Comentários de Citação sobre Juízes 14:4

כמתאננים — The term מתאננים denotes [people who seek] “a pretext” — they seek a pretext how to separate themselves from following the Omnipresent. Similarly is stated in the narrative of Samson, (Judges 14:4) “for he sought a pretext (תואנה) [against the Philistines]” (Sifrei Bamidbar 85).

ויתפרו עלה תאנה, they sewed a fig leaf. They used this leaf as fig leaves are wider than those of other trees. They sewed one to another until they had enough to make aprons out of them to cover their genitals. Some of our sages (Berachot 40) say that the tree they ate from was a fig tree. They wanted to rehabilitate themselves with the very material with which they had sinned. Other scholars maintain that the tree they ate from was the wheat tree. They base themselves on the fact that infants do not display any signs of intelligence until they have graduated to eating cereals. Still other scholars believe that the tree was the etrog tree, as the Torah wrote ותאכל מן העץ, “she ate from the tree.” Clearly, she ate fruit. The words from “the tree” therefore allude to the fact that the trunk of the tree was as edible as its fruit, and only the etrog tree was known to have edible wood. (2,17)
Rabbi Yehudah ben Simon, quoting Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, says there can be no question that G’d has not revealed the type of tree it was in the past, nor will He do so in the future. Consider what it says in Leviticus 20,16, והרגת את האשה ואת הבהמה, “you are to execute both the woman and the beast” (who engaged in sexual relations with one another). Granted that the woman sinned, but why does the beast have to die if the woman sinned? The Torah decrees this in order that people seeing the beast should not be able to point at it, saying: “here is the beast that caused her mistress to be stoned to death.” G’d would not want the tree which innocently became a passive partner in Chavah’s sin to be stigmatized throughout human history, forever more. Hence the identity of the tree has never been revealed. If G’d was concerned with the reputation of one of creation’s derivatives, how much more so would He be concerned with the reputation of a tree which was a direct creation of His. [consider the fact that G’d, personally, is credited with having planted all the trees in the garden 2,9] The scholar Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra wrote (verse 6) that the two trees, i.e. the tree of life and the tree of knowledge, were situated in the middle of the garden and were not ever found anywhere else on earth. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 19,6) explain the matter as a parable, the fig tree serving as metaphor, just as in Judges 14,4.

pretenses Heb. תאונות, pretenses to turn away from the Omnipresent, an expression of (Jud. 14: 4), “that he sought a pretense (תאנה).”