|
The Israel
Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash
Parashat Hashavua Yeshivat Har
Etzion
This
parasha series is dedicated le-zekher nishmat HaRabanit Chana
bat HaRav Yehuda Zelig zt"l.
*********************************************************
This parasha series is
dedicated in honor of Rabbi Menachem Leibtag and Rabbi Elchanan Samet
*********************************************************
PARASHAT BEREISHIT
*********************************************************
Please pray for Israel’s
captive and MIA soldiers:
Zekharia Shelomo ben Miriam Baumel, Tzvi ben Penina Feldman,
Yekutiel Yehuda Nahman ben Sara Katz, Ron ben Batya Arad, Guy ben Rina Hever,
Gilad ben Aviva Shalit, Eldad ben Tova Regev, Ehud ben Malka
Goldwasser
*********************************************************
PARASHAT
BEREISHIT
“Let Us Make
Man”
By Rabbanit
Sharon
Rimon
The Torah
begins with the creation of the world. The pinnacle of this process is the
creation of man:
God said: Let
us make man in our image, as our likeness, and let them (him) have dominion over
the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the animals and over
the land and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth. And God created man in His image; in the
image of God He created him, Male and female He created them. And God blessed them and God said to
them: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and conquer it, And have
dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every
living thing that moves upon the earth.”
And God said: Behold, I have given you every herb… it shall be for you
for food. And to every beast of the
earth… I have given every green herb for food; and it was so. (Bereishit
1:26-30)
Within the
story of Creation as a whole, the creation of man is special. Firstly, the
description of the creation of man is longer than the description of other
creations.
Secondly, the other components of Creation follow a more or less fixed pattern,
whereas the description of man’s creation deviates from this pattern.
Fixed pattern:
“God said,”
followed by a statement in the third person singular: either “Let there be…,” or
“Let the earth bring forth….”
Then comes
whatever it is that is about to be created, and the expression: “And it was
so.”
Finally, there
is a description of some action:
“God saw that it was good;” “And there was evening and there was morning, a …
day.”
When it comes
to the creation of man, there are several differences.
The opening
formula is different from that adopted for all other creations. Whereas until
now the introduction has been in the third person singular – “Let there be,”
“Let the earth bring forth” – we now find an utterance in the first person
plural: “Let us make….”
This is a
significant and prominent change, and many explanations have been offered as to
its meaning. We shall address this question at length below.
Following the
expression “Let us make man,” we find no phrase such as, “And it was so,” as is
generally the case for other creations. This expression does appear, but only
later on, after the blessing to man,
and the description of the food that is meant for man and the food meant for
animals.
Thus, we have a sense that the
phrase, “And it was so” is connected to the matter of the food, rather than to
the creation of man.
Likewise, the
actual creation of man is described in special language: “God created man.” The
word “created” (bara) appears three times in the same verse: “God
created man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male
and female He created them.” For all the other creations, the Torah
avoids the expression “He created,”
adopting instead such formulas as “And it was,” “And the earth brought forth,”
“And God made.”
Finally,
following the creation of man, the Torah does not record that “God saw that it
was good.” We do read that “God saw all that He had made, and behold, it
was very good” (1:31), but we have the sense that this may be referring to all
of Creation. Besides, the evaluation here is that “it was very good,”
rather than just “good.”
Thus, even
from the differences in language and style alone, we sense that the creation of
man is somehow different from the rest of Creation. But once we look at the
content of the verses, it becomes quite clear that man is indeed a
special creation.
Firstly, he is
created “in the image of God.” This quality is unique to mankind, making
him quite unlike any other creature.
This unique quality is emphasized three times: “Let us make man in our
image, as our likeness… And God created man in His image; in the
image of God He created him….”
Man’s
uniqueness is also reflected in the role that is bestowed on him: “And
let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky
and over the animals and over the land and over every creeping thing that creeps
upon the earth.”
God entrusts
man with the task of ruling over the world. This is not a merely technical role.
God created the world and is the true Ruler. He invests man with the authority
to assume “executive control,” as it were. Man, who is created “in the image of
God,” is God’s partner, as it were, in ruling over the world. Man manages the
world as the emissary of the Supreme Ruler.
“Let us make man” – Whom is
God consulting?
Since man is
such a special being, the description of his creation is different from that of
the rest of Creation. We have discussed above several details that testify to
the uniqueness of his creation. Each of these details is significant, and all
are worthy of further study, but in this shiur we shall limit ourselves to a
discussion of the opening declaration: “God said: Let us make man.”
