flying upon the earth," that is, He ordered that the waters should produce the fish in the sea, and birds should procreate in the earth, from the same earth.3 R. Levi ben Gershon, in his Commentary, considers it in the same light; according to this both verses agree that birds were produced from the earth. Nachmanides, adopting the opinion of R. Eliezer in his learned treatises, says, birds were created from the waters, which he seems to infer from the literal reading of the first text, and that the latter, " And the Lord God formed from the ground every beast of the field, and every bird of the heavens," is to be understood thus, And the Lord God formed from the ground every beast of the field, and he formed, besides, every bird of the heavens; and it is unnecessary to apply it to their formation from the earth, but simply to their formation by God; he strengthens this opinion by examples of many passages of Scripture where a similar style is used, and the verses consequently agree, that birds were created from the waters.* R. Perfecto Duran very sagely observes that л (ground) is to be taken for the mixture of the four elements. Maimonides understands the word rs of the first verse of Genesis to mean the elements; and the saying that the Lord God formed birds from the ground is the same as if it had been said from the four elements, and although water may predominate in birds, it is not opposed to their also containing the others. R. Hezekiah, author of the "Hiskuni," readily solves the doubt, saying that both verses are verified; for the waters produced some birds-as geese, swans, and many aquatic birds that live on the water, but those that live only on land as turkeys, fowls, &c. were formed from the earth. R. Johanan, in “"Bereshit Raba," 5 translates the word " (instead of "formed") subjected, according to the text of Deut. xx. 19, 1♫ › “when thou wouldst subject;" thus leaving no contradiction, because it would then read, not that "God formed from the ground," but that he subjected all the beasts of the field, on the earth, and every bird of the heavens and brought them unto Adam, putting them under his control. Don Isaac Abarbanel arrives at nearly the same conclusion: he undertanding "as and assembled; that is, that God congregated the animals, &c. in Adam's presence, to note the names he would give them. My apprehension is, that the bodies of birds may be considered in two points of view, or rather one involving a second in itself: it is then necessary to say, that the element of earth predominates in them, because, being composed of the four elements, the largest portion must necessarily consist of the least active, taking into consideration that a certain motion was given to them from their origin, it follows that they must have some affinity with the body in which they move, that is, the air; and, according to this first verse, says "Let the waters bring forth the reptile that hath life, and birds flying upon the earth, upon the face of the expansion of the heavens," which expansion is the aerial region, and from the affinity birds bear to air, it is applied to them. The saying "from the ground," in the second verse, considered alone, results from the predominance of the earthy element in their composition, and by this distinction the verses are understood. 3 C. 9. 4 Ephodi, c. 3. 5 C. 17. man," which seems to imply a plurality in his divine essence? RECONCILIATION. "Let us R. Samuel bar Nachman (from R. Johanan, in "Bereshit Raba,"') says, that when Moses, in writing the Pentateuch, came to this passage make man,"he exclaimed, "Lord of the Universe, wherefore wilt thou give room to heretics, to have a motive for erring in respect of thy most simple unity?" To which the Lord answered, "Moses, write: he who wishes to err, will." This author rightly foresaw that this verse would lead many to err by seemingly multiplying the First Cause, who is the only, sole, and most perfect unity, an opinion which was held by some, who considered that two contrary effects could not proceed from one agent or cause (as Avicena said), and as the effects of good and evil are such, they judged that there were two causes or beginnings from which each respectively emanated. 3 R. Levi ben Gershon,2 R. Joseph Albo, R. Abraham Salom,* and many others agreed And therefore he feigned that Moses fearing this verse might increase the error, stayed his hand while writing; but on reflection, wrote on, considering that he had nothing to fear, because only those who wished to err, would take those words as a reason, seeking thereby to give a colour to their error, as R. Joel ben Soeb, in his "Olat Sabat," and R. Samuel Yaphe, in his Yaphe Tohar," rightly remarked thereon; the reason is clear, for the following verse immediately demonstrates the Creator to be one only, as it says "God created man," in the singular, and not they created, in the plural. Some give their reason why it says "Let us make;" and, firstly, "Let R. Joshua (in the name of R. Levi, in "Bereshit Raba," 5) says, us make man;" With whom did he consult? He consulted the fabric of heaven and earth. This is a proper answer to the question, because, in the same manner as a king, possessing supreme authority and absolute power, often condescends to advise with his subjects, thus testifying the love he bears his vassals, so the King of kings on resolving to create this noble creature (man) convoked to his council the worlds he had called into being; and Jarchi, profiting by this observation, added to it, that God taught herein the propriety of humility in man (as the queen of every virtue) in thus holding counsel with inferiors. The Cabalistic Theologists (subtilizing the sacred text) say in the " Zoar," Behold, in every other work and in forming every other creature, the Scripture speaks in the singular, "Let there be light;""Let the earth bring 2 In his Commentary. 