Image: “Arch of Titus” by Nick in exsilio is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0
In his long comment on Bereshit 1:31, Radak includes an interesting midrash that he attributes to Bereshit Rabbati. Actually, the reference is itself embedded in an arresting interpretation of this blockbuster pasuk:
וַיַּ֤רְא אֱלֹקים֙ אֶת־כׇּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשָׂ֔ה וְהִנֵּה־ט֖וֹב מְאֹ֑ד וַֽיְהִי־עֶ֥רֶב וַֽיְהִי־בֹ֖קֶר י֥וֹם הַשִּׁשִּֽׁי׃
G-d saw all that He had made and found it very good, and there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.
Bereshit 1:31
Radak’s comment is largely a collection of midrash on the idea that the goodness of creation encompasses evil, suffering, and death along with what we tend to think of as positive aspects of life. This is anchored in the idea, mentioned in Bereshit Rabbah 9:5, that the phrase, “found it very good (ve-hineh tov me’od),” should be read, “found death good (ve-hineh tov mavet, or mot).”1 Here is Radak’s comment (on the first dibbur ha-matchil, “G-d saw”) in its entirety:
(לא) וירא אלקים – כלל כל אשר עשה עם בריאת האדם לאמר עליהם בכלל כי טוב, כי כלם הנבראים השפלים נשלמו עם בריאת האדם ובלתו לא היה להם שלימות לפיכך אמר מאד; והנה אחר שברא האל את האדם היה כל אשר עשה האל טוב ועמד כל אחד על שלמותו הנאות לו. ואף על פי שנקשר ההעדר והאפיסה עם מציאת העולם הזה השפל הנברא מארבע יסודות הכל טוב כמו שכתב החכם הגדול הרב רבינו משה ז״ל (מ״נ ג׳:י׳) והנה טוב מאד – עד שמציאות זה החמר השפל לפי מה שהוא עליו מחבור ההעדר המחייב למות הגופות כולם כל זה גם כן להתמדות ההויה והמשך המציאות בבא זה אחר סור זה ולזה פירש רבי מאיר (ב״ר פ׳:ט׳) והנה טוב מאד, טוב מות, וכן מצאנו (בב״ר שם) בתורתו של רבי מאיר מצאנו כתוב והנה טוב מות, ואני מצאתי כתוב דהוה כתוב באוריי׳ דאישתביאת לרומי והיא היתה גניזא וסתימא בכנישתא דאסוירוס, והנה טוב מות; ואמרו עוד (שם) והנה טוב, זה יצר טוב, מאוד זה יצר הרע, וכי יצר הרע טוב אתמהא? אלא שאילולי יצר הרע לא בנה אדם בית ולא נשא אשה ולא הוליד ולא נשא ונתן, וכן אמר שלמה ״כי היא קנאת איש מרעהו״ (קהלת ד׳:ד׳); רב הונא אמר והנה טוב זה מדת טוב, טוב מאד, זה מדת יסורין וכי מדת יסורין טוב מאד אתמהא? אלא שעל ידי יסורין הבריות באים לחיי העולם הבא וכן שלמה אמר ״ודרך חיים תוכחות מוסר״ (משלי ו׳:כ״ג), צא וראה איזהו דרך מביאה את האדם לחיי העולם הבא הוי אומר זה מדת יסורין. א״ר זעירא הנה טוב זה גן עדן מאד זה גהינם וכי גהינם טוב מאד אתמהא, משל למלך שהיה לו פרדס והכניס לתוכו פועלים ובנה אוצר על פתחו, אמר כל מי שהוא מתכשר במלאכת הפרדס יכנס לאוצרו וכל מי שאינו מתכשר במלאכת הפרדס אל יכנס לאוצרו, כך כל מי שהוא מסגל במצות ומעשי׳ טובים הרי גן עדן וכל מי שאינו מסגל במצות ומעשים טובים הרי גהינם, הנה גן עדן כל כך טוב שלא יכנס שם רע כמו שאמר ״לא יגורך רע״ .(תהלים ה׳:ה׳) ויש שם עוד דרשות אחרות.
