בני הא־להים and בנות האדם/2/en

בני האלהים and בנות האדם

Exegetical Approaches

Overview

 

 

Mingling of Angels and Humans

Sources:Jubilees5:1-277:22-29About Jubilees, Enoch6:1-87:1-6Chapter 9:4-9Chapter 10:4-9About Enoch, 2Baruch2Baruch 56:10-16About 2Baruch 56:10-16, PhiloQuestions and Answers on Genesis I:92 On the Giants:2,4-5,7-8About Philo, JosephusAntiquities 1:3:1-2About Josephus, Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer22About Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, Bereshit RabbatiBereshit 6:2 (pp.29-31)About Bereshit Rabbati, Cassuto

Meaning of "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים" – These sources understand "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים" to refer to angels. As evidence, Cassuto  points to parallel terms in Tehillim 29:1 and Iyyov 1:6.

Meaning of "בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם" – This phrase refers to women in general.  They are referred to as the "daughters of man" as a contrast to the "sons of god", to highlight that while the latter were angelic, the women were mere humans.

Evaluation of the action

• Sinful – Most of these commentators blame the angels for lusting after the women and view their actions as sinful.  Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, though, has the women share some of the guilt, asserting that they walked around uncovered like prostitutes.  Enoch further suggests that, in addition to the fornication, the angels taught mankind the art of weaponry, makeup, and jewelry leading them to transgress.  2Baruch, Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer and Bereshit Rabbati add that the giants born of the union were unjust and filled the earth with violence.
• Neutral – Cassuto, in contrast, asserts that there was no sin in the union.  The verse's language, "וַיִּקְחוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים" is the normal Biblical terminology for legal matrimony and contains no hint to adultery.  Similarly, the phrase, "מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרוּ" does not mean that they took women against their will but only that each angel chose a woman from amongst those whom they had favored.

Punishment and the flood – 2Baruch, Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer and Bereshit Rabbati all view the deluge as stemming from the angel's actions.  Enoch, in contrast, presents the angels as getting punished independently while Cassuto does not think that the angels were punished at all,¹ and asserts that the flood came as a result of other sins entirely.²

"לֹא יָדוֹן רוּחִי בָאָדָם לְעֹלָם בְּשַׁגַּם הוּא בָשָׂר וְהָיוּ יָמָיו מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה" – Most of these sources do not address the verse. Cassuto, though, suggests that Hashem is emphasizing that, contrary to what some might believe, the children of the angels and women are not immortal, and, like all humans, have a normal lifespan of 120 years. According to him, the verse reads: "My spirit of life won't stay in them permanently (לֹא יָדוֹן רוּחִי בָאָדָם), for they, too, are mere flesh (בְּשַׁגַּם הוּא בָשָׂר), and as such, their days will number 120 (וְהָיוּ יָמָיו מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה).

הַנְּפִלִים – Jubilees, Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, and Cassuto assert that the term refers to the giants who were born of the union of the בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים and בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם.  As evidence, they point to Bemidbar 13:33 which equates "הַנְּפִילִים " with "בְּנֵי עֲנָק". Cassuto asserts that they are so called because they all eventually fell to the sword and died.  The others seem to  suggest that the word alludes to the fallen angels who bore them.

Giants after the flood

Purpose of the story

• Introducing the flood narrative – According to most of these sources, the story describes the continued deterioration of mankind and as such serves to introduce the Flood narrative and Hashem's decision to destroy the world.
• Anti-mythological polemic – Cassuto asserts that the story is a reaction to mythological tales of gods coupling with humans to form immortal beings.  The Torah, instead, has lesser angels fornicating and producing human, not godly, offspring.

Can angels have relations? R. Yehoshua in Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer questions how angels which are non-corporeal, can have relations or bear children. He answers that these angels were fallen angels who assumed the form and body of humans when they fell from holiness.³ Cassuto suggests, instead, that there are many levels of angels and while those closest to Hashem (מלאכי השרת) do not procreate, the lesser angels do.⁴

Angelology – These sources believe in the existence of angels and assume that they are capable of error and sin.  Opponents⁵ question such a view, assuming that angels should be pure in their actions and above the behavior described.

Polemical motivations

Corruption of Power

Sources:Sifre Bemidbar86About Sifre Bemidbar, Targum OnkelosBereshit 6:1-7About Targum Onkelos, R. Shimon b. Yochai in Bereshit Rabbah26:5About Bereshit Rabbah, R. Saadia, RashiBereshit 6:2-6About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, Ibn EzraBereshit 6:2-4About R. Avraham ibn Ezra,  R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBereshit 6:2-4About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RadakBereshit 6:1-5About R. David Kimchi, RalbagBereshit Beur HaMilot 6:2-5Bereshit Beur HaParashah 6:1-5About R. Levi b. Gershom, Abarbanel #2Bereshit 5 Question 10Bereshit 6About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel

Meaning of "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים" – All these commentators assume that the phrase refers to people of power, but differ in the specifics:

• Sons of judges – According to most of these sources,⁶ "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים" are the sons of judges or officers. As evidence that the word "אֱלֹהִים" connotes authority Rashi points to Shemot 4:16, while Radak brings Shemot 22:27 where the term is parallel to the  word "‎‏נשיא‏‎".⁷
• Astronomers – Ibn Ezra asserts that the phrase refers to people who know "דעת עליון", astronomers who can read the signs of the stars and understood from them which women were more likely to bear strong offspring.
• Giants – Ralbag maintains that the word refers to giants, pointing out that the word "אֱלֹהִים" often comes to amplify something or express a great size.  As support, he points to the term "הַרְרֵי אֵל" in Tehillim 36:7.⁸
• Long-lived – According to Abarbanel, some of mankind were especially long-lived and strong.  These men were called "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים" since they were similar to celestial beings who are immortal.

