Difference between revisions of "Divine Plurals/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
m |
|||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
<point><b>"נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם" – What did the angels do?</b><ul> | <point><b>"נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם" – What did the angels do?</b><ul> | ||
<li><b>Consult</b> – According to Rashi (following Bereshit Rabbah) and R"Y Bekhor Shor, Hashem simply consulted with the angels regarding man's creation, but they did not actually do anything.  As evidence, they point to the verse, "וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם", which presents Hashem as the singular subject of the verb "ברא" and makes no mention of other beings.<fn>R"Y Bekhor Shor goes further to suggest that the root  "עשה" does not mean to create at all, but rather to fix that which is/will be created. (Cf. His comments tם Bereshit 1:7 as well).  Hashem does not speak to the angels about creating man, only about "fixing" man in their image, ie. making man a ruler.</fn></li> | <li><b>Consult</b> – According to Rashi (following Bereshit Rabbah) and R"Y Bekhor Shor, Hashem simply consulted with the angels regarding man's creation, but they did not actually do anything.  As evidence, they point to the verse, "וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם", which presents Hashem as the singular subject of the verb "ברא" and makes no mention of other beings.<fn>R"Y Bekhor Shor goes further to suggest that the root  "עשה" does not mean to create at all, but rather to fix that which is/will be created. (Cf. His comments tם Bereshit 1:7 as well).  Hashem does not speak to the angels about creating man, only about "fixing" man in their image, ie. making man a ruler.</fn></li> | ||
− | <li><b>Create </b>– Philo, Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel and Seforno, in contrast, suggest that the angels played an active role in creating man.  Abarbanel asserts that just as Hashem had the land actively draw forth vegetation since the two were naturally similar, he had angels abet him in creating mankind, | + | <li><b>Create </b>– Philo, Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel and Seforno, in contrast, suggest that the angels played an active role in creating man.  Abarbanel asserts that just as Hashem had the land actively draw forth vegetation since the two were naturally similar, he had angels abet him in creating mankind, as the two beings are alike in  having an intellect.</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"הָבָה נֵרְדָה וְנָבְלָה" – What did the angels do?</b><ul> | <point><b>"הָבָה נֵרְדָה וְנָבְלָה" – What did the angels do?</b><ul> | ||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
<li><b>Dirty work</b> – According to Philo, Hashem had the angels participate in creating man so that all the errors and wickedness of mankind could be attributed to these subordinate powers and not to Hashem.<fn>He does not address their necessity by the dispersal of the generation of the Tower of Bavel.</fn></li> | <li><b>Dirty work</b> – According to Philo, Hashem had the angels participate in creating man so that all the errors and wickedness of mankind could be attributed to these subordinate powers and not to Hashem.<fn>He does not address their necessity by the dispersal of the generation of the Tower of Bavel.</fn></li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Why specifically in these verses?</b> None of these sources adequately explain why it is only here that Hashem speaks of Himself in the plural.  If He often consults with angels, then why are there not more cases where the fact is shared?</point> | ||
<point><b>"בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ"</b> – One of the motivations of this position is the discomfort with suggesting that Hashem is referring to His own form in the words "בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ", for that could suggest an anthropomorphic God.<fn>See the opinion of the Karaite Benjamin Nahawandi, brought in R. Saadia's comments, who is so troubled by the idea that he goes as far as to say that the angels created man totally by themselves.  According to him the words, "נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם" are spoken by an angel and not by Hashem, and the phrase "וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים" also refers to an angel.  He then goes further to suggest that all of creation was in fact accomplished by the angels. R. Saadia questions how it is possible that a created being can himself create and brings numerous verses which speak of Hashem alone as the Creator.</fn>  Having the angels partner with Hashem allows one to explain that it is their form to which humans are similar.<fn>Thus Rashbam and Ibn Ezra explain that "צֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים" refers to the angels.</fn>  Many of these commentators, nonetheless, attempt to understand the terms in non physical ways, suggesting that they refer to the spirit or intellect.<fn>Rashi, Rashbam, and Seforno all assert that "דמות" refers to the capacity for knowledge, while Radak says both "דמות" and "צלם" can be used to refer to a spiritual form. Ibn Ezra and Seforno also suggest that the similarity between mankind and Hashem/angels might refer to the immortality of the soul.  