#breishit

[judaismandsuch]

A Brilliant Biblical Commentary that I can't Believe

Now, as many of you may know Humanity/ Man is Created twice in Breishit (Genisis) the First time in Breishit 1:27: "And G-d created man in His image....male and female He Created them."

The Second time in Breishit 2:7, and finished in 2:22: "...[G-d] formed man from the dust of the earth.....and Man became a living being." "[HaShem] fashioned the rib He took from man into a woman." (obv a bunch of stuff happens between verse 7 and 22).

Now important notes: 1)There is a lot of established commentary on all of this, but that means there is too much to succinctly summaries other views, so if you are curious about the established interpretations for all this look it up yourself. 2) All the garden of Eden stuff is a cohesive story in chapter 2-3, not mentioned at all in relation to the first creation.

Anyways there is a lot of explanation and reconciiation of these verses, as it is troubling the HaShem would describe the creation of humanity twice, and the stories be very different. There are answers, brilliant ones, bad ones, etc. But I believe I am the first to have this response.

So... it is indeed troubling, until you look a few chapters later, specifically chapter 6.

Now between chapter 2 and 6 a bunch of stuff happens: The garden of Eden, Cain and Abel. Cain taking a wife. The First city builder, the first smiths, the first tent dwellers (more accuaretly the specific ancestor of those, but w/e). The descendents of Cain and Seth, the subtle decrease in life span, etc.

Now aside from the general "Wow this is bullshit, it human civilization didn't progress in that manner." or "Humanity never had a lifespan that long!" Bad faith arguments, you run into an issue.

Who the fuck are they marrying? Hell, it's implied that there are other humans around when Cain kills Abel, where did those guys come from?

Again, loads of commentary but here we are going to my tying all this together:

Chapter 6: The Children of G-d and the Nephilim. 6:2: "The children of G-d saw how beautiful the daughters of Man (or humanity) were, and took wives from among those that pleased them." 6:4:"It was then that the Nephilim (lit. the fallen) appeared on earth when the children of G-d cohabited with the daughters of Man who bore them offspring, they were the Heroes of Old, Men of Great renown."

Now, this has it's own issues, mainly: What the fuck? Who are the children of G-d? Who are the fallen (Nephilim)? And who the hell are the Heroes of Old?

Again, loads of answers for all that already. (BTW, in Numbers/Bamidbar 13:33 Nephilim are mentioned again. by the spies, who use the word to mean 'giant', since that is a quotation of a human speaking, whereas this is not, I can safely ignore "Nephilim means giant" in my exegesis).

Now my commentary (though clever you, you may have already put it together!)

We already have fallen children of G-d mentioned: Adam and Eve. Them getting kicked out of the Garden of Eden can definitely be considered 'Falling'.

And if we consider that there were two separate 'Humans' those in the Garden (Adam and Eve), and those outside from chapter one, we get the answer to who Cain and Seth are marrying.

And then, from Adam's line we get a list of Great Humans: The City Builder, The Smith, The Musician. They could definitely be considered the heroes of old.

Are there issues with this explanation? A couple, none (scripturally) too challenging. Is this explanation original? As far as I know: Yes. But that may just mean my research is garbage.

But the biggest problem with this explanation?

It DEMANDS a fully literal acceptance of that portion of Breishit. If HaShem intended for it to be metaphorical, or a pat explanation b/c creation wasn't important, why would there be an interlock of the two stories?

There wouldn't be.

And I am NOT a (full) biblical literalist. (I do believe that one has to be within a small margin of error a biblical literalist from Avraham to the end of the Torah for Judaism to have validity).

So I have this beautiful, pat, explanation that I can't believe.

Terribly Annoying.

[nonstandardrepertoire]

How does the book of Genesis begin? In this first installment of One Word Torah, I take a deep dive into the first word of the Bible and wend my way thru questions of meaning, bias, and Biblical scholarship.

[rickpoet]

The Torah starts over tonight which means the creation of the world and things quickly turning sour. Caution, you may get wet.

