Commentaire sur La Genèse 1:26

... [R’ Simlai] said to them: In the past Adam was created from the adamah and Chavah was created from the adam. From here and onward, “in our image as our likeness”—not man without woman and not woman without man, and not both of them without Shekhinah (God’s presence).

נעשה אדם WE WILL MAKE MAN — The meekness of the Holy One, blessed be He, they (the Rabbis) learned from here: because the man is in the likeness of the angels and they might envy him, therefore He took counsel with them (Midrash Tanchuma, Shemot 18 and see Genesis Rabbah 8). And when He judges the kings He likewise consults His heavenly council, for thus we find in the case of Ahab to whom Micha said, (1 Kings 22:19) “I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by Him on His right hand and on His left.” Has God, then, a right hand and a left hand? But it means that some stood on the right side to plead in favour of the accused and others stood on the left side to accuse; and similarly we read (Daniel 4:14), “the matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the sentence by the word of the holy ones”, — here, also, He consulted His heavenly council and asked permission of them, saying to them: “There are in the heavens beings after My likeness; if there will not be on earth also beings after My likeness, there will be envy among the beings that I have created” (Sanhedrin 38b).

ויאמר, G’d addressed His angels.

ויאמר אלוקים נעשה, at this point G’d endowed His entourage to carry out the task assigned to it.

"Let us make:" It appears to me that this is also an ancient mode of expression, in the way of Aramaic. And the intention is not that He should consult with others, like angels; since it states "in Our image," and man is not in the image of the angels. It is also not an expression of honor, like the speech of kings [who refers to themselves as 'we']. Rather, this is the way of Aramaic, as in (Daniel 2:36) "and its interpretation will we say in front of the king;" and Daniel would not have used an expression of honor for himself when he was speaking with the big king (as is attested by Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra). And this manner [of speaking] is used frequently by the Talmud Yerushalmi and the midrashim: for example, "[Shimon ben Shetach] said to [Yannai], 'And what should we say [to introduce the Grace over the Meal], "for the food which we have not eaten?"'" (Yerushalmi Berakhot 7:2); "I too, we will solve it according to the opinion of the rabbis in the graveyard" (Shir HaShirim Rabbah on the verse "O, my dove, in the clefts of the rock" [2:14]); and also, "Were it only that I had a mother and father that I could honor, so that we would inherit the Garden of Eden" (Yerushalmi Peah 1:1). And Ros. wrote that this is the way of the Holy Language (Biblical Hebrew), to [use] plural when [speaking] about [one]self, as in (II Samuel 24:14) "Let us please fall in the hand of the Lord." And that is not a proof, since David was not speaking only about himself [in that verse], but [rather] about himself and about his people. And so [too] with Rechavam when he said (I Kings 12:9), "What do you advise and we will [respond] to the people", since he combined himself with his advisers; and so [too] Avshalom when he said (I Samuel 16:20), "give your advice, [about] what we shall do."

"Let Us make man:" God did not say, "let Us make a being like an animal in Our likeness," and afterwards call [him] 'man;' and as it is actually written later in Genesis 5:2. But the phrase, "let Us make man," means that there is no need to give [man] this name; rather his character shows that he is man. But, if so, it is difficult: why is it written afterwards that the Holy One, blessed be He, called their name, man; which implies that there was a need to give a name, and as I wrote regarding the name, sky and earth (shamayim ve'aretz). But rather the matter is like this - that man is different from all the species; since all the species were created in such a way that the species was unitary in its purpose and character; which is not the case for man, who rose in [God's] thought to be of two [types of] character. The one would be cleaving to his God, ready and serving in the world like an angel [does] in the heavens. And the second is [such] that he would be political and [take care of] his [own] needs; even though he would nonetheless do the will of God, it would not be on the level of the first. And behold, according to the first characteristic, he is automatically man (adam) based on the phrase 'I will be similar to the most High' (edmee le'elyon) - meaning that within him are included all the powers of the creation and he rules over everything. And behold, he is like the firstborn son of a king, who rules like the king. And because of this, everyone understands that he is the son of the king, in that they see him ruling over every detail. Which is not the case with a son of the king, who is not the firstborn; and the king [merely] makes him rule over some detail and his fellow over another detail, and so [too] with all those that govern the kingdom. It comes out that all of them together are similar to the king; but each one by himself is only similar to the king when he is given the name [of ruler] over that detail that he governs. And thus is man: the individual of spiritual stature is different then the simple individual. And in the Talmud, Shabbat 112b, they hinted to these two types of men. And it stated in the first version [of a particular statement], "this is not a man;" and in a second version, "this is an example of a man," the explanation [of this being] a man of spiritual stature. But the general human species is called man by the nature of the matter, in that they as a group rule over the entire creation. And this is according to [God's] plan. (And so [too] with the name, Israel, which indicates being higher than the nature of creation and the running [of the world]; it will be explained later in Parshat Vayislach that the whole nation is called Israel, but concerning individuals, some are called by the name Israel and some have not reached this.) And, if so, in the statement, "let Us make man," its explanation is [that it refers to] the general species of man and it is certainly called man even without being given the name; since in this general species is the creation dependent, and in this detail, they are similar to the Creator, may His name be blessed. And Adam (Adam Harishon) specifically, before he sinned, was worthy of being called man without being given the name; but after he sinned, he was given the name, man; and it will be explained further.

AND G-D SAID: ‘LET US MAKE MAN.’ There was a special command dedicated to the making of man because of his great superiority since his nature is unlike that of beasts and cattle which were created with the preceding command.
The correct explanation of na’aseh (let us make) [which is in the plural form when it should have been in the singular] is as follows: It has been shown to you that G-d created something from nothing only on the first day, and afterwards He formed and made things from those created elements.²⁰¹Fire, wind, water, and earth. Thus when He gave the waters the power of bringing forth a living soul,²⁰²Verse 20. the command concerning them was Let the waters swarm.²⁰²Verse 20. The command concerning cattle was Let the earth bring forth.²⁰³Verse 24. But in the case of man He said, Let us make, that is, I and the aforementioned earth, let us make man, the earth to bring forth the body from its elements as it did with cattle and beasts, as it is written, And the Eternal G-d formed man of the dust of the ground,²⁰⁴Genesis 2:7. and He, blessed be He, to give the spirit from His mouth, the Supreme One, as it is written, And He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.²⁰⁴Genesis 2:7. And He said, In our image, and after our likeness, as man will then be similar to both. In the capacity of his body, he will be similar to the earth from which he was taken, and in spirit he will be similar to the higher beings, because it [the spirit] is not a body and will not die. In the second verse, He says, In the image of G-d He created him,²⁰⁵Verse 27. in order to relate the distinction by which man is distinguished from the rest of created beings. The explanation of this verse I have found ascribed to Rabbi Joseph the Kimchite,²⁰⁶The father of Rabbi David Kimchi (R’dak, the famous grammarian and commentator of the Bible). The explanation is found in R’dak’s commentary to the Torah here as well as in his Sefer Hamichlal. In his works on Hebrew grammar and Bible, R’dak often mentions the interpretation of his father. Moses Kimchi, a second son to Joseph, also continued the tradition of the family. and is the most acceptable of all interpretations that have been advanced concerning it.
The meaning of tzelem is as the word to’ar (appearance), as in ‘Vetzelem’ (And the appearance) of his face was changed;²⁰⁷Daniel 3:19. similarly, Surely ‘b’tzelem’ (as a mere appearance) man walketh;²⁰⁸Psalms 39:7. When Thou arousest Thyself ‘tzalmam’ (their appearance) Thou wilt despise,²⁰⁹Ibid., 73:20. that is, the appearance of their countenance. And the meaning of the word d’muth is similarity in form and deed, as things that are akin in a certain matter are called similar to each other. Thus man is similar both to the lower and higher beings in appearance and honor, as it is written, And Thou hast crowned him with glory and honor,²¹⁰Ibid., 8:6. meaning that the goal before him is wisdom, knowledge, and skill of deed.²¹¹Ecclesiastes 2:21;4:4. In real likeness his body thus compares to the earth while his soul is similar to the higher beings.

"Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness:" Ramban wrote in the name of Rabbi David Kimchi that the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the earth, "Let us make, you and Me;" since the earth gave the bounty of its physical material - as it gave to the other animals - and the Holy One, blessed be He, gave the spiritual part; and [so,] "in our image, according to our likeness," means that [man] should be similar to both of them: in his body, to the earth and in his soul, to the celestial ones.

And God said, "let us make man, etc.": The intention of this is that God did not create man like the creation of the swarms of the waters and the swarms of the earth, [meaning] that He spoke to the waters and they brought forth the swarms and he spoke to the earth and it put forth [creatures], but rather He, the Creator said that He would make man.

ויאמר אלוקים נעשה אדם, in connection with all the other matter created in the “lower” regions of the universe, G’d issued a directive to earth phrasing it in the third person, i.e. indirect mode such as תדשא הארץ, “let earth produce herbs,”(verse 11) or ישרצו המים, “let the waters teem, etc.” (verse 24). When it came to creating the human being, the last of the creatures composed of several elements, He said נעשה אדם in the first person. Man was created last, as a sign that he is the crown jewel of creation, to make clear that all the creatures who preceded him in the order in which they were created are to serve as making life more pleasant and convenient for him. He is to be master of them all.
When the Torah wrote נעשה in the first person plural mode, my father explained this as including the various elements all of which had also been the product of G’d’s creative activity which had aimed at ultimately creating man. G’d implied that in creating man He would make use of all the ingredients in the universe that He had already created. They were all His partners in that respect, supplying parts of the raw material G’d used to make man. We may understand the entire line as if G’d had said to all these raw materials: “let us, you and Me together, construct a human being.” We find that our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 8,3 took a similar approach when they said that G’d consulted when creating heaven and earth. Rashi explains that the plural in the word נעשה is accounted for by the fact that G’d consulted with the angels. They could be included in the “we,” seeing that both G’d and the angels share the fact that they are disembodied intelligences. G’d meant to imply that man would share an attribute with Himself and the angels, namely an intelligence which was not dependent on the body.
We are taught in Bereshit Rabbah 8.3 that the Torah wanted to teach us by the wording of this verse that whenever 2 people who are disparate in stature plan an undertaking involving both of them, the intellectually superior one should consult with the other before going ahead on his own. Furthermore, in the same paragraph of Bereshit Rabbah, Rabbi Shemuel bar Nachman in the name of Rabbi Yonathan says that at the time when Moses had to write down the details of everything G’d had created on each of the six “days,” he balked when he came to this verse. He asked G’d if this formulation would not encourage heretics to think that G’d had a partner (as Divinity). G’d replied: “write it down as I dictated it to you; if someone wants to fool himself into believing that I must have a partner, let him delude himself.” G’d called this crown jewel of His creation Adam, as we are told in Genesis 5,1. (referring to Adam/Chavah). If the reason that G’d called man אדם was that he was made from אדמה, “earth,” this hardly seems to justify the name אדם, seeing that all the other creatures on earth were also made from earth. G’d wanted to distinguish man both by name as well as by body and spirit. Everybody knows that all other living creatures on earth have as their raw material earth, dust; there was therefore no need to remind us that they were inextricably tied to earth.
G’d called Man, whose spirit originated in heaven, as distinct from the spirit of the animals, אדם, to prevent his being perceived as part of life in the celestial regions. People should not think that man was simply an angel who had come down to earth. Residents of the celestial spheres have not been equipped with a body at all. The basic elements from which they are formed are none of them raw materials found in our “lower” universe. Even such creatures as שדים, demons, which do possess a body, (Chagigah 16) are totally different from man. Demons, though superficially similar to man, have been constructed from a fifth element, not from one of the four elements. At least this is what we have been told by the scientists of our time. When the Creator formed man using ingredients that are at home in the celestial regions as well as ingredients which are common in our domain, He called this creature אדם in spite of the fact his spirit originated in heaven, seeing his habitat was earth. Even though man has been equipped to make matters spiritual his principal pursuit in life, not one in a thousand does so. Hence, a name that reflects man’s predominant concern with earthly matters is quite appropriate. King Solomon had already lamented this fact in Kohelet 7,28 when he mentioned having found only one “man” in a thousand.

ויאמר אלוקים נעשה אדם בצלמנו, “G’d said: ‘let us make man in our image.’” The Torah assigned a special paragraph to the creation of man as he is such a superior creature, totally different in nature from all other living creatures. The word נעשה, in the plural, is used because seeing that on the first day of creation G’d was completely alone in the universe when He created something out of nothing, in the meantime all the phenomena which had come into existence since that day would contribute some of their own essence to the body of man. In other words, earth itself had become a partner in G’d’s creative activities and was invited to contribute to the making of the first human being. There is nothing surprising about this, as G’d had already empowered both water and earth on the fifth day and the early part of the sixth day respectively, to generate living creatures of differing capacities. G’d contributed the living soul which did not originate in either the domain of water or earth but in the celestial regions. (Genesis 2,7) Our sages explained the expression נעשה as G’d having consulted with other celestial beings before creating man. The reason for this “consultation” was that the angel in charge of running the physical universe on behalf of G’d had now to be consulted or instructed when a human being would emerge from earth, a domain which this angel was entitled to consider as his “backyard.” Rabbi Saadyah gaon understands the plural נעשה as basically a variation of the singular, similar to Balak when he invited Bileam to curse the Jewish people, saying to him אולי אוכל נכה בו, “perhaps I may be able to defeat it.” (the people). (Numbers 22,6) Rabbi Saadyah quotes more examples of plural formulations in reality being singulars dressed up as plurals in order to make them sound more impressive

They were jealous of him. This raises a question: Are angels indeed jealous? [Apparently not] for at the Giving of the Torah, Chazal say [that Moshe answered the angels rhetorical-ly]: “Is there jealousy among you?” (Shabbos 89a). The answer seems to be: Angels surely are not jealous of each other. But they are jealous of man, who was granted loftiness similar to theirs, although he is formed from clay.

