“God made the firmament, and divided between the water that was under the firmament and the water that was above the firmament; and it was so” (Genesis 1:7). “God made the firmament” – this is one of the verses due to which ben Zoma stirred up commotion in the world. “[God] made”? This is bewildering; for were they not [brought about] by God’s mere word? That is, “By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; by the breath of His mouth, all their hosts” (Psalms 33:6).18The verb “made” is employed in reference to something formed by the word of God.
Why is “that it was good” not written regarding the second day?19As it is regarding all the other days of Creation. Rabbi Yoḥanan taught it in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Ḥalafta: It is because Gehenna was created on it, as it is stated: “For the inferno is arranged from yesterday” (Isaiah 30:33) – a day that has a yesterday, but does not have a day before yesterday. Rabbi Ḥanina says: It is because division was created, as it is stated: “And let it divide between water and water.”
Rabbi Tavyomei said: If on account of division that is for the improvement of the world and its settlement, there is no “that it was good,” division that causes turmoil in the world, all the more so. Rabbi Shmuel [bar Naḥman] said: It is because the work of creating water was not completed.20Only on the third day did the water assume its final form (Genesis 1:9). That is why “that it was good” is written twice on the third day; once for the work of creating the water, and once for the other work done on that day.
A certain noblewoman asked Rabbi Yosei, saying to him: ‘Why is “that it was good” not written regarding the second day?’ He said to her: ‘Nevertheless, it ultimately returned and included everything at the end, as it is stated: “God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good”’ (Genesis 1:31). She said to him: ‘This is analogous to six people who come to you and you give each one of them a maneh, but to one of them you do not give a maneh.
You then give one maneh for everyone [to be divided among them] – will the result not be that they all have a maneh and a sixth in their hands, but one of them has only one sixth of a maneh in his hand?’ This was a rhetorical question. He then said to her in accordance with what Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said: ‘It is because the work of creating water was not completed.’ That is why “that it was good” is written twice on the third day; once for the work of creating water, and once for the other work done on that day.
Rabbi Levi said in the name of Rabbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanilai: It is written: “He tells the outcome from the outset” (Isaiah 46:10) – from the beginning of the creation of the world, the Holy One blessed be He foresaw that Moses would be called “good” (Exodus 2:2) and that he was destined to receive his [punishment] because of it [water].21Because of his wrongful actions at the Waters of Meriva (Numbers 20:12–13).
That is why “that it was good” is not written regarding it. Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: This is analogous to a king who had a ruthless legion. The king said: ‘Since this legion is ruthless, let my name not be written in association with it.’ So, too, the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘Since the generation of the Flood, the generation of Enosh, and the generation of the Dispersion were all penalized by it [water], therefore, let “that it was good” not be written in association with it.’