“G-d saw” – He included all that He had made along with the creation of the human in order to say about them in their entirety ki tov, that it is good. Since all the lower creations were completed with the creation of the human, without him they did not possess completeness, and for this reason He said me’od, “very.” Indeed, after G-d created the human everything that G-d has made was good, each one being in a state of completeness as befitting it. Even though absence and negation were connected with the existence of this lower world which was created with four elements, all are good, as wrote the man great in wisdom, our teacher Moshe of blessed memory [Rambam, in Moreh ha-Nevukhim III, 10], “‘And found it very good’ – Even the existence of this lower matter according to what it is, including absence which constitutes death and all other ills—all of this is also good, for the perpetuity of experience and the continuity of existence in the coming of one [life] after the passing of another. For this reason Rabbi Meir interpreted [in Bereshit Rabbah 9:5]: ‘very good (tov me’od)’ – death is good (tov mavet), regarding the matter we have commented on.” So we find [in Bereshit Rabbah there], “In the [sefer, i.e. scroll of] Torah of Rabbi Meir was [actually] written, ‘tov mavet,’ ‘death is good.’” And I found it written [in Bereshit Rabbati] that it was written this way in a Torah that was brought to Rome and hidden and sealed in a synagogue by Severus, ‘found death to be good [ve-hineh tov mavet].’ They continued there [Bereshit Rabbah 9:7] ‘found it good (tov),’ refers to the good inclination, ‘very (me’od),’ refers to the evil inclination, and should you wonder how the evil inclination is good: rather, without the evil inclination a person would not build a home nor marry a woman and have children and would not travel and provide, and thus said Shelomo [in Kohelet 4:4]: ‘for it [all labor and skillful work] comes from the envy of a man of his fellow.’ Rav Huna said, ‘”found it good (hineh tov)” is the attribute of goodness; “very good (tov me’od)” is the attribute of suffering. If you should wonder that the attribute of suffering is very good, rather that by means of suffering all created things come to life in the World-to-Come, and so, Shelomo said [in Mishlei 6:23], ‘the way of life is the rebuke that instructs.’ Go and see that the path that brings the person to life in the World-to-Come is said to be the attribute of suffering. Rabbi Zeira said, ‘found it good (hineh tov)’ is the Garden of Eden, ‘very (me’od)‘ is Gehinnom. A parable of a king who had an orchard and brought laborers into it and built a treasury at its entrance. He said: Anyone who works in the maintenance of the orchard should enter his treasury, while those who do not work in the maintenance of the orchard should not enter his treasury. So it is with all those who are capable of fulfilling commandments and good deeds, they are destined for the Garden of Eden; all those who are not capable of fulfilling commandments and good deeds are destined for Gehinnom. Indeed, the Garden of Eden is so good that no evil enters there, as he said [in Tehillim 5:5]: ‘Evil cannot dwell with You,’” and there are more interpretations there.
Radak, comment to Bereshit 1:31
Radak here offers several theories for why evil is included within creation. Even before he gives the midrashic reading of the word me’od as mavet, his interest is in accounting for the world’s inherent imperfection. Radak seems to identify goodness with completion, a classic philosophical definition.2 Despite the fact that creation is complete (“each one being in a state of completeness as befitting it”), it includes lack as well, and this too is included in the good. Why? Radak notes, in accordance with his rationalist perspective, that there is a hierarchy of being, in which higher forms of life (namely, humans) rely upon lower forms of life (animals, plants). Higher creations are dependent upon lower ones. Radak adds that all created beings are made of matter, specifically of the classical (Empedoclean) four elements, earth, wind, fire, and water. This by definition means that a completed creation includes simple, ephemeral elements.