Alle übrigen Geschöpfe werden nur mit ihrer Entstehung eingeführt, bei dem Menschen hält die Schöpfung inne und kündet der bereits geschaffenen Welt zuvor die Absicht an, einen "Menschen", einen "Adam" zu schaffen. Soll dieser "Adam" doch als von Gott eingesetzter Walter und Herrscher in die geschaffene Erdwelt eintreten. Es wird diese Welt auf den Eintritt ihres Herrn vorbereitet. In diesem Sinne dürfte auch der Plural נעשה zu verstehen sein. Dem Pluralis majestatis, in welchem ein menschlicher Herrscher dem Volke seinen Willen kund tut, dürfte auch wohl ursprünglich die Anschauung zu Grunde liegen, dass der Herrscher hier nicht von dem Standpunkte seines individuellen Willens, seiner individuellen Interessen gebietet, sondern dass er sich nur im Zusammenhang mit seinem Volke begreift und nur aus dem Gesichtspunkt des Gesamtinteresses und des Gesamteils Anordnungen und Bestimmungen trifft. Nur als Repräsentant der Gesamtheit gebietet der Fürst der Gesamtheit. So kündet der Schöpfer auch der Erdwelt die Einsetzung ihres Herrn gleichsam in ihrem eigenen Interesse, aus Fürsorge für ihre eigene Bestimmung an. Ebenso die Zerstreuung der Völker, הבה נרדה נבלה שם, aus Fürsorge für die Zukunft des Menschen selbst. Es erscheint der Pluralis majestatis in der Gottesrede da, wo ein scheinbar beschränkendes, störendes Einschreiten als im tiefen Grunde heilbringendes, rettendes und notwendiges begriffen werden soll. אדם, siehe Jeschurun VIII. Seite 524 ff. Wir haben dort bereits darzutun versucht, wie die grammatische und logische Analogie gegen die gewöhnliche Annahme spricht, die אדם von אדמה ableitet und die Charakteristik des Menschen als "Erdgeborenen" begreifen lässt, während doch offenbar אדמה von אדם gebildet ist, die stoffliche Herkunft aus Erde ein Merkmal wäre, das allen Geschöpfen gemeinsam zukommt, und das spezifische Merkmal des Menschen vielmehr darin bestehe, dass er nicht ganz seiner Entstehung nach der Erde angehört, sondern der seinem von der Erde genommenen Stoffe eingehauchte Gotteshauch ihn zum Menschen macht. Schon die Ankündigung hier spricht dafür, dass in אדם das ganze höhere Wesen und die ganze höhere Bestimmung des Menschen ausgesprochen sein müsse, und auch in Stellen wie: ואתנה צאני צאן מרעיתי אדם אתם kann unmöglich der Mensch als Erdkloß begriffen sein. Wir haben dort die Etymologie des Wortes אדם aus der Bedeutung Rot, als der am wenigsten gebrochene Lichtstrahl, somit als die nächste Offenbarung des Göttlichen im Irdischen; — als lautverwandt mit הדם, Schemel, somit als: הדום רגלי שכינה auf Erden, als Vermittler und Träger der göttlichen Herrlichkeit auf Erden, (im Gegensatz zu במה ,במה ist die Vermittlung der Erhöhung eines Anderen, הדום erspart einem Hohen, die Füße auf die Erde zu setzen. Ohne die Einsetzung des Menschen zum הדום — אדם müßte Gott alle die Wahrheit, die Barmherzigkeit, das Recht und die Liebe, die er auf Erden gefördert wissen will, selbst auf Erden vollbringen. Das reine, Gottes Willen vollbringende Wirken des Menschen enthebt die Gottheit des Niedersteigens zur Erde, enthebt sie des unmittelbaren Vollbringens ihres Willens im irdischen Kreise, במת האדם - בהמה ,הדום שכינה - אדם); — mit חתם, Siegel, (welche Verwandtschaft schon durch die Wurzel אטם, schließen, vermittelt wird), somit als das Siegel Gottes an seiner Schöpfung, als die Signatur, die der Welt ihren unsichtbaren Herrn und Meister vergegenwärtigt; — endlich als (דמ(ה mit vorgesetztem individualisi- renden א, als ein Wesen, dessen ganze Bestimmung in seine Gottähnlichkeit aufgeht, das aber diese Gottähnlichkeit in freier selbsttätiger Energie verwirklichen soll, somit Repräsentant, Stellvertreter, das Alterego der Gottheit; — alle diese Begriffe sind im tieferen Grunde eins, sowie auch alle die Ableitungen א־דם ,חתם ,הדום ,אדום :אדם wesentlich zusammenfallen; wir dürfen sie alle in den Begriff der Stellvertretung zusammen fassen und אדם als Stellvertreter bezeichnen. — בצלמנו. Wir haben ebenso bereits dort (S.526) nachgewiesen, dass צלם, verwandt mit (סמל, (שלמה) שלם (שמלה, nur die äußere Hülle, die leibliche Gestalt bedeutet. Also: in unserer Hülle, d. h. wenn alle die Barmherzigkeit und Milde, die Wahrheit und das Recht und die Heiligkeit der göttlichen Waltung in einer äußeren, sichtbaren Hülle auftreten wollte, so würde sie in der Gestalt erscheinen, die der Schöpfer dem Menschen erteilte. Schon die leibliche Gestalt des Menschen verkündet ihn als den Stellvertreter Gottes, als die Gottheit auf Erden, sie ist כדמותנו sie ist eine solche, wie sie einem zur Gottähnlichkeit bestimmten Wesen entspricht. — דמה ähnlich sein. Indem דמה zugleich schweigen bedeutet, und der Begriff der Ähnlichkeit sich hier also konstruiert, dass der ähnliche Gegenstand dem andern gegenüber schweigt, d. h. ihm nichts entgegensetzt, buchstäblich: ihm nicht widerspricht, nichts ihm Widersprechendes enthält — (auch unser deutscher Sprachgedanke kennt den Ausdruck: schreiende Gegensätze) — stellt sich die von dem Menschen zu erwartende Gottähnlichkeit zunächst negativ dar, dass er in seinem ganzen Wesen nichts hege und pflege, was der göttlichen Wahrheit, Liebe, Gerechtigkeit und Heiligkeit widerspricht. Gott gleich kann der Mensch nicht werden, aber ähnlich soll er ihm sein, soll nichts Gott Widersprechendes in sich und bei sich dulden. התקדש, das Hinanstreben zur Gottesheiligkeit ist seine Bestimmung. Also: Wir wollen einen Stellvertreter bilden in einer unser würdigen Hülle, wie es unserem Ebenbilde entspricht. — וירדו, es ist hier sofort אדם als der Kollektivbegriff der Menschheit gefasst, darum Pluralis. רדה, Grundbedeutung: etwas aus dessen freier Höhe in die Hand, d. i. in seine Macht herabbringen, וירדהו אל כפיו, מגוית האריה רדה הדבש bei Simson, und רודה פת bei den Weisen das Herabbringen der an den Ofenwänden festsitzenden Brode. Davon: etwas aus dessen freier Selbständigkeit in seine Macht bringen, sich untertänig machen. Mit dem Akkusativ heißt es: den ganzen Gegenstand sich untertänig machen, so nur zweimal: רודה באף גוים 4ח!1 לא ירדנו בפרך לעיניך (Jesaias 14. 6), wo es beidemal ein Überschreiten der dem Herrn oder dem Könige zustehenden Gewalt bedeutet. Sonst immer רדה ב־: gewisse Teile, Beziehungen eines Objekts sich untertänig machen, beherrschen. Diese Stellung hat der Mensch zu allen lebendigen Wesen auf der Erde. Er hat nicht die Bestimmung, sie alle und zwar ganz sich untertänig zu machen. Die Erde und ihre Geschöpfe mögen noch Beziehungen haben, die uns entzogen sind, in welchen sie Selbstzweck sind. Allein er hat die Bestimmung: לרדות בם nicht א1תם, seine Herrschaft unter allen lebenden Wesen, an ihnen und an der Erde selbst zu üben, sie für die Erfüllung seiner Menschenaufgabe aus ihrer freien Selbständigkeit teilweise in seine Hand zu bringen. Tritt der Mensch als בצלם ובדמות א׳ ,אדם an die Erdwelt hinan und fordert ihre Dienste nur im Dienste Gottes: so erkennt ihn die Erdwelt gern als ihren Herrscher an, seine Herrschaft selbst ist keine Knechtung und Erniedrigung, vielmehr eine Erhöhung und Erhebung aller irdischen Wesen in den Kreis freisittlicher, göttlicher Zwecke. Dem reinen, gottdienenden Menschen beugt sich willig die ganze Welt. Mißbraucht aber der Mensch seine Stellung, tritt er nicht als אדם, als Statthalter Gottes, sondern in eigener Machtherrlichkeit der Welt gegenüber, so beugt ihm auch nicht willig das Tier seinen Nacken. את שהוא בצלמנו כדמותנו ויִרדו את שאינו ב'כ' וִיִרדו, זכו ויִנרדו לא זכו ויִרִדו lehren die Weisen zur Stelle. רדה ist nämlich nicht רדה ,כבש ist nur das Verhältnis des Herrschers zum Volke, das ja auch nur ein bedingtes ist. Ein anderes ist כבש, welches in dem V. 28 das Verhältnis des Menschen zu der leblosen Erdwelt spezialisiert. כבש begegnen wir in כֶבֶש, der Aufgang, die Treppe, im Munde der Weisen: דרך כבושה, ein breitgetretener Weg, also: niedertreten, (amit auch כבס verwandt, walken, Treten der Wäsche) und in כבשן, der Ofen, in welchem die Dinge, die hineingeworfen werden, vollständig aufgelöst und umgewandelt werden. כבש also: gewalttätig niedertreten, dass es nicht aufkommen könne, völlig bezwingen, oder etwas in seiner innersten Natur umwandeln und umgestalten. Diese Aufgabe, einer Sache seinen Stempel aufzudrücken, sie völlig in sein Geschöpf umzuwandeln, hat der Mensch nur der leblosen Natur gegenüber, die derselben angehörigen Wesen sollen ihm Stoff und Werkzeug und Mittel zur Ausführung seiner Gedanken werden. Die menschliche Kunst ist der כבשן, der große Kalzinierofen, aus welchem die Erddinge in ganz umwandelter Gestalt hervorgehen. Darum heißt es V. 28: מלאו את הארץ וכבשוה ורדו בדגת הים ובעוף השמים וגוי. War doch hinsichtlich der lebendigen Welt ursprünglich auch nicht das Töten erlaubt! — Also: Gott sprach: Wir wollen einen Adam machen in einer unser würdigen Hülle, wie es unserm Ebenbilde entspricht, und sie sollen ihre Herrschaft üben an den Fischen des Meeres und an dem Geflügel des Himmels und an dem Viehe und an der ganzen Erde und allem Gewürme, das dahinschreitet auf der Erde. Indem hier ובכל הארץ die Aufzählung der lebendigen Welt unterbricht und ihm erst ובכל הרמש folgt, scheint die Herrschaft über das Gewürm nur als Folge der Herrschaft über die ganze Erde begriffen zu sein. In der Tat übt auch der Mensch eine Herrschaft über die niedern Tiere nur insofern, als er sie durch Vertilgung oder Verscheuchung von jedem Stückchen Erdboden entfernt, den er für seine Herrschaft in Anspruch nimmt.