Read the text at: https://jewishpoetry.net/the-floods-a-comin-a-poem-for-parsha-breisheit-aliyah-7/

[worfsbarmitzvah]

I've thought about how gentile Abrahamic religions are antisemitic religious colonialism before and it pisses me off a ton and I'm thankful you said it, but now that it's someone besides me saying it, I'm gonna give some criticism (please don't take this personally)

Everything up to Abraham (particularly Adam and Noah) have G-d creating and tending to the entirety of humanity, right?

During Abraham's time, it should stand for something that G-d tends to Hagar and Ishmael, right? Especially since Hagar gives her own name for G-d and He makes a promise to Ishmael that he'll be the father of nations (or something like that). And I think the Prophet Muhammad is supposed to be descended from Ishmael.

And Noahides are a whole Thing in all this too ofc.

But the bigger thing is there are definitely texts and interpretations that take G-d being the G-d of the Hebrews and extend it to Henotheism, but for the Jews who are purely monotheists and say there is truly only one G-d in existence and He belongs only to us, isn't it cruel to totally deny the vast majority of humanity the Divine, especially if He is still their Creator and controls the world(s) they live in?

this whole thing is coming from the assumption that judaism was always monotheistic. it wasn’t. at one point in time we were monolatrous, meaning we only worshipped one g-d but didn’t deny the existence of others. hell, the language used in the torah supports this (the way the text treats egypt’s g-ds being perhaps the most prominent example). hashem has always been our specific g-d, since before the idea emerged that he is the only g-d. our/the world’s perception of him may have since evolved into this idea of one singular deity, but it has not always been that way.

hagar and ishmael still come from our mythology surrounding our particular g-d. the idea then emerged in islam, which was born with the same jewish roots that christianity was, that muslims were descended from ishmael. and, like, i don’t really mind or care about that either way. ishmael’s not a super major figure in our folklore. the story, along others in breishit, genuinely does lend itself to the idea that hashem can be the guardian of many different peoples, families, and nations. and to tell the truth i don’t genuinely have much of a problem with sharing some folklore and roots.

but it NEEDS to be acknowledged where those roots come from. for so much of history, right up until today, christians and muslims have pretended they know our g-d and our folklore and our history better than we do. they have MURDERED us for worshipping our g-d and practicing our customs in OUR way, the way we have been since before their religions and cultures emerged. if the religions that find their roots in our culture were more willing to listen to us, respect us, and learn from us, maybe i’d be less angry. but they’re not. they’ve tried and tried and tried to eradicate us and erase where they came from and make our stuff theirs. i don’t think it has to be like that forever but i don’t think we’re very close to it not being like that as of now.

also, i can’t think of a single cultural mythology that doesn’t have a creation story of some kind. it’s just the kind of thing that societies do when they try to make sense of their place in the grand scheme. the fact that we believe our g-d created the entire world does not actually mean that that story or that g-d belongs to the entire world. the fact that everybody thinks our creation myth applies to and belongs to them is just more evidence of how widely our culture has been co-opted.

there’s nothing we can do to change the fact that our g-d has been made universal (either through the natural evolution of our theology or from colonialism and cultural theft, more likely a combination of both) and i have to be fine with that. sure, fine, the people who have adopted our g-d as their own without actually bothering to understand us at all can outnumber us by orders of magnitude.

but why does our holy city have to also be their holy city? the christians have the vatican and rome and islam has mecca and medina. why do they need jerusalem? why can’t even that just be ours?

again, i have to push this aside and be okay with sharing if i truly want to have peace in our land. and i do, because i love eretz yisrael and yerushalayim more than i hate what has been done to her. the situation has grown so far beyond the injustices i am angry about that it is impossible to right those injustices without creating brand new ones. so i will be okay with sharing our g-d, our texts, and our land. but that doesn’t mean the injustice of it won’t burn like a fire in my heart.

[maayan00sh]

The funniest thing about Gabriel sorting the books in the bookshop by the first sentence is that's literally how we title portions of the Torah in Hebrew.