1 C. 1. * Neve Salom, b. iii. c. 1. 5 C. 5. 3 Yearim ii. c. 13. forth;" and so on: but when it comes to treat of man, it says, "Let us make" in the plural, signifying (as Plato also said) that the Lord spoke with secondary causes, to which he said, I have yet to make an animated creature with a nature approaching to an equality with immortals, yet, if made directly by me, it would be entirely divine, therefore let the body be furnished by you, and I will give you the other portion, which is the soul. R. Moses Alschech? came to the same conclusion, and says, "God spoke with the four worlds alluded to by Cabalists (see Question 2); for man being composed of body and three powers of the soul, he corresponds to the world of the fabric, of formation, of creation, and of emanation; and, therefore, God said in the plural, "Let us make," that each might contribute its part, and (as R. Isaac Azama said), for worlds so opposite in themselves to unite, it was proper that there should be a mean partaking of each, that should connect them together. So that all these authors hold, that the Lord being sole and unique, spoke in the plural sense with the secondary causes. 8 The learned Aben Ezra maintains that the Lord spoke with the Intelligences, saying, "Until now I commanded the waters and the earth that they should produce animals; but in regard to this most perfect creature (man), I, with you, will make him :" therefore man became on a par with the Intelligences, because, as these have an affinity to matter, inasmuch as, looking downwards they apply themselves to move the orbs, and yet are spirituals, and in raising themselves upwards they move (as Aristotle said) for a much higher and superior purpose, which is towards himself-God. So, according to R. Samuel bar Nachman, 9 "Man was created of two opposite natures, or 117 which means body and soul, because with the body he moves downwards, and elevates himself by the soul," which meaning is adopted by R. Levi ben Gershon and Don Isaac Abarbanel in their commentaries. R. Judah a Levi 10 also says that God spoke with the angels, to whom the prophets in human shape became assimilated; and as the Hayat" writes, the theologists call them the Matatron, “The superior man," as these noble creatures approach nearer to the First Cause, terrestrial man being similar to them in some measure; and in this sense he is made in the image and likeness of God. R. Abraham bar David so considers it. Nachmanides (in the name of R. Joseph Kimchi) says, that God spoke with the earth and elements; and alleges in favour of his opinion, that, as on the sixth day, he had ordered the earth to produce animals, speaking to it, he said, in the plural, "Let us make," so the earth gave the clay and dust of which the body of man was made, and God inspired him with soul. R. Joshua of Sahnin, holds, that the Lord consulted with the souls, by which, in my opinion, he intended to say, that as souls had been already created on the first day, which is the impression entertained by the Hebrews, God would not precipitate them into latent matter, in a forcible, and to them involuntary, manner, without their consent; with them, therefore, he spoke, and said, "Let us make," that is, "Let us form human beings." R. Sedaiah a Gaon understands, that it is scriptural idiom, and therefore does not indicate any plurality, but speaking like a sovereign, says, "We the king," although he alone speaks. This author, as Aben Ezra observes on this text, and respecting the word on 12 Elohim, "God," adduces others in support of this opinion. From this R. Ame said, that God consulted with himself, meaning that he did not 6 In Thimeo. 7 Torat Moseh. 10 Cuzari, b. 4, ar. 4. 8 Aquedat Isaac, c. 3. 9 Bereshit Raba. c. 8. 11 C. 9. 12 Bereshit Raba, c. 8. speak with any creature, but communed within himself, saying, "Let us make," which is not an inaccurate mode of expression. Or, we may say, that as the greatest consideration and care is sought to be employed in making any thing recognized as superior, the Scripture, therefore, uses this special mode of speech, in the creation of man, as by saying in the plural, "Let us make,' it demonstrates a species of self-command and preparation for the execution of the work, and the Lord thereby intended to shew that every other creature had been created for man's benefit and advantage. In whatever manner it may be assumed that God spoke, whether with secondary causes, or with spirituals, with the elements, or with the souls; or whether it was only a proper mode or figure of speech, shewing self-preparation, the contradiction is reconciled; for it does not follow from saying, "Let us make," that there is a multiplication in the First Cause, Sole, and of the most Simple Unity; and Moses might fearlessly write it; for he only who premeditatedly and intentionally wished to err, will seek by