Meaning of "בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם" – Women born to the masses, who did not have any particular stature (in either position, size or long life) are referred to as "בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם", as a contrast to the "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים".

"וַיִּקְחוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים " – Ralbag asserts that the word "וַיִּקְחוּ" connotes an abduction or taking by strength (and not just marriage). As such, the verse is emphasizing how the women were taken by force, against their will.⁹

"מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרוּ" – Bereshit Rabbah, Rashi, and Radak learn from this phrase that the  בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים took whomever they wanted, even married women.

Evaluation of the action – All of these sources view the coupling as a sin, viewing the בני אלוהים as taking advantage of their position or power at the women's expense.

Punishment and the flood – According to these sources, the actions of the "בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים" is what led Hashem to decide to destroy the world. The Sifre suggests that the rape described in these verses typified the violence mentioned as the cause of the deluge,¹⁰ for if this is how the leaders acted, one can only imagine the deeds of the lay people.

"לֹא יָדוֹן רוּחִי בָאָדָם לְעֹלָם בְּשַׁגַּם הוּא בָשָׂר וְהָיוּ יָמָיו מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה" – Most of these sources¹¹ explain that Hashem decided to give mankind a reprieve of 120 years in which they would have a chance to repent; if they did not he would destroy them via flood.¹² They differ in how they understand the first part of the verse:

• Rashi and Radak understand "יָדוֹן" to mean fight.  According to Rashi, Hashem announce that He will no longer argue with himself (לֹא יָדוֹן רוּחִי) regarding man (בָאָדָם) [whether or not to destroy him], since even though he is just flesh (בְּשַׁגַּם הוּא בָשָׂר), man still does not surrender to Hashem. Radak, says instead, that Hashem will no longer have the spirit which he infused into man be in a constant battle with man's desire, a product of his being a physical being. 
• According to R"Y Bekhor Shor, "יָדוֹן" is related to judgement. Hashem is saying that He will never judge man strictly according to his deeds, since he, too (like those who sinned before),¹³ is merely flesh [and cannot handle strict justice].  Thus, Hashem will give them a reprieve of 120 years.¹⁴
• Radak also suggests that "יָדוֹן" might be related to the word "נדן", or sheath. Due to man's misdeeds, Hashem does not want His spirit to stay in its sheath, the body of man forever, but will destroy both (after 120 years).

Mixing of Lines

Sources:RambanBereshit 6:1-6About R. Moshe b. Nachman,¹⁵ Akeidat Yitzchak,  Abarbanel #1Bereshit 5 Question 10Bereshit 6About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, ShadalBereshit 6:1-4About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, R. S"R HirschBereshit 6:1-4About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch,

¹ See above that he maintains that they did not sin.

² He points out that even if one posits that the angels had sinned, it would not make sense that it was the humans who were punished.  The other sources would respond that the angels corrupted the rest of mankind, and bore wicked children who needed to be punished.

³ See also Bereshit Rabbati which explains the same.

⁴ He points to Bavli Chagigah 16a which contrasts ministering angels with שדים, asserting that only the latter are similar to man in their ability to bear offspring.

⁵ See Abarbanel.

⁶ See Sifre, Targum Onkelos, R. Shimon b. Yochai, R. Saadia, Rashi, R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, and Radak.

⁷ See also Shemot 7:1, Shemot 21:6 and Shemot 22:7-8.

⁸ See also "עִיר גְּדוֹלָה לֵאלֹהִים" in Yonah 3:3, "אַרְזֵי אֵל" in Tehillim 80:11 and "שַׁלְהֶבֶתְיָה" in Shir HaShirim 8:6

⁹ Almost all of these sources agree on this point, but do not say explicitly that they arrive at this conclusion from the language of  "וַיִּקְחוּ" .

¹⁰ See Bereshit 6, where Hashem tells Noach that he has decided to destroy the world, "כִּי מָלְאָה הָאָרֶץ חָמָס".

¹¹ The Sifre and Bereshit Rabbah do not address the verse.

¹² Ibn Ezra points out that some might argue that at the end of Chapter 5 the text shares that Noach was 500, which would only leave 100 (and not 120) years until the flood.  He responds that this is simply one of many examples where the text is achronological. In light of the fact that Chapter 5 is a genealogy list bringing the reader from Adam to Noach, it is not surprising that in this case the Torah might have preferred thematic order over chronological order.

¹³ R"Y Bekhor Shor suggests that Hashem is comparing the generation of the flood to Adam and Kayin.  Just as Hashem decided not to kill either Adam or Kayin when they sinned, since they were just mortal flesh, so too, this generation which is also just "בשר" should not be judged by the strict letter of the law.

¹⁴ Cf. Abarbanel who explains similarly but comes to the opposite conclusion.  According to him, Hashem is saying that He is no longer willing to judge leniently (as had for Adam and Kayin, knowing that their physicality was easy prey to desire).  This time, barring repentance, Hashem is to destroy the world.

¹⁵ At the end of his comments, Ramban asserts that the midrash brought in Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer best fits the language of the text, suggesting that that is really his preferred reading.