:1), what work was necessary? Many tortuous explanations have been offered [a Greek translation among the Qumran scrolls even changed the text to “sixth”!] but all skirt Scripture’s explicit assignment of this “work” - and its completion - to the seventh day.
Also overlooked is that the “work” was A-SHER A-SAH (WHICH HE MADE), narrowing the singular noun to one of four possibilities: the expanse (v. 7), the luminaries (v. 16), the animals (v. 25) or A-DAM (v. 26) [M'LAKH-TOH is not a class noun for creation; that makes A-SHER A-SAH redundant] but the missing ETH direct object indicator rules these out (see v. 25 - VA-YA-AHSS E-LO-HIM). To define M'LAKH-TOH, used here for the first time in the creation saga, we cite another of its occurrences as a third person singular possessive with OH-SEH (MAKE), when Joseph came home LA-A-SOHTH M'LAKH-TOH (TO DO HIS WORK - GENESIS 39:11; {EXODUS 36:4 and KINGS I 7:14 are similar but the Joseph episode illustrates this best}). The overseer of his master’s estate was not about to do any labor nor supervise others - the plot hinged on his being alone, vulnerable to the seductive overtures of his mistress. His M'LA-KHA was planning the household schedule. {The Aramaic translator Onkelos ingeniously renders this “to review his accounts” but there are better ways to say that [cf. ECCLESIATES 7:27; CHRONICLES I 27:24; CHRONICLES II 26:11].} M'LAKH-TOH was not divine manipulation of matter and forces but of an abstract paradigm – a plan for creation, not one of creation - A-SHER A-SAH (WHICH HE MADE), a phrase in the completed past referring to something formulated earlier but not perfected until the seventh day, when requisite entities became “very good”.
The first six layers were labeled “days” at the ends of their PAR-SHAs. The “Seventh Day” is proclaimed within its PAR-SHA, the coda “And it was evening... the seventh day” absent. This “day” was ushered in at once, not defined by what transpired in it.
VA-YISH-BOHTH BA-YOHM HA-SH'BHEE-EE MEE-KOL M'LAKH-TOH A-SHER A-SAH (AND IN THE SEVENTH DAY HE CEASED FROM THE ENTIRE PLAN HE MADE): This could be simply VA-YISH-BOHTH MEE-MEH-NAH (AND HE ABSTAINED FROM IT – cf. JEREMIAH 36:29; ECCLESIATES 7:26; PROVERBS 22:6). The repetitiveness points to something different from the first half of the verse. First He put the finishing touches on an intellectual construct; then He abruptly halted His engagement with the physical realm. VA-YISH-BOHTH (HE CEASED) MEE-KOL M'LAKH-TOH (FROM HIS ENTIRE PLAN), all the actions A-SHER A-SAH, the repeated phrase referring to those He had been doing, which He now stopped. These interruptions became a permanent cessation, in the Seventh Day, with repercussions spelled out in the next, and final, verse of the creation epic.
3. VA-Y'BHA-REKH E-LO-HIM ETH YOHM HA-SH'BHEE-EE (AND E-LO-HIM BLESSED THE SEVENTH DAY): How this blessing was manifested is the subject of many homilies, all misdirected because they attribute it to the Sabbath. YOHM HA-SH'BHEE-EE is “the seventh day” in a sequence, not every seventh day in a repeating cycle (cf. LEVITICUS 23:39; NUMBERS 29:32; ESTHER 1:10). The weekly Sabbath is YOHM HA-SHA-BAHTH (cf. EXODUS 20:8; NUMBERS 9:28, PSALMS 92:1 – EXODUS 16:29 explains the relation, as does the “Seventh Day” of EXODUS 20:10, on which the Sabbath is based). YOHM HA-SH'BHEE-EE here is the one day succeeding a sextet. The blessing was conferred on this period, not its content, for the completion of His plan, an abstract construct which entailed no measurable time span or physical changes, followed by His detachment from all things material, a scenario affording scant arena for a blessing. That Scripture tells us nothing about it means its import was apparent to early readers. Any cessation of activities can be a Sabbath (cf. LEVITICUS 23:24, 25:4 - the last a suspension of agricultural work). The weekly Sabbath is YOHM HA-SHA-BATH (THE SABBATH DAY - cf. NUMBERS 28:9; EZEKIEL 10:32; NEHEMIAH 10:32); others are just “Sabbath”. The Day of Atonement, whose date, when fixed by the court, could be any day in the week, is SHA-BA-T'KHEM (YOUR [pl.]SABBATH – LEVITICUS 23:32). The first day of Passover, which has most of the weekly Sabbath restrictions, is not YOHM HA-SHA-BATH but simply HA-SHA-BATH (THE SABBATH - LEVITICUS 23:11, 15, 16), on whichever day it falls, as this passage was correctly read by the Talmudic Sages in their dispute with sectarians. In NEHEMIAH 13:19, the first two Sabbath references are to both the weekly Sabbath and major festivals; the third “Day of the Sabbath” is the weekly Sabbath, the only one on which the “carrying” Nehemiah halted was forbidden.
