Genesis – Understanding Creation: ch 1-2:3

Rashi and new and ancient translations re: Ch 1 verse 1

It has become common since the mid-20^th century for Jewish translators -- who believe the Chumash is not God’s words dictated to Moses but rather the product of more than 4 different human authors -- to use Rashi’s ‘understanding’ that the first verse runs 2 ½ verses long instead of the seven words that Jewish tradition and the Masoretes (6^th to 10^th century C.E,) have passed on.

And, regrettably, the traditional Orthodox Art Scroll Chumash has done so as well.

Non- Orthodox Jewish translations

Below are a sample of the opening texts of the changed English translations.

I include the landmark Jewish Publication Society’s 1917 ‘traditional’ translation, followed by the Society’s revised text of 1962 and others who have similarly switched to Rashi.

JPS Tanakh 1917

1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 

2  Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep;           and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters. 

3  And God said: ‘Let there be light.’ And there was light. 

JPS 1962 

1  When God began to create heaven and earth
2  -- earth being unformed and void, with darkness over the surface of the deep                    and a wind from God sweeping over the water –                                                                 
3  God said, “Let there be Light”; and there was light.

Everett Fox  The Five Books of Moses, 1995

1.“At the beginning of God’s creating of the heavens and the earth,   
2. when the earth was wild and waste. Darkness over the face of Ocean, 
    rushing spirit of God hovering over the face of waters –
3. God said: Let there be light! And there was light.

The Reform movement’s edition by Rabbi W. Gunther Plaut, The Torah: a Modern Commentary (1981) repeats the JPS (1962) text.

Richard Elliott Friedman in his The Bible with Sources Revealed (2003), has a similar translation though he prefers  “At the start …”.

Why the change?

The JPS (1962), on the first page of its Preface, states the highly revised edition was due to two factors:  

Modern readers had difficulty with the archaic words and language of the 1917 edition which itself used the Shakespearean English of the King James version from 1611.

And the one it mentions first was to update the understanding of the text in light of archaeological findings, and more recent biblical scholarship/criticism.

As for the major change to the opening verses of Genesis, it simply in footnote #1 states that others translate it as “In the beginning God created …”

It is only with W. Gunther Plaut’s (1981) Reform edition and extended commentary that this change in the JPS is explained. (p. 18, footnote 1.)

As Plaut explains, the JPS new translation – which makes the first 2 ½ verses into one sentence - follows Rashi,  and is used instead of the KJV “In the beginning God created ..”  “as it is not likely the [human] biblical author was concerned with this problem –“; 

Namely, that God created the world out of nothing, ex nihilo as implied by the KJV and Hebrew Mesoretic traditional versification.

Plaut goes on to clarify that the new ‘direction’ of the JPS (1962) and the other translations noted above is in line with biblical criticism and the belief that Genesis’ creation chapter 1 is derived from the Mesopotamian creation tale recorded in the 7^th century BCE text,  Enuma Elish:  which, like the Egyptian creation myths, have water and land as eternally existing and living, primordial nature gods.  (p. 24)

Put simply, the Jewish traditional versification and Christian English translations going back to the King James Bible (1611) have been rejected as their common short opening verse: “In the beginning God created heaven and earth.” clearly suggests the world was created ex nihilo, out of nothing, and this was inconsistent with the dominant Mesopotamian (or Egyptian) world views; and , therefore, was an ‘impossibility’ and incorrect ‘reading’.  

Such a mindset among Bible critics and the above translators is itself illogical and ludicrous.

The Bible text of Genesis Ch 1 and Creation is so radically and fundamentally different a theology – monotheism --  and view of nature, that to claim it must be derived from Mesopotamian mythology (or even Egyptian) is beyond belief.

Where is the monotheism of Genesis ch 1 in Mesopotamian (or Egyptian) mythology?: 

a single and sole deity who created the world and all its plant and animal and human inhabitants as an act of spontaneous kindness and with joy: “It was good.” And  “It was very good.”

In contrast, the Enuma Elish creation myth is a tale of incessant war and brutality among countless gods who fight for domination and carry out fratricide, patricide and matricide in emulation of mankind’s worst instincts. 

The primordial ‘father’ god, Apsu, is murdered in his sleep, and Babylon’s  patron god Marduk ultimately gains hegemony and power by defeating and killing the primordial water and mother goddess Tiamat.

