Комментарий к Берешит 3:22

היה כאחד ממנו IS BECOME LIKE ONE OF US (or, like the Being who is One, Unique amongst us) — Lo, he is unique among the terrestrial ones, even as I am unique among the celestial ones. And in what does his uniqueness consist? In knowing good and evil, which is not so in the case of cattle and beasts (Genesis Rabbah 21:5).

AND NOW, LEST HE PUT FORTH HIS HAND. The Holy One, blessed be He, wanted His decree concerning the death of Adam to be fulfilled, and if he were to eat of the tree of life which was created to give everlasting life to those who ate of its fruit, the decree would be nullified; for either he would not die at all or his day of death would not come at the time it was decreed for him and his descendants to die.³⁹⁷See above, 2:17, where Ramban explained two theories. The teaching of the Rabbis is that man was originally designed to live forever. By having sinned, death was decreed upon him; by eating of the tree of life, he would thus restore himself to his original position of immortality. The opinion of the philosophers, however, is that man was originally destined to die; by having sinned, it was decreed that he die before the time designated at first. By eating of the tree of life he would thus live a long time and not die at the time decreed for him as punishment for his sin. This is the deeper meaning of Ramban’s words here in the text, “for either he would not die at all, etc.” And now that Adam had the power of choice, He therefore guarded this tree from him for at first Adam did only what he was commanded and he did not eat thereof as he did not need it.
Know and believe that the garden of Eden is on this earth³⁹⁸See my Kitvei Haramban, Vol. 1, p. 309, in notes, as to why this point that the Garden of Eden is on this earth is of such vital importance to Ramban that he writes: ‘Know and believe that the garden….’” as are also the tree of life and the tree of knowledge, and from there the river comes forth and is divided into four heads³⁹⁹Above, 2:10. which are visible to us. For the Euphrates⁴⁰⁰Ibid., 2:14. is in our land and within our border,⁴⁰¹Deuteronomy 1:1. and Pishon,⁴⁰²Above, 2:11. according to the words of the former scholars, is the Nile of Egypt.⁴⁰²Above, 2:11. But as these are on earth so are there also in the heavens things similarly named, and those in the heavens are the foundations of these on earth, just as the Rabbis have said:⁴⁰³Midrash Shir Hashirim Zuta, 1:4, (Buber ed., pp. 9-10). “The king hath brought me into his chambers⁴⁰⁴Song of Songs 1:4. — this teaches us that the Holy One, blessed be He, is destined to show Israel the treasures on high that are chambered in the heavens. Another interpretation of The king hath brought me into his chambers is that these are the chambers of the garden of Eden. It is on the basis of this that they have said: ‘The work of the garden of Eden is like the work of the firmament.’” The rivers correspond to the four camps of angels on high, and it is from there that the power of the kingdoms on earth is derived, just as it is written, The host of the high heaven on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth.⁴⁰⁵Isaiah 24:21. Thus the Rabbis said in Bereshith Rabbah,⁴⁰⁶16:7. “Into four heads⁴⁰⁷Above, 2:10. — these are the four kingdoms. The name of the first is Pishon⁴⁰⁸Ibid., 2:11. — this is Babylon, etc.” And the things called the tree of life and the tree of knowledge on high — their secret is high and lofty. Adam sinned with the fruit of the tree of knowledge below and on high, in deed and thought.
Now if the fruit of the tree were good for food and he desired it to become wise, why did He withhold it from him? Indeed, G-d is kind and dealeth kindly; He will withhold no good thing from them that walk uprightly!⁴⁰⁹Psalms 84:12. The serpent, moreover, has today no speaking faculty, and if it did have it at first, He would surely have mentioned in His curse that its mouth become dumb, as this would have been the most grievous curse of all. But all these things are twofold in meaning, the overt and the concealed in them both being true.
In Bereshith Rabbah the Rabbis say:⁴¹⁰16:8. Mentioned also above, 2:8. “Another interpretation of Le’ovdah uleshomrah (to cultivate her and to keep her)⁴¹¹Above, 2:15. is that these words refer to the sacrifices, as it is said, ‘Ta’avdun’ (Ye shall serve) G-d upon this mountain.⁴¹²Exodus 3:12. It is this which Scripture says, ‘Tishm’ru’ (Ye shall keep) to offer unto Me in its appointed season.”⁴¹³Numbers 28:2. By this Midrash, the Rabbis hinted that the sacrifices will cause growth and expansion in the tree of life and the tree of knowledge and all other trees in the garden of Eden. It is this which constitutes their cultivation and care.
Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra denies what the scholars have said, namely, that Pishon is the Nile, because they found that the Nile comes from the Mountain of Frankincense [far south of the equator], and therefore it swells during the days of summer.⁴¹⁴For when it is summer time in the northern hemisphere, it is the time of the rainy season in the southern hemisphere. Hence the Nile, the source of which is in the southern hemisphere, swells during the summer time. And “we know that the Garden of Eden is near the equator, where day and night are always equal” (Ibn Ezra), it follows that Pishon is not the Nile, since the Nile originates far south of the equator. This is the opinion of Ibn Ezra. Ramban replies: “But it is already known, etc.” But it is already known that many rivers come from their source and flow for a great distance and enter the bowels of the earth for a journey of many days, and then break forth again, and flow from under one of the mountains in a distant place. [This being the case, it is possible that Pishon is the Nile.]