Like, we don't talk about Genesis, we talk about the book of Breishit. The book of "in the beginning."

What Torah portion are we reading this week? Oh, this week it's "You are standing" followed by "And he will walk."

Jimbriel knows what's up lol

[2q5b]

VAYECHI

By Ezra

December 26th, 2023

I am a diaspora Jew. This is partly by accident and partly by choice. I was born in the U.S. My Jewish grandparents came to Boston from Poland and Germany after the Nazis made them into child refugees. My mother, raised Catholic, chose Judaism, married my father and converted.

As for me, I could move to Israel, the Promised Land, anytime I want. Many people I know have done this. But I don’t want to.

How can this be? I am a religious person. My prayerbook is dripping with longing for this land, full of texts written by people who couldn’t get there. The Torah that I study week after week is in large part a chronicle of my people inhabiting that land and then trying to return to it. And even if I prefer to stay in the US, how is it that millions of traditional religious Jews are happy to live all over the world, when they could easily relocate to their beloved spiritual homeland?

Today, that land has descended into hell. The IDF perpetrates mass murder, Hamas insists on acts of war, prisoners suffer in desperate conditions, Palestinians starve en masse in a Gaza that has become a ghetto.

It is more obvious than ever that Jewish statehood in the Holy Land has not ended our spiritual exile. A Jewish state may be a political reality, but it is not a spiritual solution. It cannot satisfy our longing. We yearn for something far, far deeper. We yearn for the repair of the world, the end of falsehood and bloodshed, the reign of peace and justice.

I think this deeper yearning, not satisfied by land acquisition, goes way back, back before the Exodus, back to the late chapters of the book of Breishit.

In this week’s Torah portion, Jacob and his children are living happily in Egypt. Before Jacob dies, he asks that they bury him in Canaan. After his death, the Jewish people travel together to the Promised Land for his burial and funeral. It’s not that big a deal. It doesn’t take forty years. They just ask the Pharaoh, he says yes, and they go. And then they come back to their homes in Egypt.

These are, maybe, the first diaspora Jews, and their exile seems voluntary. They could move to Israel, but that’s not where they live, that’s not where they’re raising their children and involved in government and generally thriving. And more: there is a deep purpose, perhaps one they’re not even aware of, for their exile in Egypt.

Jacob’s death ends the period of the patriarchs and matriarchs, the avot and imahot. These iconic three generations of ancestors–Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Rachel and Leah–are credited as the originators of our spiritual tradition. Genesis has been largely a book not so much about a community as about these towering individuals, whose personalities and accomplishments still reverberate in our liturgy, our mythology, our souls. 

And from the beginning there is this strange pressure for each of these generations to have one single spiritual inheritor. A chosen child to continue the mission, to receive messages from God, never mind the familial discord this may create. It’s Isaac, not Ishmael. It’s Jacob, not Eisav. And Jacob seems poised to father the next great inheritor.

But something changes in Jacob’s generation. His plan to marry Rachel goes awry when he is tricked into marrying Leah first, and he eventually also marries two of their servants for a total of four wives, with whom he fathers thirteen children. Rachel is the last one to give birth, and her firstborn son Joseph seems, early on, to be that special chosen one, the one Jacob favors. But that plan, too, goes awry. Joseph has ten older brothers who are not happy about this favoritism, ten Eisavs to worry about compared to his father, who had a hard enough time fending off just one. And the old model, of one saint passing the torch to the inheriting saint, finally breaks. The brothers turn on Joseph and sell him into slavery in Egypt.

Joseph, like the three patriarchs, is a singular personality. His individual story is dramatic and righteous. But what he’s not is the next Isaac, the next Jacob. There is no next Jacob. A new era has begun: the era of B’nei Yisrael, the children of Israel (Jacob’s alternate name). This becomes the name of the nation which will be used throughout the Bible. The dynasty is no longer a dynasty, but an expanded family in which all are equal inheritors of the tradition, with no single clear leader. A large group in solidarity and spiritual alignment.

