l. Namely, a principle exists in the thing whose principle it is or simul¬ taneously with it, even if it does not [ precede it in time. Thus it is said that the heart is the principle of the living being, and the element the principle of that of which it is the element. “First” is also sometimes used in this sense. Sometimes, however, “the first” is applied solely to what is prior in time even when that which is prior in time is not the cause of what is posterior to it. Thus it may be said that the first one who lived in that house was so and so and after him so and so. It may not, however, be said [in a case like this] that so and so is the principle of so and so. The word indicative of “the first” in our language is tehillah [ beginning ]: Thus: The beginning of [tehillat] the word of the Lord to Hosead That indicative of “the principle” is reshith. For it derives from rosh [head], which in view of its position is the principle2 of the living beings.
67. Jer. 1:1a. The word shaqed (almond tree) is supposed by the medieval commentators to derive from the root shaqod (to hasten), because it blossoms more quickly than other trees.
68. Cf. II 43.
69. Ezek. 1:4. There are various medieval explanations of the word hashmal, a hapax legomenon applied to the divine chariot. According to one explanation, it signifies hayot esh memalelot (fiery talking animals). According to another, it derives from hashoh (to be silent) and malol (to speak). According to a third explanation, it derives from hash (to hasten) and mill (to cut, to stop).
70. Ezek. 1:q. The word cegel (calf) contains an allusion to the root cagol (to be round).
71. Ezek. 1:y. According to the commentators of the Guide, the word nehoshet (brass) alludes to the word hashata (corruption, i.e., incorruptible), and qalal to the word qal (light, swift).
72. Zech. 6:1. 73. Another reference to this passage of Zechariah is found in II 10.
67a ] The Guide of the Perplexed 11-30 Now the world has not been created in a temporal beginning,3 as we have explained, for time belongs to the created things. For this reason it says: In the beginning [ bereshiih ].4 For the “be” 5 has the meaning of “in.” The true translation of this verse 6 is: In the origin7 God created what is high and what is low. This is the translation that fits in with creation in time. On the other hand the statement, which you find formulated by some of the Sages, that affirms that time existed before the creation of the world is very difficult. For that is the opinion of Aristotle, which I have explained to you: he holds that time cannot be conceived to have a beginning, which is incongruous. Those who made this statement were conducted to it by their finding in Scripture the terms: one day,8 a second day,9 He who made this statement understood these terms according to their external sense and as follows: Inasmuch as a rotating sphere and a sun did not yet exist, whereby was the first day measured? They express their opinion in the following text: The first day— Rabbi Judah, son of Rabbi Simon, said: Hence [we learn ] that there existed before that an order of time. Rabbi Abahu said: Hence [we learn ] that the Holy One, may His name be blessed, used to create worlds and to destroy them [again]}0 | This second opinion is even more incongruous than the first. Consider what was the difficulty for these two [Sages]. It was the notion that time existed prior to the existence of this sun. The solution of what seemed obscure to both of them will soon become clear to you $ unless — by God! — those two meant to say that the order of time necessarily exists eternally a parte ante. That, however, is the belief in the eternity a parte ante of the world, and all who adhere to the Law should reject it. This passage is to my mind only the counterpart of the passage in which Rabbi Eliezer says, Wherefrom were the heavens created?li To sum up: you should not, in considering these points, take into account the statements made by this or that one. I have already made it known to you that the foundation of the whole Law is the view that God has brought the world into being out of nothing without there having been a temporal 3. The word mabdcf is used, which has been translated “principle” but which cannot be so translated here.
4. Gen. 1:1. It is the first word of the Bible.
5. In the word bereshith, the be signifies a preposition meaning “in.”
6. I.e., Gen. l:i.
7. In this sentence Maimonides does not use the word mabdi i’ (principle), but the word bad’a, which derives from the same root.
8. Gen. 1:5. 9. Gen. 1:8. 10. Genesis Rabbah, III.
11. Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer, III. Cf. II 26.
jjo The Guide of the Perplexed 11-30 [ 67 b beginning.12 For time is created, being consequent upon the motion of the sphere, which is created.
