26. Bereshit — Abarbanel on the Torah, Section 26

Between Absence and Form

Previous section → The Unity of the Earth

Explanation of the words tohu and vohu¹

The expressions tohu and vohu admit two principal interpretations. Both meanings find support and confirmation in the statements of our Sages².

The first interpretation is that tohu and vohu are two synonymous terms that both indicate an incomplete mode of existence, belonging to the category of privation and absence. For this reason Ibn Ezra wrote that tohu is the same as vohu, meaning that both refer in the same way to desolation. In this direction also leans Onkelos, who translated the words as “desolate and empty,” and many commentators likewise explain them in this sense.

According to this view, some explained tohu as deriving from the expression tehom (“the deep”), with the final letter mem being an added element – as in the expression rokem chinnam³. The meaning of the verse would then be that at the beginning of creation the earth was entirely covered with water, which is called tehom.

In Bereshit Rabbah, Rabbi Yehudah bar Simon and Rabbi Abbahu also interpreted tohu va-vohu in this manner. They said that the earth was bewildered and astonished, saying: “The upper beings and the lower beings were created together. Yet the upper beings are sustained without effort, whereas the lower beings, if they do not toil, are not sustained. The upper beings live, while the lower beings die.”⁴ This is the first interpretation.

The second interpretation is that of Ramban, who distinguished between tohu and vohu. He explained that tohu refers to the primordial matter which the Greek philosophers called hyle. Because this matter is difficult for the mind to grasp, it was called tohu, from the language of bewilderment (toheh). He explained vohu as referring to form – that is, “within it (bo hu) is that by which a thing becomes what it is.”⁵

According to his interpretation, the verse means that after creation the earth was tohu – namely, matter lacking concrete form, which in his view was created first. Afterwards the Holy One, blessed be He, clothed it with form, and thus it became vohu.

In the statement of the author of Sefer Yetzirah⁶ it is said: “He made something from tohu, and from what is not He made what exists.” This interpretation is also supported by a passage in the Sefer HaBahir, where Rabbi Berachyah said: “And the earth was tohu va-vohu. What does ‘was’ imply? That it had already been. What is tohu? Something that causes human beings to wonder. And what is vohu? That it was tohu and returned to vohu – something that has substance, as it is written: ‘bo hu’ (‘within it is’).”⁷

Ramban himself cited this teaching in support of his interpretation.

Yet I am astonished that he did not also cite another passage found there, which explains the matter even more clearly. It states: “What is the meaning of the verse, ‘God made this corresponding to that’⁸? He made tohu, and its place is in evil; He made vohu, and its place is in peace, as it is written: ‘He makes peace and creates evil.’⁹ How so? Evil comes from tohu, and peace from vohu.”¹⁰

This passage clarifies that tohu refers to matter, from which all deficiency and evil derive, while vohu refers to form, from which peace and perfection proceed.

These are the two most sound interpretations of these expressions.

A third explanation – according to which tohu refers to form and vohu to matter, as interpreted by Gersonides (Ralbag) – is easily dismissed. For the meaning of the words themselves, as well as the statements in Sefer HaBahir, clearly support the interpretation of Ramban.

Ralbag attempted to support his view from the teaching of the Sages: “Tohu is a green line that surrounds the world, and vohu are polished stones.”¹¹ He understood the encircling line as the form that defines and limits things, just as the outline of a structure constitutes its final form, while the stones represent matter.

He further explained that they are called “polished” (mefulamot) in the sense of “hidden” or “obscure,” like the expression “so-and-so,” because primordial matter is itself hidden and difficult to conceive¹².

But in truth, this interpretation is itself merely a “line of tohu and stones of vohu.”¹³ The Sages did not refer to a “green line” except with respect to matter. They likened it to a line because it does not exist in actuality, yet the intellect judges that it must exist. The same is true of matter: it is prepared to receive forms, just as a builder stretches a line before construction to prepare the place for the stones.

They said it is “green” to indicate that it is neither white nor black but capable of receiving all colors. Just as green is not the final stage of color yet is not entirely devoid of color, so the primordial matter does not exist in actuality, yet it is not absolute non-existence. Rather, it stands between existence and non-existence, as green stands between white and black¹⁴.

The proof of this interpretation lies in the conclusion of the same teaching – omitted by the aforementioned scholar – where it says: “Tohu is a green line that surrounds the world, from which darkness emerges.” This cannot be explained with reference to form but only to matter, from which darkness, deficiency, and all evil proceed.

As for the “polished stones,” since they are the principal elements of a building, the Sages compared them to form, which gives a thing its strength and actuality. Because the primordial matter underlying all generated beings is one, while the forms that are impressed upon it are many, they spoke of matter as “a green line” in the singular, whereas they described the forms as “stones” in the plural.

The meaning of the term mefulamot is not “hidden” or “concealed,” as that scholar thought. Rather, it refers to large stones – precious, strong, and well-formed stones – which provide a fitting metaphor for forms. This usage appears in the Talmud as well. In the tractate Beitzah we read of “large fish (dagim mefulamim),”¹⁵ and in the chapter Eizehu Mekoman it says: “He brings smooth stones, large stones (avanim mefulamot).”¹⁶ The author of the Arukh¹⁷ explains the expression as meaning stones that are strong and solid.

It may also be explained that mefulamot means “moist,” like “fresh fish,” meaning fish that are still moist immediately after being caught. The intention would then be that those stones are not like the stones familiar to us, which retain their shape permanently. Rather, they are very moist and therefore easily receive impressions from that primordial matter. This is what the Sages meant when they said that “waters emerge from them,” meaning that those forms prepare the matter to receive other forms, just as water flows one after another.

Thus the term mefulamot denotes strength and beauty, not concealment.

Since the forms either rest upon matter or exist potentially within it – as maintained in Bereshit Rabbah – the Sages said that those stones were “sunk in the deep.” For form is borne by matter and exists within it in potentiality; matter is not borne by form.

Indeed, our Sages were accustomed to refer to forms as “stones.” Thus Rabbi Akiva said in the well-known teaching: “When you reach the stones of pure marble, do not say: ‘Water, water.’”¹⁸ There he called the “stones of pure marble” the separate forms, not the primordial matter, as will be explained later in the discussion of the firmament.

From all this it becomes clear that the interpretation of Gersonides is untenable, while the first two interpretations remain valid.

The truth of this explanation is also confirmed by the usage of the word tohu in Scripture. The prophet Isaiah says: “They are accounted by Him as nothing and tohu”; “I have spent my strength for tohu”; “The city of tohu is broken down”; “He did not create it for tohu, He formed it to be inhabited”; “I did not say to the seed of Jacob, ‘Seek Me in tohu’”; “They shall ascend into tohu and perish”; “They followed tohu, which cannot profit or save, for they are tohu”; and again: “He stretches out the north over tohu,” “He makes the judges of the earth like tohu,” and “In a tohu, howling wilderness.”¹⁹

In all these passages, the word tohu can only signify something that lacks true existence and perfection – a reality deficient by its very nature.

Next section →