Simultaneous with this shift is the movement from Canaan to Egypt. Our parasha is the end of Breishit and the beginning of Shmot, the second book of the Torah, which will be radically different than the first. Jacob gives his parting blessings to his children at the dawn of the exile and transmits a crucial message: “God will be with you and will bring you back to the land of your ancestors.”

They could return right now. The text makes sure we know that they are able, shows us how easy it is. But they don’t. Instead they allow their holy land to exist as a horizon of spiritual possibility. Here the Promised Land becomes what it remains for the rest of the five books of Moses: an ever-receding myth, somewhere we approach, but never fully reach.

And this is how the Jewish people as we know it is born.

Exile is dangerous, make no mistake. Though Joseph wants his family to live with him in Egypt and share in the power and abundance he has attained there, Jacob needs explicit encouragement from God before going. “Have no fear of descending to Egypt,” God told him in last week’s parasha, “for I shall establish you as a great nation there. I myself shall descend with you to Egypt and I myself will also surely bring you up.” Jacob is right to be afraid: in Egypt, his descendants will face mass enslavement and murder. And yet there is something about exile that is necessary to the Jewish mission in the world, that both expands and deepens it. As Joseph tells his brothers when they are first reunited, “Don’t be distressed…God has sent me ahead of you to ensure your survival in the land and to sustain you for a momentous deliverance.”

Exile is not all bad, the Torah tells us. In fact it is indispensable. It has a very real purpose. It widens the capacity of the Jewish people. It allows us to grow beyond a closed-off little family that talks to God. It allows our spirituality to impact history.

The late 19th-century Polish hasidic thinker known as the Sfat Emet is one of my personal favorite Torah commentators. I doubt my love for his teachings can be separated from my love for my own Polish grandfather, z”l. Living amidst rampant and institutionalized anti-Semitism, the Sfat Emet taught, “This is the purpose of exile: that Israel make visible God’s kingdom, which is indeed everywhere. The true meaning of the word galut (exile) is hitgalut (revealing), that the glory of God’s kingdom be revealed in every place.” 

These two Hebrew words share a root for a good reason. Exile is dangerous, one is uncovered. Without protection, vulnerable. Showing oneself, speaking truth, can be dangerous in the same way. The faith of the Jewish diaspora is that this kind of vulnerability can be worth it. If you stay in your fortress, you are safe but you are cut off, you cannot communicate. If you grab your flashlight and walk into a dark, uncertain world, you light up the road on which you walk.

The transformation of the patriarch era into an era of communal expansion in Egypt has a similar kind of opening quality, an uncovering that also entails a loss. The patriarchal intimacy with God, a clarity and protection, give way to an imperfect but much more widely shared relationship with God.

Jacob himself feels this loss as it happens. His blessing of his twelve sons in this week’s parsha begins with a mysterious introduction. “Assemble yourselves,” he announces, “and I will tell you what will befall you in the latter days.” B’acharit ha-yamim. But he never seems to get to that information, nor does he specify what days he means. What follows instead is an oblique poem containing cryptic blessings for his children. An old midrash sheds light: “He wanted to reveal the end of the exile, but the Shchinah (the Presence of God) departed him, so he began to speak of other things.” 

This failure to communicate is connected to exile. Far from home under foreign rule, Jacob is in some way blocked from prophecy. A kind of perfect awareness has been lost to him, signaling the end of his era of patriarchal perfection and the beginning of something else, something larger and deeper.

When the Sfat Emet, a wise man living in the exile of his own time, tries to teach about this midrash, he too is partly blocked, his memory fails him. He teaches, “I believe my grandfather quoted the Rabbi of Pr-shiss-cha (Przysucha) as wondering why Jacob wanted to reveal the end. His answer was that when the end is known, exile is made easier. That’s all I remember, but it seems to mean the same: revealing the end means knowing there is an end to exile, and that shows it to be but a matter of hiding, not a force of its own… Jacob our Father just wanted there to be no mistake about this, that it all be obvious, but that goal eluded him. You need to struggle to find truth.” 