The world is created when Marduk splits open Tiamat’s body and from her upper half  creates the sky and rain/snow waters above,  and from her lower half, the earth, oceans etc.  

And soon thereafter he sets many of the gods who supported him: the sun and moon and stars to shine in her upper half , the sky[1].

Such is the Mesopotamian ‘prototype’ advocated by biblical criticism.

Anyone who cannot recognize how different Genesis ch1 is from the above Mesopotamian vision has blinkers on.

And the central biblical criticism premise: that no one can -- by Divine inspiration or otherwise   -- break away from the mindset and ideas of the dominant culture(s) is clearly refuted by human history and innovation. 

Think Copernicus and Galileo and Columbus and Einstein.

Think the Alphabet with its original 22 letters: so simple that even a child could learn to read and write in weeks compared to hieroglyphics and Egyptian hieratic or Mesopotamian cuneiform that took years to master with their over 600 complex symbols.

We and the Phoenicians used this far superior writing system since at least 1500 B.C.E. while the great Egypt and Mesopotamia continued in their ‘old school’ ways for another 1000 years.

So Rashi, unfortunately, has given a ‘road map’ and 'historic credibility' to these anti-Bible translations.

Art Scroll position

Here is the Art Scroll Chumash’s translation:

            “ In the beginning of God’s creating the heavens and the earth 

2                    – when the earth was astonishingly empty, with darkness upon the surface of the deep,        and the Divine Presence hovered upon the surface of the waters –

3                  God said, “let there be light,” and there was light."

The Art Scroll, which is strictly Orthodox, explains at the outset (p. xiv) that the editors have decided to follow Rashi in all of its translations.

It justifies this by noting Rashi has been the most popular commentary for over 900 years and quotes Ramban that Rashi is the most distinguished of all commentators and like the firstborn.

However, Ramban disagrees with Rashi on the very first verse of Genesis - as the Art Scroll notes[2] - and Ibn Erza constantly disagrees with Rashi as well[3].

What makes Rashi’s commentary so special and beloved is not that Rashi, contrary to some pious believers, had more of the "ruach hakodesh" (divine sprit) than other great torah scholars before and after him, but rather the popularity of his commentary is based on his constant inclusion of ancient midrashic interpretations and other sources.  With which he at times disagrees:  with his famous lead in : but the peshat (ordinary meaning) is ...

Put simply, there would be no need for any disagreement or rejection of a Rashi ‘answer’  by  post-Rashi commentaries if Rashi was recognized by Torah scholars as 'always right'.

Secondly, Jewish tradition favors the majority opinion whether in the ancient Sanhedrin, poskim or scholarship.  And here Art Scroll even concedes in its commentary on Genesis verse 1 that most commentaries disagree with Rashi on the Genesis verse 1 issue.

Nevertheless it follows Rashi in its translation. Namely, converting the traditional 2 ½ verses into  one opening sentence.

Even the Art Scroll’s effort to cite ibn Ezra as supporting Rashi’s reading, (p, 3, comment to verse 1) is also not accurate.  Ibn Ezra merely states that Rashi has a point:  that the word   בראשית is prepositional and normally has an explicit object word for completion, but he also points out that ellipsis (an implied object clear from the context) is also possible[4].  

That does not constitute an endorsement of Rashi.

So, for the Art Scroll to take a position that Rashi's view(s) should be followed when he is in the clear minority is not justifiable and contrary to Jewish tradition.

The Art Scroll’s monolithic attitude on Rashi is especially lamentable on the matter of what constitutes the first verse or sentence of Scriptures and Creation.

The Challenge

Rashi was clearly aware that Jewish tradition ended the first verse after the seventh word. 

I say 'tradition' because all Torah texts - all torah scrolls - are a series of words without any punctuation: no periods, commas, question marks, exclamation points or quotation marks.  Only extra blank spaces between larger sections.

Consequently, learning to read a Torah scroll - including the proper vowel sounds (which were not written out) and the complex melodies (with 22 different notes and combinations) for public chanting (also not marked) was and still is a major challenge requiring extensive training under a learned teacher; passing on the 'tradition' orally for over 2000 years by Rashi's time.

So the idea that the first verse is more than seven words long is possible from the unmarked text.

