From: "Yeshivat Har Etzion's
Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash" <yhe@vbm-torah.org>
To: yhe-intparsha@vbm-torah.org
Subject: INTPARSHA60 -01: Parashat Bereishit
YESHIVAT
HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************
INTRODUCTION TO
PARASHAT HASHAVUA
PARASHAT
BEREISHIT
The
Creation of Man and Woman
by
Rav Michael Hattin
This Shabbat we begin anew the reading of the Torah,
after having celebrated its completion during Simchat
Torah. The parasha of Bereishit, describing in terse but
charged language the creation of the cosmos and the
early, disquieting history of humanity, presents us with
a myriad of thought-provoking passages. The essential
outline of this creation, though, is clear: it is a
divinely guided process which inexorably moves from the
general to the particular, from the simple to
the
complex, from the inanimate to the animate and finally to
man. The broad sweep of Divine concern that suddenly
brings the universe into existence ex nihilo (out of
nothing) is quite quickly brought into sharp focus on
that most frail and noble of creatures, Adam. This man,
his mate and primarily their progeny occupy the remainder
of the Torah's interest, the rest of the cosmic and
earthly order fading into the background and becoming the
muted canvas upon which the drama of God's interactions
with humanity are played out. The relationship between
that first man, that first woman and the Deity is thus a
critical one, imbued with a potential both grand and
grave.
I would like to direct our attention to the section
that narrates the creation of the first human beings. We
will closely follow the account of their formation, pay
strict attention to key words and phrases, and receive
guidance along the way from the traditional sources and
classical commentaries. We shall, in fact, discover that
the commentaries disagree concerning the interpretation
of the passage, reflecting a disagreement that
is
preserved in much earlier Talmudic and Midrashic sources.
"And God said: Let us make 'Adam' in our image after
our likeness, and they shall have dominion over the
fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and
over the animals and the whole earth, and over all
things that walk upon the earth. And God
created
the 'Adam' in his image, in the image of
God He
created him, male and female He created them.
And
God blessed them and said to them: Be fertile
and
multiply and fill the earth and subdue it.
Have
dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds
of the sky and over every beast that
walks the
earth... " (Bereishit Chapter 1, verses 26-28)
In these few short verses, the unique majesty
of
humanity is spelled out. Created in God's 'image,' they
alone of all of the world's creatures possess this most
precious of gifts; it is one which endows them with both
unusual power as well as the ability to forge a link with
their Creator. In this passage, the word 'Adam' appears
for the first time, but significantly, it
is not
introduced as a proper name. The mechanism of
this
creation itself, its presumed various steps and stages,
is here shrouded in mystery. Only the broadest possible
outline, enough to trace the essential attributes of the
first humans, their vocations, and no more, is here
recorded. Male and female make their appearance almost
contemporaneously, in a lyrical verse emphasizing their
equal claim to the Divine Image. Together they stand to
receive God's blessing and His instruction, and to secure
the imprimatur of 'and God saw all that He had done and
behold it was very good.'
How different is the picture that emerges from the
more detailed passage in Chapter Two:
"And Hashem God fashioned the 'Adam' out
of dust
from the earth, and breathed into his nostrils the
breath of life, and the 'Adam' became
a living
creature. Hashem God planted a
garden in Eden
towards the east and there put the 'Adam' which He
had fashioned... Hashem God commanded the
'Adam'
saying: Of all of the trees of the garden you
may
surely eat, except for the fruit of the
Tree of
Knowledge... Hashem God said: It is not good for the
'Adam' to be alone, I will fashion a compatible mate
to help him. Hashem God fashioned all of the beasts
of the field and the birds of the sky and
brought
them to the 'Adam' to see what he would name them...
the 'Adam' named all of the animals and all of the
birds of the sky and all of the beasts of the field,
but did not find among
them any that were
compatible. Hashem God caused a very deep sleep to
fall upon the 'Adam' and he slept; He took one
of
his ribs and closed up the flesh in
its place.
Hashem God built the rib that He had taken from the
'Adam' into a woman and brought her to the 'Adam.'