כאחד ממנו לדעת טוב ורע, he will know good and evil even while continuing to wear “our image.” This would be an intolerable situation, as in spite of his tendency to give in to his evil urge he would live on forever. [the author considers בצלמנו as a reference to the infinite life prevailing among the celestial beings. Ed.] In such circumstances, this Adam whose evil urge was active would continue to chase the material blessings of this world, something which would prevent him from reaching the spiritual aims set for him on earth when G’d made him in the divine image.

ויאמר השם אלוקים, The Lord G'd said: "Here man has become like one of Us, etc." We need to understand why G'd had not commanded Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of life before He forbade them to eat from the tree of knowledge. Had they eaten from it first they would have lived forever!

ויאמר ה' אלוקים...כאחד ממנו, G’d included Himself when speaking about the angels, just as He had done when about to create man in 1,26, when He had saidנעשה אדם בצלמנו, “Let Us make man in Our image.”

ועתה פן ישלח ידו ולקח גם מעץ החיים, “and now, so that he will not attempt to also take from the tree of life, etc.” Before Adam had eaten from the tree of knowledge and had become mortal, there was no concern that he would eat from that tree, as prior to that sin Adam would not be tempted to do anything against the wishes of His Creator. Besides, he had no need for what that tree had to offer, being himself immortal.

הן אדם היה כאחד ממנו, “now that man has become like one of us; etc.” according to the plain meaning of the text the word ממנו, “of Us,” is a reference to the angels. However, if that were the only true explanation the Torah should have written “like one of you.” However, due to G-d’s humility, He wrote “like one of Us.” The real intention of the verse is to say that originally, היה, “he had been,” like one of Us due to his superior intellect and due to this intellect not being hindered by the evil urge. Now, that he had sinned and become possessed of the desires of the flesh, however, he was no longer like “one of Us.”

He is unique in the terrestrial as I am unique in the celestial. Re’m raised a difficulty with this, but it seems that Rashi is saying: Hashem is unique in heaven, for His knowledge includes all: intellect, knowledge (to distinguish between true and false), and knowledge of good and evil (to distinguish between proper and improper). So too with man on earth: his intellect, coming from heaven, enables him to distinguish between true and false, and by eating from the Tree of Knowledge enables him to distinguish between proper and improper. But animals and beasts, although they ate from the Tree of Knowledge, cannot distinguish between right and wrong — only between beneficial and harmful, as they flee from harm and pursue what is beneficial. Thus, man is unique on earth as Hashem is in heaven, for the angels cannot distinguish between right and wrong, only between true and false. Therefore, Adam “must be prevented from reaching out his hand,” as he is “likely to lead people astray after him.”

