These Are the genealogies: the Hebrew genre of toledot
“A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden…and became four headwaters” (Gen.2:10)
setting the toledot scene
“These are the genealogies…” (elleh toledot….) is a verb-less clause in Hebrew that conceals a mystery that scholars are still seeking to understand.[1] In my first assignment on genre I examined the genre of genealogy in the Hebrew Bible in the context of a comparative study of a wider Near Eastern Culture. In this assignment I want to examine the concept of genealogies not just in regard to linear and segmented lists of names and their role and function in the Hebrew Bible but within a broader genre which some scholars refer to as the toledot function or formula but could also be referred to as the genre of toledot.[2] However, within this genre is found other genres such as narrative, legal and poetic as well as the linear and segmented genre of genealogies which in modern Hebrew are called shorashim (roots).[3] However, when these other genres occur in the Hebrew Bible they serve the purpose of the genre of toledot (the spiritual and genealogical dna of Hebrew Biblical literature). I will first discuss the broader aspects of the genre of toledot and then focus or zoom in to two examples in the Hebrew Bible and see how they reflect the general conventions of the toledot genre.
My hermeneutical approach is a sanguine one in which the bigger picture or story (universal) needs to be demonstrated before moving to the smaller detailed analysis (particular). A melancholic hermeneutical approach would begin with the particular (smaller unit) and move to the universal. For the sanguine exegete the story is the most important, and the melancholic exegete the detailed facts.[4] In this essay I will also discuss this genre of toledot (an expansion of the genre of genealogy) in the context of a contemporary hermeneutic. For the typical person of sanguine temperament the hermeneutic comes first in priority and is overarching, whereas the typical melancholic exegete starts with a detailed exegesis and then develops a hermeneutical approach. My approach to exegesis and hermeneutics is that of a participant and believer, which may differ from the exegetical and hermeneutical approach of an observer who is a non-believer.[5]
Beginning in the 2nd century AD the sanguine and mystical approach (esoteric) to exegesis is found in the school of Rabbi Akiva and the melancholic and logical approach (exoteric) to exegesis in the school of Rabbi Ishmael.[6] Both schools used the four senses but the Akibans emphasis remetz(allegorical) and sod (mystical) and the Ishmaelis the peshat(literal historical) and drash (moral homiletical).[7] Rabbi Akiva developed the teachings of Nehunia ben HaKanah a disciple of Menachem the Essene and Rabbi Ishmael developed his thirteen exegetical principles from the seven exegetical principles of the school of Hillel the Pharisee.[8] Both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses.[9]However, Beattie may disagree with me as he felt that in modern scholarship there was too much philosophical and midrashic exegesis (drash) and not enough philological and literal exegesis (peshat).[10] I do feel some sympathy with Beattie’s sentiment but don’t think the different ways of exegeting should necessarily exclude the others.
Meaning of Toledot
Toledot is usually translated in the English Bibles as ‘generations’. Its root is ילד which refers to ‘begetting’ or ‘being born’ or ‘giving birth’ as well as the word for child or boy (yeled). Matthew Thomas mentions that toledot has also been translated as offspring, descendants, history and family history. However, the term seems, to scholars of the Hebrew Bible, to not just refer to biological generation or the shorashim (roots) but is stretched to a broader meaning that seems more cosmic.[11] Sarah Schwartz perceives the term toledot, not only has the meaning of biological descendants but as Ibn Ezra taught, it can also mean chronicles. In Hebrew the Books of Chronicles are called Dibrei ha-yamim(words/matters/things of the days). Ibn Ezra refers to Proverbs 27:1 “what the day may bear” (יִומ מה ילד)where ילדis used in a metaphorical sense. Thus toledot also has a meaning ‘to bear or describe future chronological events or days’.[12] This more nuanced understanding of toledot perceives the Torah and Genesis, not as a mainly historical narrative but as a genealogy with a family story or history accompanying and filling out the family genealogy. The Greek LXX translators obviously saw the centrality of the concept of toledot in the first book of the Bible, as they named the first Book of Bereshit as Genesis, which is the Greek for the Hebrew word toledot.