Among the things you ought to know is the fact that the Sages have explicitly stated in a number of passages that the word eth}5 figuring in his words,14 eth hash-shamayim ve-eth ha-aretz [ the heaven and the earth],15 has in that verse the meaning: with. They mean by this that He created together with the heavens all that is in heaven and together with the earth all that is in the earth. You already know that they make it clear that the heaven and the earth were created together because He says: I call unto them, they stand up together}5 Accordingly everything was created simultaneously; then gradually all things became differentiated. They have compared this to what happens when an agricultural laborer sows various kinds of grain in the soil at the same moment. Some of them sprout within a day, others within two days, others again within three days, though everything was sowed at the same hour. It is according to this opinion, which is indubitably correct, that the doubt that impelled Rabbi Judah, son of Rabbi Simon, to say what he said, may be resolved. It was difficult for him to understand whereby the first day and the second and the third day were measured. There is an explicit statement on this point | made by the Sages, may their memory be blessed, in Bereshith Rabbah. With reference to the light said in the Torah 17 to have been created on the first day, they make literally the following statement: Those are the luminaries that have been created on the first day, but that He did not suspend until the fourth day}9 Thus a clear explanation as to this point has been made.
Among the things you ought to know is that earth is an equivocal term used in a general and a particular sense. In a general sense it is applied to all that is beneath the sphere of the moon, I mean the four elements. In a particular sense it is applied to one element, the last among them, namely, earth. A proof of this is his saying: And the earth was unformed and void, and the darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God, and so on}9 Thus sometimes all the elements are called 12. mabda \ Cf. n. 3, this chap. As to the connotations of the word “principle,” see the beginning of this chapter.
13. A preposition signifying the object of a sentence. It also has the meaning “with.”
14. Gen. 1:1.
15. The whole verse is: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
16. Isa. 48:13. Cf. B.T., Hagigah, 12a; Genesis Rabbah, I in fine.
17. In Gen. 1:5.
18. The passage that follows is not to be found in Genesis Rabbah; it occurs in B.T., Hagigah, 12a.
19. Gen. 1:2.
68a ] The Guide of the Perplexed II -50 / earth. Afterwards he says: And God called the dry land Earth.20 That also is a great secret; namely, wherever you find him saying, God named something thus, he does this in order to differentiate between the particular notion envisaged and the other notion equally signified by the term. For this reason I have interpreted to you the verse21 as follows: In the origin God created what is high and what is low. Hence the earth mentioned in the first place is what is low — I mean to say the four elements — whereas the earth of which it is said, And God called the dry land Earth, is the element earth alone. This is now clear.
Among the things you ought to know is that the four elements are the first to be mentioned after the heaven. For, as we have said, the term earth mentioned in the first place applies to them. For he mentions earth, water, spirit 22 and darkness. Now darkness is the elemental fire; do not think anything else. He says: And thou didst hear His words out of the midst of the fire? 5 and he says: When ye heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness.2+ And it also says: All darkness is laid up for His treasures,• afire not blown [by man ] shall consume him.25 The elemental fire was designated by this term, because it is not | luminous, but only transparent. For if the elemental fire had been luminous, we should have seen at night the whole atmosphere in flame like fire. The elements are mentioned according to their natural position $ namely, first the earth, then the water that is above it, then the air that adheres to the water, then the fire that is above the air. For in view of the specification of the air as being over the face of the waters,26 darkness that is upon the face of the deep21 is indubitably above the spirit.28 It was impelled to use the expression, the spirit of God,29 in order to designate the air in view of the fact that the latter is supposed to be in motion, I mean to say merahepheth [moving], and that the motion of the wind is always ascribed to God. Thus: And there went forth a wind from the Lord?0 Thou didst blow with Thy wind?1 And the Lord turned a west wind.52 This occurs frequently. In view of the fact that the term darkness [ hoshekh ], as employed in the first place,55 which designates the element,5* differs in its meaning from the term darkness [hoshekh], as employed afterwards in the signification of obscurity, it begins to explain and to differentiate, saying: And the darkness [hoshekh] He called Night?5 as we have explained. Consequently this is now clear.
