In Genesis 1:1 why בראשית instead of בראש?

Question

Genesis 1:1 בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ׃

Question: Why did the Author of Genesis choose the word בראשית instead of בראש?

I am pretty sure that the word ראשית is derived from ראש, but I am not entirely sure why one would be prefered over the other in this verse. I know ראש is commonly translated as "head," but can also be translated in other ways, such as "beginning" in Judges 7:19 and elsewhere. And I guess a beginning is like a "head" of time, so it kind of makes sense that ראש can be used to refer to a beginning. I know ראש can also be used to refer to the first or most preferred of something, which one might call the "head" of something.

The thing is, ראשית also has a similar range of meanings. It can mean "beginning," but also "first" (Numbers 24:20) or "firstfruits" (2 Chronicles 31:5).

So, I don't see much difference between a ראש and a ראשית. It seems that one difference is that ראשית is never used to refer to the physical part of the body containing the brain, at least not in Scripture. (If it is used in this sense elsewhere, however, that would be interesting. Please inform me if this is so.)

---

By the way, it seems very elegant that the second word of Genesis, ברא, takes its consonants from the first word. But this neat little poetic trick would still work if בראשית ברא were changed to בראש ברא. But, taking into account Masoretic vowels and the number of syllables, could it be that "בראשית ברא" sounds better to the ear?

Answer 1

ראשׁית is probably an abstract of ראשׁ, i.e. beginning instead of head. It is indeed odd that ראשׁ is used as beginning as well (Judg. 7:19). However, note that in that case it is clear that the word cannot mean a physical head. In Gen. 1:1, בראשׁ could perhaps be read instrumentally as with a head, meaning thinking well, wisely, etc. Then, ראשׁית would have been used to force an abstract meaning. Another possible explanation is that the original sources of Gen. 1:1 are from a time in which ראשׁ did not yet have the abstract meaning.

---

Some linguistic background: enegue triggered me to look up the semantics of feminine endings for masculine nouns. By their comment, Modern Hebrew uses -it as a diminutive. However, I think this is unrelated, for two reasons.

First, diminutives push a word to the background, so it would not be "in the very beginning" but rather "in some minor beginning". This is not appropriate for the word in context.

Second, with endings like this it is quite likely that multiple originally distinct semantics overlap. In Hebrew, -it is also used for personal names, deriving from the deity name `Anat (Rosenhouse, JSS 2002, p. 105). I would expect the diminutives to be related to these personal names, as these two are often related cross-linguistically. However, we have a second etymology for -it; Joüon and Muraoka discuss it in §88Mi of their 2011 grammar. The ending -it would originate from a feminine t appended to a ל’’י root. Later, this ending would have become an ending for abstract nouns.

In the ל’’י roots the t of the feminine, when added to the i of the root, gave the ending it, e.g. bki + t > בְּכִית weeping. This it ending became a sufformative of the abstract in other roots: רֵאשִׁית beginning; אַחֲרִית end; שְׁאֵרִית rest; חִתִּית terror; תָּכְנִית measure. Concrete nouns are very rare: חֲנִית spear; זְכוֹכִית glass.

They also refer to §101b which discusses the same sufformative¹ for ordinals and fractionals (שְׁלִישִׁית third, one third), which are of course in a sense abstract as well.

_{1: For the term sufformative, see this Linguistics.SE post.}

Answer 2

This question is only valid if one translates the first word of the bible as a stand alone phrase, in the simple absolute state--"In the beginning" (this is actually the traditional reading), however if we choose to translate differently then there would be no such problems.

The fact is that the word reshit is scattered 50 times throughout the bible, and in all the instances besides for one, in Isaiah 46:10, this word is in the construct state (which means that the head noun is connected to the next noun by the word "of"). You can read here for more on this. So it is reasonable to assume that here too the word reshith is in the construct state and means "In the beginning of". This rendering of the Hebrew looks to verse 2 for the completion of the sentence--"In the beginning of God's creating the heavens, the earth was empty and void...", or "When God created the heavens the earth was empty and void..."

In this understanding, the bible is not speaking of the beginning of time or the beginning of the cosmos, but describing the primordial formless state of the earth at a given point in time. There is evidence from other ANE cosmogonies that this reading is to be favored. That would effectively eliminate your problem of why ראשית instead of ראש, since the biblical author did not intend to speak of the beginning of the cosmos (if there was ever an absolute beginning of creation according to the biblical authors) but to describe the world in the initial period of its chaotic existence, thus the choice for "the beginning of" rather than "In the beginning".

See this question which may be particularly helpful here. See also Nahum M. Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis, (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1989) , p. 5, for a fuller discussion on this.

Answer 3

While בראשית and בראש are from the same root ,and while they both original meaning connected to the "head" (very top/starting of something) - they are not refer to the same thing in the sentence when the come with ב:

בראשית is relevent to TIME, and בראש is relative to PLACE.

Note: בראש can refer to time with additional noun next to it like: בראש השנה, בראש חודש.

---

As for your question: in order to say בראש instead of בראשית we should add another Noun to the verse that will mention time - and it will be less elegant.

I used to wonder why בראשית and not בהתחלה but got some answers (pseudo-answers) from the Numerology. Another good reason for the author to use ראש root is ברא next to it.

Answer 4

Let's remember, we only had One World Language, which had two scripts, Cuneiform and Hieroglyphic. A new Language emerged, and it was not known as Ivrit or עברית, yet. Today, we think of that first emergent language, second to the other, as "Proto-Sinaitic".

The bar is set? Why would we want to mess that saying up? What about, the head start? The head position? the chief position? Barbers at the barbershop never mean to have a rod with bar stripes 💈. Name a drug that helps you forget? Bar-bits-u-rate Why did they man go to the bar on main Street and sit down to a blank page in his notebook, later to go home to bare sheets on his bed?

We are looking at a logical function.

Think of computers.

Think foundation: B Think no foundation: R Think about how earth is a head, without a body in space.

We are looking at mathematics, called "Character Sets"

I like this one: Ursa Minor Charmin Ultra

;)

So personally, I love to say it! It's like saying clear your head! Start again! Tabula Rasa! John 1:1.111111111וווווסוסוסו