Some problems in the text of our story:
1) Why does the Torah tell us that the serpent was smarter than "any other beast," when in fact it seems to have outsmarted even the two human beings?
2) What prompted the serpent to commence its dialogue with Eve with the words "did God indeed forbid?"
3) The Torah says, "The woman saw that the tree was good to eat;" how can one "see" if something is good to eat? One can only taste it!
4) Why does the Torah say, "They saw that they were naked?" We would have expected something along the lines of "They were ashamed that they were naked," seeing that they had previously been described as being unashamed of their nudity.
5) Since they had made themselves belts to conceal their private parts, what cause was there to feel ashamed?
6) Why was God angry at the acquisition of a feeling of shame? Is this not a feeling that everyone should know?
7) Why was each of the three parties involved cursed in a different manner?
8) How is the name Chavah symbolic of woman's major function?
9) Why did God not provide man with a leather coat, if that is the proper attire for man?
10) Why is the word or spelled with the letter aleph meaning "light" in Rabbi Meir's version of the Torah, instead of with the letter ayin meaning "skin?"
1+2) The Torah describes the serpent as possessing natural slyness, as if this represented the link between beasts and man in intellectual capacity. The serpent, governed by jealousy, wanted to create a rift between Adam and Eve. The verse commencing with the words "Did God really say that you must not eat from any of the trees of the garden etc.?" can be explained in that Eve, as is the custom of women, interrupted the serpent in mid-sentence. Later, the serpent had a chance to finish the sentence by adding "and not to touch it. You will not die." The words "and not to touch it," were added gratuitously in order to prepare the ground for the argument that since touching the tree did not cause death, neither would eating from it. The serpent had hoped to trip Eve into interrupting once more, so that it could prove that touching the tree did not cause death.
3) The argument in favor of eating from the tree ran thus. If the fruit of the tree causes excessive preoccupation with eating, the same applies, at least cumulatively, to all the other good trees whose fruit is permitted. If the fruit of that tree causes excessive urges of a sensual nature due to its visual allure, why are all the other trees that are also visually alluring permitted? There remained only the appeal of the tree to the intellect to be dealt with before objection to eating from it would be disregarded totally. It was argued that intelligence is something positive, constructive. If by eating from the fruit of that tree, additional intelligence would be acquired, how could such an opportunity be passed up?
So, "SHE TOOK FROM THE TREE AND ATE." The Torah describes two considerations as having won out.
1) The external appearance of the tree was made the yardstick of what is good and what is evil.
2) The prospect of immediate pleasure outweighed the fear of the eventual harm. "Their eyes were opened and they were naked." This does not describe their embarrassment, which would not have been objectionable, and would have been the result of their having enjoyed the fruit of that tree. The awareness was a form of knowledge that they needed to maintain their image. In order to do this, expensive trimmings for one's exterior are required. They therefore quickly attempted to cover themselves so that they could prove themselves superior to the animals.
5) The Torah therefore does not state that they did this in order to cover their nakedness. This is also why no mention is made of their feeling ashamed when they heard the voice of God, only that they hid themselves out of fear, seeing that they had transgressed God’s commandment. Adam said "I heard Your voice and was afraid." To this God replied "who told you that you are naked?"
6) Had Adam and Eve eaten only from the trees whose fruit had been permitted, the feeling of shame would have necessitated covering only their private parts, would not have induced in them the feeling that they needed fancy clothing to prove their superior status. Only eating from the tree of knowledge could have accounted for that feeling.
