Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] bara vs' bero in Genesis 1:1

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] bara vs' bero in Genesis 1:1
  • Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 15:56:31 +0300

On 7/8/06, JAMES CHRISTIAN READ wrote:
Yitzhak wrote:
It is therefore significant that
the word tehom is used as a proper name in the right place (before
division of the seas).
END QUOTE

JCR: I think this is an overstatement that may well be
quite a lot less significant than to imply a direct
relation with the tiamat myth. There is nothing in
the context whatsoever which personifies tehom and the
sense is very much of a thing rather than a being.

The very phrase ' The earth was formless and void, and
darkness was over the surface of the deep' seems, in
my mind, to recall only thoughts of lifeless matter
that are yet to be prepared for the arrival of life.

The thing that you seem to be overlooking is that your
translation adds a "the" that is not present in the Hebrew
text. This would be equivalent to you writing in English,
"The earth was formless and void and darkness was over
the surface of Deep." Or "Abyss," or "Ocean." It is used
as a proper name. The use of this specific word, as a
proper name like this, at this place of the Creation story,
just appears to be too coincidental.

Could it be that Tiamat was merely named after the
physical entity represented and the hebrew makes use
of the normal word tehom with no regard for whether
other cultures use a cognate of this word to refer
to their mythical Tiamat? I am certainly aware of
clear examples in the tanak where ba'al is used in a
sense clearly distinct from any association with the
foreign god ba'al and used only as a normal word to
express a relation husband/master.

Of course Tiamat was named for the natural force (water/sea)
that it represented. Just like Yam in the Canaanite pantheon
is named for the ocean/sea, or like Hadad is perhaps named
for thunder. The Bible doesn't come out and say, "and
darkness was upon the face of Tehom, you know, that
Canaanite or Babylonian goddess, and the Divine Wind was
hovering above the waters." But it's just very suspicious that
Tehom is used in the way it is used and that the word Tehom
is mentioned rather than other words. And yes, the waters are
divided independently of Tehom's mention. They appear on the
second day, while Tehom is in the background to the first day.
But that still doesn't explain why Tehom is named as a proper
name (no definite article = "h" prefix). It's possible to suggest
that a pagan cosmogony was used as the basis for the Genesis
1 cosmogony, with some of the more problematic references
being removed

Joel Stucki wrote:
Insightful post Yitzhak. One other point that you did not delve into
is that in Enuma Elish Tiamat is defeated and divided in two with one
half of her becoming the sky and the other half the sea, just as the
waters of Genesis. Even if you believe a general Semitic root is
responsible for the similarity of the two words rather than a direct
allusion, you still have to account for these other similarities in
the story.

My argument there was that it's possible to conceive not just of a
general Semitic root, but of a general Semitic cosmogony that spoke
of the Waters being defeated and divided. In the Canaanite pantheon,
apparently Yam takes the place of Tehom in the fight, with Baal fighting
and defeating Yam, while the Babylonian myth speaks of Marduk
(identified with Bel) defeating Tehom. Still, the allusion to Tehom
remains in Genesis.

When you also look at comparisons of the six days of creation vs the
six generations of gods and the seventh cycle of rest, the order
things were created in, etc. It seems too similar to think there is
not a direct connection between them.

While I was not directly and immediately aware of this example (I think
I read about it in the context of Russell Gmirkin's discussions of the
Greek origin of the Pentateuch), it is this type of thing that I suggested
when I spoke of cultural influences that can still influence the story
without being directly visible with directly borrowed elements.

Yitzhak Sapir
http://toldot.blogspot.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page