It’s quite fascinating that the very first word of the Bible is actually a cognate of the Biblical Hebrew word for “first.” Let me explain what I mean: The Bible famously opens with the fateful words, “In the beginning [b’reishit], God created heavens and earth” (Gen. 1:1). The first word used in that passage is b’reishit, which derives from the triliteral root REISH-ALEPH-SHIN, just like the word rishon (“first”) does. In this essay, we explore three different Hebrew words that refer to the “beginning” of a process or sequence — reishit, techilah, and kedem.
We begin with the word reishit, which, as already noted, comes from the root REISH-ALEPH-SHIN. The most common derivative of that root in the Bible is the word rosh, which means “head” both in the anatomical sense (i.e., the “head” of a person that sits atop his body) and in the sense of leadership (i.e., the “head” of a nation, tribe, or military unit). The word rosh or rishon can also refer to the “first” or “beginning” instance in an expected series, thus Rosh Chodesh refers to the “beginning” of the month (Num. 10:10, 28:11) and Rosh HaShanah refers to the “beginning” of the year (Ezek. 40:1). There was also a man named Rosh who was the son of Jacob’s son Benjamin (Gen. 46:21), not to mention the Medieval German-Spanish sage Rabbeinu Asher ben Yechiel, who is often referred to as simple “the Rosh.”
If we had to find connections between these various meanings, I would argue that perhaps the central meaning of rosh is “head” in the anatomical sense. Since the “head” is the seat of the brain which controls almost all bodily functions, the term rosh likewise came to represent any entity in a leadership position that controls or has responsibility for something other than just itself. Usually, those appointed to such positions are prominent people in their own right and therefore deserve such rank and status (like a Rosh Kahal, Rosh Memshalah, Rosh Yeshiva, or Rosh Kollel), which is why rosh can also refer to something important. Moreover, because in a natural birth, the “head” is usually the first part of the body to exit the mother’s womb, the word rosh became a stand-in for anything that is “first” in relation to that which is subsequent to it. In truth, these two ideas actually converge because something “important” might be listed as “first” if things were ordered by way of importance. Conversely, if one had multiple tasks to carry out, one might try doing the more important one first because its importance causes it to supersede the rest.
Now we can better understand the word reishit. The terumah tithes that a Jew is supposed to separate from his produce and dough to give to a Kohen is referred to as reishit (Num. 15:20–21, Duet. 18:4). The Talmud (Chullin 136b) derives from that word-choice that one may not consecrate one’s entire lot as terumah, but rather must leave some remnant as non-holy, ordinary produce. Yet, elsewhere when referring to the tithe of wool shearing that must be given to a Kohen (Deut. 18:4), the Torah again uses the word reishit and the Talmud (there) does not assume that this implies that one must leave some remnant of the wool sheared as non-holy. The Tosafists (to Chullin 136) raise this apparent contradiction, and Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin (1816–1893) in Meromei Sadeh (there) offers a resolution. He argues that the word reishit in these two contexts have two different meanings. When referring to terumah, reishit denotes “importance,” which means that one ought to separate that tithe from the choicest produce yielded by one’s field. Importance is a relative measure, which means that something is important only in relation to something else which is unimportant. Because of this, in the context of terumah, the term reishit itself implies that some of the produce must remain non-terumah so that the contrast between them will highlight the terumah’s importance.
On the other hand, when referring to the tithes of shearing, the word reishit does not denote “importance,” but merely denotes “first” in succession. This means that the commandment to give a Kohen from the wool that one sheared applies to the “first” batch of wool yielded, but nowhere is there an implication that one cannot simply give the entire first batch. I would add that saying that one thing comes “first” does not necessarily imply that something else must come afterwards. This idea is best seen in the verse quoted in the Mussaf prayer on Rosh HaShanah, "So says Hashem the King and Redeemed of Israel — Hashem of the Legions — 'I am first [rishon], and I am last, and besides Me, there is no god'" (Isa. 44:6). As this verse makes clear, the fact that Hashem describes Himself as “first” does not mean that there is another god “after” him, as there is no other god besides Him.
