22. Bereshit — Abarbanel on the Torah, Section 22

One Essence, Many Powers

Previous section → The Name Elohim and the Order of Divine Power

The truth is that the Name Yah appears in the Name Elohim, which contains both El and Yah. Thus nothing was created without the mention of the Name Yah in the word Elohim.

As for the final mem at the end of the Name, it does not necessarily indicate plurality. For we find words such as Ephraim (אפרים), kilayim (כלאים), Mitzrayim (מצרים), Chushim (חושים), and others, all of which end with yod-mem, yet they do not denote a plural. Similarly, in the Name Elohim, the heh and yod are joined to the Name El to sanctify it, and the final mem is added only to remove it from the construct form. It is therefore a singular Name.

But if you are unwilling to accept this explanation, and instead maintain – as Ibn Ezra asserts – that Elohim and Elohai are always plural in form, then you must say the following: the plurality of this name does not indicate any multiplicity in the Blessed One Himself, for He is absolutely one in every respect. Rather, its meaning is similar to what the philosophers say about the soul – that it is one in its subject, yet multiple in its powers. That is to say, in its essence it is one, but with respect to its actions our knowledge of it reveals a multiplicity of powers.

Thus, because the Blessed One performs many different and even opposing actions, from our perspective and according to our estimation He is called Elohim, that is, the possessor of all influences and powers. For although His influence and power are, in themselves, one, our understanding perceives multiplicity according to the diverse and even contrary character of His actions. In this sense the Torah speaks in the language of human beings.

Concerning the meaning of the word shamayim in this verse, I have found that the sages of our people hold three opinions. Their views may be arranged as first, second, and third.

For this reason you will find in Scripture that sometimes a single action is attributed to Elohim, as in: “In the beginning Elohim created” (Genesis 1:1); “which Elohim created to do” (Genesis 2:3); or “Has elohim attempted…”¹ (Deuteronomy 4:34). At other times, however, a plurality of actions is attributed to Him, such as: “Let us make man” (Genesis 1:26); “When Elohim caused me to wander” (Genesis 20:13); and “there Elohim had been revealed to him” (Genesis 35:7), and similar expressions.

For when we consider the Name with respect to His own essence, the action is always one; but when we consider the multiplicity of influences and powers that we infer from the diversity and opposition of His actions, the language shifts into the plural.

From all this it has become clear what is signified by the names El, Eloah, and Elohim. This is what I wished to explain here.

Explanation of the word “shamayim”

Concerning the meaning of the word shamayim in this verse², I have found that the sages of our people hold three opinions. Their views may be arranged as first, second, and third.

The first of these is the view of Ibn Ezra, who explains that the word shamayim refers to the element of air. This interpretation follows his broader approach, according to which – as I have already informed you – nothing belonging to the upper realms is mentioned in the account of creation until the verse that speaks of “the heavens and the heavens of the heavens.”³ He therefore understands “shamayim” to mean the element of air and the element of fire that is above it, as he writes in his commentary on the Book of Psalms.

The commentators on his work have even brought a proof for this from the verse: “And He had commanded the skies from above, and He had opened the portals of heaven; He had rained upon them manna to eat, and He had given them corn of heaven” (Psalms 78:23–24)⁴.

But regarding this opinion, I have already explained to you the deficiencies and objections it contains with respect to the law of the Torah. For it would follow from it that the Torah does not testify to the creation of the heavenly bodies, but only to that of the lower things. This is the view of the adherents of the astronomical theory of the spheres. I have already demonstrated in my work “Mifʿalot Elohim”⁵, which I composed concerning the creation of the world, the falsity of this opinion and its refutation through rational analysis, apart from the fact that it constitutes a grave denial of the doctrine of the divine Torah.

The second opinion on this matter is the view of the author of the Guide and also, apparently, of Rashi, whose words seem to agree with him: namely, that the “heavens” mentioned in this first verse refer to the celestial bodies that move in circular motion. This is the view of the author of the Guide and of Rashi.

Ibn Ezra himself, in a later approach he adopted in his commentary on the Torah, wrote in agreement with this explanation – either in order to reconcile his interpretation with the widely accepted understanding of the verses of the Torah, or because he had reconsidered his earlier opinion⁶. For he wrote there that the upper heavens are called by a dual form (shamayim) either because of the conjunction of the higher spheres called the “head of the Dragon” and its “tail,”⁷ or because the heavens are always half above the earth and half beneath it, or because of the foundations which are the poles. Such are his words.

From here the Efodi⁸ derived his explanation, writing that the spheres are called shamayim from the word shem (“place”), which indicates a fixed and bounded location; for the permanence and delimitation of place are determined by the poles of the daily motion, since they alone remain fixed. These, therefore, are alluded to in the word shem⁹.

Yet although this interpretation of the word shamayim in the first verse accords better with the plain meaning of the text, there still remains the difficulty I raised in the second question: how is it that the Torah mentions the creation of the primary celestial bodies but does not mention the creation of the separate intellects that move them, even though these precede the heavens both in nature and in rank of existence?”

Next section →