As noted
above, this represents a sharp departure from the language that has
characterized of Creation up to this point, with a transition from the third
person singular to the first person plural. However, the principal difficulty
with this introductory phrase is not the fact that it is different, but rather
the significance of the words themselves. When God speaks in the first person
plural – “Let us make man” – He appears to be speaking to (conferring
with or seeking the consent of) someone else. The verse then continues in the
plural: “In our image, as our likeness.” In whose image is man
created? And whom is God addressing? Is it conceivable that God has some partner
in the creation of man?
The special
language of this verse invites various explanations which invoke the idea of
“association” or “partnership”:
The heretics
asked Rabbi Simlai: How many deities created the world?
He answered
them: Let us together consult [the account of] the six days of Creation.
They said to
him: The Torah does not state [in the singular], “In the beginning, God
(E-lo’ah) created…,” but rather [in the plural], “In the beginning, God
(E-lohim) created….”
He replied: At
the same time, it does not say “created” in the plural (bare’u), but
rather in the singular (bara). Similarly, it does not say, “God said” in
the plural (va-yomeru)… but rather, “God said” in the singular
(va-yomer).
When they
reached [the account of] the sixth day, [the heretics] were happy. They said to
him: See, it says, “Let us make man, in our image!” (Devarim Rabba [Vilna],
parasha 2)
The heretics
sought to prove from the Torah itself that God is not One and alone, but rather
that there are several deities. One of the verses that they used to support
their claim was that referring to the creation of man – which, according to
their argument, testified to God’s partnership with some other deity. Further on
in the same midrash, Rabbi Simlai counters this “proof” also:
The Torah does
not say that “They created man in their image,” but rather, “He created man in
His image!”
Notwithstanding this response,
the question remains why the Torah chose, in these instances, to use the plural.
After all, the text could have been formulated differently, such that the
question would not arise. Indeed, the seventy elders who were appointed to
translate the Torah into Greek (the Septuagint) did introduce slight changes so
as to eliminate such difficult questions. One of the changes was in this
verse:
King Ptolemy
gathered seventy-two elders, and put them into seventy-two rooms, and did not
tell them the purpose of his bringing them there. He went in to each one and
told him: “Write for me the Torah of Moshe, your teacher.” The Holy One, blessed
be He, guided each one of them, and they all produced the same version. They
wrote for him, “God created in the beginning” (based on Bereishit 1:1), “I shall
make man in the image and as the likeness” (based on 1:26)… “Let Me go down and
I shall mix up their language…” (based on 11:7). (Megilla 9a)
The seventy
elders changed the words, but the Torah specifically chose the plural
formulation. Why?
A theoretical
answer may be found in the following midrash:
Rabbi Shemuel
bar Nahman said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: While Moshe was writing the Torah,
he wrote what was created on each day [of Creation]. When he reached this verse,
“God said: Let us make man in our image, as our likeness” – he said: “Lord of
the universe, why are you giving a pretext to the heretics?”
He answered
him: “Write; a person who wishes to be mistaken will be mistaken.” (Bereishit
Rabba [Vilna], parasha 8)
This certainly
does not mean that the Torah is trying to mislead its readers. Rather, the Torah
is expressing a certain idea through this plural formulation, and the idea is
important enough that God will not hold it back just so that people will not
draw mistaken conclusions. One who wishes to reach an incorrect conclusion, will
be able to do so. It will be his own problem of comprehension – or, more
accurately, of his perverse desire to understand the text thus. It will not be
the Torah that has misled him. On the other hand, one who seeks to understand
the true message of the Torah, will indeed understand it properly.
Hence, as
readers who seek to achieve a proper understanding of the true messages of the
Torah, our task is to try to grasp the idea that is represented by the special
(and problematic) language that is used here.
One
explanation that is offered is that “it is the manner of kings and dignitaries
that the individual speaks in the plural; this is the style of stature and
honor.”
According to this view, the plural formulation has no special significance; it
simply reflects the style of speech that characterizes royalty.
However, if
this is the accepted style, why does it appear only in the context of the
creation of man, and not throughout all of Creation – or, indeed, throughout all
of the Torah?
Furthermore,
there appears to be some special significance to the declaration, “Let us make
man,” such that we cannot simply pass it off as the accepted royal style of
speech.
“He consulted the works of the
heavens and the earth”
A different
understanding is proposed by Radak (1:26, s.v. va-yomer) in the name of
his father (Rabbi Yosef Kimchi):
As it were, He
said to the elements: “Let us make [man] together, you and I, for his
body will be composed of the elements, while his spirit will be of a spiritual
nature, like the angels. Thus we find, in the words of our Sages, of blessed
memory: He (God) consulted with the works of the heavens and the earth.”