The 'Adam' said: This time it is bone from my bones
and flesh from my flesh; this one shall be
called
women (Isha) for she was fashioned from man (Ish).
A man shall therefore leave his father
and his
mother, and shall cleave to his wife and become one
flesh..." (Bereishit Chapter 2, verses 19-24)
We can immediately point
out some obvious
distinctions between this account and the one narrated by
the Torah in Chapter One. First of all, the four letter
name of God here introduces every mention of the Creator.
Secondly, the account of man's creation is much more
detailed. We learn that the first human was fashioned
from the dust of the earth, the 'adama' from which the
name 'Adam' is derived. Thirdly, the first man, although
materially complete in every respect, remains lifeless
and inanimate until the breath of life is blown into his
nostrils. The most glaring distinction between the two
accounts, however, concerns the creation of the first
woman. Here, her creation seems to be temporally far
removed from that of her mate, occurring only after a
naming exercise which is said to encompass all of the
creatures on the planet. Her formation is not the result
of an independent creative act by God but rather due to a
procedure that entails the removal of the first man's rib
and its refashioning into a complete woman.
The implications of this reading are clear.
The
account in Chapter One is a general outline of
the
creation and serves to acquaint us with some of its basic
features. All existence is brought into being by the
free and deliberate will of the Creator, and
that
creation contains an inherent hierarchy with humanity at
its apex. That humanity, composed of male and female
elements, is the recipient of both God's blessing as well
as His charge. The more detailed account of Chapter Two
explores in greater depth the relationship between the
male and female, and indicates that her creation was the
result of the male's existential aloneness and was only
precipitated by his dawning awareness of that fact. None
of the other creatures, apparently, could fill the void
in his being. Significantly, she, unlike the females of
other species, is fashioned from his very body, implying
a connection and cohesiveness between the two that none
of the other creatures are to experience. The account of
the first chapter is thus general in scope; that of the
second chapter, while describing the very same events,
does so in finer detail.
At the same time, however, there is a more ominous
implication in this reading. The woman is formed out of
the rib of the man, who precedes her in time as well as
in Divine attention. He is the primary being, and she is
a secondary one fashioned out of one of his ribs. This
rib, notwithstanding its integral association to the
man's body, is hardly an essential organ and is in fact
removed from him with no ill after effects. The overall
hierarchy of creation in which humanity occupies the most
exalted position therefore is seemingly extended by a
further hierarchy within humanity itself.
This explanation, containing elements both troubling
and inscrutable, is advanced by R. David
Kimchi
(Provence, 13th century, known by the acronym RaDaK,) as
well as by the Seforno (Italy, 16th century). The Radak
writes (Ch. 2, end of verse 18):
"The human differs from all other creatures who were
created as male and female. The
initial human,
however, was male. This is a reflection
of his
advantage over the female, over whom he rules
and
whom he can command, for she is like one
of his
This is unlike all the othspecies in which the male
enjoys no such preference... Since the man is
the
essence of the creation having been created first,
and the woman is subsidiary having been
fashioned
from his substance, he therefore possesses greater
abilities than the female in all respects, whether
physical or intellectual."
The somewhat more mitigated words of the
Seforno
(Ch. 2, verse 18) suggest that the female is
only
slightly less exalted than the male, who would otherwise
have no claim to her assistance for the fulfillment of
his needs.
The kernel of these views is in fact preserved
in
the Midrash, which states (Bereishit Rabba, Parsha 17,
paragraph 6): "Shmuel says: God took one of the man's
ribs from among the others." In the more colorful but
less flattering Talmudic formulation (Talmud
Bavli
Berachot 61a, Eiruvin 18b), the opinion is expressed that
God's removal of the 'rib' actually refers to
the
tailbone of the man! Clearly then, by understanding that
the woman is fashioned from the man's rib,
Radak's
conclusion seems not only conceptually warranted, but in
fact inevitable.