נעשה אדם, “let Us make a human being;” it is remarkable that the Torah did not write: נברא אדם, “let us create a human being;” the reason is that the first step, i.e. בריאה, is something that only the Creator Himself is able to perform, He cannot share this step of the process with any of His creatures. Compare Genesis 1,27: ויברא האלוקים את האדם, “the Lord created Adam, (no plural mode here); or compare Genesis 6,7: האדם אשר בראתי, “the human being whom I created.” When it comes to secondary or tertiary stages, G-d may coopt other forces in His endeavor. [Compare Kimchi on Isaiah 6,8 on the word לנו; Ed.] An alternate exegesis: we find a similar formula: “let us interpret,” in Daniel, 2,36 where Daniel offers to reveal the meaning of the king’s dream, but only he himself in a private audience with King Nebuchadnezzar will actually reveal it [out of deference to the King, since it contained unpleasant news. Ed.]

נעשה אדם WE WILL MAKE MAN — Although they did not assist Him in forming him (the man) and although this use of the plural may give the heretics an occasion to rebel (i. e. to argue in favour of their own views), yet the verse does not refrain from teaching proper conduct and the virtue of humbleness, namely, that the greater should consult, and take permission from the smaller; for had it been written, “I shall make man”, we could not, then, have learned that He spoke to His judicial council but to Himself. And as a refutation of the heretics it is written immediately after this verse “And God created the man”, and it is not written “and they created” (Genesis Rabbah 8:9)

נעשה אדם, these words have to be understood as in Kings I 22,19-22. In these verses the prophet Jeremiah depicts a conversation in the celestial regions between G’d and His angels and they discuss how to trap Achav through a deliberately false message by the false prophet Michayu, into bringing about his own destruction as retribution for his judicial murder of Navot the Yezreelite. We find similar references to G’d “consulting” in Isaiah 6,8 as well as in Job 1,6 where G’d is described as giving Satan leeway in his treatment of Job בצלמנו, in the image of the angels. [It could not refer to G’d seeing that no one had ever seen something that could be described as an “image” of G’d, the totally spiritual Being. Ed.]

אדם, another one of the species referred to as נפש חיה, one known as אדם. This is why we read in Genesis 2,7 ויהי האדם לנפש חיה, “Adam became one of the species known as נפש חיה.”

"Man:" [This is] the name of the species, as in sheep or cattle, and therefore, He said, "and let them have dominion," in the plural. It appears that the name adam (man) is derived from adom (red), not from adama (ground), since the animals were also formed from the ground. But man is differentiated in his body from animals in that his body is not full of hair and his skin (in moderate climates) is reddish.

"In Our image:" The [meaning of the letter] bet is [to be understood] as in, 'within' or as in, 'with;' since man has a [guiding] 'constellation;' and Rashi has explained [in] Shabbat61b that it is an angel, and this is the image of God that surrounds him and protects him from danger. (And see later, Genesis 4:14 and in the Book of Numbers 14:9.)

And that which is written (Genesis 9:6), "Since in the image of God did He create man" [and not also in the image of the earth,] is to tell of the wonder that through [the Divine image], man is separated from all other animals. And many agreed with this explanation, and there [also] came many other explanations regarding the saying of "Let us make" and regarding the image and the likeness. And it is correct to say that it is [also] for this reason that [the Torah] stated the words, "Let us make;" to show His dominion, may He be blessed, specifically when He made man, to teach that the essence of His kingship is seen in His creatures, [meaning] from man who He formed for His glory. And regarding the image and the likeness, even though it is stated (Isaiah 40:18), "What image will you compare Him to," and it is written (Isaiah 40:25), "To who will you liken Me, that I should be equal," nonetheless we have found that the Holy One, blessed be He, appears to His prophets in a vision of the likeness of man; since at Mount Sinai, He appeared like an elder sitting in an academy and at the Sea, He appeared like a mighty warrior and it is [also] written (Ezekiel 1:26), "Upon the... throne was the likeness of a man;" as it is in all of these [types of] visions, that He, may He be blessed, was accustomed to be seen. And about this [manner of appearance as well], it is possible that He said, "in our image, according to our likeness," even though, in truth, He, may He be blessed, has no likeness; and 'it is the glory of God to hide the thing.'

