My dear readers! My heart breaks when I think of the simple fact that usually at this time of the year, around Simchat Torah, I would write about the Joy of a New Beginning – the Joy of rolling back the Torah scrolls, of dancing with the Torah, of beginning anew the Torah reading cycle. As you can imagine, it’s very difficult to write about joy now; in a very tragic sense, we were robbed of this joy – and yet, nobody can rob us of the word of God. Therefore, I still want to bring Hebrew insights to these pages: those details in the Word that can be seen in the original Hebrew text only, but I decided to do something different this year: since the format of this blog doesn’t allow me to discuss with you a Torah portion every week, I will focus on the names only. One of the greatest losses we experience when reading our Bible in translation only is the meaning of the Hebrew names. Translations and adaptations don’t simply change the original meaning, but render the names meaningless. Unless we take time to go back into Hebrew, the Biblical names of people and places in translation have no connection at all with the original reference points and ideas buried within the text itself. That’s why I’ll comment here on the names from the four weekly Torah portions we read each month. And this month, we’ll discuss the names of the primeval history—the first eleven chapters of the book of Genesis.
FIRST MAN AND HIS “BLOODY” NAME
(my British readers would probably love this title 🙂
The name of the first man – Adam – is the first and amazing example of the meanings we miss when we read the Bible in translation only. Before even discussing the name itself, I would like to ask you: when is the first time you meet Adam in the Bible?
Here the difference between the English and Hebrew texts is striking. When we read our English Bible, there is no Adam in Genesis 1 – we first encounter Adam in Genesis 2. (Most translations introduce him in Genesis 2:20, although some speak about Adam in verse 19). However, if we read this text in Hebrew, surprisingly, we find Adam in chapter 1 – Genesis 1:26. What’s going on here?
The explanation, of course, comes from the Hebrew language. While in English, Adam is always a personal name, in Hebrew it simply means “human”. In fact, in Hebrew the term for “human beings” is Bnei Adam – ‘the children of Adam’. In Gen. 1:27, “adam” is used in the collective sense: not only the individual Adam, but all humans are created on the sixth day. In Genesis 2 and 3, the generic and personal usages are mixed. This interplay between the individual “Adam” and collective “humankind”, and the ambiguous meanings embedded throughout the narrative, add a new dimension and bring additional depth to the crucial events of Genesis 3 – something that is completely missed in English translations.
There are many things we can say about this one little Hebrew name of three letters—many deep things that are not seen in translation. Two different words jump at us from this name. And the first one is dam – blood. Wow! Why would the word dam be within Adam? Maybe, it shows us that this creature is indeed flesh and blood? We know that the theme of blood goes through the entire Torah – through all the five books of Moses:
“But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood”[1]
“Then they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts”[2] –
“For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life”[3]
… but it all starts here, inside of the name Adam: this “bloody” aspect is a component of Adam’s identity from the very beginning.
There’s another Hebrew word that is connected to the original Hebrew word ‘adam’ – ‘adama’, the earth, or the ground. One cannot really see the etymological connection between ‘man’ and ‘ground’ in English translation, but in Hebrew, it certainly stands out. In Hebrew, when you say “Adam” you almost hear the word adamah in this name. In fact, they correspond and correlate one to another just as masculine and feminine nouns in Hebrew do – which means that their connection is very deep and intimate. For example, in Genesis 3, when God punishes Adam, it’s Adama that is cursed as a result of this punishment – another proof of this essential inner bond. It is very clear that this ‘earthly’ aspect is also a component of Adam’s identity. Why?
The traditional explanation says that the man is called Adam because ‘the LORD God formed man from the dust of the earth” (‘Adamah’). However, the great Rabbi of the city of Prague, Judah Loew ben Bezalel (‘Maharal of Prague’), was wondering why man was the only one to be called after the ground – after all, were not the animals also created from the earth? His answer was that, while the animals were created ‘almost completed’ (they grow on the outside but their minds remain basically at the same level), both man (Adam) and the land or ground (Adamah) evolve and develop; they were both created in a basic, pure status, and they both require long and hard work in order to reach their greatest potential and bring forth fruits.
