21st Century Bible Hebrew -- Genesis 1:8, textual evidence

Genesis 1:8

 

ח וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לָרָקִיעַ שָׁמָיִם וַיְהִי־עֶרֶב וַיְהִי־בֹקֶר יוֹם שֵׁנִי:

 

Transliteration: Va-yiqra elohim la-raqia shamaim va-y’hi erev va-y’hi voqer yom sheni.

Translation:     Gd named the raqia heaven and there was evening and there was morning a second day.

Letters in this lesson:

Vocabulary in this lesson:

שֵׁנִי    second     

 

Now, here’s another question. Verse 1 says “creation of heaven and earth,” but here it says that Gd gave the name “heaven” to the raqia. Does that mean that heaven didn’t actually exist before this? Judaism would say no.

 

There were dialogues for a long time about about whether heaven or earth was created first, and one answer was that it doesn’t matter because they are equal partners in the world.

 

R. Shimon bar Yochai said they were created at the same time, like a pot and its lid. Apparently makers of clay pots used to make sure the lid fitted tightly by building a large ball, then cutting the top off, scooping out the insides, and making a lip for the lid to sit on. R. Shimon was known as one of the greatest explainers of Torah in his time, which was around the Hadrianic persecution, and he is credited as author of the Zohar, the best-known work of Jewish mysticism.

 

In any case, Rashi gives credit to a Rabbi Yitschaq (somebody other than his own father who played a large role in his education) as saying that the creation story is not intended to teach the exact order in which things happened. You can see that for yourself. We still haven’t come across anything describing the creation of heaven or earth, they simply were there. You also know that one stream of Jewish thought says that light already existed at the start, it simply wasn’t perceptible to mortals until Gd took action.

 

What’s missing from this second day of creation? Anybody? Anybody?  Bueller?

 

That’s right, there’s no ki-tov here. Think back and tell me why that would be? I have given you the clue.

 

The raqia is not and cannot be perceptible to mortals, not in and of itself. Gd never made it manifest. It therefore cannot be used as evidence for the truth of what the narrator says about it; he has to add va-y’hi khen for credibility. So in and of itself, the raqia is not good.

 

Which is an interesting perspective on the heavenly journey of the rabbis. What separates the waters is not good in and of itself; the separation of the waters happened simply because Gd ordered it, not because He knew it was good. He had a purpose, but some of the things Gd uses for His purposes are not in and of themselves good. They are only good in relationship to His purposes, and mortals cannot perceive His purposes any more than they can perceive the raqia.

Next week: a confusing binyan.

© Patricia Jo Heil, 2013-2018 All Rights  Reserved