בצלמנו כדמותנו, according to the interpretation of my father of blessed memory, the meaning of the word בצלמנו applies both to a physical likeness as well as to a spiritual likeness, the ending נו not applying to two different subjects, “our,” but applying to two different parts of the same subject. It matches the prefix נ in the word נעשה. If we understand the word נעשה as applying to the angels, we must treat the words צלם and דמות as referring to spiritual attributes only, the meaning being that man would be endowed with parts of the spiritual attributes known as צלם and דמות respectively. The expressions צלם and דמות respectively, are sometimes applied to something physical and on other occasions applied to something abstract, spiritual. The word צלם is an attribute sometimes applied to a physical entity, such as in Samuel I 6,5 צלמי טחוריכם, “images of your hemorrhoids,” or in Numbers 33,52 צלמי מסכותם, “their molten images.” The same expression is also used to describe something spiritual, as in verse 27 of our chapter here.
The same is true of the word דמות as for instance, in Song of Songs 7,8 קומתך דומה לתמר, “your posture resembles that of a date palm,” or Ezekiel 1,13 ודמות החיות, “and the appearance of the chayot,” (a category of angels shown to the prophet in this vision). The same word is also used to describe physical appearances such as in Ezekiel 32,2 כפיר גוים נדמית “you were compared to a young lion;” or in Psalms 102,7 דמיתי לקאת מדבר, “I am like a great owl in the desert.”
The word נעשה is justified seeing that these attributes are means employed by G’d. The letter ב which serves as a prefix to צלמנו, is to be understood as a “helper,” meaning “equipped with our attribute צלם, i.e. our intelligence, we shall produce a creature whom we will endow with portions of these attributes of ours.” We will do this although, essentially, man is of the earth, to wit his name אדם. Alternately, it is possible to understand the prefix ב in the word בצלמנו as a letter that describes that something is equipped with an attribute. G’d would be saying that this new creature called אדם, man, shall be equipped with the attribute known as צלם.

בצלמנו, “ín our image.” A reference to the facial features of man. The word צלם appears in such a context in Daniel 3,19, “וצלם אנפהי אשתנו, and the features of his face were contorted.” The Torah added the word בדמותינו, “in our form,” as the word is related to דומא, the physical contours of creatures or objects, as this word is used to describe phenomena whose external appearances and shapes are similar to one another. The Torah, in this case, draws attention to man and other mammals produced by the earth on the sixth day having much in common in terms of external appearance and raw materials used to produce them. The plural refers to the spiritual similarity of man to disembodied celestial beings on the one hand, and his physical resemblance to purely terrestrial beings on the other. The reason why the Torah added the words בצלם אלוקים ברא אותו, is to emphasise the miraculous properties possessed by a creature such as man.

By the decree. I.e., as the angels decree and speak before Hashem, so the matter stands. Thus we see that Hashem consults the angels.

And He said, "let us make," since He is the source of humility; for this reason, He spoke in the plural form, since this is how a humble individual speaks. And He did not get concerned with giving room for error [that there are other powers besides God which helped in the creation of man], since He preceded [it] by stating, "And God said," [which is in the] singular: the Lord, He is God, He, Himself in His glory - as if it were possible - molded the dirt and blew the spirit of life into it. Its stating "let us make" in the plural form also wants [to teach] that the attributes of God are many; the thirteen attributes of mercy and the name, Elohim, which is the attribute of judgment, agreed together to create man.

AND LET THEM HAVE DOMINION OVER THE FISH OF THE SEA. On account of his [man’s] being male and female, he said, And let ‘them’ have dominion over the fish of the sea, in the plural.
In Bereshith Rabbah, the Rabbis have said:²¹²7:7. “Let the earth bring forth a living soul after its kind.²⁰³Verse 24. Said Rabbi Elazar: ‘A living soul — this has reference to the spirit of the first man.’” Now it is impossible that Rabbi Elazar should say that the expression, Let the earth bring forth, be explained as having reference to the soul of the first man at all.²¹³Since man did not at all derive his higher soul from the earth at all. Instead, his intent is to say what I have mentioned, that the formation of man as regarding his spirit, namely, the soul which is in the blood, that was done from the earth, just as in the command of formation of the beasts and cattle. For the souls of all moving things were made at one time, and afterwards He created bodies for them. First He made the bodies of the cattle and the beasts, and then the body of man into whom He imparted this soul [which resides in the blood, and is akin to that of the cattle and beasts], and afterwards, He breathed into him a higher soul. For it is concerning this separate soul that a special command was devoted by G-d Who gave it, as it is written, And He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.²⁰⁴Genesis 2:7.
The way of truth in this verse [as to why Scripture begins with “man” in the singular — let us make ‘man’ — and then uses the plural, let ‘them’ have dominion] will be known to him who understands the following verse [27, where the same change appears. It begins by stating, in the image of G-d He created ‘him,’ and then uses the plural: male and female He created ‘them’.]
It is possible that Rabbi Elazar meant to explain the expression Let the earth bring forth as meaning “the earth of eternal life,” that it bring forth a living soul after its kind that will exist forever. Similarly, [we explain that when Scripture] said, male and female He created them,²⁰⁵Verse 27. it is because man’s creation at first was male and female, and His soul was included in both of them. However, in the formation, man was formed first, and then He built the woman from the rib of man, as Scripture tells later. Therefore Scripture mentioned here the term “creation,” and in the chapter below it mentioned “formation.”²⁰⁴Genesis 2:7. The person learned [in the mysteries of the Torah] will understand.
The meaning of let them have dominion is that they shall rule vigorously over the fish, the fowl, the cattle, and all creeping things — “the cattle” here includes the beast.
And He said, And over all the earth, to indicate that they are to rule over the earth itself, to uproot and to pull down, to dig and to hew out copper and iron. The term r’diyah — [’v’yirdu’ over the fish … and over all the earth] — applies to the rule of the master over his servant.

.נעשה אדם, the word אדם includes males and females. Proof that this is so is found in Genesis 5,2, when both the males and the females of the species are described as having been “created,” i.e. בראם, “He had created them;” we also have a statement by Rav Hunna, who asks the rhetorical question: ‘how do we know that Chava was also called אדם? Answer (Isaiah 44,13) כתפארת אדם לשבת בית, which is translated by the Targum as: “like the beauty of a woman who resides in a house; (or who transforms a house into a home).” Furthermore, we have a verse in Numbers 31,35: ונפש אדם מן הנשים, “and human souls, of the women;”

בצלמנו IN OUR IMAGE — in our type.

כדמותנו, similar to us (angels) in our intellectual faculties. This is borne out by the fact that when man’s spiritual decline is described in Psalms 49,3 his intelligence at that time is compared to a בהמה, a domesticated mammal.

