Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Is יְעוֹפֵף a command, or an adjective?









Here is the pasuk in question, with its trup:





Avraham said...

I didn't quite understand how this fits into the machlokes chazal. From what I saw, the point was that if ye'ofef is an "adjective," then the ofos were made completely out of water, but if it's a verb, then there's room for interpretation, being that since they were created on the fifth day, they must have been created from the sea, hence "sea-dirt." I would have said the other way: if it's an adjective, then one pasuk says water, and the other says dirt, so it must have been both. If it's a verb, then "piresh bemakom acher," and they were made totally out of adamah (which is not an opinion in chazal-making it completely talui on the second pasuk, whether vayitzer means create or gather). On the other hand, this would imply that half of the ofos' briah came from the adamah and half from the water, but there are many midrashim that discuss how the fifth day constitutes the toldos of the yamim, so maybe indeed the first tzad is right. (Of course, even then they're still mostly from the yamim even if some is from the adamah.) You didn't really weigh in on this. Thoughts?

joshwaxman said...

Unfortunately, I don't have the presence of mind right now to really have any deep insights into it. And I wrote this a week or so ago, though I only posted it now, so I am even a bit out of it.

I'll give my analysis without looking at either what they or you say, and compare with what you said. (Just finished. It is the same, so I agree with you.)

The fifth day command, as an adjective:
"And God said: 'Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and with the fowl that fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.'"

In this manner, the creation of birds must have happened at least **in part** from water, because that is what 'swarm' means. If another pasuk elsewhere indicates that they were created, along with beasts, from earth, then we harmonize and end up with mud.

If a verb, then:

No one said anything about creation of these birds, just that they should fly. If so, they could be created just from the earth.

And now I look, and this is what you are saying. Good point. Though as you note, that is not an opinion of Chazal. So I agree with your question. More later, bli neder.

joshwaxman said...

From the words in the post, what it seems is that:

if adjective, then JUST the fifth day, and just water since that was the day that Hashem said ישרצו about the birds. And we will discard the pasuk from perek 2 in the way they describe.

if verb, then both. why? because the creation was not via ישרצו of the water. it just mentions that the birds should fly (on day five), but not their means of creation. If so, the pasuk in perek 2 fills a vacuum as to the method of creation for birds. And the method of creation mentioned in perek 2 does not contradict any method of creation in perek 1. Therefore, perek 2 says they were created from earth, and only from earth. Great. From what earth? The answer is from the earth at the bottom of the sea. And that is why birds are mentioned as being introduced (even though their method of creation was not mentioned) on day 5. And mud at the bottom of the sea = rekak.

I think that that is what they are saying. I still agree that your explanation is possible. But they are trying to fit these two parsings into the machlokes of Chazal, and are able to manage it in this manner.

Anonymous said...

I was wondering if you could get to some of these or if you ever formerly addressed any of these questions?

joshwaxman said...


I dropped a couple of answers to some of them, though I don't know they will be satisfying...

Anonymous said...

Thank You


Blog Widget by LinkWithin