The First Six Days
by Morris Engelson
In the beginning
We all know the first English words of the
Hebrew Bible: "In the beginning created..."; B'reishis
bara, in Hebrew. But it is not that simple. Numerous essays,
and even whole books, have been written on the meaning of the
first words, or just the first word. For example, the popular
commentary by Rabbi Hirsch spends six pages on the first words
of the Bible. B'reishis is a compound word which can be
understood as "in the beginning of," and not just "in
the beginning." Thus Rashi, the eleventh century commentator
on the Bible, who always strives for the clearest and simplest
meaning, says that the opening statement is, "In the beginning
of G-d's creating..." But this word, b'reishis, can
be understood in other ways as well. It is a compound word consisting
of "be" and "reishis." We have
"in the beginning", or more properly "in the beginning
of", when the two elements are combined into one word. But
we can also read the individual elements as separate words. Thus,
we can read that the creation was accomplished be = "with"
something named reishis. Reishis would be something
that was at first. This is similar to the Hebrew word rishon,
which means "first", as in first, second, etc. But
reishis, in this mode, is a noun. It is the instrument
of creation, or the means by which the creation was accomplished,
or that out of which all was created, or several other possibilities.
I will not take up space to reference verses and procedures to
show why this mysterious, reishis, is frequently identified
as "wisdom." Suffice it to say that it is an ancient
tradition. Thus Onkelos notes, near two millennia ago, in his
translation to Aramaic, that "With wisdom G-d created..."
And what was this first wisdom? It was the Torah, which predates
creation by 974 generations. But nothing can exist, or did exist,
unless G-d willed it. So apparently G-d willed some form of creation
974 generations before the creation we read about in the Bible.
But wait a minute. We hold that time itself was bara =
created, so how could something else (namely the Torah) be "created"
before there was time? How can there be a "before",
before there was time? Well, there was no time, but there was
something like time. These ideas, and other variations, are not
my invention. These ideas come from the Talmud and major expositors
of the Torah, such as Nachmanides, Maimonides, Rashi, and others.
I could go on, and on, this way for thousands of words as I do
in my book The Heavenly Time Machine. Suffice it
to say that the initial creation is a most complicated matter
and a great mystery.
The above is not the usual way that the beginning
of the Bible is understood. But I have a reason for describing
the above as I have chosen. And the matter can be legitimately
understood this way. But this is not the only acceptable explanation.
There are certainly numerous, and I do mean numerous, other ways
to understand the first words of the Torah; the Hebrew Bible.
Not only are there numerous ways to understand these matters,
but we hold that the multiple meanings can be simultaneously
true; even meanings that appear to contradict each other. This
is all very confusing. So let's step back a bit to consider method,
rather than content.
A layer of meanings
I discuss in my book why we hold that the
Torah is the source of all knowledge in all ages. Clearly that
would not be possible for a book written in plain language, given
the vastly different scientific sophistication of cultures millennia
apart in time, even if all knowledge could be directly explained.
This provides one reason why we hold that the Torah has a multiplicity
of meanings concealed within the ordinary meaning. This is particularly
true for matters connected to the initial creation which is considered
to be a great mystery. Not only are there many meanings, but
some of the meanings can appear to contradict each other. Yet,
both contradictory meanings can be true. Consider the following
simple analogy.
Suppose one wanted to provide some scientific
instructions respecting heat flow. We start with a statement
that a hotter substance gets cooler and the colder substance
gets warmer, when items of differing temperature are brought
together. This fits the basic experience of even a scientifically
primitive culture. The reader will agree that the document makes
sense. We might now proceed to explain something about heat capacity,
or maybe something about combustion or some other basic information
related to heat. All of this could, in principle, be acceptable
to a primitive culture. But we also want to provide information
useful to a more sophisticated scientific understanding. Here
we provide a hidden subtext that deals with more advanced concepts.
Suppose we explain that if the two materials that are brought
together are of a certain type, and if we do something else (which
we, who are more sophisticated, know as an electric current),
then the flow of heat will be reversed and the lower temperature
substance will get colder and not warmer. What would the primitive
people think of the Peltier Effect? It is contrary to experience,
it is contrary to logic, and it is contrary to the plain meaning
of the text which states that the cold stuff gets warmer and
not colder. Yet both statements – that the cold gets warmer,
and that the cold gets colder, are true. These are simply at
a different level of meaning and sophistication.