The function of Toledot Genre
Rendburg holds that each toledot section of material has a single anthologist (someone who draws on the oral traditions and records them) and that there is single redactor who gathers all these anthologies into a unified piece of literature by the use of the toledot clause.[13] Some refer to the Priestly writer of the Documentary Hypothesis as the Redactor.[14]Rendburg believes that this final Redactor was in the time of the united kingdom of David and Solomon. Soggin while seeing much value in Rendburg’s ideas doesn’t think he has proved that the final redactor was in the days of David and Solomon.[15] Regardless of whether a Solomonic scribe was the final redactor or not, I think that Rendburg does demonstrate that there was a Solomonic editor. Wiseman in 1936 after a study of the recently discovered Near Eastern texts proposed that there was no reason that Moses couldn’t have possessed written records that were handed down from the time of the Patriarchs, which he then redacted for his purposes. When the Documentary Hypothesis had been proposed and theories of long oral traditions speculated, scholars did not think that there was written literature from such early times.[16] In reality there was written literature from before the time of Abraham and Abraham came from a very literate part of the world. The further study of genres of the ancient world have also increasing demonstrated the literary sophistication of those times. Since 1936 even more incredible discoveries have been made that re-enforces Wiseman’s insights.[17]
The more traditional belief that Moses was the single author (with the assistance of his Scribes) that firstly compiled and redacted these anthologies, then later Solomon edited it and that, along with the whole of the Hebrew Bible (minus the deutocanonicals), Ezra (the Priestly writer) re-edited it, is also possible. Ezra may have deliberately placed the Chronicles at the end of the Hebrew Bible so that the toledot formula would encompass the whole Bible. Evidence to support this can be seen that in 1 Chronicles there are 8 mentions of toledot.[18] Just as the Torah- Genesis-Deuteronomy - was considered the heart ((לבbecause it started with bet (bereshit) and ended with lamed (Yisrael) so 2 Chronicles also ended with a lamed (ve-yaal). This expanded the idea of the word of God as a Divine Heart to the whole of the Tenach. Cassuto and others considered that the first toledot clause in Genesis 2:4 included not only the section after the clause but also that before it in Genesis 1.[19]
The Divine Heart which is 32 (לב) in gematria and thus the 32 aspects of Wisdom in the Divine Heart, are the ten sayings (linked to the 10 sefirot) and 22 Elohims of Genesis 1 (alluding to the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the 10 Nekudim). The mystical Rabbis connect this to 1 Chronicles 29:11 where they perceive the sefirot (Divine attributes, energies or emanations). Besides the 10 sefirot, there is one sefirah (daat/ experiential knowledge) which is a hidden sefirah which makes the number 11.[20] The ten sefirot are also associated with the concept of the tree of life set in a mystical garden or apple orchard.[21] There are 11 schema toledot in Genesis according to Schwartz, though some scholars exclude Genesis 5:1 because it uses zeh (this) instead of elleh (these) and thus describe a 10 toledot schema.[22] Six of these elleh toledot are prefixed with the letter vav (ו) and vav is considered to represent the male Son and the six lower sefirotof chesed (mercy or loving kindness) –yesod (foundation) in Jewish mystical thought. Jewish mystical though is based on a mystical exegesis of the Hebrew text of the Bible. Thomas perceives that the use of the six vav toledot clauses (Gen.10:1; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9) are those which have a co-ordinate function and the four non-vav clauses (Gen.2:4; 6:9; 11:10; 37:2) are those that have an independent function. Thomas lists Gen.5:1 with the independent clauses, thus making five independent ones.[23] This gives the schema and structure to Genesis.[24]
It would seem to me that Ezra the Priestly editor of the Torah of Moses, developed this Mosaic toledot structure and schema and arranged the 22 Hebrew books of the Bible (representing the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the 22 pathways of Wisdom within the Heart) as the unified family genealogical story of the people of Israel.[25]However I do not necessary agree with Thomas’ use of the terms independent and co-ordinate but I prefer the term ‘major section’ for that toledot section that introduces a genealogically important figure and ‘sub-section’ for the one that is linked to the previous ‘major section’. I do not think that the major sections are independent of other sections but there is a continual linguistic and conceptual linking of the sections.
It should be noted that there are actually 13 mentions of toledot in Genesis (Gen.10:32 and Gen.25:13 לְתוֹלְדֹתָ֖ם) but most scholars ignored them as part of the toledot structure preferring a structure of 11 or 10 toledot.[26] The number 13 has a deep significance in Judaism and the Torah recounts the 13 aspects of Divine Mercy (Chesed) in the Book of Exodus.[27]Jacob has 13 children (12 sons and one daughter) and there are 13 Tribes of Israel.[28]Could an understanding of the role of the genre of toledot be enriched with deeper reflection on the role of the 13 toledot as a structural feature of Genesis (Bereshit)? In Jewish gematria both the word love (ahavah) which is associated with the sefirah of Chesed as its quality and the word for one as in unity (echad) is also 13. Is this alluding to the reality that this is not just a genealogical family history but a love story between Y-H-V-H and his people of the 13 Tribes of Israel? Does the lamed and mem as prefix and suffix to toledot in these two ignored 12th and 13thtoledot serve some kind of linking purpose as לmeans ‘for or to’ and מmeans ‘from’ as a prefix but pluralizes as a suffix? I also find it interesting that ל is the 12th letter of the Hebrew alphabet and מ the 13th letter. The l’toldotam of Gen.10.32 is separated from its elleh by three words and the one in Gen.25:13 is separated from its va-elleh by 4 words. It would seem to me that this emphasis on the elleh in the midst of a subsection of the Toledot of Gen.10.1, which then in 11.1-9 tells the events of the Tower of Babel, has an important function in the toledot narrowing process of the genealogical story.[29] That this adding of mem as a suffix turns a feminine plural construct noun into a masculine third person plural noun may also have some significance.[30]
Thomas also perceives that the toledot of Numbers 3:1 is the only one of 16 toledot in the Pentateuch outside Genesis that is part of his toledot structure for the Torah of Moses.[31] He also believes that the use of the toledot genre in Genesis creates a trajectory that focuses on the family story or chronicle of Israel. I also note that this trajectory seems to be leading to the importance of the descendants of Joseph and Judah. Whereas, the use of the toledot in the rest of the Pentateuch focuses on a trajectory leading to Aaron and Moses and the role of the Levitical priesthood, according to Thomas.[32] One could argue in agreement with the insights of Rendburg, that Genesis was redacted by Solomon or a royal scribe concerned with the unity of the House of Judah and the House of Ephraim as two important halves of the Solomonic Kingdom.[33] If it was redacted later in the time of the two Kingdoms, a scribe from either side would more likely downplay the other side’s importance in the family story.