Die Auffassung des כאחר ממנו ist dunkel. Gewöhnlich wird es: "wie einer von uns" verstanden, welches sprachlich ganz gerechtfertigt ist, wie "ומת אחד מהם אל אחד מבניו usw. Der Plural wird dann auf Engel bezogen, und da, wie wir geglaubt, der Genuss vom Baume dem ersten Menschen keineswegs eine ihm bis dahin fehlende höhere Erkenntnis gebracht hat, so müßten wir es also verstehen: der Mensch hat sich also wie einer von uns benommen, selbst zu wissen was gut ist und bös. Diese Ansicht ist alt. Schon ר׳ פפיס in ב׳ר כ׳א erklärte das כאחד ממלאכי השרת :כאחד ממנו Allein ר׳ עקיבא verwies ihm schon das Unstatthafte, hier in ganz konkreter Weise, hinsichtlich der Einsicht in Gutes und Böses die Engel in gleiche Linie mit הב"ה zu stellen, דייך פפיס. Aufgefordert, seine Ansicht über die Bedeutung des Satzes הן האדם היה כאחר ממנו auszusprechen, erwiderte שנתן לו המקום לפניו שני דרכים דרך החיים :ר"ע ודרך המות ובירר לו דרך המות. (So ist die Lesart im ילקוט) ,Gott habe ihm zwei Wege zur Wahl vorgelegt, den Weg des Lebens und den Weg des Todes, er habe den letzteren gewählt. Diese sich dem Sinne nach so sehr empfehlende Erklärung dürfte denn doch auch wortgerechter sein, als es auf den ersten Blick scheinen möchte. חַאַד bezeichnet überall: eines aus zweien oder mehreren. ממנו heißt ebensowohl: von ihm als von uns, und kann recht wohl wie das rabbinische כל כמיניה den Sinn haben: von ihm, von seiner Entscheidung, seiner Wahl abhängig. אחד ממנו würde demgemäß heißen: das eine oder der eine von den seiner Entscheidung anheim gegebenen zweien, und היה כאחד ממנו: er ist wie der eine seiner Wahl Überlassene geworden. Es hatte ihm Gott die Wahl anheim gegeben, sich in seinem Urteil über das ihm Gute oder Böse dem göttlichen Willen unterzuordnen und damit den Weg des Lebens zu betreten, oder selbst zu entscheiden, was gut und bös sei und damit dem Untergange zu verfallen. Er hat sich nun dafür entschieden, selbst zu wissen was gut sei und bös. Mit dieser Wahl hatte er nun auch über sein äußeres Geschick entschieden. Außerhalb des Paradieses geschaffen, war die Versetzung ins Paradies nur eine Prüfung, ihm die beiden Wege vorzulegen. Im Paradiese wird das Paradies nicht wieder gewonnen; nur in עצבון, in der Schule der Entsagung liegt der Weg zur Wiedergewinnung der reinen menschlichen Größe. ארורה, feindlich sollte ihm die Natur gegenüberstehen, sein Leben ein Leben des Kampfes und der Mühe werden, da ist der Tod ein freundlicher Erlöser aus der Laufbahn des Kampfes und der Mühe, ein ewiges Leben wäre ein ewiges Kämpfen und Ringen, die Barmherzigkeit Gottes lässt ihn nicht in der Nähe des ewig regenerierenden Baumes des Lebens. Ein Verbot würde ihn ja nicht schützen, פן ישלח ידו er würde gleichwohl sich an dem Verbotenen vergreifen. שלח יד ist in der Regel ein ungerechtfertigtes Handanlegen an einen Gegenstand.

ועתה פן ישלח ידו, “and now, lest he stretch out his hand;” this is an abbreviated verse, [reflecting the urgency of the matter? Ed.] The word: ועתה, could have been omitted as it is well known that הכל בידי שמים חוץ מיראת שמים, “everything is subject to control by heaven except matters that depend on one’s degree of awe for heaven.” G-d did not therefore have to “fear” what Adam was about to do, but He knew it beforehand. G-d was perfectly capable to prevent Adam from eating of the tree while he was in the garden. It was His domain also, and He could have denied him access without having to expel him. Why then did the Torah bother to begin our verse with the word: ועתה, “and now?” It was inserted as the attribute of Justice urged G-d to test man’s ability to resist his temptation. G-d was certain that, especially now, Adam would not be able to resist that temptation, therefore G-d put him beyond such temptation. This was going beyond the demands of justice, an act of Mercy by G-d. It gave Adam an opportunity to claim that even if he had remained within the garden he would have resisted the temptation to eat from the tree of Life.