Mesoretic reading

The division of Torah scroll words into sentences as found in printed copies is the work of the Masoretes (6^th to 10^th century C.E.).

Concern arose that the proper reading of torah scrolls: of the Divine words and their messages, was in danger.  The Jewish people were dispersed across the known world: from Spain to India to North Africa, and reliance on the proper, oral transmission from teacher to student was no longer ensured.

This fear that led torah scholars and even entire families to tackle the challenge of creating a ‘guide for (public)  readers that ‘filled in the blanks’.

They devised the vowel marks – below and above the Holy consonants -- and  melody notation – again above and below -- and, finally, added one piece of punctuation, the highly visible diamond colon, as a period.

As well, in marginal notes they wrote outs the proper reading of words whose written spelling is different than how they are to be pronounced (called Keri Uch Teev).

Surviving Mesoretic texts

Only two of their bound ‘guides for public recitation’ have survived: the complete Leningrad Codex (colophon 1008 C.E.)[5] and the incomplete, somewhat older Aleppo Codex which Maimonides has used [6] and which is missing Genesis Ch 1 among other sections.

The Leningrad Mesoretic text makes clear in two separate ways that the first verse of the Bible, as passed on through ancient tradition, is only seven Hebrew words long. 

·       The sentence ending double colon period appears after the seventh word.

And the cantillation or melody/ chanting marks also confirm the seven word length.  The marking for word seven, ארץ , is a lower vertical line called פסוק סוף = “end of sentence”.

Rashi’s view and justification

Rashi had two difficulties with an opening verse of seven words. 

The fifth word is שמים (heaven/skies) and it precedes the word ארץ (land) though the text makes clear the ארץ (land) was created on Day 1 and שמים only on Day 2 (verses 7-9).

More importantly, the very first word of the Bible, בראשית, is a prepositional word and requires a word object to complete the ‘thought’.

Rashi could not come up with any ‘implied’ object from the context: a common technique called ellipsis. And so, with palpable frustration and reluctantly, after citing numerous examples from Scriptures in support, he concluded the first verse runs 2 ½ verses long and not just seven words.

In fact, the early C.E. midrash, Berashut Rabba, sees the creation of light as the first act of God, and therefore considers the opening verse to run three (3) full traditional verses.  So Rashi is not all alone.

But the difficulties created by the long verse readings are enormous and for those unwilling to read all of this length blog, let me cut to the simple solution Rashi missed.

The ‘missing’ word was identified by Sforno (died 1550): the word TIME. 

Namely, the text should be understood as:

                    “In the beginning [of Time] God created …” 

Why Rashi was incorrect

The reasons why a longer first sentence are unacceptable and unjustified by the text are literary, grammatical, tradition and the evidence from ancient and even outside sources.

Below is Rashi’s view of the Mesoretic versification in English translation                               (Sefaria, Genesis 1:1).   

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”.

 Literary grounds

Rashi’s reading has major and obvious difficulties:

1      1. It  makes the first verse not 7 words long but a very long 25 words -- even in                          compact  Hebrew.

2.     It requires the verb ברה to be read as a participle and not a main verb. 

3.     It also requires the ‘first verse’ to have imbedded the 3 subordinate ideas or                          clauses of the traditional verse 2.  

4.   Finally, Rashi’s ‘object’ to complete  בראשית   is an entire, 2 clause sentence: God Said: “Let there be light.”   But the examples he or ibn Ezra find have a single word -- usually a noun, as the object.

All of these simple observations indicate Rashi’s ‘reading’ is incorrect.

Aural intent and Audience

Rashi also seems to forget that Torah scrolls are meant to be read aloud to an assembly of people none of whom would have a copy of the text in hand to ‘follow along’ at their own pace.

Today, thanks to Gutenberg and the printing press, it is possible, but not so for millennia prior to the mid-15 century, when only rare and costly hand copied texts were available.

So having a 25 word first sentence, with at least 5 ideas to ‘juggle’, and in a convoluted structure with 3 imbedded subordinate clauses, makes the Bible start with a leaden thump. 

Such an awkward, clumsy and confusing start is not how great literature begins.

As Robert Alter has recently reminded his follow biblical criticism colleagues in his The Art of Biblical Narrative ( 2011), the texts of the Chumash are as well crafted and elegant as any by Cervantes, Fielding and Dickens ( p. 165) or a Tolsty and Henry James (p. 25).