Only Rashi seems to have no problem with suggesting that maybe the phrase "צלם" might speak of some physical aspect of Hashem Himself.</fn></point> | <point><b>"בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ"</b> – One of the motivations of this position is the discomfort with suggesting that Hashem is referring to His own form in the words "בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ", for that could suggest an anthropomorphic God.<fn>See the opinion of the Karaite Benjamin Nahawandi, brought in R. Saadia's comments, who is so troubled by the idea that he goes as far as to say that the angels created man totally by themselves.  According to him the words, "נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם" are spoken by an angel and not by Hashem, and the phrase "וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים" also refers to an angel.  He then goes further to suggest that all of creation was in fact accomplished by the angels. R. Saadia questions how it is possible that a created being can himself create and brings numerous verses which speak of Hashem alone as the Creator.</fn>  Having the angels partner with Hashem allows one to explain that it is their form to which humans are similar.<fn>Thus Rashbam and Ibn Ezra explain that "צֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים" refers to the angels.</fn>  Many of these commentators, nonetheless, attempt to understand the terms in non physical ways, suggesting that they refer to the spirit or intellect.<fn>Rashi, Rashbam, and Seforno all assert that "דמות" refers to the capacity for knowledge, while Radak says both "דמות" and "צלם" can be used to refer to a spiritual form. Ibn Ezra and Seforno also suggest that the similarity between mankind and Hashem/angels might refer to the immortality of the soul.  Only Rashi seems to have no problem with suggesting that maybe the phrase "צלם" might speak of some physical aspect of Hashem Himself.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Philosophical concerns</b> – These commentators are comfortable with the concept of angels and point to other cases in Tanakh which assume some sort of heavenly assembly andconsulation.<fn>See King I 22:19, Yeshayahu 6:2-8 and Iyyov 1-2. Cassuto questions these parallels, asserting that in all those cases it is explicit with whom Hashem is talking or consulting.  Thus, in Bereshit, too, if Hashem was really speaking to another, the verse should have specified as much.</fn> Most of them (with the exception of Rashi and R"Y Bekhor Shor) do not even find it problematic that they might have aided Hashem in creating man.  <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. Saadia</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Commentary Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>, however, questions the idea wondering how a created being can himself create. <multilink><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Cassuto</a><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="Prof. Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Prof. Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink> further argues that the rest of the chapter seems to emphasize how Hashem alone created.</point> | <point><b>Philosophical concerns</b> – These commentators are comfortable with the concept of angels and point to other cases in Tanakh which assume some sort of heavenly assembly andconsulation.<fn>See King I 22:19, Yeshayahu 6:2-8 and Iyyov 1-2. Cassuto questions these parallels, asserting that in all those cases it is explicit with whom Hashem is talking or consulting.  Thus, in Bereshit, too, if Hashem was really speaking to another, the verse should have specified as much.</fn> Most of them (with the exception of Rashi and R"Y Bekhor Shor) do not even find it problematic that they might have aided Hashem in creating man.  <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. Saadia</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Commentary Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>, however, questions the idea wondering how a created being can himself create. <multilink><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Cassuto</a><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="Prof. Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Prof. Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink> further argues that the rest of the chapter seems to emphasize how Hashem alone created.</point> | ||
Line 33: | Line 34: | ||
<category>Hashem Acting Alone | <category>Hashem Acting Alone | ||
<opinion>Utilized Earthly Elements | <opinion>Utilized Earthly Elements | ||
− | <p>Hashem's plural language | + | <p>Hashem's plural language included the earth, His tool in creation.</p> |
<mekorot><multilink><a href="RadakBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Kimchi</a><a href="RadakBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">cited in Radak Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Yosef Kimchi" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Kimchi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>, Ralbag,<multilink><a href="AbarbanelBereshit1-26" data-aht="source"> Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink>, Maasei Hashem,</mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="RadakBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Kimchi</a><a href="RadakBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">cited in Radak Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Yosef Kimchi" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Kimchi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>, Ralbag,<multilink><a href="AbarbanelBereshit1-26" data-aht="source"> Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink>, Maasei Hashem,</mekorot> | ||