The contemporary spiritual exile, the one you and I are living through, is not easy, at times it is horrific. How it will end, how a better world could be revealed, is not yet clear. But if we are struggling to find the truth, struggling to uncover it, then we will not have wasted our time. Wherever we are in the world, it is our task right here and now to reveal and enact the good and the holy, the better world that is possible, hiding in plain sight.

Chazak Chazak v’Nitchazeik.

[israelseen1]

RAVKOOK ON PARSHAT VAYESHEV: THE DIVINE COINCIDENCES THAT MOVE HISTORY TO ABSOLUTE GOOD

RAVKOOK ON PARSHAT VAYESHEV: THE DIVINE COINCIDENCES THAT MOVE HISTORY TO ABSOLUTE GOOD “אֵ֣לֶּה ׀ תֹּלְד֣וֹת יַעֲקֹ֗ב יוֹסֵ֞ף…” “These are the chronicles of Yaakov:Yosef…” (Breishit  37:2) Thus the Torah begins to chronicle an extraordinary series of events that lead by the end of the Parsha to Yosef, alone and forgotten, in the Pharaoh’s prison in Mitzrayim-The Land of the Narrow Straits. Let…

[parashapix]

Vayishlach

: וַתִּגַּשׁ גַּם-לֵאָה וִילָדֶיהָ, וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ; וְאַחַר, נִגַּשׁ יוֹ��ף וְרָחֵל--וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ. And Leah also and her children came near, and bowed down; and after came Joseph near and Rachel, and they bowed down. (Breishit 33:7)

[judaismandsuch]

A Small Note on Gilgamesh (and arguments based on parallels)

So, I saw a post that briefly refrenced the simalarities between the flood story in the Epic of Gilgamesh and the story of Noah.

Now, I am not going to recount the 2, because... I don't want to, but suffice to say the similarities are not simply surface level, but are fairly significant.

Now, I have seen that used as a 'GOTCHA' for Judaism/the bible. "This story clearly predates Judaism, so the religion is clearly bulshit."- though not exactly phrased that way- is the thrust of the argument.

I want to address *exactly* how stupid that argument is/give several counter arguments that exist with a quarter ounce of thought.

Assuming that Judaism *is* correct in it's entirety, and that therefore the story of Noah actually occurred as written, then of fucking course another culture in the area would have a near identical version of story! It happened! It's collective history! It would be weird if they didn't!

There was a major flood in the area, it permeated the collective unconscious and, due to base cultural similarities, both cultures independently developed there own similar myths.

The flood story was incredibly common across all cultures in the area, and when G-d was creating the mythological history if it was ignored people would have rejected the creation myth, so HaShem took the most popular one (Gilgamesh version) re-adjusted it to fit the morals and lessons that were desired, and put it in.

It is a portion of Jewish theological doctrine (not a necessary aspect, but a popular view) that G-d went to each people and offered them the Torah, but it was rejected by all but the Israelites. If this occured, the ancient Babylonians would have heard the Noah story, and then re-jigged it to match their beliefs in the epic of Gilgamesh.

The dating of Israelites and/or the creation of the bible is off. So the 'historical analysis' of the bible puts the creation of Breishit at around 500 BCE*, but the Exodus at around 14th c. BCE (usually), Assuming that the Jewish view of the creation of the Torah is correct, it would be written at 14th c. BCE as well. The oldest copy of the Gilgamesh flood myth is 1640 BCE, toss in a touch of wiggle room, and you could have Gilgamesh written post exposure to Israelite nation.

Abraham is dated to about 1800 BCE, if HaShem told him the flood story, there would have been more than enough time for him to tell it to others, and for it to make its way to Assyria.

Now, basically all of these do depend on one running with the pre-supposition that Judaism is actually G-d given (or at least willing to accept that for the sake of the argument), which I feel is kinda ok in an argument about whether or not a religion is full of crap. After all, if you refuse to accept any argument with 'the religion is to some degree true' as a premise, no argument about its validity can function.