Finally, such a complex sentence is also not the norm.  Short sentences and, at most, compound sentences with no subordination is the rule in the Chumash:                              WWWW and then  XXXXX   and then YYYY  and then ZZZ.

Not  WW-XX-YY-ZZ-WW or other complex combinations.

These are basic rules of any text designed to be read aloud.

Ancient translations

Rashi’s reading is also not supported by other, far more ancient translations which constitute independent ‘checks’.

Targum Onkelos (c. 100 C.E.)

This Aramaic translation has been popular since its creation around 100 C.E. and has  been included in print editions – alongside  Rashi – for centuries.

A quick look at any copy of Onkelos shows he agreed with the Mesoretic versification: verse 1  is just seven words long  and with full main verb.

Older Evidence

Early 4th century C.E. - The Latin Vulgate bible 

The Christian Jerome, for his landmark Latin translated, the Vulgate, used both the Greek Septuagint text of the Jewish community of Egypt (3rd century B.C.E.) and Hebrew scrolls of the entire Tanach.

Although fluent in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew, he too would have faced the challenges of a Hebrew text without vowels and punctuation marks, and would have had to have the assistance of one or more Jewish torah scholars.

The Vulgate, consequently, is a semi-independent 'check' on Bible's versification.

On Genesis ch 1 it is totally consistent with the Mesoretic tradition.

Genesis 1 Biblia Sacra Vulgata  https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=VULGATE

1 In principio creavit Deus caelum et terram.

² Terra autem erat inanis et vacua, et tenebrae erant super faciem abyssi: et spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas.

³ Dixitque Deus: Fiat lux. Et facta est lux.

⁴ Et vidit Deus lucem quod esset bona: et divisit lucem a tenebris.

⁵ Appellavitque lucem Diem, et tenebras Noctem: factumque est vespere et mane, dies unus.

Latin, by Jerome's time, had period punctuation and capitalized the first word of a sentence.

Just looking at the above text shows it is consistent with the Mesoretic tradition and, in fact, Jerome used the flexibility of Latin word order to carefully mimic the Hebrew word order and structure as well.

Jerome’s translation is filled with ‘and’ and  ‘also’ connectives and here he uses three different ones:  et = and; the verb suffix que = and; and autem = also.

Autem is always placed as the second word in a new sentence as Jerome does in Verse 2.

And, of course, all verbs are full main verbs: no participles.

3rd century B.C.E. - Septuagint

The Greek translation of the Tanach used by the Greek speaking Jews of Alexandria and Egypt since the 3rd century B.C.E. also supports the Mesoretic tradition of versification.

ΕΝ ἀρχῇ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν. 2 ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος, καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου, καὶ πνεῦμα Θεοῦ ἐπεφέρετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος. 3 καὶ εἶπεν ὁ Θεός· γενηθήτω φῶς· καὶ ἐγένετο φῶς. 4 καὶ εἶδεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸ φῶς, ὅτι καλόν· καὶ διεχώρισεν ὁ Θεὸς ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ φωτὸς καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σκότους. 5 καὶ ἐκάλεσεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸ φῶς ἡμέραν καὶ τὸ σκότος ἐκάλεσε νύκτα. καὶ ἐγένετο ἑσπέρα καὶ ἐγένετο πρωΐ, ἡμέρα μία. 6 Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ Θεός· γενηθήτω στερέωμα ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ ὕδατος καὶ ἔστω διαχωρίζον ἀνὰ μέσον ὕδατος καὶ ὕδατος.

Greek sentences do not start with capitals but there are periods to show the end of sentences.  And the Septuagint uses only full verbs. 

Therefore, these three ancient translations show that Rashi's reading of 21/2 verses was not the 'understanding' of these three oldest, foreign language translations going back a millennia or more by Rashi’s time.

Lastly, all three understood the Hebrew word בְּרֵאשִׁית as a 'complete thought' or ellipsis.

Onkelos used ." In the past"  = בקדמין

  Jeromeused In principio  = In the beginning (noun)

The Septuagent used ΕΝ ἀρχῇ= in the beginning (noun)   (http://biblehub.com/greek/746.htm)

Conclusion

Only the Mesoretic versification of Genesis ch 1 is warranted.