בצלמנו, a species designed to live forever seeing that it is predominantly intellectual. By doing this, G’d provided an opening by means of His Torah to acquire an understanding of the nature of purely spiritual, disembodied beings such as angels. Our soul has been given the key to understand something about the nature of such beings.

"In our image" (tsalmeinu): The form of the body and its build is not called tselem but rather toar or tavnit (as Rambam said in the Guide for the Perplexed 1:1). Since they would say yafat toar (nice appearance), not yafat tselem. And to indicate the construction of the parts of a body, they would say, "the tavnit of the tabernacle and the tavnit of all its vessels" (Exodus 28:9). Rather, they would call tselem anything that is made to resemble something else, like a drawing on paper made to resemble a specific person; and so [too] any statue or mask made to resemble a certain body. As it is written (I Samuel 6:5), "the resemblances of (tsalmei) your hemorrhoids and the resemblances of (tsalmei) your mice;" and (Ezekiel 16:17) "and you made resemblances of (tsalmei) males;" and (Ezekiel 23:14) "resemblances of (tsalmei) Chaldeans, inscribed with vermilion." And the word, tselem is derived from tsel (shadow) (and like Bochart also wrote), since a shadow depicts a form which resembles a body. And from it did men learn to begin the art of drawing. And also in Aramaic, they say a 'golden tslam' [to mean a golden statue] and the like; and the intention is always about something that is made to resemble something else. Only once do we find - in Daniel 3:19, "and the appearance (tselem) of his face changed" - [that it refers] to the appearance of a living person, and it is a borrowed expression [there] and not precise. And behold, man is a resemblance of God; meaning that from a certain angle, he resembles the Power that is Master of all the powers. And ostensibly, the letter bet (designating in or according to) in the word betsalmeinu is difficult according to my explanation - and so [too] (Genesis 9:6), "since betselem (in the image/resemblance) of God did He make man." Since according to my explanation, man himself is the resemblance of God, and not [just created to be] in the image of God. However, it is fitting to know that we have found this in a few places - an additional bet in a word that [simply] indicates that it is the predicate of a statement (praedicatum). For example, "since it is be evil" (Exodus 32:22); "Behold, the Lord will come be strength" (Isaiah 40:10); "He is be one" (Job 23:13); "be the Lord is His name" (Pslams 68:5). And this [type of] bet is frequently used in Arabic. And it appears that the expression, be evil, be strength, be one [all] mainly indicates [that it is] as if you would say a certain person has the characteristic that is called evil, strength or [oneness]. Here too, [it is understood as] "let Us make man [to have] the quality which would justify it being called, resemblance of God." And behold, the word, betsalmeinu, and the expression, tselem Elohim (image of God), are not a proof that the Torah teaches that God has a human form (Antropomorphismus). And we cannot deny that some of our forbears attributed a build like the build of a man to God, and so did they say in the blessing for grooms (Ketuvot 8a), "Who formed man in His resemblance, in the resemblance of the image of tavnito (His build)." And tavnit is certainly a name that refers to the structure of the parts of a body. And nonetheless, our forbears did not believe that God and the angels had a body and a hull like us. And Rashi explicitly wrote (Makkot 12a, s.v. chamuts begadim) that angels are not flesh and blood. But the truth of the matter is that a completely incorporeal simple intellect that has no form - no breadth and width and height whatsoever - is something that is impossible for a person to imagine and [hence] it will not be [internalized by him.] And if the philosophers speak about Him, at the end of the day, they can only describe Him negatively (what He is not), not positively (what He is). And the Torah was given to the whole people, and the people need to be able to imagine their God with a positive description, not just a negative description. And behold, [therefore] our forbears would attribute to God and to the angels and to souls, a finer spiritual substance than any body known to us, and nonetheless, [that substance] has a form and a build. And see the book Malakhet Machshevet, Parshat Shelach Lecha.

"According to Our likeness:" The image is according to our likeness; and automatically, man - who is clothed in it - is in the likeness of God; and in this is the power [of man].

"And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over the animals:" And later the order is reversed, as it is stated (Genesis 9:2), And your fear and your dread shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every bird... and upon all the fishes of the sea," and also David reversed the order and stated (Psalms 8:7-9), "And You have given him mastery over the works of Your hands, everything have You placed under his feet. Sheep and cattle, all of them, and also the animals of the field. The birds of the sky and the fish of the sea, the ones that travel the paths of the seas." And also here it states, "let them have dominion," but in Parshat Noach [above], it did not mention dominion, and also David stated, "You have given him mastery," and this change [in wording,] does it not matter?

כדמותנו, this explains the reason why man would be equipped with this heavenly kind of צלם, in order that he should resemble celestial beings more than other creatures on earth, seeing he has been equipped with intelligence. The prefix כ in the word כדמותנו must be understood as a כף הדמיון, a descriptive prefix in the imaginary sense, seeing that it cannot be understood literally, i.e. earth-bound man cannot be compared in all his parts to celestial beings, else what does he do down here on earth? G’d declares that at least in some respects אדם will be similar to the celestial beings.
Man will have a certain amount of latitude concerning whether he will be more tied to his habitat, i.e. איש האדמה, as Noach was after the deluge, or whether he will strive to become more like his celestial counterparts. G’d gives man this בחירה, choice, and it is up to him to choose his path in life. King Solomon expressed this thought when he said in Kohelet 7,29 אשר עשה אלוקים את האדם ישר וגו', the word ישר meaning that “balanced,” Man has as much basic tendency to cater to his spiritual part as he has to cater to his secular, physical attributes. He has been given the additional attribute of intelligence in order to help him make the correct choices. A correct choice is to use the part which is עפרי, i.e. “earthy,” primarily to secure his livelihood, not to indulge his body more by catering to what his senses tell him and by pampering his mortal body. His intelligence is to be used to secure him an infinite existence in his afterlife. Kohelet adds at the end of the verse we quoted, that sadly, Adam has chosen many intrigues, i.e. has not made the best of the choices that were open to him. He refers to the variety of attractions available in our world, which appeal to our senses and tempt us to remain enslaved to the pull of earthiness exerted by our bodies, which are made of earth.

וירדו בדגת הים ובעוף השמים ובבהמה, “and to exercise dominion over the fish in the sea, the fowl in the heavens, and the domestic beasts.” Although at first glance, the free-roaming beasts do not seem to be included, this is not so; the term בהמה here includes all the beasts on earth.

The attribute of humility, that... But before, Rashi explained that [Hashem consulted the angels] so they would not be jealous. [Why does Rashi explain here that it was to teach humility?] The answer is: Hashem could have ignored the angels’ jealousy. Nonetheless, He showed humility and consulted them, to remove grounds for jealousy. (Nachalas Yaakov)

And [about] its stating, "in our image, in our likeness," it is possible that the intention is to say that there should be a side of mercy and a side of judgment in [man], to implement the ways of judgment and the ways of mercy in what they set up; and understand [it]. And that is the secret in its stating (Genesis 2:7), "And the Lord, God formed, etc." And its stating, "and let them have dominion" is in agreement with our explanation: given that the creation resembles the Creator with respect to the attributes of mercy and judgment, it follows logically that [man] should rule [over] the creations, since he has the attribute of mercy for that which it is fitting and for those that require it, and the [capability] to kill those that are guilty in judgment. And He made him govern everything; and even if it does not mention governance over the waters, it is hinted by its stating, "over the fish of the sea" - behold, it mentions the sea among those governed.

בצלמנו, “in our likeness,” comparable to angels.

כדמתנו AFTER OUR LIKENESS — with the power to comprehend and to discern.

וירדו, the root of the word is רדה to exercise authority, dominion. The construction is similar to that of ויבכו, derived from בכה, and ויעש, derived from עשה, the last root letter being dropped in all of these examples.

כדמותנו, acting intelligently like the angels, though from free choice, not like the angels who act under Divine compulsion. In this respect, though the angels are celestial beings, they do not resemble man. In this respect man is a little more like G’d Himself than are the angels, though our habitat is in the “lower” regions of the universe. The principal difference between G’d’s total freedom of action and that of man’s is that G’d’s freedom of action is always put to a constructive use, whereas man frequently abuses his G’d given freedom to oppose the expressed will of His Creator. At any rate, not being hampered by the limitations imposed by having a body, the qualitative freedom of G’d is far superior to that of man, and this is why the Torah uses the comparative כדמותנו, to show that the comparison is limited.

"Ke'demuteinu:" In similarity to Us - that He be similar to Us. However, in what way is man similar to God? It appears to me (like I wrote in Bikkurei HaItim 5588, page 165) that [just] like God is the Master of all powers - and that is the connotation of the word Elohim - so too is man distinguished from all the other animals; in that all of them have an ability and makeup for a specific trait and activity, and only man has the makeup and ability for all of the traits and activities in the world. (See Rabbi N. H. Wessely's Sefer HaMiddot, Section I, Chapters 1 and 2). And from this it comes out that he has dominion over all the animals; and for this reason, He immediately said, "let them have dominion over the fish of the seas, etc." And so [too] did David state (Psalms 8:6-7), "And You have made him little less than angels, etc. You have made him govern over the works of your hands." And behold, with man, it does not state, "and it was so," since it does not state, "let there be man," but [rather], let Us make man. Due to the stature of man, He fashioned him as if it were 'a thought-out work,' and as if he was made with more special supervision and attention than all the other animals.

"And let them have dominion,etc.:" That other creatures do not injure him quickly.

And it seems most likely to me to say about this, that concerning these three types, man has greater power to rule over one than over the other. And behold, he can rule the most over the beasts and the wild animals and all that crawls on the ground, since they are found with him; and man can go after them to all of the places that they go - [to] and fro - and run to; which is not the case with birds and fish, since man cannot fly in the air or walk down to the bottom of the seas. And nonetheless, he has more power over the birds than over the fish, since man can, at least, see to where they are flying and chase after them or shoot his arrows and astound them; which is not the case with the fish, since they are covered by the sea, and so] they have two disadvantages [for man's control; not being seen and being inaccessible.] Therefore, here - where it states, "let them have dominion" [ veyirdu] which is understood [also] as an expression of descent [yeridah], that if [man] does not merit [to have dominion,] he will be in descent in front of [the animals] and not be able [to control] them at all - it mentions the [three different types] in the manner of 'not just this, but even that;' and started with the fish of the sea [to say] 'not just' that [man] will not control them - as this is not such a novelty, since he cannot go to the place that the fish are going [and] also his eye has no mastery over them [to see them] - 'but even' the birds, which he can see as they flee from before him; nonetheless, he will not control them [either]. And [so too] 'not [just'] the birds, 'but even' the beasts he will not control. But in Parshat Noach, and also [with] King David, [the verses] don't mention an expression of dominion, but rather an expression of fear and [being] below and governance - the understanding of which does not convey any expression of descent - if so, [these verses] are certainly speaking about a time when man [is meritorious], and so, he controls them. Hence, it mentions them [also] in the way of 'not just this, but even that' but in reverse order: 'not just that he will control those that walk on the ground, 'but even' the birds; and 'not just' the birds, which he can at least see, 'but even' the fish; and it is easy to understand.

וירדו בדגת הים, this line stresses that all the creatures on earth had only been created in order to be of use to man. Due to his superior intelligence, man is to exercise dominion over all of these creatures. Man is reminded who it was Who created all these living creatures other than himself. As to the plural mode of the word וירדו, [which seems out of place when אדם is understood as a reference to man the species, Ed.] this mode was chosen because the term אדם includes the male and the female of the species, as we know from the formula of G’d’s blessing in which He is reported as blessing אותם, “them,” although at the time only a single human body had been created. (verse 28) The very term וירדו -as opposed to such terms as וימשול or וימלוך which are far more common terms to express authority, reign or rule, - indicates that this “dominion” is more of a potential kind than an actual one, such as a king ruling over his subjects.
Besides, whereas rulers generally exercise control only over people who are their contemporaries, and cannot extend their authority automatically over subsequent generations of their subjects, the root רדה, implies superiority based on natural law by one species over another. Man is superior to the animals both by reason of his intelligence and by reason of the means at his disposal to establish physical superiority over them. Eventually, by having rescued the animals from extinction during the deluge, man even acquired the right to use the animals as food. Prior to the deluge the “dominion” mentioned here was evident primarily in man using the animals as beasts of burden, etc. The various kinds of birds were used by man to enjoy its eggs, its feathers, etc. At any rate, the right accorded to man to exercise control over the animal kingdom was not fully implemented until after the deluge.

Had it been written... And then, the heretics would not err.

And by way of hinting, its using the expression of descent (yeridah) [through the word vayirdu (let them have dominion)] hints by way of what they, of blessed memory, informed us (Zohar, Shemot 94b) that through the actions of man, he descends in his elevation, from the level of man to the level of fish to the level of birds to the level of animals to the level of swarming creatures. According to the severity of the sin, man goes down from the level of his elevation until he descends lower and lower - may God save us - and this is what is hinted here at the time of the creation: the different levels of descent by which he will receive his punishment and also, through which, He will return to his roots. And it began speaking [about] the descent of the soul of man to the level of the fish, since the descent that is designated for the high souls when they sin is that their souls should be reincarnated as fish. And for this reason, the verse attributed to them [that their death be by way of] gathering in their place, as they do not have to suffer the pain of slaughtering with the sword, but rather their being gathered permits them [to be eaten] (Chullin 27b). And afterwards, a descent that is lower than it, and that is the reincarnation of the soul as a bird, and this requires greater pain than fish, and God, may He be blessed, commanded it to be half slaughtered, like that which we learned (Ibid.), [the requirement to render it permissible to eat is the cutting of] the majority of one [of either the esophagus or the trachea] with birds. And afterwards, it stated the descent into animals, which is an aspect that is worse than it, and the pain of which is great, like that which we learned (Ibid.), [the requirement to render it permissible to eat is the cutting of] the majority of two (of both the esophagus and the trachea) with animals. And afterwards, it stated the descent into the inanimate and plants, and that is its stating, "and over all the earth:" the word, the earth, speaks about the inanimate and the word, over all, hints within it to the plants. And all of these descents of souls are those that have the hope of returning to their previous [state], since from the inanimate it goes up to the plant and from the plant it enters the dumb animal and from the dumb animal, it goes up to the animal that speaks (the human being). And there is a descent that is lower, and it is an end that has no hope after it, and it is the descent to the level of 'disgusting and crawling animals,' such that it has lost its hope; and this is the level of the evildoers that exchange their faith - the sinners of Israel that have acted unusually.

כדמותנו, “like the image of the angels.”This comparison of the human species to that of angels is going to stand man in good stead when exercising his authority (superiority) over all the other creatures on earth G-d had created. A different exegesis of the word: כדמותנו: seeing that it is impossible to compare human beings to the Creator, seeing that Isaiah 40,8 has already stated that this is impossible, (Isaiah 40,18) but on the other hand, it is also impossible to compare human beings to the creatures G-d had created before He created the human species, as in that case what advantage would this species have over the beasts created before him, there was no other way to describe our superiority except by comparing it to Divinity in some degree, i.e. as “a shadow of our essence,” בצלמנו כדמותנו; [just as a shadow is only a two dimensional likeness of the person or object it reflects, so the human beings are lacking in some dimension possessed only by their Creator. My words, Ed.] The common denominator between G-d and man on the one hand, and man and beast on the other, is that just as G-d is our ruler, so we rule over the other creatures in the universe.

וירדו בדגת הים AND THEY SHALL HAVE DOMINION OVER THE FISH … [AND OVER THE BEASTS] — The expression וירדו may imply dominion as well as descending — if he is worthy he dominates over the beasts and cattle, if he is not worthy he will sink lower than them, and the beast will rule over him (Genesis Rabbah 8:12).

And Seneca wrote similarly to this (L VIII. c. 23), Cogitavit de beneficiis. nos ante natura quam fecit, nec tam leve opus sumus, ut illi potuerimus excidere - Scias non esse hominem tumultuarium et incogitatum opusm. And all of this, however, is so that we recognize how great were his kindnesses upon us.

"And in all the earth:" [Refers to] the animals in all parts of the world, and not to the fish of the seas and the birds of the skies, since it is impossible for man to dominate them, except in a place where he can reach; and this is not 'in every place.' Which is not the case with animals, [they are dominated] in all the earth (and see verse 28.)

ובדגת הים ובעוף השמים, actually, the species mentioned here are the most elusive for man to demonstrate his control over. It requires extreme intelligence and skill for man to effectively control either the fish in the sea or the birds in the air. Both of these categories of creatures do not share the same habitat on earth with man. This is the reason why the Torah mentions these unlikely candidates for man’s control before the domesticated beasts, control over which is something we have no real problems with. The Torah, so to speak, tells us that if man can bring his authority to bear on the birds in the sky and the fish in the sea, he can obviously exert his control over those species that share the same habitat as he, i.e. the dry land.

In our form. This means: the form we prepared for man. It cannot mean the form of Hashem, for He has no form or image, as written in Parshas Va’es’chanan (Devarim 4:12): “But you saw no image.” Thus, בצלמנו means: in the form we made for him, just as בצלמו (v. 27) means “in the form that was made for him,” as Rashi says there. And when Rashi says later (v. 27, ד"ה בצלם), “The form that was made for man is the form of the image of his Creator,” it means the image that Hashem used when revealing Himself to the prophets. Furthermore, Rashi there says, “The form of the image of his Creator” only because he is explaining the double expression of בצלמו בצלם אלהים. Thus, בצלמו means the form that was made for man, while בצלם אלהים means the image of his Creator. See Re’m.

ובכל הארץ, “and over the whole globe;” what had the Torah omitted to mention regarding man’s dominion over the creatures on earth, so that this additional term was needed? It is a reference to spiritual, non corporeal forces that abound in our universe and appear to interfere with our freedom, especially demons.

"And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens and over the beast and over all of the earth and over all of the crawling animals that crawl upon the earth:" Nachmanides (Ramban) explained, "'and over all the earth,' [to mean] that they should rule over the earth itself: to uproot and to smash and to dig copper and iron." And ostensibly, this is difficult: how can it speak about the earth itself and then afterwards, go back and speak about the crawling animals that crawl upon it? And one of my students answered, that [the crawling animals] are a general category [that can come] after the [listing of] individual parts; as if it said, "And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens and over the beast and more generally, have dominion over all of the earth and over all that crawls upon it." And "the crawling animals that crawl upon the earth" will include all of the animals, and [it is] like it says in the verse that is after this, "and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens and over all of the animals that crawl over the earth." And I say that other animals are called "flesh that crawls on the earth," [and] "animals that crawl upon the earth; but the phrase, "the crawling animals that crawl upon the earth" is never found in any place to refer to all animals, but rather only to the crawling animals. And behold, in the verse after this, it is written "and subdue it" about the earth itself - therefore, the words of Ramban are plausible, that here also, when it states, "and over all the earth," the intention was about the subduing of the earth itself: to dig, to plant and to build homes and to to do with it according to our will. And afterwards it mentions the crawling animals, because of their being (as per the words of my student, Yosef Yira) close to the ground. Hence, after He said that they should have dominion over the whole earth, He added that they should have dominion also over the crawling animals, which appear as if they are clinging to it and a part of it. And the intention is that in man's working of the earth, he expels and destroys the crawling animals that are in it.

ובבהמה, the species of animals that grow up in man’s vicinity.

ובכל הארץ, meaning the beasts on earth, anywhere, including the free-roaming beasts, חיה. Sometimes the word בהמה includes only domesticated animals, other times the expression חית הארץ includes all mammals on earth. It all depends on the context in which the Torah uses these terms.

To understand and to be intellectually creative. Rashi is answering the question: [How is man in the likeness of angels, when] man has a body and the angels do not?

This expression וְיִרְדוּ has [the meaning of] ruling... Meaning, if we read וְיִרְדוּ it means ruling, and if we read it וְיֵרְדוּ it means descending. [Alternatively,] here it is written וירדו [with a yud], meaning descending, but later (v. 28) it is written ורְדו [without a yud], meaning domination. Here, where Hashem spoke to the angels, He minimized man, saying he is lower even than the fish, not to mention the beasts of the earth. But when Hashem spoke to man (v. 28), He boosted his pride, saying that if he will be righteous he will dominate the beasts and cattle. (Nachalas Yaakov)

ורמש, we explained the term previously (verse 25). It is a reference to small or tiny creatures, predominantly living in desolate areas, or even in regions that are not desolate. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 8,12) explain the expression וירדו as a combination of two words, the words רדיה and ירידה, “dominion” and “ decline, descent.” They see in the term a veiled warning to man. As long as man qualifies for the description בצלמנו בדמותנו, i.e. that the spiritual part of him predominates, he enjoys this control over the inferior creatures on earth. Should he forfeit the right to be described as בצלמנו בדמותנו he suffers a ירידה, a decline, not only in the spiritual sense but also in the manner in which the animals relate to him by accepting his authority. In commenting on the meaning of these expressions בצלמנו בדמותנו, the sages say that just as man’s soul is pure, so his body (man) is meant to be pure; just as his soul is holy, so his body is supposed to be holy; just as his soul is able to see without being seen, so his body is to be able to see without being seen. Just as his soul puts up with the problems of the whole word, so his body has to endure all the problems involving his physicality.
Furthermore, in order to explain the dual nature of man, our sages explained that G’d had said to Himself: “if I make him out of matter found only in the “upper” regions of the universe he will live forever, if, on the other hand I make him out of materials extant only in the regions of the “lower” universe, he will never attain an enduring afterlife;” therefore G’d decided to make man out of a mixture of matter found in the heavens and of matter found on earth. Now, if man sins he will die, if he will resist sin, he will live. (Bereshit Rabbah 8,11)