Radak then cites Rambam, who, in Moreh ha-Nevukhim, writes that the goodness of creation includes all kinds of negation and absence, including death. This is because death is necessary for the continuity of life; there can be no continuity, no passing on, if no one has an end point. Rambam goes on to cite the midrash in Bereshit Rabbah that posits that me’od, “very” (מאד) can be read as mavet, “death” (מות), so the phrase would then be read “death is good” rather than “it is very good.”
It is at this point that Radak brings in the reading he knows from Moshe ha-Darshan’s Bereshit Rabbati, an apparently large, late (medieval) midrash collection that was lost until modernity. There are some, though not a huge amount, of citations of this work, especially by Rashi, but not all accord with the unique manuscript of Beresit Rabbati that we have in our hands. In this case, however, Radak’s midrash is attested in the text we have, and is printed in the (only) edition, by Chanokh Albeck.3 Radak brings a reading from the legendary Severus Scroll, which was thought to have been carried away to Rome by Emperor Titus after the destruction of the Second Beit ha-Mikdash in 70 CE.4. As Radak reports, this scroll, to which other variant readings are attributed, was allegedly given to a Roman synagogue by the emperor Severus (Alexander, early 3rd century). According to Bereshit Rabbati, in the Severus scroll, this verse, 1:31, in which the Masoretic text has ve-hineh tov me’od (והנה טוב מאד), was actually written out as ve-hineh tov mavet (והנה טוב מות).
Radak then proceeds to explore the necessity not only of death as a part of creation, but also the experience of suffering, drawing upon Bereshit Rabba 9. He offers, through the midrash, several answers to this question. Radak suggests that people would not accomplish the basic tasks of life if not for the yetzer ha-ra (evil inclination), meaning that evil is necessary and suffering the result. He also suggests that humans need tasks to work towards, opening the possibility that they will fail. Radak concludes his comment with the observation that the existence of a perfected world with no evil, which we can conjure in our minds, is available in the World-to-Come. It is there that evil by definition cannot exist.
What does Radak’s exploration of the problem of the existence of evil, suffering, and death (what philosophers and theologians call theodicy) gain from his citation of Bereshit Rabbati? There is immense power, I think, in the concept of offering realia as a testament to Rabbi Meir’s variant readings of Torah (and one of Yeshayahu), which are found elsewhere in rabbinic literature.5 Radak took Bereshit Rabbati as reporting material evidence of Rabbi Meir’s derash. This is not only one (authoritative) interpretation, but a matter to be considered with the utmost seriousness, written as it apparently was in a physical Torah scroll.6 For all his praise, and it was genuine, of Rambam, Radak is not satisfied with the continuity theory for the existence of death. It’s not just death, but evil itself and the suffering it engenders, that troubles Radak. These are sufficiently difficult that they must be necessary to be acceptable. He uses this rare midrash to support his sense that the created world, even in its completeness, must contain need, strife, striving, pain, lack, and death in order to exist—in the same way that a perfected world necessarily exists without them, awaiting those who strive well. So central is this idea that it was written into a scroll of Torah.
- Mot and mavet are spelled the same in consonantal Hebrew and either way, have the same meaning and are near-homographs to me’od; mot obviously sounds more similar to me’od, but mavet is the more expected form.
- This is, in fact, the literal meaning of the Latin term on which our word “perfect” is based: thoroughly made.
- In Chanokh Albeck, ed., Midrash Bereshit Rabbati (Jerusalem: Mekitzei Nirdamim, 1940), p. 209
- See Emanuel Tov’s section on the Severus Scroll and R. Meir’s Torah in his Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd rev. ed., (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 119-121.
- See Parshablog on The Torah of Rabbi Meir for more on this subject.
- This gets into the far larger question of what to do, theoretically, if authoritative alternate readings emerge; an outstanding book on the topic is B. Barry Levy, Fixing God’s Torah: The Accuracy of the Hebrew Bible Text in Jewish Law (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2001).
Leave a Reply