The Masoretes in their vowel sound notation, double diamond period and cantillation marking made clear what was ancient Jewish tradition on this issue.

Their view is supported by both independent Jewish and non-Jewish translations that go back a millennia before Rashi.

And Rashi’s reading has so many flaws in terms of the normal style of the Chumash and it would make public reading confusing to its audience.

The English wording of the King James Bible (1611) "In the beginning .. " has an onomatopoeic quality.  “The three words, including the multi-syllabic word choice of “beginning”,  create an audible, three second duration: aptly creating the ‘feel’ of  TIME starting.

Jewish translators – both religious and secular – need to rethink their abandonment of the traditional English and Hebrew versification. 

Secular scholars should not ‘twisted’ the Chumash to fit into a foreign culture with radically different values and world view.  And to ‘manipulate’ Rashi: to justify such an alien reading – a reading that they, as bible scholars, should know is contrary to basic Bible style and rules of public recitation, is unacceptable and intellectually dishonest.

 And pious Jews should not put Rashi on so lofty a pedestal.

Jewish tradition (Masoretes), other great torah scholars before (Onkelos) and after Rashi (Ramban and others), and the simple rules of Bible style and public recitation should have made clear that Rashi was wrong here.

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En%C3%BBma_Eli%C5%A1

[2] P. 3 Commentary to verse 1

[3] See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_ibn_Ezra section on Influence on biblical criticism

[4] https://www.sefaria.org/Ibn_Ezra_on_Genesis.1.1.2?lang=bi

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leningrad_Codex

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleppo_Codex

UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLE: English translations and lost nuances of Shema

Shema: Lost nuances and lost complexities

Many passages from the Tanach and especially the Torah are used as siddur prayers, and too often those praying and reading these passages: both in the Hebrew and modern English translations -- miss out on the texts’ nuances and complexities.

This is particularly true of the 3 paragraphs of the twice daily Shema prayer.

Why?

1.     Lack of clear punctuation.

The Torah comes from the earliest period of written alphabet languages and was originally intended to be read aloud to assembled masses.

It predates the Greek introduction of vowel letters – which in English became A-E-I-O-U and sometimes Y, and the dot and stroke vowel symbols used in printed Hebrew texts were only invented by the Masoretes of the 6^th-10^th centuries C.E.

Also, Torah scrolls do not have indicators for sentence ending periods (.), short pauses, i.e., the coma, exclamation points (!), question marks (?) and most importantly, quotation marks (“   “) for direct speech.

The Masoretes only added the diamond colon (    ) as the equivalent of the modern period, and relied on their other invention: musical cantillation notation, to act as ‘semi-punctuation’ guides.

Today, Chumash and siddur texts still restrict punctuation in the Hebrew to the Masoretes’ double diamond period and sometimes a comma. They leave the rest for the reader to fill in by ‘self-analysis’ – unless he or she is very familiar with the cantillation markings.

So, the Hebrew texts continue to be challenging as punctuation improvements have not been added; the texts are exactly as the Masoretes left them over 1000 years ago.

By comparison, it is far easier to follow English translations as all English versions since the great King James Bible (1611) have standard markings for periods, commas, and question marks.

And since the early 20th century, limited use of quotation marks (often as single quote marks) has become common as in the landmark Jewish Publication Society (JPS) version of1917 down to the Art Scroll. 

Modern English ‘YOU”

Modern English, unlike Hebrew, French and even Medieval English, uses the pronoun 'you' for both singular and plural.

And this ‘collapse’ to just “YOU” has major implications in understanding text.

The Medieval English of Shakespeare and the great King James Bible (1611) had distinct forms for “YOU”: singular Thee and Thou” and plural “Ye and You”, making clear whether one person or a group was involved.

And until recent times, this clarity was perpetuated in subsequent Christian translations and the often repeated, JPS translation of 1917.

However, more recent translations: both Christian and Jewish, including the Art Scroll, have abandoned the diverse forms for ‘YOU’ to be more colloquial.

In doing so, their English texts lose key nuances and often key meanings of the Biblical text, as plural and singular situations become confused as they appear as one and the same.

This is true of the 3 passages of Shema as will be illustrated below.

BLOCK format

Both the classic Hebrew masoretic text and English translations are normally presented in blocks which often obscure important ‘shifts’ and cause the text’s different ‘voices’ to be overlooked and ignored -- especially when read quickly.