ועתה פן ישלח ידו AND NOW, LEST HE PUT FORTH HIS HAND… [AND EAT AND LIVE FOR EVER] — And if he does live forever he is likely to lead people astray, so that they may say, “He, also, is a god”; there are also Agadic Midrashim, but they are not in keeping with its (the verse’s) plain sense.

לדעת טוב ורע, we already explained that the term לדעת טוב ורע refers to perceptive powers equal to that of the angels in our commentary on 2,17. In Bereshit Rabbah 21,5 Rabbi Pappus explained the words כאחד ממנו to mean “like one of the ministering angels.” Rabbi Akiva violently disagreed with him, saying “you have overstepped the boundaries of permissible interpretation, i.e. דייך פפוס. What then is the meaning of these words? G’d has placed two paths in front of man, one is the path of life. If he chooses the other path, he automatically abandons the path of life.
Rabbi Berechyah, quoting Rabbi Yochanan, said that as long as man was single he was similar to the “One,” i.e. immortal. The moment his one side had been removed he became a split personality, i.e. that is the meaning of “knowing good and evil.” The opinion of the Onkelos sides with that of Rabbi Akiva who interpreted the word כאחד as being similar to the One and only One, having received his knowledge of good and evil directly from Him. In other words, his choice over good and evil stemmed directly from G’d, not from the fruit of the tree of knowledge.

If he would live forever... [You might ask:] Once Adam was given a mate why would people claim that he is a god, according to what Rashi explained on (2:18), “It is not good for the man to be alone”? The answer is: If he had no mate, people would err on their own. But with a mate, he could still mislead people, since he has the knowledge of good and evil and lives forever. (Nachalas Yaakov)

Another peculiarity in our verse is the word היה. G'd was afraid that Adam might live forever, not that he had already achieved that status. The word therefore should have been עוד לא היה, or something to that effect. Furthermore, why would the ability to distinguish between good and evil elevate man to the status of G'd? How can we justify the expression ממנו, "like one of Us?" This would give the impression that there are physical beings in the heavens!

ולקח גם מעץ החיים, “and he will also take from the fruit of the tree of Life.” One reason that would have caused him to eat from that tree is that he had not even been warned not to eat from it. At any rate, after Adam had already sinned once by eating from the tree of knowledge, there was reason to assume that to breach the restrictions once more, especially if the objective was to repair the damage he had caused himself by eating from the tree of knowledge was not far fetched, and G-d took that into consideration by physically preventing him from carrying out such an intention.

כאחד, the word achad spelled with the vowel patach does not necessarily have to be in a construct form. Ibn Ezra does not agree that this is grammatically possible.

In view of the fact that G'd had warned man not to eat from the tree of knowledge He was not worried about his eating from the tree of life. He did not think man would be motivated to do so either of his own volition or as a result of seduction by the serpent. The seducer only urges man to taste what is forbidden; Satan never urges you to do what is perfectly permissible. Man on his own had no desire to eat from that tree in order to secure permanent life, something that was his birthright anyways. It was only after he had forfeited his birthright that he would seek to find an alternative for what he had lost. If G'd had forbidden the tree of life immediately, the serpent might have succeeded to entice even Adam himself into eating from it. Therefore G'd was wise in not including the tree of life in the prohibition immediately. After having eaten from the tree of knowledge with its fateful consequences, Adam's priorities had changed, and G'd now had to be concerned lest man eat from that tree in order to neutralize the mortality that had been decreed on him.