The above idea also applies to the Torah.
The Torah has a text and multiple layers of subtext. There is
a simple meaning, a plain meaning, a hidden meaning, a secret
meaning, and so forth. An understanding provided by a competent
authority, who is qualified to deal with Torah at the appropriate
level, is accepted as true. We accept the information even if
we do not properly understand it; even if it is counterintuitive
to us; and even if it contradicts a meaning that we know and
understand. The most secret of meanings is known as kabbala.
I do not know any kabbala, as only the most rudimentary knowledge
is available to the general public. Any such material that I
might quote is only of a surface nature, and there are depths
and more depths beyond whatever someone at my level of Torah
understanding might know.
With the above as a very basic introduction,
we are now ready to look into the multiple meanings of the first
six days of creation.
Nature during creation
Science tells us that, while there is a connection,
the basic laws of physics were different during the creation
than what we now have. There was one, or maybe two, basic forces
while we now have four. Superstring theory indicates that there
may have been ten, or eleven or maybe twenty six elementary dimensions
to this universe, but we now experience just four. The universe
was small and hot and full of energy and no matter. Now the universe
is large, and cold and with lots of matter. Clearly there are
many differences in how we would describe the early universe
compared to how we describe the universe at this time. The same
applies to the Torah. There are a number of basic differences
between the first six days when the universe was in a process
of creation, and the seventh day, when creation ceased, and all
subsequent days, up to our own time.
The Torah describes different types and levels
of "creation" during the first six days. There is a
fundamental creation (out of nothing) and there are subsequent
adjustments, shaping, making and building of what already exists.
After six days, it is all finished. We are told that "By
the seventh day G-d completed His work which He had done... [and]
He abstained from all His work which G-d created to make."
The seventh day is the Sabbath, when the Orthodox Jew abstains
from any creative activities in recognition of the "abstained"
from creative work described above. The Sabbath, which is the
seventh day, is a unique day, but it is a spiritual uniqueness.
Physically, in terms of the laws of nature, it is a day like
any other day of the completed universe. But the first six days
are clearly different from the seventh day, and also from each
other, in terms of physical content and structure. This leads
us to a question – Is the meaning of "day" in
general, and especially respecting time duration, the same or
different for the first six days and subsequent days? The reader
should not be surprised that the answer is both yes and no, given
the introduction to the multiple levels of meaning within the
Torah.
"Day?"
I know of no major Jewish Orthodox commentator
who disputes that the plain meaning of "day," as used
in the Torah for the first six days of Creation, is ordinary
days. Nevertheless many, if not all, of these commentators also
claim that these are not ordinary days. This difference, respecting
ordinary days and not ordinary days, is not a difference in degree.
It is not a difference between a simplified approximation and
a more complete and more correct description. Both descriptions
are complete. Both descriptions are equally accurate. Both descriptions
are equally true. We have here a difference in kind. Both descriptions
are simultaneously complete; simultaneously different; and simultaneously
true. This is how it is for the mystery of Creation; the mystery
of Ma'aseh Breishis, that may not be taught to more than
two people at any one time.
Here is how 13th century Kabbalist and Torah
commentator, Nachmanides explains it. "Know that the term
'day' as used in the story of creation was, in the case of the
creation of heaven and earth, a real day, composed of hours and
seconds, and there were six days like the six days of the workweek,
as is the plain meaning of the verse. " He then goes into
a kabbalistic explanation involving sayings and emanations, known
as sefiroth, because "Emanations issuing from the
Most High are called 'days,' for every Divine Saying which evoked
an existence is called 'day.'" But he can not tell us very
much because these matters involve secrets. And even that which
he tells us is shrouded in mystery and "I do hereby firmly
make known to him [the reader] that my words will not be comprehended
nor known at all by any reasoning or contemplation, excepting
from the mouth of a wise Kabbalist."
Notwithstanding all that I say below, it is
the firm Jewish Orthodox position that the six days of creation
are ordinary days and that the universe is less than 6000 years
old. Nevertheless, it is simultaneously true that the six days
of creation are not ordinary days and the universe is billions
of years old. How this can be is beyond my ability to explain.