20. Gen. mo. 21. I.e., Gen. 1:1. See above in this chapter.
26. Cf. Gen. 1:2. 27. Ibid. 28. Ibid. Maimonides identifies the spirit with the air. 29. Ibid. 50. Num. 11:31. 31. Exod. 15:10. 32. Exod. 10:19.
Among the things you ought to know is that the words, And He divided between the waters, and so on,56 do not refer merely to a division in place in which one part is located above and one below, while both have the same nature. The correct interpretation of these words is that He made a natural division between both of them — I mean with regard to their form — making one part, that wrhich He first calls water, into one particular thing by means of the natural form with which He invested it, and bestowing upon the other part a different form, that latter part being water proper. Hence it says: And the gathering of the waters He called Seas.57 In this way it makes it clear to you that first water of which it is said, over the face of the waters,58 is not the water that is in the seas, but that part of the water situated above the air was differentiated by means of a certain form, whereas another part is this water here. Thus the phrase, And He divided between the waters which were under the firmament, and so on,39 is analogous to the phrase, And God divided between the light and the darkness,40 in which the division is in respect of a certain form. The firmament itself | was produced from water; as [the Sages] say: The middle group congealed.+1 The words, And God called the firmament Heaven,*2 is intended, according to what I have explained to you, to make clear that the term is equivocal and that the heaven mentioned in the first place, in the words the heaven and the earth,*5 is not what is generally named heaven. It has rendered this signification even more certain by the use of the words, In the face of the firmament of heaven,** whereby it meant to make clear that the firmament is not the heaven. Because of this equivocality of the terms, the true heaven is sometimes likewise called firmament, just as the true firmament is called heaven. Thus it says: And God set them in the firmament of the heaven.*5 In these words there is likewise a clear indication of what has already been demonstrated, namely, of the fact that all the stars as well as the sun and the moon are situated within the sphere — as there is no vacuum in the world — and that they are not located upon the surface of a sphere, as the vulgar imagine. This appears from his saying: in the firmament of the heaven, and not: upon the firmament of the heaven. Thus it has become clear that there was a certain common matter, which it names water. Afterwards it was divided into three forms; a part of it turned into one thing, namely, the seas; another part of it turned into another thing, namely, the firmament; a third part turned into a thing that is above the firmament.
6 g« ] The Guide of the Perplexed II -50 The latter is entirely beyond the earth.46 With regard to that subject, He chose a different method of approach leading to extraordinary secrets. With regard to the fact that that which is above the firmament is called water in name only and that it is not the specific water known to us, a statement setting this forth has also been made by the Sages, may their memory be blessed. They made it in the following passage:47 Four entered the Paradise, and so on. Rabbi Aqiba said to them: When you come to the stones of pure marble, do not say, Water, Water, for it is written: He that speaketh falsehood shall not be established before mine eyes. 48 Reflect, if you are one of those who reflect, to what extent he has made clear and revealed the whole matter in this statement, provided that you consider it well, | under¬ stand all that has been demonstrated in the “Meteorologica,” 49 and examine everything that people have said about every point mentioned in that work.
Among the things you ought to know and have your attention aroused to is the reason why it is not said regarding the work of the second day that it was good. You already know what the Sages, may their memory be blessed, have said about this according to the method of nonliteral interpretation.50 The best statement of this kind they have made about this is their saying that this was so because the work of the water had not been terminated.51 To my mind also the reason in question is very clear. For whenever it mentions a thing among those that exist, having been produced in time and subsisting in durable, perpetual, and permanent fashion, it says with reference to it that it was good. But there is something hidden, as you will see, with regard to the firmament and the thing above it, which is called water. For if the matter is considered according to its external meaning and with a recourse only to superficial speculation, it does not exist at all. For between us and the lowest heaven, there exists no body except the elements, and there is no water above the air. This judgment applies all the more if someone imagines that this firmament and what is above it are above the heaven. In that case the thing would be even more impossible and remote from apprehension. If, on the other hand, the matter is con¬ sidered according to its inner meaning and to what was truly intended, it is most hidden. For in that case it was necessary for it to be one of the concealed secrets so that the vulgar should not know it. How then could it be proper 46. This translation appears to make better sense than the more literal rendering: All this is outside the earth.
