Musar sur La Genèse 2:17

The entire laws pertaining to sacrifices as well as those pertaining to rehabilitation from נגעי אדם, different skin diseases people are afflicted with from time to time, are all reminders of the first sin committed by Adam and the resultant diminution of man's stature in the universe. Seminal flux, i.e. vaginal discharges resulting in ritual impurity, skin eczemas, menstrual bleeding, seminal emissions both voluntary and involuntary, and how to purify people experiencing these phenomena are all part of the legislation in this book. These laws are followed by the report of the death of two of Aaron's sons whose experience served as atonement for the failure of original man, as will be explained in its proper place. As a result of all the above a special day of the year had to be set aside to afford man an opportunity to obtain forgiveness and cleanse himself of his sins. This too is an allusion to what happened when death was decreed on Adam, i.e. mankind; G–d's day is reputed to be equivalent to one thousand years of our calendar, hence one day compensates for the penalty decreed on Adam that he would die on the "day" he would eat from the tree of knowledge (Genesis 2,17). Once this part of rehabilitation of man has been achieved, i.e. that man has succeeded in the סור מרע, "distancing himself from evil" part, he can strive for positive rehabilitation, the attainment of קדושה, sanctity. The second part of the book of Leviticus commences with the imperative to become holy, an ideal to be striven for because G–d Himself is holy. There follows the part of the book in which the sanctification of certain times of the year is legislated in פרשת אמור. This is followed by the legislation pertaining to sanctity of the land itself in the שמטה year as set out in פרשת בהר. The seven times seven year cycle described by the Torah in connection with this legislation is an allusion to the seven days of creation as will be explained in its place. This legislation is followed by promises of blessings if we observe the commandments and warnings of progressively more severe punishments if we fail to heed G–d's warnings and persist in our contrary and obstinate ways. The promises held out for proper observance of the commandments have not yet all been fulfilled, for we have not yet lived up to the premise which would enable G–d to shower us with all His goodness. It is only in the messianic future that all of these promises with their beneficial impact on both our bodies and our souls can be fulfilled. At that time our bodies will achieve the same deathlessness as our souls. I have written extensively on this in the introduction to my treatise תולדות אדם.

First let me explain a few of the finer nuances in the verses which forbid man to eat from the tree of knowledge. The Torah twice says: ממנו, "from it," ומעץ הדעת טוב ורע לא תאכל ממנו כי ביום אכלך ממנו מות תמות "From the tree of knowledge of good and evil, do not eat from it, for on the day you eat from it you will surely become mortal" (Genesis 2,17). During the conversation between Eve and the serpent, however, the word ממנו occurs only once, i.e. ומפרי העץ אשר בתוך הגן לא תאכלו ממנו ולא תגעו בו פן תמותון, "And from the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, the Lord has said 'do not eat from it and do not touch it lest you die'" (Genesis 3,3). Another difficulty in the text is the fact that in the original command by G–d we find the words “2,16) ”עץ…ומעץ הדעת and 2,17), and also the serpent itself refers to "the tree itself" (3,1). Eve, on the other hand, mentioned only a prohibition of the fruit of the tree (3,3). Only afterwards do we read in verse 6 of the conversation between Eve and the serpent: ותרא האשה כי טוב העץ למאכל, "the woman saw that the tree was good for eating." Another difficulty is the fact that surely Eve was an extremely intelligent woman. What could have prompted her to tell the serpent of an additional prohibition, that of touching the tree, when such a prohibition had not been issued by G–d? A further difficulty is that since Eve knew that G–d had not prohibited touching the tree, why did the fact that the serpent pushed her against the tree and she did not die influence her to the extent that she accepted the serpent's argument that just as touching the tree had not proved fatal to her, eating from it would not have fatal consequences either? (compare Bereshit Rabbah 19,3 that the serpent pushed Eve against the tree). How did Eve deduce a prohibition from something that had not been commanded? Yet another difficulty is the wording of the punishment. The Torah quotes G–d as saying to Adam: ארורה האדמה בעבורך, "The Earth will be cursed on your account" (Genesis 3,17). This means that Earth was punished at that time for a former misdemeanour. Why was Earth not punished at the time it failed to produce the kind of trees it had been commanded to produce?

It is quite clear that the tree of knowledge responded to G–d's original command to earth, that its trunk was as edible as its fruit. This was because this tree had been planted by G–d Himself, was not the product of the general instruction to Earth on the third day of creation (Genesis 2,8). The serpent alluded to this fact when it said that G–d had only forbidden eating "of the tree of the garden," and made no mention of the fruit of the trees (Genesis 3,1). According to the serpent, man was not allowed to partake of the wood of the trees that G–d had planted. The reason this was forbidden, explained the serpent, was that these trees were supernatural creations. There was no reason however, for Eve to worry that the fruit of the tree was forbidden, seeing that the fruit was something natural, part of the laws of nature. The serpent was astute enough to use the language G–d had used to convince Eve that only the wood had been forbidden.