And it could not be done in a short essay, in any event. The
interested reader will have to study the wisdom of master commentators
such as Nachmanides, Rashi and Maimonides, to get a hint at what
this is about. All I can do here is to reiterate that both positions
are simultaneously true.
How old is the universe?
I show in my book procedures and commentary
that lead to a universe age of between 14 and 16 billion years,
depending on which procedure one chooses to follow. Some of these
number can be traced back to the first century, almost two thousand
years ago. There is a deeply hidden knowledge in the Torah that
yields these numbers. But the truth is that I do not really understand
it, and all I can do is report what others have done. I noted
before why ordinary people, like this writer, are not privy to
this knowledge. Here is one example, connected to the 974 generations
that I mention earlier.
We have the following story on page 88b of
Talmud Tractate Shabbos. Moses has arrived to accept the
Torah and the angels protest. They object that this great treasure
which was established 974 generations before creation should
be handed over to fallible human beings. Moses is obliged to
respond, and he proceeds to quote from the Torah. It says You
took us out of slavery in Egypt. Were the angels ever in Egypt?
It says don't steal, don't murder, don't covet. Do angels have
private property to steal? Etc. Soon the angels agree that the
Torah, indeed, belongs with humans and not with them. It's a
nice story, and one can admire how Moses cleverly turned the
shortcomings of mankind into a reason why we need the
help and guidance of the Torah. But the kabbalists provide a
different explanation. Rabbi Dr. Nathan Lopes Cardozo asks on
page 132 of his book Between Silence and Speech: Essays
on Jewish Thought, "How could the angels even have
suggested that the Torah should remain the exclusive property
of the heavenly realms? Was it not clear that the contents of
this text could refer only to mankind?" Of course it was
clear to the angels who knew the Torah better than Moses did.
Indeed, they knew the Torah so well that they were concerned
lest the deep secrets of the Torah become available to mankind.
"It would be dangerous for the existence of the world if
the powers of creation and destruction were given into the hands
of a creature who finds it difficult to distinguish between good
and evil." But then they saw that Moses was not talking
about secrets, he was talking about the plain meaning of the
Torah. This was perfectly acceptable to them and they withdrew
their objection. And what of the few spiritually advanced, saintly
people, who can delve into the secrets? They understand the danger
and they keep the secrets secret, just as the angels wanted.
The first six days
The authoritative Sefer Seder Olam
considers the second Rosh Hashana (New Year), when Adam becomes
one year old, as the beginning of the first year in the calendar.
Currently (in December of 2001) we are in Hebrew year 5762. This
is based on a somewhat different system, which shows two years
more than the Sefer Seder Olam, which would identify the
current year as 5760. In either case, all the years beginning
with Adam are fully accounted for. We simply add up the ages
of the fathers at the birth of a son. Thus, Adam was 130 years
old at the birth of Seth. Seth was 105 at the birth of Enosh.
Enosh was 90 at the birth of Kenon. The first ten generations
consisting of: Adam, Seth, Enosh, Kenon, Mahalallel, Yered, Henoch,
Methuselah, and Noah comes to 1656 years from creation. This
is the time of the flood. The next ten generations get us to
Abraham, and we have a total of 2048. In this fashion we eventually
get to our own time. There is no question but that the Torah
identifies the age of the world as less than 6000 years. But
that is since the time of Adam, and not the time of creation.
This leaves us the six days of creation to work with.
I have said this before, and I will emphasize
it again. The first six days are ordinary days, as explained
by the previous quote from Nachmanides, and the statement of
other commentators. Nothing that follows changes that. Nevertheless,
these days can also be billions of years in duration. Both statements
are true. I can not explain this mystery which is beyond my level
of understanding.
Different commentators point to different
statements in the Torah to show how and why the first six days
can be, or are, many years in duration. A full presentation of
what has been said about this is beyond the scope of a short
essay. Here are a few examples.
How old is the universe? I do not know, precisely,
and neither does anybody else. Except perhaps the "wise
kabbalists" that Nachmanides refers to. But they and the
angels, who know the deepest secrets of Torah, are not telling.
|