When used at the beginning of the Torah, reishit refers to that which occurred at the very beginning of time — Hashem creating the world. But the word reishit doesnot just prosaically mark the ordinal beginning of a sequence, it also implies importance. Rashi (to Gen. 1:1) picks up on this valent aspect of the word reishit to expound on the first verse in Genesis as though it were alluding to the “important” elements of the world that serve as the true catalyst for creation – the Torah and the Jewish People. Those elements are even called reishit elsewhere in the Bible in reference to their great importance: The Torah says about itself, “Hashem has acquired me [from] the reishit of His path / kedem [predating] His productions from then” (Prov. 8:22), while the prophet Jeremiah characterizes the Jewish People as “the reishit of Hashem’s produce,” meaning they have attained terumah-like status such that any “non-Kohen” who illicitly “eats” them will bear the brunt of that sin (Jer. 2:3).
Menachem Ibn Saruk in Machberet Menachem notes that the word rosh can also refer to a "count/number," especially when tabulating an amount of people (see Ex. 30:12, Num. 31:49, Ps. 139:17, Job 22:12). This might be related to what we call in English a “head count” or “head tax” whereby each person — characterized by his head — represents one unit of whatever is being counted. However, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (to Ex. 30:12) takes a different approach, explaining that in this context rosh does not refer to the constituent individuals being counted, but rather to the final total as a whole. He connects this to rosh in the sense of “head,” by explaining that just as the head unites all parts of the body under its control, so does rosh as a “number” join all the individual units counted under one umbrella.
The word rosh (Deut. 29:17, 32:32–33, Job 20:16, Lam. 3:19, and more) also refers to “poison,” and Rabbi Hirsch (to Deut. 29:17) clarifies that this deadly extract can come from both the plant kingdom and the animal kingdom. Some explain that poisonous rosh is extracted from a venomous snake’s rosh ("head"), and essentially refers to “snake venom” (see Targum and Rashi to Jer. 8:14). Others argue that rosh refers to a poisonous flora, with Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim explaining that this word relates to REISH-SHIN (“head”) because the plant in question’s round top looks like a head (hemlock?).
Although the classical lexicographers trace the words rosh, rishon, and reishit to the triliteral root REISH-ALEPH-SHIN, Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim actually sees the middle ALEPH as not part of the core root, instead tracing those words to the biliteral root REISH-SHIN. Indeed, in one place the word rishon is spelled with a YOD instead of the usual ALEPH (Job 8:8), and in another instance reishit is spelled without an ALEPH or YOD between the REISH and SHIN (Deut. 11:12). Similarly, in Aramaic, the word rosh is pronounced reish, as occurs thirteen times in the Aramaic parts of the Book of Daniel and in popular Aramaic terms (like reish geluta, reish metivta, and even the name Reish Lakish). Even though in Biblical Aramaic, reish is spelled the same as the Biblical Hebrew rosh with an ALEPH, in later Aramaic, the middle ALEPH is replaced with a YOD.
Other words that Rabbi Pappenheim traces to the two-letter root REISH-SHIN include: yerushah (“inheritance,” by which the heir effectively becomes the new “head” of estate), tirosh (“new wine,” i.e., of the foremost quality and of beginning stage of its existence), rishayon/reshut ("permission/authority," i.e. the power given to a leader who rules over others), reshet ("net," the tool by which a hunter can become the figure of authority over an animal), rosheh (“weak,” something which is easily susceptible to becoming subjugated), and rash (“poor/destitute,” a person in such a browbeaten state that anything can easily rule over him).
The word techilah and its various inflections appear thirteen times throughout the Bible (according to Even Shoshan’s concordance). Like reishit, it too refers to the “first” or “opening” act within a sequence. For example, after introducing who the prophet Hosea was and when he lived, the Bible reports, "In the beginning of [techilat] Hashem speaking at Hosea, and Hashem said to Hosea..." (Hos. 1:2). Similarly, when Rashi (to Gen. 1:1) asks why the Torah begins with the Creation story rather than the first commandments (given when the Jews were enslaved in Egypt), the word Rashi uses for the infinitive verb “to begin” is l’hatchil, which is a cognate of techilah.