7) Adam (man) added to his sin by blaming his wife, suggesting that because she had given him of the fruit, he had been bound to eat it. That is why God blamed him doubly now, saying
1) "Because you listened to your wife;"
2) "Because you ate." When our sages explain Psalms 69,32, "And this will please the Lord better than a bullock tossing its horns and showing its hooves," they say that this refers to the offering brought by Adam. The ox Adam offered had its horns protruding beyond his hooves. Split hooves are a sign of "purity" in an animal, and reconciliation with one's Maker is to be achieved by means of the sacrifice of a "pure animal" (or by words as described in Hoseah 14, who describes the bull as equivalent to lips). When such a reconciliation is attended by the claim that others are responsible for one's shortcomings, one distorts the concept of sacrifice. Adam did this by blaming his sin on his wife. Therefore, the Psalmist describes the signs of purity of his sacrificial bullock as having been obscured by its horns. Originally, the bull had only one horn, a sign of superior strength. It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah that a horned animal is more likely to gore, to cause damage. Therefore, it would have been most fitting symbolically to serve as the sin offering for Adam. Eve fell into the same trap as Adam by blaming the serpent for her sin. The serpent, being the last party involved in the episode, did not need to be asked by God. It was cursed by having its former superior height reduced till it became the lowliest creature, condemned to crawling on the ground. Since the serpent had tricked Eve into eating what held allure for the eye, it would henceforth subsist on a diet of things that looked like earth, i.e. held no allure for the eye. The ongoing enmity between man and the snake, with man seeking to smash the head of the snake, is another part of the curse decreed on the latter. Woman was cursed in matters specific to her function. When she fails to become pregnant right after marriage, both parties worry about her being barren. Her pain will be greater than that of man, since even when she bears children she is not certain of her husband's love. There is the discomfort of pregnancy and the pain of giving birth. Despite all this, man dominates her when it comes to marital relations. Since man was created first, and since the survival of the species depends on him (he is commanded to procreate, not she), she who was created later was clearly created for his benefit, and not vice versa. Woman's sex urge is therefore usually weaker than man's. As the Talmud says
(Kidushin 2), "It is the way of a man to try and recover what he has lost (i.e. looking for a wife), it is not the way of the lost object (woman) to go looking for its owner." For this reason, man displays less embarrassment in matters relating to sex. Granted that the urge for physical contact is rooted in the animalistic within us, man nevertheless has the redeeming excuse that he needs to reproduce the species. Woman does not share this redeeming aspect of the sex urge. The comparison is similar to what Solomon has stated in Proverbs 6,31-32 when he compares people who steal because of need with people who steal because of greed. The curse upon man was greater, since as a direct product of God’s creative activity (He personally had equipped him with the soul of life), his conduct should have been on a far higher plane than even that of his wife. He was cursed in all "directions" of motion corresponding to the status of being a "living creature" par excellence which had been his prior to his sin. The four aspects of motion can be subsumed as defined by the answers to the questions
1) where to?
2) how?
3) how much?
4) motion itself. Scriptural references for the above are "Go for yourself from your country," i.e. "where to;" (
Genesis 12,
1). "He will keep going and cry" equals the "how"? (
Psalms 126,
6). "Continuing to grow in intensity," equals the "how much?" (
Exodus 19,
19). "Here I am going to die," equals the "motion itself," an example of when the very nature of the motion transforms the essence of the one who is in motion (
Genesis 25,
32). God said, "Because you listened to your wife"
1) "The earth is cursed," will not yield its fruit easily. Man is condemned to eat vegetables he has to grow and plant, since he had been too anxious to eat from the fruit of the tree for which he did not have to toil.
2) Only after having "sweated and toiled" will man be able to feed himself from now on.
3) "Until you die," i.e. until your travels take you from above the ground to your grave below.
4) "To dust you will return," you will dissolve into a multiplicity of particles (reference to how much, quantity). Instead of being a single integrated unit, you will disintegrate.