Put simply, the Torah/Chumash constantly shifts between narration, indirect speech and direct speech, and ideally these distinct ‘threads’ should be separated as is done in standard, play scripts.

Again, the 3 paragraphs of Shema illustrate these complex shifts and the importance of their separation.

Vav Hahefuch

This unique time shifting verb form - using past tense prefixed by Vav (וְ) to mean future tense, and vice versa -- is the Torah's hallmark and verb parallel to the 4 letter, proper name of the Divine, the tetragrammaton. It is a conflation of the verb TO BE in its past-present-future forms; and consequently should be translated as The ETERNAL. 

This special verb form is used for God as narrator and when God's communication to humans is presented as INDIRECT SPEECH.  E.g., God told Moses that ... -- as in the opening of the 3rd paragraph of Shema. 

Any time Vav Hahefuch appears in direct speech, attention must be paid, and an explanation sought -- as this is NOT the normal style of the Torah.  

Finally, translations do not adequately warn the reader whenever the Divine Vav Hahefuch appears, as they simple give the intended verb tense 'meaning'.

Shema – section 1  (Deuteronomy 6:4-9)

The first section of Shema begins with an exhortation to believe in the one and only God,  the ETERNAL,  in  collective language:    ... "He is OUR God".

The rest of the passage is in the singular and calls upon each individual person to dedicate himself (and herself) to the true God.  The commandments of tephillin and mezzuzot are highlighted at the end as well as the injunction of constant Torah study and the education of each person’s children.

Shema – section 2  (Deuteronomy 11:13-21)

The second passage is all in the plural and directed at the people as a whole. It switches only once between Moses as speaker to a Divine quotation. (See chart below.)

It focuses on Eretz Ysrael as God's gift, and how life there will be sweet -- with  abundant crops and numerous flocks.  But if the people abandon God and worship pagan deities, there will be no rain, which will escalate to prolonged drought.  And if that does not lead the people to return to God, they will be punished by military invasion, defeat and exile.

Finally, the commandments and constant visible reminders of tephilin and mezzuzot are repeated – this time in the plural.

Shema – section 3  (Numbers 15:37-41)

The 3rd section of Shema is the commandment of tzizit.

Males are to wear a sky blue thread at each of the 4 corners of their cloak or garment as a perpetual reminder to follow God and not stray as they interact with the pagan world.

Unlike the first two Shema passages which are segments of long sermons that repeat the ideas again and again, the tzizit passage is found in the Torah all by itself: sandwiched between two major violations.

It is immediately preceded by the story of the individual Israelite who collected wood on Shabbat and was communally stoned to death at God's order (Numbers 15:32-36) and is immediately followed by the great group rebellion of Korach (Numbers, ch 16).

The passage is also the most complex as it combines narration, indirect speech and Divine direct speech.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

The charts below highlight these various issues.

GUIDE:

 Vav Hahefuch verbs are in BOLD RED.    

“YOU” singular is in BOLD BLUE.

The 4 letter proper name of God is translated here as the ETERNAL.

The word “ELOHEM” -- which is best understood as ALMIGHTY, I translate as God when accompanied by a possessive pronoun to avoid sounding awkward: i.e., “Our Almighty”, “worship other Almighties”.   