For the purposes of this essay I will use one example of an independent or major section toledot and one example of a co-ordinate or subsection toledot for my deeper exegetical analysis. For a further contrast I will choose one that is a shorashim form of toledot (Gen10:1) and one that is not (Gen. 2:4).
Toledot of Genesis 2:4: Heavens and the Earth
“These are the genealogies of the Heavens and the Earth, when they were created, on that day the Lord God made land and skies...”[34] This first toledot has been very confusing to scholars studying the genre of toledot in the Hebrew Bible.[35] This led to the broader understanding of the meaning of toledot.[36] Some scholars interpreted this heading in a more cosmic manner of the creation or universe giving birth. However Schwartz is not convinced that this reflects a Hebraic understanding of the creation.[37] On a peshat (literal or simple) level of reading the text I may agree with her, but I also believe that on the more spiritual levels of remetz(allegorical/ metaphorical) and sod (mystical/ anagogical) it could be read in this manner. St Paul seems to have a concept of the whole of Creation groaning and longing like a ‘woman in labour’ to give birth to the sons of God, which is drawn from a mystical reading of the Jewish tradition.[38]
On the peshat level, the term toledotrefers to human genealogy and the family stories that enliven and give purpose and direction to those names in the genealogies. I would agree with Collins idea, that the word aretz (without the ה) should be translated as land rather than Earth.[39] Gen. 2:4 means that the story is moving from the Cosmic Blueprint that describes the Creator Elohim bringing the Earth (ha-aretz) and the Heavens or Cosmos (ha-shamayim) to a human frame of reference of land (aretz) and skies (shamayim). There is a significance of meaning, beyond the purpose of the grammar, that the letter hahהis left off to demonstrate this shift in the story. For the first time the Divine name Y-H-V-H is mentioned as it represents God descending through the four worlds to encounter mankind.[40] The Ramban (Nachmanides) gives an alternative to b’hibaram (בְּהִבָּֽרְאָ֑ם) ‘when they were created’ as b’hah baram ( ב־ה בראם) ‘with הthey were created’. He then links this הto the final הin the Divine Name.[41] This final ה represents the world of assiyah(making or action) which is alluded to in Gen.2:4 with the word asot (עֲשׂ֛וֹת) ‘made’. This day that is linked with ‘they were created’ refers to the sixth day when Adam and Eve were created (bara) and formed (yetzah). Thus the ‘they were created’ may not refer to the Earth and the Heavens or land and skies but to Adam and Eve.[42] The so-called second Creation account is actually a more detailed genealogical story (toledot) about how the sixth day unfolded in the land of Eden. It is not another telling of the creation of the whole Earth and the Cosmos but of the land of Eden in which the Lord God makes a beautiful and special garden for Adam and Eve (mankind) out of his love for them.[43]
As mentioned above Cassuto held that the toledot heading of Gen 2.4 could include the Creation account above it as part of that toledot.[44] Ouro would agree, as he perceives a textual unity between Gen.1 and Gen.2-3 on the peshat level, in opposition to the scholars who follow the Documentary Hypothesis. He believes there is only one universal Creation account in Gen.1 and he refers to the one in beginning in Gen 2:4 as the Garden of Eden Account.[45] Ouro through a textual analysis of Gen.2-3 believes that there is a thematic and linguistic unity that demonstrates a single author or redactor to this account.[46] Ouro and Wenham posited the Toledot heading or clause of Gen.2:4 with an antithetical chiastic structure that tied the Creation Account of Gen.1 with the Garden of Eden Account.[47] This would seem to confirm my own understanding as the centre of the chiasm are the Hebrew words hibaram and asot. I believe this refers back to Adam and Eve and the sixth day of the Creation Account in Genesis 1. The hah(ה) in front of shamayim and aretz in Gen2.4a refers back to Gen.1:1. Thus I think that the chiasm looks like this:
ha-shamayim (the Heavens)
ha-aretz(the Earth)
hibaram(they were created)
asot(made)
aretz(land)
shamayim (skies)
Ouro also sees that Gen.2.4 -3.24 has, what he calls, “an antithetical chiastic macrostructure”. At the heart of this chiasm are the verses Gen.2:15bc (working in God’s Divine Will) and Gen.3:23 (working in the human will). Thus it is focused on man’s work or story.[48] The whole of the genealogical story of man is how mankind lived in the Divine Will, then lost that and descended into the miasma of the human will. The Promise (transmitted or birthed in each generation through the toledot narrowing) is the returning to the Divine Will step by step as a new birthing (ללדת) into the Kingdom of the Divine Will.