These are the things that we see in the first man’s name in Hebrew. Undoubtedly, these “bloody” and “earthly” aspects form the original components, not only of Adam’s identity, but of God’s message to humanity: this “flesh and blood” man needs to be developed after he comes into this world, otherwise his “earthly” components prevail. We see this happening almost right away in Genesis 4, where both the words form one of the most tragic verses in the whole Bible: The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground (קול דמי אחיך צעקים אלי מן האדמה).
Now you would probably appreciate the answer that was given by a Jewish sage to the traditional question: To whom is God speaking in Genesis 1:26? His answer was: “God is speaking to you and to me—to everyone. He says: “If you agree, if you allow me into your heart, together – you and I – we will make a man (adam) from you!”
CAIN AND SETH: DIFFERENT NAMES OR DIFFERENT WORLDVIEWS?
In Genesis 4, Cain, the first born of Adam and Eve, killed his brother Abel. By the end of this chapter, another son was born to Eve. She called him Seth: “For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel”. The difference between the names of the brothers, Cain and Seth, is extremely significant in Hebrew, yet is completely lost in translation. What does this difference reflect?
The name Cain in Hebrew carries the meaning of something being “acquired”. This name referred to Eve’s action: she was the one who “acquired”. When God cursed the land and banished Adam and Eve from the Garden, He also gave them the promise that many read as the promise of a coming saviour. When we read: “Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the Lord,” we can see how strong her longing was for the lost place and for the return to this place. Probably, waiting for the fulfilment of the promise of Genesis 3 (and maybe also feeling guilty and trying to make up for her mistake), she felt and thought that she had to do something; that it was her task and her responsibility to remedy the situation. Apparently, she connected the birth of her son with the immediate fulfilment of this promise; she really hoped that through her son they would get back to the Garden they had lost. That’s why Eve called Cain by this name: she thought she “acquired” him from the LORD to fix the situation.
On the other hand, the name Seth expresses an altogether different worldview. In Hebrewשֵׁת (shet) means something like “provided”; the Hebrew verbלָשִית means “to appoint” or “to provide”. Pay close attention: in this case, the name refers to God’s action, not Eve’s. This difference is extremely significant and shows that by this point, Eve knows it’s not her efforts, but God’s grace alone, that can help them.
WHAT’S IN A NAME?
This hope of the return to the Garden moved from generation to generation. By the time Noah was born, people were already extremely tired of the curse on the land and waited eagerly for the fulfilment of this promise. That’s why Noah’s father regarded his son as one who should bring deliverance from the curse – as one who should provide comfort and rest. Noah is one of the most well-known characters in the Bible, virtually everyone knows who he was, but few remember Lamech, Noah’s father. However, Lamech is well worth remembering, not only because he fathered his son Noah, who would save the dying world through his faith and obedience, but also because he recognized this son’s special calling and mission by giving him a very significant name. Why did Lamech name his son Noah? What did he expect from him?
Noah’s name has a very prophetic meaning indeed. This root in Hebrew means ‘rest’, and from Lamech’s prophetic words we understand that he saw in his son the one who would be the “rest-giver”— the one who would provide deliverance and comfort from the curse. When God cursed the land and banished Adam and Eve from the Garden, He also gave them the promise of a coming savior. By naming his son Noah, Lamech hoped that he would be this promised savior. Evidently, Lamech felt the burden of toil upon an earth which God had cursed, and he looked for “relief from our work and from the toil of our hands”.[4] It is clear from Lamech’s words that even these first generations were extremely tired of this curse and waited for the fulfillment of the promise. Lamech regarded his son as the one who should bring deliverance from the curse, as one who should provide comfort and rest.
Thus, when we read this text in Hebrew, the allusion to Genesis 3:17 is obvious. .However, this allusion, as well as the prophetic meaning of the name “Noah”, is completely lost in translation.
[1] Gen. 9:4
[2] Ex. 12:7-23
[3] Lev.17:14
[4] Gen. 5:29
Excerpts from my books are included in this article (and many other posts here), so if you like the articles on this blog, you might enjoy also my books
As always, I would be happy to provide more information (and also a teacher’s discount for new students) regarding our wonderful courses (juliab@eteachergroup.com).
Join the conversation (No comments yet)