ואכל וחי לעולם, “he will eat and live forever.” If you were to remind us that the Torah had previously written that as a result of, or even on the day of eating from the tree of knowledge man would die, what good would it do him to eat from the tree of Life? We are forced to assume that the tree of Life, i.e. its fruit, was a medication intended to heal people that had been afflicted with a fatal disease. Anyone not so inflicted would not feel the urge to eat from it; [for all we know its fruit did not even look inviting. Ed.] Perhaps the translation of the expression: מות תמות, especially the repetition of the word for “death”: means that after having eaten from the fruit of the tree of knowledge man would be considered as if already legally dead. A different exegesis: G-d said that seeing death had already been decreed for man, and He had decreed that anyone eating from the tree of Life would live forever, how could both decrees exist side by side except by denying those who had eaten from the tree of knowledge access to the tree of Life?A third possible exegesis: if Adam and Chavah would give birth to children while still in the garden, and these had not eaten from the fruit of the tree of knowledge, it would be unfair to decree death for them; and if they were to eat from the tree of Life they would live forever. Therefore they had to be denied access.[Seeing that G-d did not consider uprooting the tree of Life, it is proof that anything in this universe which dies out, or perishes, does not do so as an act of G-d Who had created it for the benefit of His creatures, but must be a result of those creatures having forfeited by their actions the good such a phenomenon could do for them. Ed.]

ועתה פן ישלח ידו,.originally, Adam had not been forbidden to eat from the tree of life, but, on the contrary, had been commanded to eat from it, as we explained on 2,17. This tree was one of the trees of the garden from all of which Adam had been instructed to eat. As long as he would eat from the fruit of that tree, he would lengthen his original life span. However, as soon as he had violated G’d’s commandment by eating from the tree of knowledge, his punishment was premature death, i.e. death before he had attained the life span originally set for him. Therefore, G’d did not want him to remain inside Gan Eden so that he would not now take from the fruit of the tree of life just as he had taken from the fruit of the tree of knowledge. If he were to do that he would live far longer than G’d meant for him to live. It was the nature of that tree to reinforce man’s natural powers and to extend his life span. Seeing that Adam had violated the commandment he would now receive his punishment, i.e. shortening his life span. It was appropriate to expel him from the garden on that account to prevent him from eating the fruit of that tree. The meaning of the words גם מעץ is a reference to the other tree he had eaten from without permission. G’d reasoned that if He allowed man to remain in the garden and commanded him not to eat from the tree of life, he would once again violate His commandment just as he had done previously concerning the tree of knowledge. The meaning of the word לעולם is not to be understood literally as “forever, but describes a long period of time. It is similar to the meaning of the word לעולם in Exodus 21,6 where it cannot possibly mean “forever,” seeing that the servant who is the subject in that verse does not live forever.

The meaning of the word היה then is: "up until now man was alone unto himself," i.e. he was immortal," however, now that he has lost his immortality, he might want to eat from the tree of life. The word אחד ממנו, would refer to the uniqueness of man on earth. He alone of all the creatures on earth was immortal. The knowledge man acquired due to having eaten from the tree of knowledge might prompt him to want to eat from the tree of life to recapture the uniqueness of his former stature of ruling over the creatures of earth. I have found a proof for my interpretation of the word ממנו in Onkelos. Onkelos translates the word as מניה, "from him," i.e. כאחד ממנו, "like the only one of its kind"