this text to give colour to his errors, although to avoid such excuse, the Seventy-two Interpreters translated it in the singular, "I will make man," &c.'3 QUESTION 7. Gen. 1:26. And God said, Let us make man Isa. 40:25. To whom will ye liken me, or in our image, as our likeness. shall I be equal? saith the Holy One. What comparison or similitude can there be between nothing and the Fountain of Wisdom and Existence ? The latter passage states this; how then does the Scripture say, "Man was made in the image and likeness of God." RECONCILIATION. It is clear and manifest that although the Almighty Creator and Divine Beauty is immense and infinite, the emanation which he was pleased to communicate to the universe is finite. The angelic world according to their ordained degrees, and from their nearer approximation to the Divinity, possess the largest portion, next the celestial, and then the corruptible,—not from either bearing any proportion thereto, for there can be none between infinite and finite. From this consideration, the prophet says, "To whom will ye liken God? and what similitude will ye compare to him?" giving it to be understood, that no comparison can be drawn between the Creator and the created. The Scripture does not imply the contrary, by saying, “Let us make man in our image," because any image of the infinite must be finite, or it would not be an image, but the same as what it was intended to be an image of, Infinite. Picture the divine beauty of the Creator by created beauty, as you would a handsome figure in a mirror; although it will be a similitude and likeness, it will not be equal, but only an image or reflection of the represented. According to this, God, desiring that man should understand how much he participated in his divine beauty, says, He made him in his image and likeness; and as a comparison cannot be completely equal to the compared, as our likeness," with the comparative letter as, כדמותנו,,the text says termed by grammarians, The caph of comparison. The solution of the preceding Question (6) also elucidates the present, in saying, that the Lord, speaking with all the worlds, said, “Let us make man 13 Meguila, c. 1. in our image, as our likeness," is, "Let him bear a resemblance to the three (or, the angelic, the celestial, and the corruptible) worlds;" therefore, the Greeks termed man "the Microcosm," and the Hebrews top by "the world in miniature," for as Maimonides, 14 Aben Ezra, Bechayai, Abarbanel, and many others, 15 observe, the three principal parts of man—the brain, heart, and liver-bear great resemblance by their functions to the idea of those three worlds. QUESTION 8. Gen. 1:26. Let us make man in our image, as our likeness. 9:6. For in the image of God made he man. Deut. 4:15. And guard ye your souls greatly, for ye saw no manner of similitude, on the day that the Lord spoke unto you at Horeb. God having no material figure or corporeal form, how is it said, "God made man in his image?" RECONCILIATION. For the solution of this doubt, and to understand the verse properly, it is necessary, in the first place, to explain the word by “in our image," the word by having various meanings in the Holy Scriptures. 1st. The countenance and corporeal form: as, describing Nebuchadnezzar And the form of his visage * 1 וצלם אנפוהי אשתני when irritated, it says was changed." writings. "Male images," in which sense it is often found in the sacred 2nd. It is used for the spiritual form of man, that is, the intellectual comprehension, as it is said, "Adam begat Seth" by "In his image," this cannot be understood in respect of bodily members, for every father begets children in a similar manner, but the Scripture means, that Adam being most wise begat a wise son, and therein was his image and likeness. 3rd. It is applied to that subtlety termed by Plato "the celestial vehicle," and by Cabalists by "Ideal form." David spake of this in saying, w's ban' obra "Surely in an image (or shade) walketh man," meaning, that mankind being constituted of opaque earthy matter, and a spiritual soul, there is something which connects these extremes; and this is by or an extremely subtle and diaphanous object, approaching to a spirit. 4th. It is a shade or shadow, from which is derived by a shade, and by the shadow of death, as many passages of Scripture testify. Proceeding then to solve the doubt: If in saying, "Let us make man,' God spoke with secondary causes, or with angels, then by "image" must be understood a representation of the three worlds, for which reason he is termed "Microcosm;" if he spoke to the earth only, then, by "image" the body must be understood, and by "likeness" the soul and understanding, which in spirituality resembles God. If it is only a figure of speech as used by the Great, to speak in the plural, then, as Plato says, there pre-existed in the divine mind all the ideas of the creation, and God chose to make man in such a manner, that the perfections of the whole should combine in him, in such a degree and mode as the subject was capable of; and as in God, a most simple unity, these are super-eminent, so it may be said that man is a shadow of it; therefore, it is not because an image is required, that corporeality in God is implied, for it should be explained in the foregoing manner. Dan. 3:19. 2 Ezek. 16:17. 14 Guide, b. 1, c. 72. 15 In their Commentaries. 4 Psalm 39:7. |