창세기 2:17의 Musar

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.

Regarding involuntary manslaughter, discussed in 21,13, the penalty of exile to a city of refuge parallels Adam's expulsion from Eden. Adam's sin had been due to the serpent's power to seduce. This had resulted in death being introduced in the universe (Genesis 2,17). When the Torah writes here מכה איש, when a man kills, it means Adam who was the first איש, individual, to cause death. Anyone who causes death is subject to "you are dust and to dust you shall return" (Genesis 3,19). The repetition of the expression מות תמות, in Genesis 2,17, is our clue to transmigration of souls, to the concept that several re-incarnations may be necessary for man to achieve his תכלית, his allotted task on earth. However, the principal meaning of the line was never that death would occur immediately after the sin had been committed. After all, Adam was 930 years old before he died (Genesis 5,5). His sin was comparable to an inadvertently committed act since it had been due to the outright seduction by the serpent. This is the reason a person guilty of involuntary manslaughter only has to be exiled to a city of refuge.

The death penalty for striking father or mother, or even for only cursing them, is due to the Torah regarding father and mother as G–d's partners, since they contribute two thirds in producing a child. They deserve a degree of respect similar to that due to G–d Himself (21,15, or 17). The reason the Torah inserts the penalty for kidnapping between the penalty for striking and the penalty for cursing father or mother, is to teach us that all these three sins are closely connected; one of these sins usually is the cause for the next one. All three are due to the pollutant man has absorbed since yielding to the serpent's seduction in גן עדן. The Midrash Hagadol Genesis 3,7, says that Adam was a thief, since he ate what did not belong to him. He was גונב דעת עליון, he deceived, or better, tried to deceive G–d. Misrepresentation in order to put oneself in a better light fraudulently is the worst kind of stealing (Mechilta on Mishpatim item 13).

We read in Chronicles I 16,27: הוד והדר לפניו, עז וחדוה במקומו, "Glory and majesty are before Him, strength and joy are in His place." This verse contains a lesson about the exiles of the Jewish people, i.e. that they are for the good of the Jewish people. The chapter quoted describes an ongoing activity, i.e. בשרו מיום אל יום ישועתו, that even the redemption that has not occurred yet should be spoken of daily, or better still, it refers to a period of over one thousand years. Considering that in our eyes G–d's day is equal to a millenium, it follows that this is why Adam died on the day he ate from the tree (as he was warned he would in Genesis 2,17), though he lived close to one thousand years, the verse quoted in Chronicles, clearly refers to a period of exile. Lamentations 1,13, which describes the exile as already lasting כל היום,-at least one thousand years,- prompts the Zohar to comment that "my very glory," הודי, has proven to be my ruin." When you re-arrange the letter of the word הוד, you get דוה, as in כל היום דוה, "suffering constantly" (ibid.). I have already elaborated on this elsewhere, where I wrote that the word "הדר," is derived from "היפוך, i.e. "turning something around, reversing it," similar to the meaning of the expression "הדרן עלך," i.e. הפוך בה והפוך בה," (keep reviewing it, keep busy with it). What the Zohar meant was that the original "הוד," glory, will eventually lead to an even greater degree of "הוד" in the messianic future, just because that "הוד" had been converted to "דוה." We are told of that day in the future that ישמח ה' במעשיו, "that G–d will delight in His works" (Psalms 104,31). When you re-arrange the letters of the word ישמח, you have the word משיח, a reference to when that time will come. Concerning that day, the Midrash says that the Messiah will be given the combined “הוד, glory of Moses and הדר (its reversal) of Joshua, meaning that from the time of Joshua the spiritual decline set in, and the glory, הוד, kept turning into progressively more דוה, suffering. The הדר, decline would then reverse itself, i.e. the meaning of that term would no longer be negative. This process will lead to the cessation and disappearance of the iniquity due to the pollutants that the serpent spread throughout the world, and will enable the Messiah to make his appearance, and the new dimension of "light," the glory of the Messiah to manifest itself. The הדר (reduced measure of majesty in relation to Moses) of the new leader Joshua will be reversed at that time, a time described in Ezra 2,63 as the period when there is once again a High Priest who can stand in front of the אורים ותומים, the time when Elijah will have appeared. This period is alluded to when the Torah tells us in Numbers 27,21 that the new leader of the Jewish people will have to consult G–d by means of the אורים ותומים, i.e. the Ineffable Name worn by the High Priest Elazar in his breast plate. We also find an allusion to messianic times when the Jewish people are counted in our portion; the name of the son of Dan is given as שוחם (26,42), whereas in Parshat Vayigash, (Genesis 46,23) it is given as חשים. I have found that the Ari comments on this that the reason why the letter ו is missing in the spelling of that name in Genesis is to allude to the letters in the word משיח. In the time immediately preceding the arrival of the Messiah, one of the descendants of Dan will conduct a great battle. All this is mentioned in the Zohar's commentary on Parshat Balak (page 68-69, Sullam edition). It is based on Genesis 49,17: "Dan shall be a serpent (נחש) by the road, a viper (שפיפון) by the path, that bites the horse's heels so that its rider is thrown backwards." According to the Zohar, the "serpent" is a reference to Shimshon whereas the "viper" is a reference to Elijah who rescued Tzaliah a descendant of Dan when the latter "flew" in pursuit of Bileam. The latter, escaped by means of sorcery and Tzaliah was at a loss what to do. When Numbers 23,3 describes Bileam as וילך שפי, this is a reference to Bileam's profound identification with the negative forces in this world as symbolized by the serpent. Jacob's blessing to Dan referred to above and resulted in two descendants of Dan referred to as Tzaliah and Ira asserting mastery over the evil forces of this world. Ira was one of David's warriors. This is what is alluded to in Samuel II 8,4: "David hamstrung all the horses (of his adversary)…"The רכב referred to in that verse alludes to Genesis 49,17, i.e. an exploit of Dan. The words ויפול רוכבו אחור in that same verse refer to someone called Shalyah from the tribe of Dan who will assist the משיח בן יוסף in the war preceding the coming of the Messiah. The verse in Genesis concludes with the word לישועתך קויתי השם, to indicate that looking forward to imminent redemption at that time will be justified. The reason why the son of Dan here is referred to as שוחם is to express the hope that this descendant of Dan at the time mentioned will be equivalent to the משוח מלחמה, the Priest whose special task it was to accompany Israel in battle (Sotah 42 on Deuteronomy 20,2). [Active participation in war was certainly not the Priest's normal function. In fact any priest who had killed a person was no longer fit to perform Service in the Temple. Ed.] Pinchas too, seeing that he was descended maternally from the tribe of Joseph, whose descendants will play the leading role in the battle preceding the coming of the Messiah, was such a משוח מלחמה. At a later stage this very שוחם is "transformed" into a חומש. When someone has inadvertently used sacred property, i.e. Temple property, for personal or mundane purposes, he must make restitution of the principal amount plus twenty per cent so that the total amount paid back is twenty percent (חומש) larger than the original. The people of Israel are considered as קדש לשם "sacred to the Lord," as Rashi explains on Song of Songs 8,12: האלף לך שלמה, ומאתים לנוטרים את פריו. Israel is considered G–d's vineyard, and anything stolen from it must not only be replaced, but the חומש, in this case מאתים, must be added to make the restitution legal.

