[Avodah] Local, Non-Global or Global Flood

[Arie Folger]

R'ZS wrote, regarding Rashi on Bereishit 1:1:
> So Rashi tells him no, it doesn't mean that, it means that they
> were created for the sake of two "reshises".  He doesn't like
> that, so Rashi tells him if he wants to avoid drush then he'll
> have to read it as if it said "bereshis bero".

Actually, I think that the above analysis emphasizes Rashi's secondary
point, while missing his main point. To borrow from the title of a
work that uses the kind of analysis I want to suggest here, What's
bothering Rashi?

What bothered Rashi is, first and foremost, that it is incongruent to
suggest that G"d created heaven and earth in the beginning, since
heaven was created on the second day, and earth on the fourth. The
primordial waters were the first thing in existence, it seems.

So, Rashi says, either read "bereishis" as derash, or as semikhut. THE
POINT IS NOT THAT IT IS DERASH OR SEMIKHUT, but that it would be
incongruent to read the verse as meaning "in the beginning G"d created
heaven and earth."

Of course, I already hear you scream that in 2:4, Rashi finds a way to
claim heaven and earth had already been created on day one. Well, that
shows that there is an (intentional) evolution in Rashi's commentary.
At 1:1, he claims it was incongruent, while in 2:4, once we have read
beyom 'asot haShem E-lohim shamayim vaarets, he gives another,
conflicting interpretation, that 1:1 is literal, and that creation
included one additional, earlier stage.

I suggest that when reading Rashi without preconceptions, the
coherence and attractiveness of this suggested interpretation will
readily be grasped.

Kol tuv,

KT,
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Basler Gymnasium experimentiert mit Chawrutá-Lernen
* Where Will We Find Refuge ... from technology overload
* Video-Vortrag: Psalm 34
* We May Have Free Will, After All
* Equal Justice for All
* Brutal Women of Nazi Germany
* Gibt es in der Unterhaltungsliteratur eine Rolle für G"tt?