"God saw that the light was good" (Gen 1:4)

Reading through the story of creation

Last time, we finished v. 3 of Genesis 1, in which God made a decision and then – it’s not clear how – light came into being. Now two more things will happen. I’m going to pull apart the first half of this verse, so the literal translation that begins the comment will not match my more idiomatic translation immediately below. I’ll continue to integrate some transliterated Hebrew into the comments. Those who haven’t yet learned to decode the Hebrew alphabet [you can learn here, from my friend Tamar Kamionkowski] can always listen to the audio to get the sounds of Hebrew into your head.

4 God saw that the light was good, and God distinguished light from darkness. 

וַיַּ֧רְא אֱלֹהִ֛ים אֶת־הָא֖וֹר כִּי־ט֑וֹב וַיַּבְדֵּ֣ל אֱלֹהִ֔ים בֵּ֥ין הָא֖וֹר וּבֵ֥ין הַחֹֽשֶׁךְ׃

God saw the light וַיַּ֧רְא אֱלֹהִ֛ים אֶת־הָא֖וֹר The next thing that happens after light comes into existence, and again with the special verb form that Biblical Hebrew uses for telling a story in sequence, God “saw” (va-yar) the light.

It is still sometimes said that, by contrast with Greek culture, Judaism “emphasises hearing rather than seeing.” That’s not really accurate (those who have the patience and the money, or a library card, can read more about this in my dissertation). It’s really a 19th-century us vs. them idea that’s out of date but has lingered on in many people’s minds. In fact, seeing and sight and the use of one’s eyes are the primary image Biblical Hebrew has for considering and  evaluating things. 

When Jacob “saw” his father-in-law’s “face” and realized it was not the same as it had been (Gen 31:2), it means not only that his eyes viewed Laban’s face, but that he had an insight about Laban’s behavior toward him — he realized something he had not previously understood.  Here at the beginning of creation, God “sees” the light and is (as it were) checking his work.

that it was good כִּי־ט֑וֹב The light that came into being as a result of God’s decision was “good.”

Note to those who are working through the Hebrew with me: Hebrew, biblical and modern alike, does not the word “is.” In Hebrew, “Me Tarzan, you Jane” would be perfectly grammatical as is. (Okay, it should be “I Tarzan.”) But as in Russian and no doubt other languages, a juxtaposition of words with no verb demands that English speakers fill in some form of the verb “to be”: ה֣וּא ט֔וֹב hu tov ‘he good’ would be translated as “he is good.” And you can expect to see a variety of English words translating Hebrew’s Swiss Army conjunction, כי ki.

As with English good, the Hebrew word tov can indicate quality, approval, or the opposite of evil.  Whatever it means here, we can say two things: (1) This first, cosmic description of creation uses the word tov over and over again; creation is consistently described as “good.”  (2) Did I say consistently? It actually occurs seven times, just like the 1+6 occurrences of “there was light” + “so it was.” (3) This evaluation precedes and thus appears to prompt the next consecutive action in our story.

In Exodus 2, a woman gives birth to a baby, and the first thing that happens is: ‏וַתֵּ֤רֶא אֹתוֹ֙ כִּי־ט֣וֹב ה֔וּא va-tére oto ki tov hu ‘she saw him, that good he’ – using this same unusual syntax to say, “She saw that he was good.” (The NJPS translates tov here as “beautiful,” King James that he was “a goodly child,” NRSV that “he was a fine baby.”) Jewish tradition spins this resemblance into a story that “When Moses Was Born the House Was Filled with Light.”

In our story, however, this evaluation has a perplexing consequence. We’ll talk about that next time.