It should by now be obvious that the critical word
in the text around which the above comments pivot is the
infamous 'rib.' "Hashem God caused a very deep sleep to
fall upon the 'Adam' and he slept; He took one of his
ribs and closed up the flesh in its place. Hashem God
built the rib that He had taken from the 'Adam' into a
woman and brought her to the 'Adam.'" In the original
Hebrew, the word for 'rib' is TZELA. Thus, "He took one
of his tzelaot and closed up the flesh in its place.
Hashem God built the tzela that He had taken from the
'Adam' into a woman and brought her to the 'Adam.'" That
tzela unequivocally means rib is, however, by no means
certain. Of the forty usages of the term in the Tanakh,
only two are understood to mean 'rib' in its narrow
anatomical sense, and those two are the very subject of
our investigation! The vast majority of the other usages
of the term have to do with the world of buildings:
"And you shall fashion the boards of the Tabernacle
out of acacia wood lengthwise. You
shall make
twenty boards for the southern direction... as for
the second side (tzela) of the Tabernacle on
the
north, also twenty boards... you shall make
five
bars of acacia wood for the boards of
one side
(tzela) of the Tabernacle... and for the second side
(tzela)." (Shemot Ch. 26)
The fundamental meaning of the word
tzela is
therefore more precisely rendered as 'side,' from which
the cognate meaning of rib is derived, since the ribs
define the sides of the upper body. That this is in fact
the case is borne out by the verb form of tzela which
occurs in the account of Jacob's nocturnal struggle with
the mysterious stranger. Jacob emerges from the contest
victorious but suffering from a dislocated hip. As dawn
breaks, Jacob passes the place later known as Penuel
nursing his injury and limping - 'tzolea.' Here, the
verb tzolea is clearly associated with 'side,' since to
limp is to place all of one's weight on one side of the
body.
Having established that 'tzela' can certainly
be
rendered as 'side,' we can now reassess the meaning of
the narrative in Chapter Two: "Hashem God caused a very
deep sleep to fall upon the 'Adam' and he slept; He took
one of his sides and closed up the flesh in its place.
Hashem God built the side that He had taken from the
'Adam' into a woman and brought her to the 'Adam.' The
'Adam' said: This time it is bone from my bones and flesh
from my flesh; this one shall be called woman (Isha) for
she was fashioned from man (Ish)." According to this
reading, the first woman is not fashioned from the first
man's rib at all but rather from his 'side.' Or, to
employ the striking language of the opposing
view
recorded in the Midrash and Talmud "Du partzufin nivra ha-
adam" - the 'Adam' was initially created as a two-faced
creature! In other words, the initial human being was
not male only, but was rather a composite being made up
of a male and female joined at the back. The act of
'creating' the women was really just the
act of
separating this creature into two discrete sides, one
male and one female.
This novel approach does not represent a flight of
interpretive fancy but is actually grounded in the text
itself. Returning to the account in Chapter One, we
read:
"And God said: Let us make 'Adam' in Our image after
Our likeness, and they shall have dominion ... over
all things that walk upon the
earth. And God
created the 'Adam' in His image, in the image of God
He created him, male and female He created
them.
And God blessed them and said to them: Be
fertile
and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it..."
The recurring shift between the description of the
human in the plural ('they shall have dominion,' 'male
and female He created them,' 'God blessed them and said
to them') versus the singular ('Let us make Adam,' 'in
the image of God He created him') is indicative of 'his'
initial state. The 'Adam' is at one and the same time a
single creature, as well as a binary entity made up of
male and female components. The two components that make
up this dual creature are fashioned simultaneously by
God, and remain cohesively joined during the bestowal of
the blessing and injunction. Only later, in the process
described in Chapter Two, are the two halves separated in
order to form freestanding male and female human beings.
In other words, there is no hierarchy between the male
and female, no temporal gap separating them in creation,
no special measure of Divine attention accorded to a man
formed first and thus deemed primary in the scheme of
things. Instead, we have an account of a human being, a
male/female creature, formed and fashioned to be the
crown of creation, beloved of the Creator and guided by
His word, complete in every respect and lacking only the
individuality which discreteness confers.
