43. Bereshit — Abarbanel on the Torah, Section 43

A Light Without a Luminary

Previous section → Light Before the Stars

Therefore, I hold that in this divine account, the term “speech” signifies the decree of His wisdom. Just as a person, through speech, determines what shall be done, so the Blessed One, through His wisdom, decreed that something should be. Thus, “Let there be light” means that He decreed that light should come into existence in actuality¹.

Observe that through this statement, Scripture refutes two erroneous opinions that had been expressed regarding this light, as I mentioned earlier. First, those who said that it was an intelligible, non-sensory light—against this it says: “Let there be light.” For the expression “let there be” (yehi) is used only of something tangible, brought into actual existence, as in “let there be a firmament,” “let there be lights.” The term yehi denotes coming into existence outside the intellect.

Second, by saying “and there was light,” it refutes the opinion that this light was the light of the luminaries, or that Hashem merely caused some luminous substance or shining body to form, as suggested by Nachmanides. For it does not say “and there was something shining,” but simply “and there was light,” indicating that light itself came into being in the air, without the creation of luminaries or any shining body at that time².

Thus, this light was an actual quality diffused through the air, not emanating from sparks of a luminous body, but brought into existence by the divine will—not from anything else, as with the other things created on the first day. Nor did this light arise through motion or as a result of motion; rather, it came into being immediately, at once, by the command of God, as affirmed by the Sage in the Kuzari.

For this reason, it is consistently referred to here as “light”: “Let there be light,” “and there was light,” “that the light was good.” But on the fourth day it does not say so; rather, it says: “Let there be lights” (Genesis 1:14), “and they shall be for lights.” For here, light itself was created in an abstract sense, whereas there, the luminous bodies were made.

And why should it be difficult for those who reflect to accept that God created the sphere without stars, or the stars without light, or light without a luminous body—once one accepts the fundamental belief that the world was created after non-existence, and that things were brought into being from nothing? Shall anything be too wondrous for the Lord—to perform signs and wonders in the heavens and on the earth, and to bring about new creations both in substances and in their properties?

Thus, the meaning of “Let there be light” is that God decreed that light should come into existence; and “and there was light” clarifies that this creation did not arise from a luminous body, but that light itself was newly brought into being and diffused through the air in a wondrous manner.

Finally, it does not say here “and it was so,” but rather “and there was light,” because the expression “and it was so” indicates permanence and continued existence in that same state.

And because this light served only until the fourth day, it is not said concerning it “and it was so,” but rather “and there was light,” indicating that this light came into being without a luminous body.

I have already mentioned that the statement of the Sage—“these are the very luminaries that were created on the first day, but were not set in place until the fourth day”—does not contradict this interpretation. For it may indeed be understood that they were created potentially within the sphere on the first day, and that on the fourth day the Creator, blessed be He, brought them into actuality.

It is also possible that the view of that Sage was that the sphere was created independently on the first day, and the luminaries independently as well, and that on the fourth day the luminaries were attached to their spheres. For the opinion underlying this statement is that the stars are not parts of the sphere itself, and that the sphere remains fixed while the constellation returns, according to the view of our Sages.

Another possible interpretation of their words—even if we concede that the stars were already within the spheres—is that the light and rays of the stars were not yet illuminating because the dry land had not yet appeared. For it has already been explained in natural philosophy that a ray shines when it strikes a solid body, such as the earth. This is why the Ocean Sea remains dark: although the sun strikes the waters there, since water is not a body that preserves a stable form, it does not reflect light in a luminous way³.

Thus, at the beginning of creation, when the waters covered the dry land, the rays of the sun could not illuminate, nor could they produce a perceptible reflection, because of the waters. Perhaps for this reason it is said: “and darkness was upon the face of the deep” (Genesis 1:2)—to indicate the cause of the darkness, namely the deep, since the rays striking the waters were not reflected and therefore did not give light.

Because of this, the Blessed One found it necessary to bring forth the first light to serve during those days, until the drying of the waters on the third day. Then, immediately on the fourth day, the rays of light were reflected upon the dry land, and “the earth shone with His glory”⁴ (Ezekiel 43:2). This, properly understood, is the meaning of the opinion of our Sages, and not as Maimonides understood it.

Thus, the fifth question is resolved: this light was neither an intelligible light nor the light of the sun, but rather a created light brought forth temporarily in order to distinguish the days of creation.

And in this way the sixth question is also resolved: why it is not said concerning the light “And God made.” The reason is that this light was an accident⁵ without a subject, and the light was entirely uniform and undifferentiated. Therefore, the language of “making,” which is reserved for differentiated things, as will be explained later, was not appropriate here. Nor is it said concerning this light “and it was so,” because its existence did not endure permanently.

At the end of the section Eleh Pekudei⁶, I shall again set forth my opinion concerning this light more fully.

(Parashat Bereshit — Genesis 1:1, A Light Without a Luminary in the Commentary of Don Isaac Abarbanel)

Next section →