8) Originally, Adam had called Eve “
ishah ", emphasizing her parity with man, i.e.
ish. After the episode with the tree of knowledge, he called her
chavah, emphasizing the female element within her, and the fact that she was the mother of all subsequent human beings. Between these two names, the two functions of woman are defined. On the one hand, as the
eyshet chayil, woman of valor, she possesses all the ingredients that can raise her to the status of prophetess; on the other hand her function is to become a mother. A woman who fails to give birth, just like a man who is sterile, has not forfeited her major function in life, as is proven from Isaiah 56,3-5, "Let not the barren proclaim I am but a dried-out tree." We hold the view that man's major function is the performance of good deeds, something quite independent of procreation. If Jacob had been angry at Rachel for demanding children, else her life would not be worth living (
Genesis 30,1-2), it was precisely for this reason. When the Talmud in Nedarim 64 states that of the four categories of people who are considered as dead, one is the group that have no children, the reference is only to their perpetuating their name on this earth. When woman conducts herself true to her purpose as helpmate to man, she also retains the name
ishah. When, however, she acts as a hindrance, her function is reduced to that of the female part within her, i.e. she remains only
chavah, mother.
9) God, in His kindness, covered their entire bodies with clothing, fulfilling a wish Adam had expressed already before that. God had waited for this request for clothing just as He had waited for the request of a suitable mate.
We find man referred to as
Adam, to signify his lofty origin ("in His image"); he is called
enosh to signify his dependence and reliance on matter as the raw material he is made of. He is also referred to as nachash, signifying his state when surrendering to the call of the purely animalistic, and when indulging in phantasies. (
Genesis 49,
17) "Snakes bite the heel of the lofty horse, and fell its rider." The influence of the
nachash on
ishah stems from the similarity of the raw material both are made of. It can be described like
etzem me-atzomay, "a bone from my bones." In turn,
ishah as the vehicle of
Adam can bring about the latter's downfall. The ability to fantasize, to use one's imagination which is man's, is also the ability to distort and misconstrue the facts and appearances thereof. In one's imagination, the restriction placed on any activity can easily be interpreted as a restriction placed on all activities. It is something
arum, tricky, since it is liable to mislead. Sin always has its beginnings in the images created by the power of imagination. It fuels our will to materialize our fantasies. When Haman, who had the run of the greatest Empire in the world, felt that Mordechai's refusal to bow down to him rendered all his accomplishments null and void ("All this is not worth a thing to me" Esther 5,13), we have a classic example of the distorted view of things created by the figments of our imagination. This explains why the prohibition of the tree of knowledge could be equated by Eve with the prohibition of the fruit of all the trees.
The Midrash (
Bereshit Rabbah 19,
4) quoting Rabbi Yehudah ben Symon states that whatever was created more recently assumed a role of dominance over things created earlier, since more recently created beings represented closer proximity to the spiritual, were not totally wrapped up in their material existence. The fact that "heaven" was superior to what had been created on the first day is proof of that. The serpent argued in the same vein. Eve was afraid that unless they (the humans) ate from the tree and thereby acquired higher spiritual insights, they would be superseded at a later stage by beings who were even closer to the original source of spirituality, i.e. God, than man. She was afraid that man could then be placed in an inferior position. The serpent, according to those sages, claimed that God Himself had "eaten" from the tree of knowledge, and had then become capable of creating the universe. It meant to portray physical satisfactions as an end in itself, instead of merely as a means to an end. This was the great lie that the serpent tried to peddle. Anyone believing this lie to be true, is in fact a
kopher be-ikkar, a true heretic
(Sanhedrin 38).
Another Midrash tells of the serpent suggesting that human intelligence is the ultimate arbiter of what is true and what is false. Eve disagreed at first, saying that they had been warned not to think so, i.e. not to touch that which supposedly stands for knowledge. Touching, as distinct from eating, means that one uses one's intellect without making it the final arbiter of one's actions. When the serpent proved that such use of one's intellect did not have harmful consequences, Eve was tricked into believing that even absorbing, i.e. eating the fruit (i.e. total immersion in the value of perception based only on one's intellect) would pose no danger. This interpretation does not essentially differ from the previous one. "Their eyes were opened." Once they became aware that their nakedness represented a state of imperfection, they tried to reassure themselves unsuccessfully that being human was superior to being animal, and the flimsy covering they made for themselves was symbolic of the fact that the advantage man enjoys over the animal is merely superficial. Both were condemned to die and leave behind on earth all the accomplishments achieved during their lifetime.