Gen 2.4 and following describes how the Lord God (Y-H-V-H) created (bara) man’s soul and formed (yetzah) their body and then activated (aseh) them. He created all for man- the Earth and the Heavens, the land and the skies with all their creatures were given into man’s stewardship. According to the Rabbinic Sages (chazal) the sixth day represents moving from the Primordial (Kadmon / Charos) time or days (of Atik Yomim) to Chronos time or dibrei ha-yamim.[49] This begins the genealogical chronicles of human kind. Even though this Toledot is told in an aetiological narrative form the genealogical concern is clear by introducing a more detail description of the founders of the genealogy Adam and Eve and their children especially Cain, Seth and Abel and their descendants.[50] Eve is described in genealogical terms as the mother of all the living.[51] One may wonder about the genealogical or toledot purpose in the more detailed description of the descendants of Cain, when this lineage would be destroyed in the Flood. However the wives of Noah’s three sons may have been descended from the Cainites and thus are considered the ancestors of all of mankind after the Flood too.
Thomas sees the idea of Divine Promise as a part of the toledot function as well as the process of narrowing or focusing on the next link in this genealogical story.[52] The toledot clause or heading is a genealogical focal point to which the traditional Patriarchal stories can be gathered in order to make a rhetorical impression on the reader.[53] This idea of the genealogical Divine Promise is in a sense foretold in this first Toledot in Gen.2:10-14 when read on the level of allegory (remetz). The River (Nahar) which is a masculine singular represents Adam and his seed who pass through the garden and out to the other side (of the Flood) in the form of four headwaters (rashim which is masculine plural) that represent Noah and his three sons from whom all humanity descends. Thus in allegorical form the Divine Promise is revealed which will unfold in the next toledot sections. This allegory even reveals clues to the identity of three of the rashim(heads or rivers) with Noah’s sons and their movements over the earth after the Flood. The description of Pishon alludes to Japheth and the spread of his seed to the north (Havilah), Gihon alludes to Ham and the spread of his seed to the South (Cush or Africa) and the Tigris to Shem and the spread of his seed to the Middle East (Ashur or Assyria). There is no description for the fourth river Euphrates as it refers to Noah himself.[54] This will be further revealed in the toledot subsection, which I will discuss next, of the Table of the Nations beginning in Gen.10:1.
Toledot of Genesis 10:1: The Sons of Noah
“And these (ve-elleh) are the genealogies of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham and Japheth and their sons who were born to them following the Flood…” Here we see the use of the vav (and) in front of the word elleh(these) to represent this as a subset of the previous Toledot rather than an independent one. Thomas refers to this subset as co-ordinate.[55]Thomas holds that the use of the vav has a significant effect on the meaning and function of the Toledot subsection. The toledot clause without the vavintroduces information that stands apart from its context while the toledot clause with the vav is linked to the information that has preceded it.[56]
Gen.10 is a shorashim or genealogy that is a segmented and linear toledot and to us moderns is more of what we think about when we think of a genealogy. It is interesting to note how the toledotclause or heading has a play on words with toledot (genealogies) and vayivaledu (and were born) which both have yalad ((ילד as their Hebrew root. The previous shorashim toledot heading in Gen 5.1 was still concerned with man’s created connection with the Divine by the use of the word bara (created) which links it to Gen. 5.1-2. In 5:1 bero is used and in 2:1 hibaram(they were created) which links it to the Gen.2:4 toledot as well as the sixth day of the Creation. In fact the first half of Gen.5:2 is a repeat of Gen.1:27. It is only after stressing the human-divine connection that the rest of Genesis 5 gets on with the human activity of begetting (yoled). Gen.10.1 however doesn’t mention the God-connection but gets straight to the business of the begetting. Does this reflect the redactor’s concern to demonstrate how the godly concerns of Adam and Noah are rapidly forgotten after the Flood and will only be restored beginning with Abraham?
