וְשָׁמְר֣וּ אֶת־מִשְׁמַרְתּ֗וֹ וְאֶת־מִשְׁמֶ֙רֶת֙ כָּל־הָ֣עֵדָ֔ה לִפְנֵ֖י אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד לַעֲבֹ֖ד אֶת־עֲבֹדַ֥ת הַמִּשְׁכָּֽן׃
И пусть он будет на страже за него и на страже за все общество при скинии собрания, чтобы отправлять службы при скинии;
Rabbeinu Bahya
ותרא האשה כי טוב העץ למאכל וגו', “the woman saw that the tree was good as food, etc.” The sages (Berachot 40) disagree as to the exact nature of this tree.
Some say it was a fig tree and they base themselves on the fact that immediately after eating from the tree Adam and Chavah are described as covering their genitals with fig leaves (verse 7). They feel that this shows that the very thing which had become their downfall now had become the instrument of their rehabilitation.
Other sages believe that the tree in question was the grapevine. This is why we read in Bereshit Rabbah 19,8 Chavah squeezed the juice from the grapes and brought it to her husband. Seeing that its appearance was red like blood, their blood would be spilled and the blood of the whole universe, tit for tat, measure for measure, the punishment fitting the crime. The blood of the female of the species which would be spilled at regular intervals is the menstrual blood. This is also the mystical dimension of Deut. 32,14: “and the blood of the grapes you will drink as if it were delicious wine.” The Torah called the grape “blood,” seeing that grapes had brought blood into the world.
Still another view is that of Rabbi Abba from Acco in Bereshit Rabbah 15,8 who believes that the tree in question was the Etrog tree, the citron fruit.
Other scholars were aghast at all such suggestions, saying that there can be no question that G-d did not reveal the nature of this tree to any man living or in the future. As proof for their view that the Torah deliberately concealed what tree it was they cite Leviticus 20,16 ואשה אשר תקרב אל כל בהמה לרבעה אותה והרגת את האשה ואת הבהמה. “And a woman who approaches any animal for it to mate with her, you shall kill the woman and the animal, etc.” To the question that if the woman has sinned why should the animal be killed also, what sin did it commit?” The answer given is that the animal must not be allowed to survive as otherwise people would point to it saying: “this is the animal which caused a certain woman to be executed.” If G-d had been so concerned with the honour or dignity of His creatures, would He not be equally concerned with His own honour and not reveal that He Himself had been the cause of man’s death by allowing man to point to that tree?
Some say it was a fig tree and they base themselves on the fact that immediately after eating from the tree Adam and Chavah are described as covering their genitals with fig leaves (verse 7). They feel that this shows that the very thing which had become their downfall now had become the instrument of their rehabilitation.
Other sages believe that the tree in question was the grapevine. This is why we read in Bereshit Rabbah 19,8 Chavah squeezed the juice from the grapes and brought it to her husband. Seeing that its appearance was red like blood, their blood would be spilled and the blood of the whole universe, tit for tat, measure for measure, the punishment fitting the crime. The blood of the female of the species which would be spilled at regular intervals is the menstrual blood. This is also the mystical dimension of Deut. 32,14: “and the blood of the grapes you will drink as if it were delicious wine.” The Torah called the grape “blood,” seeing that grapes had brought blood into the world.
Still another view is that of Rabbi Abba from Acco in Bereshit Rabbah 15,8 who believes that the tree in question was the Etrog tree, the citron fruit.
Other scholars were aghast at all such suggestions, saying that there can be no question that G-d did not reveal the nature of this tree to any man living or in the future. As proof for their view that the Torah deliberately concealed what tree it was they cite Leviticus 20,16 ואשה אשר תקרב אל כל בהמה לרבעה אותה והרגת את האשה ואת הבהמה. “And a woman who approaches any animal for it to mate with her, you shall kill the woman and the animal, etc.” To the question that if the woman has sinned why should the animal be killed also, what sin did it commit?” The answer given is that the animal must not be allowed to survive as otherwise people would point to it saying: “this is the animal which caused a certain woman to be executed.” If G-d had been so concerned with the honour or dignity of His creatures, would He not be equally concerned with His own honour and not reveal that He Himself had been the cause of man’s death by allowing man to point to that tree?
Rabbeinu Bahya
צעקת בני ישראל באה אלי, “the outcry of the Children of Israel has come to Me.” Has this very wording not already been mentioned in verse 7?
Or HaChaim
ויפקד משה ואהרון ונשיאי העדה, Moses, Aaron and the princes of the congregation counted, etc. Why were three groups of people needed to perform this count? Moses was G'd's agent; Aaron was required as the Levites were subject to his instructions as the Torah made plain in 3,9. The princes of the various tribes had also been appointed to be in charge of the people who were numbered (compare Numbers 7,2). Why were the princes not involved when the Levites were counted who replaced the firstborn, i.e. the Levites from the age of one month and over (3,40-43)? On that occasion the total number was determined by G'd and this is why even babies in a crib had to be included. Bamidbar Rabbah 3,9 describes how Moses asked G'd if he was really expected to enter the tent of every Levite family and examine if there was a male baby of 30 days and over. G'd responded that if Moses were to stand outside He would convey to him the number of Levites who qualified for the count inside that tent. As this information was given only to Moses, neither Aaron nor the princes were involved in that count.