SHEMA – section 1   Deuteronomy 6:4-9		HEBREW TEXT		ENGLISH TEXT
Speaker	Audience			Direct speech “   “	Indirect speech	narrator	COMMENTARY
Moses	Entire people -- including Moses himself	שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל:  יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ, יְהוָה אֶחָד		Hear, O Israel: the ETERNAL is our God, the Eternal is the only one.			Spoken collectively: = PLURAL “our” NORMAL use of Imperative verb.
Moses	Each, individual person	וְאָהַבְתָּ, אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, בְּכָל-לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל-נַפְשְׁךָ, וּבְכָל-מְאֹדֶךָ.		And you shall love the ETERNAL your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your diverse might			Text switches to the singular and each INDIVIDUAL. Also switches to using the DIVINE Vav Hahefuch As this is direct speech, I suggest the Vav Hahefuch is used by Moses to mean ‘eternally’.  NB: Torah scrolls do not have vowel markings and their addition is based on oral tradition.  This is not a real issue except for the last item: מְאֹדֶךָ     is plural, so I translate it as ‘various might’. בְּבֵיתֶךָ  / בֵּיתֶךָ  is also plural for houses וּבְקוּמֶךָ. is also plural וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ also plural  is יָדֶךָ is also plural for some reason
Moses	Each, individual person	וְהָיוּ הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם--עַל-לְבָבֶךָ.  וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ, וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם, בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ, וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ.		May these words, which I command you this day be upon your hearts; You shall teach them to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your houses, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and whenever you rise up.
Moses	Each, individual person	וּקְשַׁרְתָּם לְאוֹת, עַל-יָדֶךָ; וְהָיוּ לְטֹטָפֹת, בֵּין עֵינֶיךָ.		You shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be for frontlets between your eyes.
Moses	Each, individual person	וּכְתַבְתָּם עַל-מְזֻזוֹת בֵּיתֶךָ, וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ		You shall write them upon the door-posts of your houses, and upon your gates.
SHEMA – section 2   Deuteronomy 11:13-21			HEBREW TEXT	ENGLISH TEXT
Speaker	Audience			Direct speech “   “	Indirect speech	narrator	COMMENTARY
Moses	Entire people		וְהָיָה, אִם-שָׁמֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ אֶל-מִצְו‍ֹתַי, אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם, הַיּוֹם--לְאַהֲבָה אֶת-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם, וּלְעָבְדוֹ, בְּכָל-לְבַבְכֶם, וּבְכָל-נַפְשְׁכֶם.	It shall come to pass if you shall listen diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the ETERNAL your God, and to serve Him with all your hearts and with all your souls,			Except for the opening word, וְהָיָה ,         all else is in normal verb form This indicates the passage and warning are of Divine origin.
GOD	Each, individual person		וְנָתַתִּי מְטַר-אַרְצְכֶם בְּעִתּוֹ, יוֹרֶה וּמַלְקוֹשׁ; וְאָסַפְתָּ דְגָנֶךָ, וְתִירֹשְׁךָ וְיִצְהָרֶךָ.	I will give rain for your land in its season: the early rain and the latter rain. You shall gather in your corn, and your wine, and your oil.			Switches to a DIRECT QUOTE from GOD to each, individual person. Uses Vav hahefuch in this direct speech as an eternal promise.
GOD	Each, individual person		וְנָתַתִּי עֵשֶׂב בְּשָׂדְךָ, לִבְהֶמְתֶּךָ;	I will give grass in your field for your animals
GOD	Each, individual person		וְאָכַלְתָּ, וְשָׂבָעְתּ	You will eat and be full.
Moses	Entire people		הִשָּׁמְרוּ לָכֶם, פֶּן יִפְתֶּה לְבַבְכֶם; וְסַרְתֶּם, וַעֲבַדְתֶּם אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים, וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶם, לָהֶם.	Take heed to yourselves, lest your heart will become deceived, and you will turn aside, and you will serve other gods, and you will bow down to them;			Switches back to the people as a whole. First 2 verbs are normal verb form but thereafter the next 3 verbs are vav hahefuch as a Divine vision into the future.
Moses	Entire people		וְחָרָה אַף-יְהוָה בָּכֶם, וְעָצַר אֶת-הַשָּׁמַיִם וְלֹא-יִהְיֶה מָטָר, וְהָאֲדָמָה, לֹא תִתֵּן אֶת-יְבוּלָהּ; וַאֲבַדְתֶּם מְהֵרָה, מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ הַטֹּבָה, אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה, נֹתֵן לָכֶם.	The anger of the ETERNAL will be kindled against you, and He will shut up the sky. so that there shall be no rain, and the ground shall not yield her fruit; and you will quickly perish from off the good land which the ETERNAL gives to you.			This section alternates between vav hahefuch and normal verb forms. -- The ‘land’ is in normal verbs in the mid section and again at the end.   It is only for the people and their future, Divine punishments that Vav Hahefuch is applied.
