Musar zu Bereschit 9:7
וְאַתֶּ֖ם פְּר֣וּ וּרְב֑וּ שִׁרְצ֥וּ בָאָ֖רֶץ וּרְבוּ־בָֽהּ׃ (ס)
Ihr aber seid fruchtbar und mehret euch, pflanzet euch auf der Erde fort und mehret euch auf ihr!
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
The commandment to be fruitful and multiply that we find in Genesis 9,7, is a repetition of the same commandment already recorded in פרשת בראשית in 1,28: "G–d said to them: "Be fruitful and multiply, etc". We have devoted considerable space to discussing that commandment in connection with the discussion in the Talmud Yevamot that failure to comply with this commandment is very serious. This commandment is obligatory for males only. Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka notes that in both instances this commandment is introduced in the Torah as a blessing, i.e. "G–d blessed them and said to them…" From this he concludes that the commandment applies equally to both men and women. The author of the Mishnah in Yevamot 65 bases his statement that only males are obligated to procreate on the fact that only males are in the habit of "conquering," and that the Torah connects the commandment with the directive to "conquer or subdue" the earth (Genesis 1,28). At any rate, both these rabbis understand the words פרו ורבו, "be fruitful and multiply," as a command. Bar Kappara in Ketuvot 5 says that the reason a widow should be married on Thursday evening is that when cohabitation takes place this will be on Friday, the day that G–d blessed mankind with the blessing to be fruitful.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Adam ruined this state of affairs by interfering with the סוד היין, the mystical properties of the grapes. [I suppose that this is based on the tree of knowledge having been a grape bearing tree. Ed.] He followed an evil path by squeezing a cluster of grapes (and consuming its juice). Had he not done so, that "wine" would have remained in the state of what our sages call the יין המשומר בענביו, "the wine that remained preserved within its grapes (compare Berachot 34).” In that event he would have been like "the cistern that does not lose a single drop” [hyperbole for total recall, see Avot 2,11. Ed.]. He would have retained all the holiness that had been his when he was created. When Adam sinned, he did not only lose some of his former glory, fall from a "high roof" (to the ground), but he fell into a "very deep pit" (below the ground). This was a בור רק, an empty pit [allusion to the pit Joseph had been thrown in. Genesis 37,24], since it did not even contain the ingredients for the survival of the species. The species was wiped out at the time of the deluge as a direct consequence of Adam having polluted that "drop of sacred semen," and made it "evil smelling." Due to G–d's personal intervention, Noach was saved seeing he was righteous, and the righteous are the foundation of the universe. The present universe was founded by him as a result.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Having demonstrated that all our sources understand the meaning of the words פרו ורבו to be a commandment, we need to explain why Rashi (9,7) says: לפי פשוטו הראשונה לברכה, וכאן לצווי, "according to the plain meaning, the first time this expression is used it is a blessing, whereas in this instance it is a commandment." Rashi adds that the homiletical meaning to be derived from the verse is that anyone who does not practise the commandment to procreate is compared to someone who sheds blood. It appears from Rashi's words that he disagrees with the teachers of the Mishnah, all of whom had understood the words פרו ורבו each time to convey a commandment. If so, Rashi would find himself contradicting the Talmud in Sanhedrin 59 which we quoted earlier.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
The author quotes Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi, who addresses himself to that difficulty in his commentary on Rashi and opines that both in Genesis 1,28 and 9,1 the Torah expresses a blessing which subsequently is followed by the words פרו ורבו as a commandment. The latter statement is to be understood as an elaboration of the blessing. The actual commandment however is derived only from Genesis 9,7: ואתם פרו ורבו. This sentence does not contain a blessing and is in agreement with the statement in Sanhedrin 59.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
According to this, the homiletical meaning Rashi speaks about, namely the comparison of someone who fails to carry out that commandment to a murderer as stated by Rabbi Eliezer in Yevamot 63, is based on the verse immediately prior to that in which the Torah proclaims: שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed." He apparently holds that only males are commanded to fulfil this commandment, and disagrees with Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka. The latter holds that the line "He blessed them," applied to both man and woman. The reason that the other scholar disagrees is that he holds that just as only males are in the habit of conquering, a condition in Genesis 1,28, so only males have to fulfil the condition of being fruitful. Clearly then he must hold that the words "He said to them, etc." must be understood as a commandment. The same reasoning applies to the first time the words פרו ורבו appear in Genesis 9,1. Rabbi Yochanan would then be in disagreement with Bar Kappara and the Talmud Sanhedrin 59, who both hold that the commandment is only found in Genesis 9,7, i.e. ואתם פרו ורבו. Nonetheless he interprets these verses homiletically on the basis of Rabbi Eliezer who believes that a homiletical explanation based on matters which appear side by side in the Torah is almost a commandment in itself [words are mine. Ed.]. Rabbi Eliezer bases his approach to exegesis on Psalms 111,8: סמוכים לעד לעולם, that words next to one another always, i.e. under all conditions, have an exegetical significance. Rabbi Eliezer applies that principle even when the verses in question are not "free" for homiletics but have already been explained as necessary in a different context.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Rabbi Eliezer, who upholds the principle of סמוכים under all conditions, reads this verse as a blessing only, whereas he interprets verse 7 in the same chapter as both a commandment and a warning about the seriousness of failing to heed that commandment basing himself on the preceding verse. Rabbi Yehudah, however, sees a command in both 9,1 and 1,28; the fact that in one of these verses the words "G–d said to them" does not appear twice does not concern him, since the fact remains that both times the verse adds the words "He said to them." It follows that the words ואתם פרו ורבו ושרצו in 9,7 are totally superfluous and thus available for a conceptual comparison i.e. הקיש, with the preceding verse.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy