ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף עמוס 6:12

בראשית ברא IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED — This verse calls aloud for explanation in the manner that our Rabbis explained it: God created the world for the sake of the Torah which is called (Proverbs 8:22) “The beginning (ראשית) of His (God’s) way”, and for the sake of Israel who are called (Jeremiah 2:3) “The beginning (ראשית) of His (God’s) increase’’. If, however, you wish to explain it in its plain sense, explain it thus: At the beginning of the Creation of heaven and earth when the earth was without form and void and there was darkness, God said, “Let there be light”. The text does not intend to point out the order of the acts of Creation — to state that these (heaven and earth) were created first; for if it intended to point this out, it should have written 'בראשונה ברא את השמים וגו “At first God created etc.” And for this reason: Because, wherever the word ראשית occurs in Scripture, it is in the construct state. E. g., (Jeremiah 26:1) “In the beginning of (בראשית) the reign of Jehoiakim”; (Genesis 10:10) “The beginning of (ראשית) his kingdom”; (Deuteronomy 18:4) “The first fruit of (ראשית) thy corn.” Similarly here you must translate בראשית ברא אלהים as though it read בראשית ברוא, at the beginning of God’s creating. A similar grammatical construction (of a noun in construct followed by a verb) is: (Hosea 1:2) תחלת דבר ה' בהושע, which is as much as to say, “At the beginning of God’s speaking through Hosea, the Lord said to Hosea.” Should you, however, insist that it does actually intend to point out that these (heaven and earth) were created first, and that the meaning is, “At the beginning of everything He created these, admitting therefore that the word בראשית is in the construct state and explaining the omission of a word signifying “everything” by saying that you have texts which are elliptical, omitting a word, as for example (Job 3:10) “Because it shut not up the doors of my mother’s womb” where it does not explicitly explain who it was that closed the womb; and (Isaiah 8:4) “He shall take away the spoil of Samaria” without explaining who shall take it away; and (Amos 6:12) “Doth he plough with oxen," and it does not explicitly state, “Doth a man plough with oxen”; (Isaiah 46:10) “Declaring from the beginning the end,” and it does not explicitly state, “Declaring from the beginning of a thing the end of a thing’ — if it is so (that you assert that this verse intends to point out that heaven and earth were created first), you should be astonished at yourself, because as a matter of fact the waters were created before heaven and earth, for, lo, it is written, (v. 2) “The Spirit of God was hovering on the face of the waters,” and Scripture had not yet disclosed when the creation of the waters took place — consequently you must learn from this that the creation of the waters preceded that of the earth. And a further proof that the heavens and earth were not the first thing created is that the heavens were created from fire (אש) and water (מים), from which it follows that fire and water were in existence before the heavens. Therefore you must admit that the text teaches nothing about the earlier or later sequence of the acts of Creation.

...The first question is in the verse "in the beginning God created" etc. It is that if the text was coming to tell the order of the creation and what came before, why would it say that the First created heaven and earth. For in them you will find that which physically exists above and below. If all this was created in the beginning, what was it that was created afterward? And the commentators ... this in the saying that the text did not come to tell us the order of creation ... You should say: in the beginning of God's creation of Heaven and Earth, the Land was Void and Nothing. This is the way of Rashi and Ibn Ezra. Ralbag is close to them if not that he makes ... with the saying "let there be light." The text speaks according to its thought "In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth and the Earth was Void and Nothingness ... God said let there be light." This explanation does not appear entirely correct with me because it would it would obligate that the text ... On the first intention creation to Heaven and Earth that is the essence ... and its faith.

and the night when one said This is one of the places where Scripture abbreviates its words because it is unnecessary to explain who [the subject] is, and the expression means, “the sayer said.” [Similar to this is (Amos. 6:12), “Will horses run on the rock, or will one plow with cattle?” He should have said, “Will a man plow with cattle?”] However, our Sages said, “The angel appointed over conception is named Laylah.”

the furrows Heb. תַּלְמֵי. The furrow of a plowshare is called תֶּלֶם. Another explanation: on the furrows of the field where they erect their altars, as it is said (below 12:12): “like heaps on the furrows of the field.” There the judgment for their iniquity shall spring up on them. Another explanation: swearing falsely Every covenant they form with one another they break. and...shall spring up like hemlock which springs up on the furrows of the field, which is a bitter grass, so do their judgments spring up and bitterness grows for the poor and needy. Amos, too, says: (6:12) “For you have turned judgment into hemlock.”

Or will he delight with the Almighty The double interrogative is like all double interrogatives. the first one is customarily prefixed by a “hey” and the second one by אִם ; e.g., (Amos 6:12), “Will horses run (הירצון) on the rock, or (אִם) will one plow with cattle?” (Job 6:30), “Is there (היש) injustice in my tongue, or (אִם) will my palate not understand wickedness?” Here, too, will God hearken to his cry...or will he delight with the Almighty? Will one who is a wicked man or a flatterer perhaps be able to delight and rely on the salvations of the Holy One, blessed be He, and call to Him in time of trouble? This is a question.