Thomas refers to this toledot as the Toledot of Shem because he sees that it’s genealogical narrowing purpose to be on the descendants of Shem.[57]While I would agree that the narrowing function of the toledot is central to this, as to all the Toledot sections, I think that the listing of the descendants of Ham and Japheth have an importance beyond being used as a tool of the narrowing process of the genealogies. In fact, Thomas while seeing the narrowing process for the whole of this section, states that this is the first toledot heading or clause that does not have a narrowing focus as it includes all the sons of Noah and their descendants. All of them are also subjects of the Divine Promise that the world would not be totally destroyed by a Flood again.[58]
Kaminski has an interesting discussion about the reason that the descendants of Japheth and Ham are mentioned before the descendants of Shem. She and other scholars have noted that the secondary lines are discussed first and then the line of promise which is considered the primary line. This is used in a way that allows for the immediate descent to the next section of the genealogy of the promised lineage.[59] Kaminski also notes how the order of primogeniture is often reversed in the lineage of the genealogical focused lineage of the promised seed. The younger is often seen as the son of choice. In the genealogies of Japheth and Ham in Genesis 10 the primogeniture is preserved. For example in Gen.10:2, the sons of Japheth are listed. While only two of the sons’ offspring are listed, that of the first son Gomer (Gen.10:3) and the fourth son Magog (Gen.10:4), they are listed according to the primogeniture of Gen.10:2. However in the genealogy of Shem subversion is found. For example, the sons of Shem are listed in Gen10.22 (Elam, Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, Aram) and like the sons of Japheth only two (Arpachshad and Aram) are selected to list their sons in turn. However the fifth son Aram’s sons are given first in Gen.10:23 and the sons of the third son in Gen. 10:24.[60]
There may also a link to the allegory of the Pardes (mystical Garden) and the Garden of Eden and its four headwaters (rivers) mention above in the Toledot of Gen.2:4. The description of the descendants of Japheth, Ham and Shem (in that order) also follow in Gen.10. Noah represents peshat פas the father of the three spiritual senses - with Japheth ר(remetz), Ham ד(drash) and Shem ס(sod).[61]Could this be seen as hidden Promise (in Gen.2.10-14) read allegorically and revealed Fulfilment in Genesis 10?
We see throughout the genealogies of Genesis as well as in the whole Bible that it is often the younger son that is chosen to carry the promise or the birthright. Seth is the younger brother of Cain and Abel, Shem is the younger brother of Japheth and Ham, Abraham is a younger brother of Haran and Nahor, Isaac is the younger brother of Ishmael, Jacob is the younger brother of Esau, Joseph is a younger brother of Reuben, Levi, Simeon and Judah, Ephraim is the younger brother of Manasseh, Moses is a younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, David is the youngest son of Jesse, Solomon is a younger son of David and Bathsheba.
A Contemporary Catholic Toledot Hermeneutic
In studying the concept of toledot and its use in the Hebrew Bible I have come to the conclusion that it is not just a function or formula but is a genre and a genre which includes many other genres in its service. Today’s generation are interested both in genealogy and story-telling and a hermeneutical approach to Scripture that recognises this could engage the people of our time. A genealogical story of our family is a personal story that engages each human person. This toledot genre also provides an understanding of the underlining unity of the Scriptures. The Documentary Hypothesis of past generations, while having some value, tended to fragment Scripture into pieces and has led to a loss of faith in many. However, the toledot reading of Scripture moves away from Scripture being historical and scientific in the way fundamentalists perceive it while not becoming just another piece of ancient literature that needs to be scientifically analysed in the way Modernists perceive it.
As a practicing and believing Catholic, of Jewish background and ancestry, I am bound to accept the reading of Scripture (which is infallible and inerrant in all its parts) with all the four senses as stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.[62] I would also be wise to listen to the words of the Messiah when he taught that the Jewish Pharisee Rabbis and Scribes sat on the teaching Chair of Moses.[63] Therefore a truly Catholic hermeneutic that includes the literal (peshat), moral (drash), allegorical (remetz) and anagogical (sod) levels is necessary. This hermeneutic for the reading and understanding of Scripture must also be based on the analogy of faith.[64] The Promise that this toledot genre of the Hebrew Scriptures carries, is fulfilled in the coming of the Messiah and the New Testament opens with a toledot heading.[65] The DuTillet and Shem Tob Hebrew versions of Matthew preserved in the Jewish communities both use the term “elleh toledot” (these are the genealogies) in Matt.1:1.[66] Rather than elleh toledot‘the book of the origins’ (Βίβλος γενέσεως) is found in the Greek of Matt.1:1 or ‘writings of the genealogies’ (כתבא דילידותה) in Aramaic.[67] The Church Fathers taught that one must read the Hebrew Old Testament in the light of the New Testament and that hidden in the Old is the New.[68] Thus a truly Catholic hermeneutical approach needs to be incarnational. The whole idea of the genealogical story of toledot allows for an incarnating of the Divine in the genealogical family story and events, enfleshed in the words of the Hebrew Bible and the oral Tradition that accompanies it.[69]
Jewish tradition teaches that the Shekhinah (feminine Presence of God) was present with Adam and Eve in the Garden and that the Shekhinah left Eden as a weeping mother and went into the Exile (galut) of the world accompanying mankind in their sorrows.[70] She also accompanied Israel in all its exiles of sorrow.[71] The word toledot is in the feminine and it is this feminine womb of the Mother (Shekhinah) that is guiding the Divine Promise (through the genealogical narrowing process which is like a baby passing through the uterus) from generation to generation (v’dor l’dor) and giving birth (yalad) metaphorically to each generation in the Divine-Human love story. She is the woman (isha) of Gen.3:15 of the first Toledot section (Gen.2:4-4:26) who with her Son will crush the head of the Serpent (nahash) and lead all back to living in the Divine Will as man did it the Garden of Eden.
