Opening lines are certainly important. Case in point, I always spend way too much time working out how to begin a TftD. Typically I have a thought I want to convey; that's the body. I try to end with a nice tag line that summarized the main point in a memorable way (with varying success). The first line/paragraph is really meant to pique the reader's interest in reading more. I typically do that with either a cute story (often involving my grandchildren), or an interesting fact (often drawn from my physics background), or a straight up question on a Chazal (often based on a Rashi). The cute stories and interesting facts are meant to seem irrelevant, but they always exemplify some dimension of the topic expressed in the TftD.
Walking around pregnant in one's ninth month, they say, is like carrying a 16 lb bowling ball with you every place you go. (Having never been pregnant, I can neither confirm nor deny that statement.) Try this: When said pregnant women comes home after a very long day and sites down at the kitchen table where she had her morning coffee, tell her, "You know, physics says that you have actually expended zero work in carrying that pregnancy around all day." (I probably should have mentioned that you want to first remove yourself and any throwable objects from out of arm's reach. Having been around pregnant ladies and having very little tact, I can confirm the importance of following the advice offered in that statement.)
Quite obviously she has expended a lot of work in carrying that pregnancy all day. Which does not contradict the fact that from a physics standpoint, she absolutely has done zero work. It is not at all trivial to resolve our common sense about her state of exhaustion and the physical definition of work. You may also ask her, "How was work today?" When asking that, of course, you are using the word "work" in a completely different sense altogether.
The Torah begins, as we all know with: בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹקים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ. I shall leave that untranslated, but you all have a general idea. Rashi begins his famous commentary on the Torah with a cryptic quote from Chazal: The Torah really didn't need to start this way. It should have simply started with the first mitzvah that G-d gave the Jewish people; namely, the sanctification of the new month. Rashi gives an answer -- which requires it's own exposition; not my issue. True enough that the word Torah comes from the root "to instruct", to technically speaking an instruction manual ought to begin, continue, and end with... well, instructions. However, from Rashi's answer it is clear that he is not asking on a technicality. Rashi -- in his first comment to the Torah -- wants you to know that all is not as it seems and this really shouldn't be here except for the ancillary compelling reasons.
The Ramban straight up asks the question: How could the Torah not start with the work of creation!? After all, our entire faith is founded upon the belief that we are nothing but a creation of the one and only Creator. Regardless of what you call it... why would I think that our central text should not start with the work of creation?
Simple, says the Ramban, because we cannot understand it. We so deeply and fundamentally cannot understand the work of creation, that anything written about it is going to look wrong and be misinterpreted. In that first verse, the word הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם does not mean what is commonly translated as heaven or sky; the word הָאָֽרֶץ does not what what is commonly translated earth or land. Why, then does it use those words? Because they are the correct words. Analgously to the difference between the common definition of work and the precise physical definition of work. With enough work (yep; pun intended), of course, one could understand how they are related.
The work of creation, though, is so difficult beyond words to understand. So esoteric, in fact, that even the introductory material can only be taught to one student at a time -- to ensure there is no misunderstanding between talmid and rebbi. In situations such as those, the topics are best left to the Oral Law and not the Written. Now that the Torah had to write this (see Rash and supercommentaries), though... what does it mean? Essentially explains the Ramban, the first verse tells us that G-d started the work of creation by creating both the physical (הָאָֽרֶץ) and spiritual (הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם) realities. הָאָֽרֶץ, if you will, refers to all that physics aspires to describe. הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם refers to spiritual world that connects more directly to the Creator. Man, the pinnacle of Creation, is the link between them and the reason for the Creation.
The much sought "Theory of Everything" -- aka ToE -- will be expressed as a single, compact equation using symbols that look so familiar; yet we know it belies an extraordinary complexity that is belied by its elegant simplicity. All of that and infinitely more is contained in the exquisite beauty of our Torah.
Walking around pregnant in one's ninth month, they say, is like carrying a 16 lb bowling ball with you every place you go. (Having never been pregnant, I can neither confirm nor deny that statement.) Try this: When said pregnant women comes home after a very long day and sites down at the kitchen table where she had her morning coffee, tell her, "You know, physics says that you have actually expended zero work in carrying that pregnancy around all day." (I probably should have mentioned that you want to first remove yourself and any throwable objects from out of arm's reach. Having been around pregnant ladies and having very little tact, I can confirm the importance of following the advice offered in that statement.)
Quite obviously she has expended a lot of work in carrying that pregnancy all day. Which does not contradict the fact that from a physics standpoint, she absolutely has done zero work. It is not at all trivial to resolve our common sense about her state of exhaustion and the physical definition of work. You may also ask her, "How was work today?" When asking that, of course, you are using the word "work" in a completely different sense altogether.
The Torah begins, as we all know with: בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹקים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ. I shall leave that untranslated, but you all have a general idea. Rashi begins his famous commentary on the Torah with a cryptic quote from Chazal: The Torah really didn't need to start this way. It should have simply started with the first mitzvah that G-d gave the Jewish people; namely, the sanctification of the new month. Rashi gives an answer -- which requires it's own exposition; not my issue. True enough that the word Torah comes from the root "to instruct", to technically speaking an instruction manual ought to begin, continue, and end with... well, instructions. However, from Rashi's answer it is clear that he is not asking on a technicality. Rashi -- in his first comment to the Torah -- wants you to know that all is not as it seems and this really shouldn't be here except for the ancillary compelling reasons.
The Ramban straight up asks the question: How could the Torah not start with the work of creation!? After all, our entire faith is founded upon the belief that we are nothing but a creation of the one and only Creator. Regardless of what you call it... why would I think that our central text should not start with the work of creation?
Simple, says the Ramban, because we cannot understand it. We so deeply and fundamentally cannot understand the work of creation, that anything written about it is going to look wrong and be misinterpreted. In that first verse, the word הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם does not mean what is commonly translated as heaven or sky; the word הָאָֽרֶץ does not what what is commonly translated earth or land. Why, then does it use those words? Because they are the correct words. Analgously to the difference between the common definition of work and the precise physical definition of work. With enough work (yep; pun intended), of course, one could understand how they are related.
The work of creation, though, is so difficult beyond words to understand. So esoteric, in fact, that even the introductory material can only be taught to one student at a time -- to ensure there is no misunderstanding between talmid and rebbi. In situations such as those, the topics are best left to the Oral Law and not the Written. Now that the Torah had to write this (see Rash and supercommentaries), though... what does it mean? Essentially explains the Ramban, the first verse tells us that G-d started the work of creation by creating both the physical (הָאָֽרֶץ) and spiritual (הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם) realities. הָאָֽרֶץ, if you will, refers to all that physics aspires to describe. הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם refers to spiritual world that connects more directly to the Creator. Man, the pinnacle of Creation, is the link between them and the reason for the Creation.
The much sought "Theory of Everything" -- aka ToE -- will be expressed as a single, compact equation using symbols that look so familiar; yet we know it belies an extraordinary complexity that is belied by its elegant simplicity. All of that and infinitely more is contained in the exquisite beauty of our Torah.
Comments