The sin of the golden calf involved three distinct kinds of death penalty. Those who had been warned by reliable witnesses were executed by the Levites. Those who worshipped the golden calf but could not be executed judicially because although there were witnesses against them they had not been properly warned, were killed by a dragon; those who were guilty but against whom there were no valid witnesses died by the plague. Something similar happened in the case of the seduction by the serpent. Adam had been warned not to eat, the penalty spelled out. G–d Himself was the witness in his case. Eve was guilty because G–d had stated in Genesis 2,24: "Therefore man leaves the home of his parents and cleaves to his wife." Rashi sees in this the prohibition of the different kinds of incest that apply to all of mankind. However, she had not been warned that the penalty for contravening this law was death. The serpent's sin was committed with neither forewarning nor the testimony of an independent witness against it. We have a halachic rule that one does not use any argument that can serve as an extenuating circumstance on behalf of a seducer (Sanhedrin 29). Adam rehabilitated himself by offering an ox, as explained by our sages (Shabbat 28). When the Jewish people made the golden calf they reversed what Adam had done by exchanging the true G–d for the image of an ox.

The purpose of these garments was to be לשם ולתפארת, "for dignity and adornment," as stated by the Torah in Exodus 28,2. Genesis 2,28 reports: "Adam and Eve were nude; they did not experience a sense of shame." The serpent became jealous when it saw their nudity. This is the mystical dimension of all the forbidden sexual unions. The serpent had infected humans with a pollutant. The priests were warned by the Torah not to climb the altar by means of steps so as not to reveal even part of their bodies in the process (Exodus 20,23). It is a natural tendency of man to want to climb steps, to become G–d-like, the vision held out to Eve by the serpent in Genesis 3,4. This tendency became outlawed, i.e. ערוה. Adam later was מושך בערלתו tried to conceal the fact that he was circumcised, as stated by our sages in Sanhedrin 38b. The seven days of inauguration of the Tabernacle before Aaron took over in his capacity as High Priest were symbolic of the seven days of creation. On the eighth day Moses called upon Aaron; on that day he was crowned with ten crowns (Rashi on Leviticus 9,1). He was considered as if he had been created anew on that day. On that date Adam was resurrected, so to speak, because Aaron fulfilled the commandment of "sacrificing his own personality," i.e. אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן, performing an act which reversed the direction Adam had taken, when, instead of cementing his close relations with G–d, he had distanced himself from G–d by eating from the tree of knowledge and bringing death into the world. Nonetheless death henceforth would occur when someone, who was close to G–d (i.e. a priest) would fail to observe all the strictures on the performance of the service in the Tabernacle G–d had placed on the priests, just as death was the consequence of non-observance of G–d's law in the macrocosm, so now death would be the penalty for failing to observe G–d's law within the Tabernacle, the microcosm. At the creation G–d had warned with the words מות תמות; now two sons of Aaron died because they had approached G–d in a forbidden manner, as will be explained in due course.

When the Torah discusses legislation involving damages caused by an animal's horn (Exodus 21,35), it is a rule of thumb that an animal which had a blameless record, was never aggressive, is held responsible (its owner) for half the damage it has caused. If, however, the animal had a record of causing damage, its owner is assessed the full value of any damage it has caused. When a human being causes damage he is always considered as having a record of aggressiveness and is therefore always held responsible for the total damage he causes. This all dates back to original man who had caused severe damage to this world, so that all human beings who came after him must consider themselves as having been forewarned. G–d had warned him that "on the day you eat from it you will become mortal." Adam had been fully awake at the time the serpent seduced him; this is why he could not plead extenuating circumstances. He also sinned while asleep, since, during the one hundred and thirty years that he did not cohabit with his wife he emitted semen nocturnally, which in turn was converted into all kinds of destructive spirits, as we have explained elsewhere. This was all due to his having absorbed pollutants emitted by the serpent. As a result, man is held fully responsible for damage caused by him both while awake and while asleep. When we speak about man as being מועד לעולם, forewarned concerning any sin he commits, and therefore fully responsible for his actions, this means that he pays the full penalty, mortality, for his transgressions. This mortality is passed on from generation to generation.