VA-YI-QA-DESH OH-THOH (AND SANCTIFIED IT): QA-DOSH (HOLY) does not have the connotation of the English “sanctified”, for “holiness” is not an intrinsic attribute or condition of a person or object. QA-DOSH is “set apart/designated” (cf. EXODUS 13:2; LEVITICUS 8:10; JOEL 1:14). Since the seventh day was already, in style and content, different, it is hard to see what more holiness it needed.
KEE BHOH SHA-BHATH MI-KOL M'LAKH-TOH (FOR IN IT HE CEASED FROM ALL HIS WORKINGS): This phrase and the next are not a summarizing coda; that is forestalled by the introductory KEE (BECAUSE) which alters the complexion of this account. The blessing was necessitated by His deliberate disengagement from all things corporeal, a condition that was to become permanent and, unlike when done by humans, as consequential as any of His creation modes - with one difference: it was to remain in effect permanently. This aspect of the Seventh Day defines it as the emergences of the first six defined them - but it never ended! His Seventh Day is perpetual, as His universe is constantly expanding. This was its blessing, the potential to prolong time without abatement or constraint.
A-SHER BA-RA E-LO-HIM LA-A-SOHTH (WHICH E-LO-HIM CREATED TO DO): Creation was for “making”, not His but those to whom He would entrust it. The Seventh Day was "sanctified" by being allocated to A-DAM and blessed to extend as long as necessary for man to achieve His mandate. There is no Sabbath in this PAR-SHA. SHA-BHATH (HE CEASED) is not a nominal designation, although the ancients were aware of the connection, not explicit until EXODUS 20:11, and recognized its centrality in their lives, something later readers, especially non-Jews, could not appreciate, even those who preserved residual Sabbath experiences (see 1:31 – YOHM HA-SHEE-SHEE). VA-YA-NACH BA-YOHM HA-SH'BHEE-EE (EXODUS 20:11) is taken to allude to his “resting” on the seventh day. The radical root of VA-YA-NACH, "Nun-Cheth", means “rest” as in Old English, not “relaxation/recuperation”. YA-NACH, “to set down/leave off” (cf. GENESIS 2:15, 42:33; EXODUS 17:11; LEVITICUS 7:15), is transitive, not the reflexive “rested”. This passage is actually “He relinquished (control over the temporal) on the Seventh Day”, then reads AL KEIN BEI-RAKH Y-H-W-H ETH YOHM HA-SHA-BATH VA-Y'QA-D'SHEI-HOO (THEREFORE Y-H-W-H BLESSED THE SABBATH DAY AND SANCTIFIED IT). AL KEIN indicates that the preceding statement is the reason for what is about to be stated. But if His cessation of activity is what confers the Sabbath designation on this day, it must have been temporary; yet we see no resumption of His activity. And if the Sabbath was indeed a day without such activity, surely a blessing would have been more suited for the other six days. The verse comes into focus once we realize that the “seventh day” in the first half of it is not the Sabbath of the second half. It is the one of Creation, that open-ended period in which A-DAM now functions. The Sabbath is man's weekly commemoration of that Divine act, an observance that attests to His role as Creator and Sovereign by imitating Him - as He ceased to “create”, so man surrenders control over certain aspects of the material world. The blessing He accords man's Sabbath is not the original one bestowed on His seventh day but a projection of it - as His is extended, so our Sabbath is amplified; as His seventh day is holy by being set apart for us, so the Sabbath is set apart from the mundane days for intellectual and spiritual growth. Some traditionalists insist that only a literal interpretation of the Seventh Day as the last of a sequence of consecutive, 24-hour days could lend meaning to any Sabbath observance. This argument is baseless. On the contrary, our infusing holiness and ritual into a recurrent time period is far more meaningful. {Many commentators claim the 7-day cycle is a natural one inherent in nature; this is nonsense. Among ancient documents, only Scripture even had the concept of the “week”. That 7-day cycle was later dispersed by civilizations spreading the Christian and Muslim belief systems that came to dominate the world’s secular calendars as a matter of convenience and convention.} This correspondence underscores the formality of Sabbath observance prescribed in the Old Testament. While the Sabbath has taken on additional features, many with psychological and social benefit, the central, indispensable manner of its observance is the deliberate refraining from certain physical manipulations. Only trespasses of these strictures are Sabbath violations and, in traditional Jewish circles, an observant Jew is one who is “Shomer Shabbos” (a “Sabbath keeper”). Nothing else - not dietary laws, prayer services, festival practices or other rituals [or popular "social and moral concerns"] – qualifies the faithful. Periodic abstention from daily routine, elevated to a formal ritual etiquette, was a biblical innovation. No ancient culture anywhere had anything like this. The Egyptians instituted one day of rest out of ten for the hardy souls that built the first pyramids but this was restricted to those prized laborers while they were so engaged. The biblical Sabbath is not, in its essence, a day of rest but a behavioral declaration; deliberate violation incurred extreme penalties. Any creed that substitutes another devotional formula or day of the week for ritualistic recognition completely subverts the Sabbath concept and its underlying motivation.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.