As mention above Gen.2:10, when allegorically exegeted, reveals that the one River (Divine Will) that watered and united all in the Garden, became divided into four headwaters or ways of wisdom, that are in need of unity in order to place man back on the road to living in the Divine Will. An exegesis that begins with the peshatlevel and moves to the spiritual levels enriches the text. I believe this was the intention of the final redactor who applied a very sophisticated and nuanced literary genre of the toledot to achieve his ends under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. An exegesis that remains only on the historical-critical level reflect more of a modern agenda than revealing the original intention of the anthologists, redactor and editors within their literary, religious and cultural context. Just as the toledot genre allowed the Redactor of Genesis to gather all the different anthologies (whether 10, 11 or 13 sections) to create a unified family genealogical narrative, so a new Redactor might gather the wisdom of the 70 Gentile nations (listed in Gen.10) and the 70 clans of Abraham (including the sons of Ishmael and Esau) for the birthing (toledot) of a new unity in the Divine Will.[72]
Appendix: A 13 Toledot Structure of Genesis
1. Elleh Toledot: Heavens and the Earth (Gen.2-4-4.
2. Zeh Toledot: Adam (Gen.5:1)
3. Elleh Toledot: Noah (Gen.6:9)
6. Va-elleh Toledot: Sons of Noah (Gen10:1)
12. Elleh…L’toldotam: Families of the Sons of Noah (Gen.10:32)
4. Elleh Toledot: Shem (Gen.11.10)
7. Va-Elleh Toledot: Terah (Gen.11:27)
8. Va-Elleh Toledot: Ishmael (Gen.25:12)
13. Va-Elleh… L’toldotam: Names of the Sons of Ishmael (Gen.25:13)
9. Va-Elleh Toledot: Isaac (Gen.25:19)
10. Va Elleh Toledot: Esau (Gen.36:1)
11. Va-Elleh Toledot: Esau the Father of Edom (Gen.36:9)
5. Elleh Toledot: Jacob (Gen:37:2)
References
Beattie, D.R.G. "Peshat and Derash in the Garden of Eden." Irish Biblical Studies 7 (1985): 62-75.
Bauscher, Glenn David. The Peshitta Aramaic-English New Testament: An interlinear Translation. USA: Lulu Publishing, 2006.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
Chavel, C (translator). Ramban Nachmanides: Commentary on the Torah, Genesis. Brooklyn, NY: Shiloh Publishing House, 1999.
Collins, Jack. “Discourse Analysis and the Interpretation of Gen 2:4-7.” Westminster Theological Journal 61 (1999), 269-276.
Green, Arthur. A Guide to the Zohar. USA: Stanford University Press, 2004.
Hall, Christopher A. Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers. USA: InterVarsity Press, 2009.
Heschel, Abraham Joshua. Heavenly Torah: As Refracted through the Generations. New York; Continuum, 2007.
Hobbins, John F. “Jerome’s Twenty Two Books: The Alphabet of the Doctrine of God.” Ancient Hebrew Poetry.
Howard, George, Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Georgia USA: Mercer University Press, 2005.
Kaminski, Carol M. From Noah to Israel: Realization of the Primaeval Blessing After the Flood. Vol. 413. New York: T&T Clark, 2004.
Kaplan, Aryeh (Rabbi). The Bahir. Boston: Weiser Books, 1979.
Lauterbach, Jacob Z. Mekhilta De-Rabbi Ishmael (JPS Classic Reissues). Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2010.
“Matthew 1:1” Bible Hub< https://biblehub.com/text/matthew/1-1.htm>
Ouro, Roberto. “The Garden of Eden Account: The Chiastic Structure of Genesis 2-3.” Andrews University Seminary Studies Vol.40 No.2, 219-243.
Patai, Raphael. The Hebrew Goddess. Detroit: Wayne State University, 1990.
Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern texts relating to the Old Testament with supplement. Princeton University Press, 2016.
Rendsburg, G.A. The Redaction of Genesis. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1986.
Sarah Schwartz, “Narrative Toledot Formulae in Genesis: The Case of Heaven and Earth, Noah, ad Isaac.” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Vol.16 art.8 (2016), 1-36.
Soggin, J. "Reviews of Books -- The Redaction of Genesis by Gary A. Rendsburg."Journal of the American Oriental Society 109, no. 4 (1989): 675.
Subtelny, Maria E. "The Tale of the Four Sages who Entered the Pardes: A Talmudic Enigma from a Persian Perspective."Jewish Studies Quarterly 11, no. 1/2 (2004): 3-58.
Thomas, Mathew A. These are the generations: Identity, promise, and the Toledot Formula. California: Clermont Graduate University, 2006.