Ramban (1:26,
s.v. va-yomer) cites this view and agrees with it. He elaborates as
follows:
God said: Let
us make man – the creation of man demands its own divine utterance
(va-yomer), owing to man’s great status, for his nature is not like the
nature of the beasts and animals that God had created with the preceding
utterance.
And the proper
plain meaning of the expression “Let us make” is as follows: it has already been
shown (1:1, s.v. bereishit III) that God created ex-nihilo on the first
day alone, and then from those created elements He formed and made the rest of
creation. When He imbued the water with the power to swarm with living things,
He said, “Let the water swarm…” (1:20). In the case of the animals, He said:
“Let the earth give forth…” (1:24). (Similarly,) concerning man He said: “Let us
make” – i.e., I and the aforementioned earth shall make man: the earth shall
give forth man’s body from its elements, as it did for the animals and beasts,
as it is written: “The Lord God formed man from the dust of the earth” (2:7);
while the blessed God breathed into him his spirit, as it is written: “And He
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.”
And He said,
“In our image, as our likeness,” because man resembled both of them. In the
composition of his body, he resembled the earth, from which he had been taken,
while in his spirit he resembled the upper (spiritual) beings, which have no
body and are immortal.
Thereafter the
verse says, “in the image of God He created him,” to recount how wondrously man
stood out from all other creations.
I found this,
the meaning of the literal level of the text, attributed to Rabbi Yosef Kimchi,
and it is the most plausible of all explanations that have been offered….
For man
resembles both the lower and the upper worlds, in form and in glory…. For in
body he resembles the dust, while his soul resembles the beings of the upper
worlds.
According to
this explanation, the creation of man is narrated using special language because
man is, truly, different from all the rest of Creation. All living things
emerged from one of the existing elements: “Let the earth sprout forth” – i.e.,
it is the earth that gives forth vegetation. “Let the waters swarm…” – the water
gives forth swarms of living things. “Let the earth give forth living things” –
the earth issues animals.
When it comes
to man, the situation is different. On one hand, he is taken from the earth, as
we read in chapter 2: “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the earth.” On the
other hand, he is not simply a product of the earth. Rather, there is special
Divine involvement in his formation: “… and breathed into his nostrils the
breath of life” (2:7).
Thus, man’s
uniqueness finds expression in the opening words of his creation: “Let us make
man.” There are two “partners,” as it were, in his creation: the earth, and God.
Man is a complex creation. He is not just a creature of the lower world, nor is
he a creature of the upper world. Rather, he is a combination of both.
Therefore, his creation requires a partnership of upper and lower forces.
According to
this understanding, there is, indeed, a “partnership” of forces involved in
man’s creation, but the two partners are clearly not equal: one is the Master of
the world, Creator of everything, Who also created the earth. He uses the earth,
which He Himself created, in order to continue issuing new creations.
Indeed, it
becomes immediately clear that this is the true intention: “And God created
man”: the Creator of man is God Himself, just as for all other aspects of
Creation which are said to have emerged from the earth or from the water, the
Torah goes on to assert that it was God Who created them.
He consulted with the
ministering angels
The above
explanation would appear to solve the problem of the plural formulation of the
verse. However, the phenomenon of expressions in the plural, giving rise to the
impression of “partnership” or “association,” appears elsewhere, too, and in
those cases the above answer is not appropriate.
Following the
sin of Adam, we read: “The Lord God said: ‘Behold, man has become like one of
us, knowing good and evil…’” (Bereishit 3:22). Who are the many whom man has
come to resemble? Here we cannot accept that the text is referring to God and
the earth (i.e., forces of the upper world and forces of the lower world).
Similarly, in
the story of the Tower of Bavel, God says: “Let us then go down and
mix up their language there” (Bereishit 11:7). Who goes down together with God
to mix up the language of mankind? Here again, the answer cannot be that God is
inviting the earth to join Him.
If we consider
all three verses, we are, once again, brought back to the same question: is it
possible that God has some sort of partner, some associate in the upper worlds?
Is it possible that there is some other being with whom God consults concerning
the creation of man, and that man knows good and evil just like God does – and
this “partner” also descends together with God to confuse the language of
mankind?
The three
verses would all seem to imply that God is speaking to some being that belongs
to the upper worlds. It is quite impossible to suggest that some other deity
exists, or any spiritual power that is God’s “equal,” but it is possible that
there exist, in the upper worlds, beings of a lower level than God, which are
also created by God.