There is another way to solve the problems we have raised. On the day G'd commanded Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge He gave two commandments. G'd actually allowed for the possibility that Adam would violate His command by saying: "should you eat from it, your only way to rehabilitate yourself will be through death, through mortality of the body." In halachah we would consider the second commandment, i.e. the need to die as a לאו הניתק לעשה, a negative commandment tied to a positive commandment. The positive commandment is viewed as the תיקון, reparation of the negative commandment that has been violated. We have mentioned earlier that had it not been for the sin, Adam would have become so refined that he would have been considered as at home in the world of the permanent beings, just as the prophet Elijah who departed this world, body intact. It was only due to the sin that Adam's body forfeited the chance to rise with him to such lofty heights. Once deprived of the opportunity to refine his body in the manner described, the very act of separation of the soul from the body becomes the symbol of the inability to achieve the elevation of the body to eternal life. Under such circumstances man would not eat from the tree of life of his own accord. He would be afraid that as a result of eating from it he would forever forfeit potential rehabilitation should he violate the command not to eat from the tree of knowledge. Only death could afford him that chance, and once he had eaten from the tree of life he would not die. The matter was different, however, once he had eaten from the tree of knowledge without having eaten as yet from the tree of life. If he had eaten deliberately from the tree of knowledge, man would certainly be careful not to eat from the tree of life as that would condemn him eternally to a physical existence only. However, as we explained, man's sin had been inadvertent, meaning that he thought he was not bound to die in order to rehabilitate himself. If so, there was no powerful incentive for him to stay clear of the tree of life. Actually, Adam erred; even though his sin was inadvertent it could only be completely atoned for through death of his body at some stage. The principal reason that G'd had commanded man not to eat from the tree of knowledge was to prevent knowledge of evil becoming an integral part of his perceptions. His perceptions were meant to concentrate only on what is good. This is what Solomon meant (Kohelet 7,29) when he said that ישר עשה האלוקים את האדם, that "G'd made man perfectly upright." Evil did not figure as part of man's imagination and fantasies. All of this changed after he ate from the tree of knowledge. The fact that man felt naked and ashamed is proof that his fantasies now included things that were evil. Once man had undergone such a drastic change and the purpose of the prohibition to eat from the tree of knowledge had been irreversibly thwarted, he would no longer consider not eating from the tree of life as his insurance should he need to recapture his original status. He had already lost that status irretrievably. With the incentive not to eat from the tree of life gone, G'd had to forbid man to eat from that tree. In view of the fact that man had ignored a previous command, G'd deemed it safer to place the tree of life out of Adam's reach by expelling him from the garden.

Having said all this we can now understand a difficult passage in Bereshit Rabbah 21,6. Commenting on the words: "and now, lest he reach out and take also from the tree of life and eat thereof and live forever," Rabbi Aba bar Kahane says that the word ועתה, "and now" in this verse teaches that G'd encouraged Adam to repent. This word is used by the Torah to introduce the process of repentance. For instance, we have Deut. 10 where Moses described the sin of the golden calf and his endeavours to obtain forgiveness for the Jewish people. Verse 12 there commences with the words: ועתה ישראל, and goes on to describe what it is that G'd asks of the Jewish people so that they can rehabilitate themselves. The expression פן, always means "not or no." G'd said: "lest he stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and and eat of it and live forever." Thus far Rabbi Aba bar Kahane. This Midrash is extremely puzzling. How could G'd justify encouraging man to do repentance by saying to him "NO!?" Why did G'd only start to worry that Adam would eat from the tree of life after He had said to him "No?" It appears as if G'd would not have been concerned about Adam living forever if he had done תשובה! This cannot be since man had already become mortal on the day he ate from the tree of knowledge!

Actually, keeping in mind our exegesis, the words of Rabbi Ada bar Kahane make sense. G'd wanted Adam to realise that he had sinned by eating from the tree of knowledge. He did this by telling him to repent. Adam answered this invitation to do תשובה by saying that he had not sinned in a manner that required him to repent. He argued that he had been unaware of committing a sin when he ate from the tree. When G'd heard that Adam thought that an inadvertently committed sin does not require repentance, He began to worry that now there was no impediment to Adam eating from the tree of life. This is why G'd had to expel him from the garden to prevent this from happening. Later on Adam did repent and spent 130 years immersing himself in the waters of the river גיחון to atone for his sin [compare Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer 20. Ed.].

Although G'd had said that Adam would die "on the day" he would eat from the tree of knowledge, the word "day" could have one of two connotations. It could mean a period of 24 hours, i.e. a day in human terms, or it could refer to a day in G'd's terms, i.e. 1000 years. If it is the latter, the meaning of the warning was that Adam would die before he reached the age of 1000 years. The respective connotation of the word depends on the severity of the sin and the feeling the sinner had at the time he committed the sin. If the sinner intended to anger G'd at the time he sinned, the meaning of the word "day" would be the minimum. The sinner would have to die before that period of 24 hours expired. If, however, the sin was not committed intentionally and the sinner had made it plain that he had not intended to sin, he would be given the maximum period possible, i.e. he would live up to but not including 1000 years.