Trim, James. “DuTillet Hebrew Matthew” Hebrew/Aramaic New Testament Online Interlinear Project. <http://192.145.238.185/~torahd5/hrvnt/14-2/>
Weinberg, Matis. Patterns in Time: Rosh haShanah. Vol. 1. Israel: Feldheim Publishers, 1989.
Wiseman, P.J. Recent Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis. Marshall, Morgan & Scott, Ltd., London, 1936, 10.
Woudstra, Marten H.“The Toledot of the Book of Genesis and their Redemptive-historical significance.” Calvin Theological Journal 5 (1970), 184-189
[1] Mathew A Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, promise, and the Toledot Formula, (California: Clermont Graduate University, 2006), 59.
[2] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 13.
[3] For the purposes of clarity I will use the contemporary term shorashim (roots) for the linear and segmented genealogies in the Bible.
[4] These temperaments affect what kind of approach a scholar takes. A phlegmatic will see all the different sides to a topic but find it had to come to any decisions. A choleric will only see one way to understand a text or issue and they argue vigorously for it. Of course the dominantly choleric will think temperaments even though discussed by the saints of both Judaism and Christianity as just stuff and nonsense akin to astrology and the enneagram. I am by nature a sanguine-choleric but hoping to develop more melancholic traits (sensitivity and logical reason) and phlegmatic traits (open-mindedness and acceptance) through learning and suffering.
[5] Phlegmatics (or melancholic-phlegmatics) will appreciate the strength of both approaches and would probably be the best people to be University lecturers as they prize open-mindedness, diversity, tolerance and fairplay.
[6] Abraham Joshua Heschel, Heavenly Torah: As Refracted through the Generations, (New York; Continuum, 2007), 46-64.
[7]Maria E Subtelny. "The Tale of the Four Sages who Entered the Pardes: A Talmudic Enigma from a Persian Perspective." Jewish Studies Quarterly 11, no. 1/2 (2004): 3-58.
[8] Hagigah 16b and Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, The Bahir, (Boston:Weiser Books, 1979), xi-xiii. Menachem was paired (zugot) with Hillel as the leaders of the Rabbis of the Rabbinic Sanhedrin. Menachem was replaced by Shammai a more rigorist Pharisee.
[9] In the Catholic Church these two approaches became the school of Alexandria and the school of Antioch, as well as the differences between the Franciscans and Dominicans. Today this is also reflected in Judaism with the different approaches of the Chasidim and Litvaks. This is in some respects a generalisation as it is more nuanced than such a dualism.
[10] D. R. G. Beattie, "Peshat and derash in the Garden of Eden," Irish Biblical Studies 7 (1985): 62-75. I suspect that Beattie was of a dominant melancholic temperament (who favour the peshat and are deeply thoughtful and sensitive introverted observers and researchers).
[11] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 61-62.
[12] Sarah Schwartz, “Narrative Toledot Formulae in Genesis: The Case of Heaven and Earth, Noah, and Isaac,” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Vol.16 art.8 (2016), 11.
[13] G. A. Rendsburg, The Redaction of Genesis, (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1986), 26.
[14] Schwartz, “Narrative Toledot Formulae in Genesis: The Case of Heaven and Earth, Noah, ad Isaac”, 6.
[15] J. Soggin, "Reviews of Books -- The Redaction of Genesis by Gary A. Rendsburg,"Journal of the American Oriental Society 109, no. 4 (1989): 675.
[16] P.J. Wiseman, Recent Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis, (Marshall, Morgan & Scott, Ltd., London, 1936), 10.
[17] James B. Pritchard (editor), Ancient Near Eastern texts relating to the Old Testament with supplement, (Princeton University Press, 2016), 3-669.
[18] 1 Chron.1:29, 5:7, 7:2, 4, 9, 8:28, 9:9, 34, 26:31. Only the first one uses elleh toledot form and the other 7 the l’toldotam form. According to the traditional Jewish dating method of the Seder Olam Ezra lived in the 4th century BC not the 6th.
[19] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 78. I will discuss this more further on in this essay.
[20] Kaplan, The Bahir, (Boston:Weiser Books, 1979), 161-63.
[21] Arthur Green, A Guide to the Zohar, (USA: Stanford University Press, 2004), ix.
[22] Schwartz, “Narrative Toledot Formulae in Genesis: The Case of Heaven and Earth, Noah, ad Isaac”, 1.
[23] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 110-11.
[24] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 112.
[25] St Jerome lists these 22 Books of the origin Hebrew canon which today is the 24 Books of the Hebrew canon and the 39 Books of the Protestants. See John F. Hobbins, “Jerome’s Twenty Two Books: The Alphabet of the Doctrine of God” Ancient Hebrew Poetry
[26] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 113-116.
[27] Exodus 34: 6-7.
[28] Gen.30:1 and Gen.48.