If repentance has to commence at the place where the sin was committed, only the fig tree could provide the leaves, seeing that it had been instrumental in man's fall (assuming that the fig tree was the tree of knowledge). Man hid, i.e. he considered himself beyond the sphere of Divine attention, just as the animal kingdom of which he now felt a part was outside the domain of God’s personal supervision. Only when addressed by God directly did man perceive that he had been wrong in his assumptions. This in turn led to complete repentance, recognition of his error. God’s rhetorical question "How could you feel naked unless you had eaten from the tree I told you not to eat from or you would become mortal," meant "You came out of earth's lap naked and you will return to earth naked." Adam replied, "True, I ate, but I was obliged to eat since the woman You gave me, gave me to eat." This stamps man as an ingrate, and woman who argued that her having succumbed was due to the serpent's enticement, claimed that her sin was natural, almost preordained. It is man's task to "hit the snake on the head," to neutralize its ability to mislead us and to distort the powers of our imagination. The snake's way is underhanded, it attacks the unprotected rear. It is our task to smash it head-on. Having abused our intelligence, we are condemned to attain our perfection via the route of gaining our sustenance through toil and sweat. The animal kingdom, having remained true to its instincts, does not need to fend for a living and finds its needs readily provided for (see Rabbi Eliezer at the end of tractate Kidushin). "On your belly you will move," i.e. even things suitable for you, you will find only with difficulty. This is the penalty for the serpent which had not been true to its instincts. The enmity between woman and the serpent is the disdain felt by people of sincere convictions (Torah) for those who adhere to all kinds of physical self-indulgence. The ability to crush the power of imaginary enjoyments will be greater than the power of those enjoyments to seduce, though that power will be great. The painfully slow process of pregnancy and giving birth, has its parallel in the equally gradual growth of perception of true values. Constant vigilance against falsehoods portrayed as true values in life renders such growth painful. Woman's mentor will henceforth be her husband, and he will be predominant in her thinking. "To Adam He had said," He called him Adam on account of the qualities he had originally been equipped with. When true to his purpose, the earth will be blessed by his conduct, and will yield its fruit willingly. When untrue, such as during this episode, man's ascendancy over earth as a superior is naught, hence the earth does not feel it needs to respond to man's efforts. The right to use nature for his own ends is based on man's doing so in the service of his Creator. Only then does earth also serve its Creator by serving man. "For you are dust," the intellectual faculties per se must not be viewed as ruach hakodesh, holy spirit. Through their being used constantly to fulfill tasks set for us by God, they gradually evolve, gain spiritual content, and ultimately—as in Jacob's dream with the ladder—may be transformed and become truly spiritual intellect. Adam was a pious man, who separated from Eve for 130 years once he had realized that he had brought mortality into the lives of the human species. During this period, he fasted and placed fig leaves on his flesh as a form of atonement. There are three kinds of repentance, corresponding to three types of sin.
1) Fasting is an antidote for errors committed through contamination of one's intellect through certain kinds of food or drink, which induce heretical views.
2) Sexual continence, in this case from his wife, who had seduced him into sinning.
3) The fig branches that tormented his body. When Adam called his wife chavah, he expressed the recognition that she had misled him, an act of repentance on his part. When God fashioned the leather coats for man, this was a sign that their repentance had been accepted. In the same way as leather garments are good for protecting the body, the light of Torah protects man's eyes. Both together are the way God in His kindness enables us to overcome the mortality which had resulted from eating of the tree of knowledge. Compare Onkelos on Leviticus 18,5 "When you observe the Torah, you will live forever." God’s Torah restores life to the condemned.
10) Rabbi Meir's version of the spelling of the word or with an aleph expresses the same thought that Onkelos stated on the verse in Leviticus.