<point><b>"נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם"</b> – Hashem was speaking of himself and the earthly elements whom He was going to utilize in creating man, as the verse says, "וַיִּיצֶר ה' אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים".  Hashem formed Adam's body from the earth and then infused into him his soul.</point> | <point><b>"נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם"</b> – Hashem was speaking of himself and the earthly elements whom He was going to utilize in creating man, as the verse says, "וַיִּיצֶר ה' אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים".  Hashem formed Adam's body from the earth and then infused into him his soul.</point> | ||
Line 43: | Line 44: | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> | ||
<opinion>Rhetorical Flourish | <opinion>Rhetorical Flourish | ||
− | <p>Hashem | + | <p>Though Hashem was speaking only of Himself, He did so in the plural.</p> |
<mekorot><multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Commentary Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonHaEmunotVeHaDeot2-6" data-aht="source">HaEmunot VeHaDeot 2:6</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="LekachTovBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Lekach Tov</a><a href="LekachTovBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="LekachTovBereshit11-7" data-aht="source">Bereshit 11:7</a><a href="R. Toviah b. Eliezer (Lekach Tov)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Toviah b. Eliezer</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit1-26-27" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor #1</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit1-26-27" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26-27</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit3-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 3:22</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>,<fn>This is the first suggestion brought to understand Bereshit 1:26. See above that R"Y Bekhor Shor also raises the possibility that Hashem was consulting with the heavenly beings, and understands Bereshit 3:22 accordingly.</fn> Ibn Kaspi, <multilink><a href="ShadalBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RSRHirschBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. S"R Hirsch</a><a href="RSRHirschBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="RSRHirschBereshit3-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 3:22</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, R. D"Z Hoffmann, <multilink><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Cassuto</a><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="Prof. Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Prof. Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Commentary Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonHaEmunotVeHaDeot2-6" data-aht="source">HaEmunot VeHaDeot 2:6</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="LekachTovBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Lekach Tov</a><a href="LekachTovBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="LekachTovBereshit11-7" data-aht="source">Bereshit 11:7</a><a href="R. Toviah b. Eliezer (Lekach Tov)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Toviah b. Eliezer</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit1-26-27" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor #1</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit1-26-27" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26-27</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit3-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 3:22</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>,<fn>This is the first suggestion brought to understand Bereshit 1:26. See above that R"Y Bekhor Shor also raises the possibility that Hashem was consulting with the heavenly beings, and understands Bereshit 3:22 accordingly.</fn> Ibn Kaspi, <multilink><a href="ShadalBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RSRHirschBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">R. S"R Hirsch</a><a href="RSRHirschBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="RSRHirschBereshit3-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 3:22</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, R. D"Z Hoffmann, <multilink><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Cassuto</a><a href="UCassutoBereshit1-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 1:26</a><a href="Prof. Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Prof. Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink></mekorot> | ||