[29] I am not sure exactly what this means but I am convinced that these two overlooked toledots serve something important in this genre. This needs more reflection and study. The discussion of the toledot of 10.32 maybe should have been discussed in the section of this essay under Gen.10.1 but I think it was important to discuss it with its almost twin in Gen.25:13.
[30] See Appendix for my 13 Toledot structure of Genesis.
[31] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 114. These 16 toledots are found in: Ex. 6:16, 19, Ex. 28:10, Num. 1:20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, 3:1.
[32] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 115-116.
[33] Soggin, "Reviews of Books -- The Redaction of Genesis by Gary A. Rendsburg.", 675.
[34] This is my translation. For the reason for placing the “made” after Lord God in the translation see Jack Collins, “Discourse Analysis and the Interpretation of Gen 2:4-7,” Westminster Theological Journal 61 (1999), 276.
[35] Marten H. Woudstra, “The Toledot of the Book of Genesis and their Redemptive-historical significance,” Calvin Theological Journal 5 (1970) 185.
[36] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 81.
[37] Schwartz, “Narrative Toledot Formulae in Genesis: The Case of Heaven and Earth, Noah, ad Isaac,” 4-5.
[38]Romans 8.
[39]Collins, “Discourse Analysis and the Interpretation of Gen 2:4-7,” 274-5.
[40] The letters of the Divine Name Y-H-V-H can be arranged as a figure of a man with the yod as his head, the first hah as his arms, the vav as his torso with the top of the vav being his heart and the bottom his phallus and the final hah as his legs.
[41]Rabbi C Chavel (translator), Ramban Nachmanides: Commentary on the Torah, Genesis, (Brooklyn, NY: Shiloh Publishing House, 1999), 64-5.
[42]As I point out below Genesis 5:2a seems to confirm this reading of mine.
[43]Gen.2: 8.
[44] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 78.
[45] Roberto Ouro, “The Garden of Eden Account: The Chiastic Structure of Genesis 2-3,” Andrews University Seminary Studies Vol.40 No.2, 221.
[46] Roberto Ouro, “The Garden of Eden Account: The Chiastic Structure of Genesis 2-3,” 221.
[47] Roberto Ouro, “The Garden of Eden Account: The Chiastic Structure of Genesis 2-3,” 222.
[48] Roberto Ouro, “The Garden of Eden Account: The Chiastic Structure of Genesis 2-3,” 226.
[49] Matis Weinberg, Patterns in Time: Rosh haShanah, Vol. 1, (Israel: Feldheim Publishers, 1989), 26.
[50] Gen.4.
[51] Gen.3:20.
[52] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 160-81.
[53] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 162.
[54] This as allegorical reading could also refer to the four sages who enter the Pardes (Garden). Shimon ben Azzai was a master of peshat, Elisha ben Abuyah a master of drash, Shimon be Zoma a master of remetz and Akiva ben Yosef a master of sod.
[55] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 110-11.
[56] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 187.
[57] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 83.
[58] Thomas, These are the generations: Identity, Promise, and the Toledot Formula, 192.
[59] Carol M. Kaminski, From Noah to Israel: Realization of the Primaeval Blessing After the Flood, Vol. 413, (New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 62-64.
[60] Kaminski, From Noah to Israel: Realization of the Primaeval Blessing After the Flood, 63.
[62] CCC 115“According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.”
[63] Matt.23.1-3.
[64] CCC 114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.
[65] Matt.1:1.
[66]For the Shem Tob version see George Howard. Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Georgia USA: Mercer University Press, 2005. For the DuTillet version see James Trim, “DuTillet Hebrew Matthew” Hebrew/Aramaic New Testament Online Interlinear Project <http://192.145.238.185/~torahd5/hrvnt/14-2/>
[67] Glenn David Bauscher, The Peshitta Aramaic-English New Testament: An interlinear Translation, (USA: Lulu Publishing, 2006), 11. For the Greek see “Matthew 1:1” Bible Hub< https://biblehub.com/text/matthew/1-1.htm>
[68] Christopher A. Hall, Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers, (USA: InterVarsity Press, 2009, 192.
[69]Everyone exegetes according to a certain hermeneutical approach whether it is one that is traditionally Jewish or Christian or one that is based on the historical critical method developed over the last couple of centuries. While a committed and orthodox Catholic can learn and appreciate the Jewish and historical critical exegesis, they must read it within a Catholic hermeneutic that is surrendered in obedience to the judgment of the Magisterium of the Pope and Church. Catholics reject all forms of Sola Scriptura whether the fundamentalist kind or the modernist.
[70] Raphael Patai, The Hebrew Goddess. (Detroit: Wayne State University, 1990), 158.
[71] Jacob S. Lauterbach (trans), Mekhilta De-Rabbi Ishmael (JPS Classic Reissues), (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2010), 137-140.
[72] A Protestant and Muslim strength is the Peshat, a Jewish Litvak strength and a traditionalist Catholic strength is the Drash, a Catholic, Hindu, Buddhist strength is the remetz, an Eastern Orthodox, Chasidic Judaism and Tribal indigenous religions have sod as their strength.