Indeed,
several midrashim and commentators infer from the wording of the verse that God
confers with the angels. Ibn Ezra, for example, addresses the three
verses that we cited above in his commentary on Bereishit 3:22 (s.v.
va-yomer):
“Behold, man
has become like one of us….” Do not be surprised at the use of the word “us.”
Similarly, we find, “Let us make man in our image,” and “Let us go down.” In all
of these instances, God is speaking to the angels.
Rashbam adopts
a similar view (1:26, s.v. va-yomer):
He (God) said
to the angels: Let us make man.
Likewise, we find in the case of Mikhiyahu ben Yimla, in Melakhim (I
22:19-22), and in Yeshayahu (6:8): “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us,”
and likewise in Iyov (1:6).
Rashbam brings
examples from elsewhere in Tanakh, where the text notes explicitly that God
consults with the “heavenly retinue.” If so, then this is not an unusual
phenomenon: God consults with the angels concerning His plans for the world.
However, the fact that the phenomenon exists elsewhere in Tanakh does nothing to
explain what “need” God has to consult with the angels. Can He not decide alone
what to do in the world? What is the significance of God’s consulting with
the angels?
The midrash in
Bereishit Rabba 8 raises the question of whom God consults before creating man,
and cites a number of different opinions.
We shall now look at some of the other possibilities addressed there:
Rabbi Simon said:
When the Holy One, blessed be He, came to create man, the ministering angels
were divided into camps and factions. Some said, “Let Him create man;” others
said, “Let Him not create man.” This corresponds to the verse: “Kindness and
truth met; justice and peace came together” (Tehillim 85:11): Kindness said:
“Let God create man, for he will perform acts of kindness.” Truth said, “Let Him
not create man, for he will be full of deceit.” Justice said, “Let Him create
man, for he will perform righteousness;” peace said, “Let Him not create him,
for he will be full of divisiveness….”
According to
this midrash, some angels maintained that man would be a worthy creation, since
he would possess positive qualities, and would be able to achieve good in the
world. Others argued that he was not worthy of being created, since his
deficiencies – and, consequently, his potential for evil - would be too
great.
The
continuation of this midrash describes the outcome of this consultation:
What did the
Holy One, blessed be He, do? He took truth, and cast it to the ground….
God decides in
favor of the angels that support the creation of man; those that view his
positive qualities. In other words, God’s verdict is that the positive aspects
of man outweigh the negative.
Another
midrash presents the consultation with the angels in a sharper light:
Rav Yehuda
said in the name of Rav: When the Holy One, blessed be He, sought to create man,
He first created one set of ministering angels. He said to them: Do you wish for
us to create man in our image?
They answered:
Master of the universe, what will he do?
He said to
them: He will do such-and-such.
They said to
Him: Master of the universe – what is man, that You should remember him, and a
mortal, that You should take note of him? (Tehillim 8:5)
He stretched
forth His little finger between them, and burned them.
And likewise a
second set of angels.
The third set
said to him, Master of the universe: the previous angels that spoke before You –
of what good were they? The entire world is Yours; all that You wish to do in
Your world – do. (Sanhedrin
38b)
This midrash
describes how God created the angels specifically for the purpose of consulting
with them, but the consultation was fictitious: the moment that the angels
uttered something that went against the will of God, He burned them. Ultimately,
the conclusion is that the whole world belongs to God, and He can do whatever He
wishes with it.
In reality, then, there is no real discussion. So what is the point of God
creating the angels and making a show of conferring with them? Why invite debate
in the first place?
“And He saw that it was
good”?
According to
the various midrashim that we have examined, the role of the angels is to
represent different views. Sometimes the midrash places one group of angels in
confrontation with another group, one in favor of man’s creation and the other
against it. In other instances, the midrash presents the angels in confrontation
with God, with God supporting the creation of man and the angels opposing it.
What is common to each case is that the debate raises the question of whether or
not man is worthy of being created.
The debate, in
its various forms, teaches us that the creation of man was not a simple and
self-evident matter. Rather, much thought and deliberation was required before
concluding that such a creature should, in fact, be brought into existence.
Why is it
specifically the creation of man that arouses such profound deliberation?
Because man is a complex being. He is composed of both material substance and
spiritual essence, and he has free choice. Therefore he is capable of great
good, but he is also easily able to do evil.
The discussion
with the angels gives expression to both aspects of man – the positive and the
negative. While God does eventually decide in favor of creating him, in the
background there is the debate, the deliberation. The deliberation is not a
reflection of God’s inability to decide, but rather an expression of the
complexity of man; the fact that man can be “good,” but may also be “not
good.”