<point><b>Way of the text or way of the world</b><ul> | <point><b>Way of the text or way of the world</b><ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Way of the text</b> – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the way of Torah is to sometimes speak of the plural in singular or male as female and vice versa<fn>He points to numerous verses as examples, such as "וּבְנֵי פַלּוּא אֱלִיאָב" in Bemidbar 26:8 or "וַתִּקַּח הָאִשָּׁה אֶת שְׁנֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים וַתִּצְפְּנוֹ" in Yehoshua 2:4.</fn> | + | <li><b>Way of the text</b> – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the way of Torah is to sometimes speak of the plural in singular or male as female and vice versa.<fn>He points to numerous verses as examples, such as "וּבְנֵי פַלּוּא אֱלִיאָב" in Bemidbar 26:8 or "וַתִּקַּח הָאִשָּׁה אֶת שְׁנֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים וַתִּצְפְּנוֹ" in Yehoshua 2:4.</fn> R. Hoffmann, in contrast, explains that the word "אלהים" specifically can be either plural, as it refers to the abundance of Hashem's powers, or singular, since all those powers are subsumed in one enitity.<fn>In addition to the verses here, he points to Bereshit 20:13 as another example where the proper name Elohim takes a plural verb (though not in the speech of Hashem).  Other such examples include Bereshit 35:7, Devarim 4:7 and  Devarim 7:23.</fn></li> |
<li><b>Way of the world – </b>R. Saadia and R. Hirsch suggest that, as is the way of kings and other honored people, Hashem sometimes speaks of himself using the "royal we".<fn>As support R. Saadia points to Balak's words, "אולי אוכל נכה בו" and Daniel's "דנא חלמא ופשרה נאמר קדם מלכא".  Ibn Ezra questions these examples, claiming that Balak was likely using the plural because he was referring to his army and that it was unlikely that Daniel would refer to himself in the roayl we when speaking to a king!</fn>  Cassuto proposes instead that when a person exhorts himself into action, he tends to use the plural, saying "let's go" and the like.</li> | <li><b>Way of the world – </b>R. Saadia and R. Hirsch suggest that, as is the way of kings and other honored people, Hashem sometimes speaks of himself using the "royal we".<fn>As support R. Saadia points to Balak's words, "אולי אוכל נכה בו" and Daniel's "דנא חלמא ופשרה נאמר קדם מלכא".  Ibn Ezra questions these examples, claiming that Balak was likely using the plural because he was referring to his army and that it was unlikely that Daniel would refer to himself in the roayl we when speaking to a king!</fn>  Cassuto proposes instead that when a person exhorts himself into action, he tends to use the plural, saying "let's go" and the like.</li> | ||
− | <li><b>Aramaic</b> - Shadal maintains that this is an Aramaic form. In Aramaic it is customary to use the plural to refer to a singular entity. | + | <li><b>Aramaic</b> - Shadal maintains that this is an Aramaic form. In Aramaic it is customary to use the plural to refer to a singular entity.<fn>He points to Daniel 2:36 and several cases in the Yerushalmi and midrashic literature as support.</fn> </li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Why specifically in these verses?</b> R. Hoffmann suggests that such plural "flourishes" only occur in verses</point> | <point><b>Why specifically in these verses?</b> R. Hoffmann suggests that such plural "flourishes" only occur in verses</point> |
Version as of 12:09, 8 August 2015
Divine Plurals
Exegetical Approaches
Partnership with Others
The plural form is used because Hashem was including the angels in His speech.
Sources:Philo,1 Bereshit Rabbah, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Rashi, Rashbam, Ibn Ezra, R. Yosef Bekhor Shor,2 Radak, Abarbanel #2,3 Seforno
"נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם" – What did the angels do?
- Consult – According to Rashi (following Bereshit Rabbah) and R"Y Bekhor Shor, Hashem simply consulted with the angels regarding man's creation, but they did not actually do anything. As evidence, they point to the verse, "וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם", which presents Hashem as the singular subject of the verb "ברא" and makes no mention of other beings.4
- Create – Philo, Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel and Seforno, in contrast, suggest that the angels played an active role in creating man. Abarbanel asserts that just as Hashem had the land actively draw forth vegetation since the two were naturally similar, he had angels abet him in creating mankind, as the two beings are alike in having an intellect.
"הָבָה נֵרְדָה וְנָבְלָה" – What did the angels do?
- Most of these commentators suffice by saying that Hashem spoke with the angels, but do not elaborate as to whether they actively helped in dispersing the nations.
- Abarbanel, though, claims that after the people sinned by building the tower,5 Hashem decided to remove His providence from the nations and give them into the hands of ministering angels instead. It is this that Hashem tells the angels when He says, "let us go down".
"הָיָה כְּאַחַד מִמֶּנּוּ לָדַעַת טוֹב וָרָע"
- Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor, and Radak6 maintain that here, too, Hashem is speaking with the angels and refers to them when saying "מִמֶּנּוּ".7
- Though Targum Pseudo-Jonathan agrees that Hashem is conversing with the angels, he obviates the problem of the plural differently, by understanding the word "מִמֶּנּוּ" to mean "from him" (from Adam) and not "of us".8
Why work with angels?