The word techilah can be traced back to the triliteral root CHET-LAMMED-LAMMED (Ibn Janach, Radak) or the biliteral root CHET-LAMMED (Menachem Ibn Saruk). Following the biliteralist approach, Rabbi Pappenheim explains that the core meaning of that root is deeply associated with the concept of “circularity” and “encirclement” (both physically and conceptually). The various derivatives of this root share a core theme of cyclical motion, completion, and the commencement of processes. As a derivative of this root, techilah exemplifies the initiation of cyclical motion, marking the moment when a process enters into its natural cycle and starts its course. [I have discussed the biliteral root CHET-LAMMED many times in these articles already, for instance, see "Through the Looking Window" ().]
The rabbinic legal term l’chatchilah, which means "from the outset" or "in the first instance," directly ties into all of this. It is composed of three elements, the prefix LAMMED ("to/for"), the prefix KAF ("like/as"), and techilah. This word represents the ideal or optimal way to perform a mitzvah according to Halacha from the beginning, before any extenuating circumstances or deviations come into play. It reflects an ideal starting point, the proper form and intention one should have from the outset, echoing the word techilah’s conceptual connection to origination and process.
Rabbi Pappenheim points out that rishon/reishit can not only denote temporal precedence, but can also denote spatial precedence. As an example of the latter, he points to the passage which states that when Jacob met Esau, Jacob positioned his secondary wives and their children in front (rishonah, literally "first," i.e. preceding them in space) and positioned Leah, Rachel, and their children behind them (Gen. 33:2).
The words reishit and techilah can be used as synonyms because both of them denote “the beginning.” In one particular case of these two words being used almost interchangeably, the Bible states that "fear of Hashem" is a prerequisite to acquiring Torah wisdom, using two different words in two different places: King David writes, ”The reishit of wisdom is fear of Hashem” (Ps. 111:10), while his son King Solomon writes, “The techilah of wisdom is fear of Hashem” (Prov. 9:10). What is the difference between reishit and techilah in this context?
The Maharal of Prague (in Netivot Olam, Netiv Yirat Hashem ch. 1) explains that King Solomon’s choice of the word techilah implies that “fear of God” and “wisdom” are inseparable, essentially functioning as one unified concept. This idea is already found in the Mishnah (Avot 3:17), which teaches, “if there is no ‘fear,’ then there is no ‘wisdom;’ if there is no ‘wisdom,’ then there is no ‘fear.’" Accordingly, the use of techilah reflects King Solomon’s broader agenda throughout the Book of Proverbs to elevate and praise wisdom itself, in this case by asserting that wisdom “starts” with fear of God, and thus both are part of the same continuum. In contrast, King David uses the word reishit to focus on the significance of fear of God, presenting it as an “important” component and even goal of wisdom. King David’s verbiage thus underscores that the essence of wisdom is to produce fear of God, without which wisdom lacks true value.
Rabbi Zev Hoberman (basing himself on the Vilna Gaon's comments to Prov. 9:10) takes a slightly differently approach. He explains that while reishit refers strictly to that which is chronologically "first," techilah can also refer to that which chronologically comes later, but has been foreseen from the beginning as the ultimate goal. In light of this, he explains that King David, who spent his entire life trying to attain wisdom, taught the lesson that in order to reach that goal, one must first pursue fear of Hashem. On the other hand, King Solomon who was miraculously given wisdom without effort did not preach that fear of Hashem must chronologically precede wisdom, but that it nonetheless should remain one’s goal from onset.
Interestingly, Targum Yerushalmi (also known as Targum Neofiti) actually sees the word b'reishit in the beginning of Genesis as an allusion to "wisdom," adding to its translation of that verse that Hashem created "with/through wisdom."
Malbim in Sefer HaCarmel offer another way of differentiating between the words reishit, rishon, and techilah. He explains that while these three terms all relate to "beginnings" or "firsts," they are not totally synonymous: Rishon refers to something in the opening position of a numerical sequence, as it is used in counting. That term focuses on positioning relative to other items in a series (e.g., first, second, etc.). Iin contact, reishit indicates an absolute beginning or primal origin. It is not necessarily part of a countable sequence, appearing without reference to anything subsequent, but has importance in its own right. In other words, reishit represents an independent starting point, which is why the Bible's first verse uses the word b’reishit ("in the beginning") to describe the creation of the world, as this beginning encompasses everything that follows (e.g., everything created within the realms of the heavens and earth), rather than being part of a sequence.