It is perhaps for this reason that the description of the creation of man is not
followed by the words, “And God saw that it was good.” It was not yet possible
to determine whether “it was good,” since it would depend on man’s free
choice.
What is God’s
conclusion concerning man’s creation, several generations later, when He sees
man’s actions? Is God able to declare, “it was good”?
Further on in
parashat Bereishit, the Torah describes man’s actions in the world. There is
Adam’s sin; the episode of Kayin and Hevel, the incident with Lemekh, the
wayward “sons of God” and human women, and the corruption of the generation of
the Flood. After ten generations (from Adam until Noach), God looks at mankind
and is deeply disappointed:
God saw that
the wickedness of man was great in the land, and the entire inclination of the
thoughts of his heart was only evil, all the time. And God regretted having made
man on the earth, and He grieved to His heart. And God said: I shall wipe out
man, whom I have created, from upon the face of the earth… (Bereishit 6:5-7)
After
observing man’s actions, it would seem that “God saw that it was not good.” God
regrets having created man!
This is a most
shocking and painful conclusion. Is it possible that God was “mistaken” in His
decision; that man truly should not have been created? Were the angels “correct”
in predicting that the inclination of the thoughts of his heart would be only
evil?
The next verse
(8), which concludes parashat Bereishit, is enlightening: “And Noach found favor
in the eyes of God.”
Man’s evil in
the world is indeed extensive, to the point where God is grieved and seeks to
wipe out mankind. However, immediately thereafter, the Torah testifies that
there is still some hope. Not everything and everyone is so terrible. There is
someone who does find favor in God’s eyes. And if there is one such individual,
that is a sign that there is hope for mankind. There is still some chance that,
ultimately, God may find that concerning man, too, “It was good.”
It is on this
optimistic note that parashat Bereishit concludes.
He consulted with
Himself
A different
view in Bereishit Rabba 8 connects the end of parashat Bereishit with the verse,
“Let us make man”:
God said: Let
us make man. With whom did He consult?...
Rabbi Ami
said: He consulted with Himself [literally: “with His heart”]. This may be
compared to a king who had a palace built by an architect. When he saw the
result, it did not please him. To whom could he complain? Surely to the
architect! Similarly, the Torah says, “He was grieved to His heart”
(Bereishit 6:6).
At the end of
parashat Bereishit we discover that God is grieved to His heart over man’s
actions. The words, “He grieved to His heart,” describing God’s sorrow over
human behavior, teaches us – according to Rabbi Ami – that it was God alone who
decided to create man. Therefore, when man turned out to be a disappointment, He
had no one else to blame; He could only “grieve to His (own) heart.”
According to
this view, there is no debate with anyone else. God deliberates alone; He
consults “His heart.”
What is the
significance of this consultation?
This is an
expression of true complexity; of two aspects that continue to exist within man
and define his essence. Parashat Bereishit, with its description of the
beginnings of man’s world, presents this complexity from the very start,
introducing into the world the question of whether man’s creation will turn out
to have been “good.”
Following the
description of man’s actions, we are almost convinced that “it was not good.”
However, it turns out that a kernel of goodness still exists; it is still
possible for man to be “good” and to “find favor in God’s eyes.” For the sake of
this possibility it is worth continuing to maintain the human race.
But why is it
so important to God to continue and to maintain mankind, with all of its
complexity and its capacity for corruption and destruction?
Apparently,
the extent of man’s complexity is also the extent of his potential:
Rabbi Beriya
cited Shemuel in the name of Shemuel: “God saw all that He had done, and,
behold, it was very good” – This refers to the evil inclination. But how can the
evil inclination be called “good”? It teaches us that were it not for the evil
inclination, a man would not marry, he would not bear children, and the world
could not exist. (Midrash Tehillim 9)
It is
specifically the evil inclination that facilitates creativity, building, and
progress. It is specifically his ability to choose between rebelling against God
and performing God’s will that gives special meaning to his choice of good, of
doing what God wants him to. When the other creations (including the angels)
perform God’s will, it is only “good;” there is nothing wondrously special about
it, since it is for this purpose that they were created, and they are unable to
do otherwise.
But when man,
with his free choice, with his evil inclination, chooses to perform God’s will
and to build the world with holiness, then it is “very good.” This imbues the
performance of God’s will with enormous power. It is for this that man was
created, so as “to perfect the world in the Kingdom of God.”
(Translated by Kaeren Fish)
|