But I am not endorsing any of these arguments per se, rather I am giving them to show how stupid using another religions flood myth to discredit Judaism is.

The same form of argument goes for a lot of the caananite religion based 'gotchas' that people have tbh.

*k I'll be honest, the arguments about the bibles age and authorship bug me *so* much. They all feel preseneted in a 'if you disagree with this you're a fucking religious nut job' kind of way, and really run with 'lack of physical evidence before such and such a date', which... its a book, written on hide. How much did you expect to survive in an agrarian society almost constantly at war which went through multiple periods of straight up ignoring it and reverting to paganism? Like, they would have pushed them more recent if the dead sea scrolls hadn't been found! I know it's a tad fundamentalist of me, but damn those arguments annoy me.

[rickpoet]

A poem for Torah portion B'reishit by Rick Lupert from his book "God Wrestler: a poem for every Torah Portion. See more at www.JewishPoetry.net

[israelseen1]

RAV KOOK ON PARSHAT VAYISHLACH:RESTORING THE BROTHERLY LOVE OF YAAKOV AND ESAU

RAV KOOK ON PARSHAT VAYISHLACH:RESTORING THE BROTHERLY LOVE OF YAAKOV AND ESAU “וַיִּשְׁלַ֨ח יַעֲקֹ֤ב מַלְאָכִים֙ לְפָנָ֔יו אֶל־עֵשָׂ֖ו אָחִ֑יו אַ֥רְצָה שֵׂעִ֖יר שְׂדֵ֥ה אֱדֽוֹם-Yaakov sent messengers ahead to his brother Esau in the land of Seir, the country of Edom.” (Breishit 32:4) Yaakov is finally returning home. Twenty-two years earlier he fled his twin brother’s very angry wrath. Yaakov…

[unpickled-olive]

(OP, you're about to get a wall of text from me, someone you've never interacted with. Sorry. I'm responding to the ask because I've seen that argument/idea a lot recently.)

The thing is that Judaism has been about interpretation and non-literal reading for millenia. Some people bring up "eretz Yisrael" as if it's the first thing that can't be interpreted figuratively.

What about eruv lines? It was unreasonable to consider carrying something down the street a sin, so Jews reinterpreted the "private domain" mitzvot for Shabbat.

What about Jews in New York ruling microscoping crustaceans kosher? It was unreasonable to consider drinking water with invisible things in it a sin, so the crustaceans were interpreted as not treyf.

What about Breishit stating that the world was created in 6 days? It goes against basic science, so was reinterpreted as allegorical.

What about execution and animal sacrifice being explicitly prescribed in the Torah? Jews have found so many ways to circumvent execution, reinterpreting or even just disregarded mitzvot that call for the death penalty.

So why can't Eretz Yisrael be interpreted non-literally? Why can't this one thing evolve? Especially when, as with previous cases, there are very important ethical issues to consider?

This is a genuine question because I'm trying to understand your side and not get involved in internet fights.

You keep saying you pray to Eretz Yisrael and not Medinat Yisrael. But if you're praying and the prayer yearns for a return to Eretz Yisrael, how do you interpret that? How is that not about returning to the Land of Israel (country there or not)? You say Eretz Yisrael specifically, not Am Yisrael (you did say a few times you were praying to the People of Israel so maybe it's a miscommunication, assuming not though). I'm confused how you reconcile [praying to return to the land of Israel] with [being against the return to Israel].

If you can't explain that I understand but that's my sticking point with this whole thing. This is why I'm personally having trouble taking your arguments seriously. Hope to hear back, have a nice day/night.

i mean i pray to eretz and am. but to answer your question, medinat has no reason to exist. the geographical location of our holy land will always remain. we don’t need a jewish state to make it so

jews who yearn for the holy land have every right to want to return and to return. we don’t need medinat yisrael to do so

the other side of my argument points out a lot of the antisemitism in the palestinian charters. which yes they did go back on that, and yes there are still several antisemitic flaws in certain structures of their government as well. but that is something we could have pushed harder for. that is something we could’ve gotten the UN involved in. dividing up the land and expelling people was cruel and unnecessary to the people presently there

i hope that makes sense…

[parashapix]