50. The Hebrew word derash, which is used here, is often employed in contradistinction to peshat, which means literal interpretation.
51. Genesis Rabbah, IV.
The Guide of the Perplexed 11-50 [ 69 b to say of such a matter that it was good? For the meaning of the words, that it was good, is that the thing in question is of externally visible and manifest utility for the existence and permanence of that which exists. But in a matter whose meaning is hidden and that, understood in its external meaning, does not exist in such a way as to appear useful, what utility externally visible to the people at large could there be so that the words, that it was good, could be said with reference to it? I cannot help adding for you the following explanation: The thing in question, though it represents a very great part of the existents, | does not constitute the purposed end for the permanence of that which exists; and therefore the words, that it was good, could not be said with reference to it. This could rather occur with reference to a compelling necessity that the earth be uncovered. Understand this.
Among the things you ought to know is that the Sages have made it clear52 that God only made grass and trees grow from the earth after He had caused rain to fall upon them, and that its saying, And there went up a mist from the earth, and so on,55 is a description of the first state of matters obtaining before the command: Let the earth put forth grass.5* For this reason Onqelos translates: And there had gone up a mist from the earth.55 This is also clear from the [scriptural] text itself because of its saying: And no shrub of the field was yet in the earth.56 This is clear by now.
You who are engaged in speculation, know that, after the forces of the sphere, the first of the causes producing generation and passing-away are light and darkness — because of the heat and the cold consequent upon them. The elements intermix in consequence of the motion of the sphere, and their combinations vary because of light and darkness. The first com¬ bination that is produced by them is constituted by two exhalations, which are the first causes of all the meteorological phenomena among which rain figures. They are also the causes of the minerals and, after them, of the composition of the plants and, after those, of that of the living beings; the final composition being that of man. Darkness is the nature of the existence of the whole lower world, light supervening in it. It should be sufficient for you to know that when there is no light, the state of matters remains permanent. The [scriptural] text about the Account of the Beginning goes exactly in this order, leaving out nothing.
Among the things you ought to know is their saying: All the works of the Beginning were created according to their [perfect] stature, [perfect] 52. Genesis Rabbah, XIII ab init. 53- Gen. 2:6. 54. Gen. 1:11.
55. Gen. 2:6. In Aramaic. 56. Gen. 2:5.
70 a ] The Guide of the Perplexed II -50 reason, and [perfect] beauty [/ le-sibyonam ].57 He means that everything that was created, was created according to the perfection of quantity, the per¬ fection of form, and with the most beautiful accidents. This is | expressed in the word le-sibyonam [ according to their beauty], which derives from the word sebi [ beauty ] as used, for instance, in the phrase: which is the sebi [ beauty ] of all lands.™ Know this, too, for it is a great principle, which has been established as true and has become clear.
Among the things on which you ought to reflect carefully is the fact that it mentions the creation of man in the six days of the Beginning and says: Male and female created He them.™ It then concludes its account of the creation, saying: And the heaven and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.™ Then it makes a new start regarding the creation of Eve from Adam, and mentions the tree of life and the tree of knowledge and the tale of the serpent and all that story; and it makes out that all this happened after Adam had been placed in the Garden of Eden. Now all the Sages, may their memory be blessed, are unanimous in thinking that all this story occurred on Friday and that nothing was changed in any respect after the six days of the Beginning. For this reason, none of these things should be judged incongruous ■, for, as we have said, up till then no perm¬ anently established nature had come about. Withal they have mentioned things that I mil let you hear, having gleaned them in their various places, and I shall give you pointers to certain things, just as they, may their memory be blessed, have given us pointers. Know that those things that I shall mention to you from the dicta of the Sages are sayings that are of utmost perfection 5 their allegorical interpretation was clear to those to whom they were addressed, and they are unambiguous. Hence I will not go too far in interpreting them, and I will not set forth their meaning at length.61 For I will not be one who divulges a secret. However, it will suffice for someone like you if I mention them in a certain order and by means of slight indications. One of these dicta is their saying6S! that Adam and Eve were created together, having their backs joined, and that this being was divided and one half of it, namely, Eve, taken and brought up to [Adam]. The expression, one of his ribs,65 means according to them one of his sides. They quote as proof the expression, a rib of the tabernacle,64 which [the Aramaic version] translates: a side of the tabernacle. In accordance with this, 62. Cf. Genesis Rabbah, VIII; cf. B.T., 'Erubin, 18a. 65. Gen. 2:21.