Malbim further explains that as opposed to those two terminologies, techilah refers to an initial point that negates a preceding time, but does not imply any connection with subsequent events. In this way, techilah merely marks that something did not exist before, but does not necessarily integrate with the future in the same way reishit or rishon do. Malbim adds that the creation of the world is described as reishit rather than techilah because creation marks the origin of time itself. Although, I’m not quite sure how this adds up.
Isaiah relates that Hashem promises that in Messianic Times, "I will return your judges as in the beginning [rishonah], and your advisors as in the beginning [techilah]" (Isa. 1:26). The Vilna Gaon (in his comments to Isa. 1:26) cites a Midrash that explains that the "judges" referred to in this verse are King David and King Solomon, while the "advisors" referred to are Moses and Aharon. Based on that Midrash, the Vilna Gaon explains that when discussing the "judges," Isaiah uses a cognate of reishit because reishit implies the first in a series, but does not negate the existence of something before the given series. In this case, while David and Solomon might have been exemplar judges, they were not the "first" judges (as the entire Book of Judges preceded them in time), but merely the most "important" judges — the first and foremost in a series of subsequent king-judges who ruled the Jewish People. By contrast, when mentioning the "advisors," the prophet uses the term techilah because Moses and Aharon were the absolute first "advisors" that the Jewish People ever had as a nation, so the term techilah which precludes anything before is appropriate. [The problem with the Vilna Gaon's beautiful explanation is that the Midrash as it appears in extant versions (see Yalkut Shimoni to Isa. §391) actually reads the opposite, "judges" refers to Moses and Aharon, and "advisors" refers to David and Solomon.]
For more about the difference between reishit and techilah, the reader is urged to consult with Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim’s Yeriot Shlomo, as the very first essay in that work devotes thirteen pages to this topic.
Another term that denotes the “beginning” is kadam or kedem. In fact, Targum Onkelos translates the word b'reishit in the beginning of Genesis as b’kadmin. One occurrence can be said to have happen kodem another, which means that it came “before” it in the temporal sense. These terms have close relatives in other Hebrew words that also derive from KUF-DALET-MEM, like mukdam (“early”), kadmon/kadmoniyot (“ancient/antiquities”), hakdamah (“introduction”), kdam (equivalent to the English prefix "pre-"), kidomet ("prefix"), takdim ("precedent," an occurrence the likes of which has happened in the past), and mikdamah ("advance payment"). This term thus denotes the future becoming the present, and in Modern Hebrew gives us the word kidum (“advancement/progress”).
The term kodem can also refer to “before” in a spatial sense. Meaning, kedem/kadimah means “east/eastward” because that it is the direction from which the sun rises, so it represents that which comes first. [For more about the relationship between Hebrew words in the temporal and spatial spheres, see “Forthwith in the Fourth Dimension” ().]
It is in this spatial context that the Aramaic words kaman (“before us”) and l’kaman (colloquially means “later on,” but literally means “towards [that which is yet] before us”) derive from the three-letter root KUF-DALET-MEM. The same is true of the Aramaic word kamma, meaning “first” (as in Bava Kamma or Mara Kamma). But if you’re wondering what happened to the middle DALET, the answer is that it simply disappeared. This missing DALET is hinted at in the dagesh placed in the letter MEM in those words. (That dagesh is also the reason why it has become customary to transliterate the name of the tractate into English as Bava Kamma, instead of Bava Kama).
Rabbi Shaul Goldman points out that this development (i.e., the disappearance of the DALET) seemingly occurred in the post-Tannaitic period, as earlier Aramaic works (like the Aramaic parts of the Bible, Targum Onkelos, and Targum Jonathan) do not use these DALET-less words, while later Aramaic works from Amoraic times (like Pesikta, the Jerusalemic Talmud, and the Babylonian Talmud) do.
I will conclude with an interesting suggestion made by Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim. He wrote that KUF-DALET-MEM derives from the biliteral root KUF-DALET, specifically explaining kedem as related to the Biblical Hebrew word kodkod (“head” or “skull”). This neatly parallels the polysemous word rosh which means both “head” and “first/beginning” (as detailed above).