Moses	The Entire people		וְשַׂמְתֶּם אֶת-דְּבָרַי אֵלֶּה, עַל-לְבַבְכֶם וְעַל-נַפְשְׁכֶם; וּקְשַׁרְתֶּם אֹתָם לְאוֹת עַל-יֶדְכֶם, וְהָיוּ לְטוֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֵיכֶם.	You shall place these, My words in your heart and in your soul; and you shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be for frontlets between your eyes.			A repeat of the commandment of tephillin from Section 1, but now presented in the PLURAL – i.e. to all the male members of Israel.          --- Vav hahefuch is used to stress this is an ‘eternal’ commandment.
Moses	The entire people		וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אֹתָם אֶת- בְּנֵיכֶם, לְדַבֵּר בָּם	You shall teach them to your children, to talk of them,			This is a rephrasing of the final message from Shema section 1 but this time it begins in the PLURAL and soon switches to the SINGULAR -- to stress that every person is obliged to study Torah/pray  whenever and wherever possible; and to affix mezzuzot.          ---- Uses Vav Hahefech to stress Torah study and  memuzah commandments are eternal. Again, the words “houses” and “gates” are in the plural.
Moses	Each individual person		בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ, וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ.	when you will sit in your houses, and when you will walk by the way, and when you will lie down, and when you will rise up.
Moses	Each individual person		וּכְתַבְתָּם עַל-מְזוּזוֹת בֵּיתֶךָ, וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ.	You shall write them upon the door-posts of your houses, and upon your gates;
Moses	Entire people		לְמַעַן יִרְבּוּ יְמֵיכֶם, וִימֵי בְנֵיכֶם, עַל הָאֲדָמָה, אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְהוָה לַאֲבֹתֵיכֶם לָתֵת לָהֶם--כִּימֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם, עַל-הָאָרֶץ.	So that your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children upon the land which the ETERNAL swore unto your fathers to give them, as the days of the sky above the earth.			This closing reverts to the PLURAL as the Divine promise to the Patriarchs was for the entire nation. All is in normal verb tense.
SHEMA – section 3                       Numbers 15: 37 - 41			HEBREW   TEXT	ENGLISH TEXT
Speaker	Audience			Direct speech         “   “	Indirect speech	narrator	COMMENTARY
Narrator	Listener/reader		וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה, אֶל-מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר.			The ETERNAL said  to Moses saying;	Normal use of Vav Hahefuch in narration.
God	Moses		דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל,  וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם	Speak to the children of Israel,	and you will say to  them		Starts with normal verb for direct speech then switches to Divine Vav Hahefuch for indirect speech.
God	Moses		וְעָשׂוּ לָהֶם צִיצִת עַל-כַּנְפֵי בִגְדֵיהֶם, לְדֹרֹתָם; וְנָתְנוּ עַל-צִיצִת הַכָּנָף, פְּתִיל תְּכֵלֶת.		that they should make for themselves fringes in the corners of their garments, throughout their generations and that they should put on the fringe of each corner a thread of blue.		Continues in indirect speech. The Israelites are in third person. _______________________ Switches to direct speech. Returns to speaking to the people as “YOU”. Uses vav hahefuch  to emphasize these commandments are Divine and eternal.
Moses	Entire People		וְהָיָה לָכֶם, לְצִיצִת, וּרְאִיתֶם אֹתוֹ וּזְכַרְתֶּם אֶת-כָּל-מִצְו‍ֹת יְהוָה, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם;	It shall be for you for a fringe that you will look upon it, and will  remember all the commandments of the ETERNAL, and will do them,
Moses	Entire People		וְלֹא-תָתוּרוּ אַחֲרֵי לְבַבְכֶם,	[So] you will not follow after your own hearts
			וְאַחֲרֵי עֵינֵיכֶם,	and after your own eyes,
			אֲשֶׁר-אַתֶּם זֹנִים, אַחֲרֵיהֶם.	after which you lustfully follow.			The Hebrew verb זֹנִים means prostitution.  I therefore added ‘lustfully’ for clarity
			לְמַעַן תִּזְכְּרוּ, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֶת-כָּל-מִצְו‍ֹתָי; וִהְיִיתֶם קְדֹשִׁים, לֵאלֹהֵיכֶם.	So that you may remember and will do all My commandments, and will be holy unto your God.
God	Entire People		אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם, אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתִי אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, לִהְיוֹת לָכֶם, לֵאלֹהִים:  אֲנִי, יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם.	I am the ETERNAL your God who took you out of the land of Egypt to be your God. I am the ETERNAL, your God.			Closes with a direct quote from God to the people; done in normal, direct speech verb form.