Vayeitzei

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר לָבָ֔ן הַגַּ֨ל הַזֶּ֥ה עֵ֛ד בֵּינִ֥י וּבֵֽינְךָ֖ הַיּ֑וֹם על־כן קרָא־שְׁמ֖וֹ גַּלְעֵֽד: וְהַמִּצְפָּה֙ אשר אָמר יִצֶף יְהֹוָ֖ה בֵּינִ֣י וּבֵינֶ֑ךָ כּי נִסָּתר אִ֥ישׁ מֵֽרֵעֵֽהוּ: Jacob then took a stone and erected it as a monument. Jacob said to his kinsmen, “Gather stones,” so they took stones and formed a mound, and they ate there on the mound. (Breishit 31:45-46)

[adamavshamayim]

Soo we’re in a new cycle of the Torah now and I want to post some form of short thoughts on the parsha because, let’s be honest, when I tried to post a full length dvar Torah here every week I stopped after maybe three. But I do want to keep myself reading the parsha and finding something to share about it each week.

Anyway I was sitting in shul this morning as we read breishit. And I know people like to talk about the first day, and the sixth day, and Shabbat. Or, of course, gan eden. But the fourth day jumped out at me this time.

On the fourth day:

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אלוקים יְהִ֤י מְאֹרֹת֙ בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם לְהַבְדִּ֕יל בֵּ֥ין הַיּ֖וֹם וּבֵ֣ין הַלָּ֑יְלָה וְהָי֤וּ לְ��ֹתֹת֙ וּלְמ֣וֹעֲדִ֔ים וּלְיָמִ֖ים וְשָׁנִֽים׃

G-d said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate day from night; they shall serve as signs for the set times—the days and the years ~

Hashem doesn't tell us every chag every year when to start it. Hashem created the sun, moon and stars to tell us when the moadim are, the festivals, and the days and the years. We walk into kabbalat shabbat in bright daylight, we walk out in darkness. We keep track of sunrise, sunset, and three stars. We remember what day of the Hebrew month it is based on what the moon looks like each night. In a world where it’s easy to survive under fluorescent lighting 24/7, not paying attention to night or day, Judaism asks us to know when the sun rises and sets.

Often when I'm asked why my Judaism and environmentalism dance in tango, my first reaction is not about brachot or tzaar baalei chayim or waiting after meat or trees or any of my usual rant topics. My gut thought is often zmanim. Which is often a surprise to myself. But really, I think, the way we mark time, the way we pay attention to the time of day, month and year, the solar/lunar calendar, is one of my favorite parts of Judaism. And right here in breishit, Hashem tells us that marking time is the reason He created the sun and moon. Hashem doesn't wait until days or months come up in the context of any specific calendar related mitzvah to explain this. No, it's clear from the outset that the active practice of observing Judaism is about paying attention to the sun, moon, and stars, which is difficult to do without going outside. I mean yeah you can look at your watch and know the zmanim and say havdallah without going outside, but how cool is it to after that, walk outside and see dark, and go oh wow, there are stars, of course there are, because we just said havdallah. It's not just a neat coincidence! It was created this way. And BH that if you ever want to see the sunset and you know when minha and maariv can be said that day, you know when to go outside, without having to look it up.

[mirroryears]

cain?

where's abel?

[afrenomes]

English. Even though I know the Hebrew names of the books, it’s more like I’ve memorized the order of them in Hebrew. So, in my head, instead of immediately knowing that Numbers and B’midbar are the same book, I’d have to think “Breishit, Shmot, Vayikra” before I finally get to B’midbar. Idk if that makes any sense, but it’s just too clunky for me to default to Hebrew for naming the books, but I would at least know what you were talking about if you said them in Hebrew.

Question to English-speaking diaspora Jews: How do you typically refer to books of the Tanach? Is it by their Hebrew name (e.g. Bereshit) or by their English-given name (e.g. Genesis)?