- Moral lesson – According to Bereshit Rabbah, Rashi,and R"Y Bekhor Shor this is a show of modesty. Hashem consults with the angels, not because He needs their advice,9 but to teach a lesson in humility to humans. If even Hashem asks permission of those lesser than Him before acting, all the more so should mankind.10
- Divine duties – Others might more simply suggest that Hashem often has intermediaries fulfill His will,11 and the cases discussed here are not particularly exceptional except for the fact that the Torah shares the heavenly discussion with the reader.
- Dirty work – According to Philo, Hashem had the angels participate in creating man so that all the errors and wickedness of mankind could be attributed to these subordinate powers and not to Hashem.12
Why specifically in these verses? None of these sources adequately explain why it is only here that Hashem speaks of Himself in the plural. If He often consults with angels, then why are there not more cases where the fact is shared?
"בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ" – One of the motivations of this position is the discomfort with suggesting that Hashem is referring to His own form in the words "בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ", for that could suggest an anthropomorphic God.13 Having the angels partner with Hashem allows one to explain that it is their form to which humans are similar.14 Many of these commentators, nonetheless, attempt to understand the terms in non physical ways, suggesting that they refer to the spirit or intellect.15
Philosophical concerns – These commentators are comfortable with the concept of angels and point to other cases in Tanakh which assume some sort of heavenly assembly andconsulation.16 Most of them (with the exception of Rashi and R"Y Bekhor Shor) do not even find it problematic that they might have aided Hashem in creating man. R. Saadia, however, questions the idea wondering how a created being can himself create. Cassuto further argues that the rest of the chapter seems to emphasize how Hashem alone created.
Polemical concerns – R"Y Bekhor Shor explicitly rejects Christian interpretations that the plural form might refer to the trinity, asking why Hashem would be inviting another to act, if He is "three in one" and all are of one mind. According to the Christian understanding, the verse should have been consistently in the plural, opening "And they said, let us..." rather than "And He said..."17
Hashem Acting Alone
Utilized Earthly Elements
Hashem's plural language included the earth, His tool in creation.
"נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם" – Hashem was speaking of himself and the earthly elements whom He was going to utilize in creating man, as the verse says, "וַיִּיצֶר ה' אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים". Hashem formed Adam's body from the earth and then infused into him his soul.
Why only by man? Ramban explains that despite the fact that the animals too were brought forth from the land, Hashem only prefaces man's creation with the statement "נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם" due to man's high stature.
"הָבָה נֵרְדָה" and "כְּאַחַד מִמֶּנּוּ" – This approach can only account for the plural language in Bereshit 1 and would have to explain the other instances in a different manner.
"בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ" – Troubled by the idea that the verse might be saying that Hashem has some physical shape, these commentators assert that these terms can refer to both a physical and spiritual form. Hashem is saying that man will be similar to the earth in his body, but to Hashem in his soul.
Philosophical concerns – This approach might be motivated to explain as it does due to a discomfort with the idea that angels helped to create man.18
Polemical motivations
Rhetorical Flourish
Though Hashem was speaking only of Himself, He did so in the plural.
Sources:R. Saadia Gaon, Lekach Tov, R"Y Bekhor Shor #1,19 Ibn Kaspi, Shadal, R. S"R Hirsch, R. D"Z Hoffmann, Cassuto
Way of the text or way of the world
- Way of the text – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the way of Torah is to sometimes speak of the plural in singular or male as female and vice versa.20 R. Hoffmann, in contrast, explains that the word "אלהים" specifically can be either plural, as it refers to the abundance of Hashem's powers, or singular, since all those powers are subsumed in one enitity.21
- Way of the world – R. Saadia and R. Hirsch suggest that, as is the way of kings and other honored people, Hashem sometimes speaks of himself using the "royal we".22 Cassuto proposes instead that when a person exhorts himself into action, he tends to use the plural, saying "let's go" and the like.
- Aramaic - Shadal maintains that this is an Aramaic form. In Aramaic it is customary to use the plural to refer to a singular entity.23
Why specifically in these verses? R. Hoffmann suggests that such plural "flourishes" only occur in verses