It is
important to point out that this alternate view stating
that 'the initial human being was a two-faced creature'
is adopted by R. Abraham Ibn Ezra (Spain, 12th century)
and R. Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban, Spain, 13th century),
two of the pillars of biblical exegesis. It also seems
to be the reading accepted by the Talmud (see Talmud
Bavli Berakhot 61a and Eiruvin 18b).
Significantly, the name of this initial human being
is 'Adam,' but aside from the first time that the name
appears (Let us make 'Adam'), it is always preceded by
the definite article ('the'). Only at the end of the
parasha does it become the proper name of the first man.
The use of the definite article indicates that a proper
name is not being used, any more than one would say 'the
Abraham' or 'the Sarah.' How then to understand the
first time that 'Adam' occurs, absent the preceding
definite article? Usually, the phrase is translated 'Let
us make man,' but the interpretation suggested above
negates that reading, since the initial human being was
not exclusively a man at all. Knowledge of a simple rule
of grammatical etiquette obviates this difficulty. When
a noun or idea is introduced for the first time, the
definite article cannot be employed, since its use would
imply prior familiarity with the thing. Thus, if I am
describing to you my new blue cap, I introduce the thing
by saying "I bought a new blue cap." After this initial
introduction I can go on to describe its features by
employing the definite article: "THE new blue cap has a
visor and an elastic strap." Introducing the blue cap to
you for the first time by saying "I bought the new blue
cap" is unintelligible, because you know nothing of the
blue cap to begin with. Similarly, in the description of
the vessels of the Tabernacle (Shemot Chapter 25), the
first mention of each vessel is always without
the
definite article (an ark, a table, a menora) and all
subsequent ones incorporate it (the ark, the table, the
menora).
Knowing from Chapter Two that
the human was
fashionedout of the dust of the earth or 'adama,' it is
now possible to understand this oft-quoted phrase. 'Let
us make man' ought to be rendered 'Let us make
an
earthling,' and all subseuses of the term which occur
without fail with the definite article ought to
be
translated 'the earthling.' "And God said: Let us make
an earthling in our image after our likeness, and they
shall have dominion ... over all things that walk upon
the earth. And God created the earthling in His image,
in the image of God He created him, male and female He
created them." The term 'earthling' is, of
course,
genderless, just as the first human being was
not
exclusively male or female but both.
Having established the validity of this reading, we
must finally ask ourselves a fundamental question: what
is the meaning of this interpretation? Why is the first
human being so curiously created? What lesson
of
importance is conveyed by this account? Or, to phrase
the question differently in order to begin to formulate
an answer: if the initial human being was in fact a two-
faced creature containing at the outset the complete male
and female personalities joined at the back, in what way
could one possibly argue that the earthling was alone?
After all, the impetus for the act of separation was
aloneness: "Hashem God said: It is not good for
the
'Adam' to be alone, I will fashion a compatible mate to
help him." Where is the aloneness when two human beings
are so close that they share the same body? What greater
togetherness could there be than two human beings sharing
the same blood that courses through their veins?
In typical Talmudic fashion, we will
answer the
question with a question. The Talmudic discussion on
this topic records a query which at first glance appears
to be casuistic but actually is terribly
profound.
"According to the one who says that the first human being
was a two-faced creature joined at the back, which one
walked first, the male or the female?" In other words,
when two human beings are joined at the
back, of
necessity one leads and the other is forced to follow.
When two human beings are joined at the back, they can
never look in the same direction. When two human beings
are joined at the back, they are not the paradigm of
unity but actually the loneliest creatures in the cosmos.
The awesome truth of the male/female relationship is here
cast in sharp relief. A man and a woman may join in
union, may agree to economic partnership, may share the
very warmth of their bodies; but if they are not looking
in the same direction, if their goals remain disparate,
if one leads and the other follows against their will,
then true togetherness will always elude them. Only by
looking eye to eye, walking side by side, and focusing on
the same destination will they truly merit to become Ish
and Isha, man and woman, one flesh. This is the lesson
of "Du partzufim nivra ha-adam."
Shabbat Shalom.
YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH
ALON SHEVUT, GUSH ETZION 90433
Copyright (c) 1999 Yeshivat Har Etzion
All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
From: "Ohr Somayach" <ohr@virtual.co.il>
To: weekly@vjlists.com
Subject: Torah Weekly - Bereishet
* TORAH WEEKLY *
Highlights of the Weekly Torah Portion
Parshas Bereishet
For the week ending 29 Tishrei 5760 / 8 - 9 October 1999
===========================================
Overview
In the beginning, Hashem creates the entire universe, including
time itself, out of nothingness. This process of creation continues
for six days. On the seventh day, Hashem rests, bringing into
existence the spiritual universe of Shabbat, which returns to us every
seven days. Adam and Chava -- the Human pair -- are placed in the
Garden of Eden. Chava is enticed by the serpent to eat from the
forbidden fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil," and in
turn gives the fruit to Adam. By absorbing "sin," Adam and Chava
render themselves incapable of remaining in the spiritual paradise of
Eden and are banished. Death and hard work (both physical and
spiritual) now enter the world, together with pain in childbirth. Now
begins the struggle to correct the sin of Adam and Chava, which will
be the main subject of world history. Cain and Hevel, the first two
children of Adam and Chava, bring offerings to Hashem. Hevel gives
the finest of his flock, and his offering is accepted, but Cain gives
inferior produce and his offering is rejected. In the ensuing
quarrel, Cain kills Hevel and is condemned to wander the earth. The
Torah traces the genealogy of the other children of Adam and Chava,
and the descendants of Cain until the birth of Noach. After the death
of Shet, Mankind descends into evil, and Hashem decides that He will
blot out Man in a flood which will deluge the world. However, one
man, Noach, finds favor with Hashem.
===========================================
Insights
A Man's Work
"Hashem G-d took the man and placed him in the Garden of Eden,
to work it and to guard it" (2:15)
What was Adam's work? Ostensibly it would appear that Adam
was placed in Eden to work and guard the Garden. However, the
gender-endings of the two verbs "to work it" and "to guard it" are
both feminine. Garden -- gan -- is a masculine noun. The "it" cannot
be referring to the garden.
The work and the guarding that Adam had to do was to work and
guard his soul. (Soul, neshama, is a feminine noun). How was
Adam supposed to work and guard his soul? By fulfilling one
simple command. Not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of the
knowledge of good and evil. Seems like a simple enough job. G-d
places Adam in more than a veritable "garden of Eden." He puts him in
the real Macoy. Adam has just one mitzvah and he can't even keep that
one. What possessed Adam to eat from the fruit of the tree of the
knowledge of Good and Evil?
Before Adam ate from the fruit, evil existed in the world only in a
state of potential. Evil existed outside of Adam. By eating the
fruit, Adam ingested evil into himself, thus bringing evil into
actuality. But why should Adam have wanted to bring evil into his
body? Why take poison?
Adam wanted to serve G-d in the greatest possible way. He
reasoned that if his service of G-d consisted of refraining from
eating of the fruit when evil was no more than a potential, so to
bring the enemy onto his "home ground" and then defeat him would be a
much greater way of serving G-d!
Adam's motivation was selfless. His mistake was fatal. Literally.
He and Chava (Eve) brought death into the world. Adam tried to second
guess G-d. If G-d tells us to do something, He wants us to do exactly
that, no less and no more.
We can see Adam's mistake from another point of view. The fruit that
he was forbidden to eat was not from the "tree of knowledge" as is
sometimes misquoted. It was from the "tree of the knowledge of Good
and Evil." "Knowledge" in the Torah always connotes connection,
conjunction, amalgamation . The union of man and wife is spoken of in
terms of "knowledge." Eating from the tree caused a knowledge, a
mixing of Good and Evil. It created a world where Good and Evil
became very hard to separate.
===========================================
Sources:
* Rabbi Eliyahu Dessler, Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch,
Rabbi Mordechai Perlman
================================
Ohr Somayach International
22 Shimon Hatzadik Street, POB 18103
Jerusalem 91180, Israel
================================
(C) 1999 Ohr Somayach International - All rights reserved.
**********************************************************************