64. This occurs, e.g., in Exod. 26:20.
The Guide of the Perplexed 11-50 [ 70 b they say that [“of his ribs”] means: of his sides.65 Understand in what way it has been explained that they | were two in a certain respect and that they were also one 5 as it says: bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh.66 This has received additional confirmation through the fact that it says that both of them have the same name: for she is called 3 ishshah [woman], because she was taken out offish [man].61 It also confirms their union by saying: Aral shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. 68 How great is the ignorance of him who does not understand that all this is necessary with a view to a certain notion. This then has become clear.
Among the things you ought to know is the following explanation, which they give in the Midrash. They mention69 that the Serpent had a rider, that it was of the size of a camel, that it was the rider who led Eve astray, and that the rider was Sammael. They apply this name to Satan. Thus you will find that they say in a number of passages that Satan wanted to tempt Abraham our Father not to agree to offer Isaac as a sacrifice, and that he also wanted to tempt Isaac not to obey his father. And with refer¬ ence to that story, I mean to say the binding [of Isaac], they say likewise: Sammael came to our Father Abraham and told him: What, old man! have you lost your senses, and so on.70 Thus it has become clear to you that Sammael is Satan. This name is used with a view to a certain signification, just as the name serpent [, nahash ] is used with a view to a certain significa¬ tion. When they speak of its coming to deceive Eve, they say: Sammael was riding upon it,• and the Holy One, blessed be He, was laughing at both the camel and its rider.
Among the things you ought to know and have your attention aroused to is the fact that the Serpent had in no respect direct relations with Adam and that it did not speak to him, and that such a conversation and relation only took place between him and Eve-, it was through the intermediation of Eve that Adam was harmed and that the Serpent destroyed him. Extreme enmity only comes to be realized between the Serpent and Eve and its seed and hers. On the other hand her seed is indubitably the seed of Adam. Even more strange is the tie between the Serpent and Eve, I mean between its seed and hers, a tie that is in the head and the heel-11 she being victorious over it through the head | and it over her through the heel. This also is clear.
Among the amazing dicta whose external meaning is exceedingly 65. Those of Adam at the time of the creation of Eve. 66. Gen. 2:23.
67. Gen. 2:23. 68. Gen. 2:24. 69. Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer, XIII.
70. Genesis Rabbah, LVI.
71. Cf. Gen. 3:15. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
7i*] The Guide of the Perplexed II -30 incongruous, but in which — when you obtain a true understanding of the chapters of this Treatise — you will admire the wisdom of the parables and their correspondence to what exists, is their statement: When the Serpent came to Eve, it cast pollution into her. The pollution of [ the sons of] Israel, who had been present at Mount Sinai, has come to an end. [As for] the pollu¬ tion of the nations who had not been present at Mount Sinai, their pollution has not come to an end.1'1 This too you should follow up in your thought.
Among the things you ought to know is their dictum: [The size of] the tree of life [corresponds] to a walk of five hundred years, and all the waters of the Beginning spring up from beneath it.75 They make it clear there that this measure is meant to apply to the thickness of its body and not to the dimension of its boughs. They say: The object of this saying is not its body, but its trunk, [whose size corresponds] to a walk of five hundred years. The interpretation of its trunk is: the thickness of its upright timber. They added this supplementary remark in order to complete the explanation and exposition of the meaning. This then is clear.
Among the things you ought also to know is their dictum: As for the tree of knowledge, the Holy One, blessed be He, has never revealed that tree to man and will never reveal it.1* This is correct inasmuch as the nature of what exists requires it.