וַתִּפָּקַ֙חְנָה֙ עֵינֵ֣י שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם וַיֵּ֣דְע֔וּ כִּ֥י עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם הֵ֑ם וַֽיִּתְפְּרוּ֙ עֲלֵ֣ה תְאֵנָ֔ה וַיַּעֲשׂ֥וּ לָהֶ֖ם חֲגֹרֹֽת׃
At nadilat ang mga mata nilang dalawa, at nalaman nila na sila ay hubad; at nagtahi sila ng mga dahon ng igos at gumawa sila para sa kanilang sarili ng mga panamit sa baywang.
Ein Yaakov (Glick Edition)
(Fol. 70) R. Chanan said: "Wine was created for nothing else than to comfort mourners and to compensate through it the wicked for any good thing they do in this world, as it is said (Pr. 31, 6) Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish and wine to those who have an embittered soul." R. Isaac said: "What does the passage (Ib. 23, 31) Do not look for wine when it looketh red, mean? You shall not look for wine which makes the faces of the wicked in this world red, and makes them pale (puts them to shame) in the world to come." Raba said: "You shall not look for wine because its end is bloodshed." R. Cahana raised the following contradiction: It is written (Pr. 104, 15) Y'shamach (waste), and we read Y'samach (rejoice); i.e., If he merits (takes care) it will cause him to rejoice; if not, it will cause him ruin, and this is meant by Raba who said: "Wine and good odor made me wise." R. Amram, the son of R. Simon b. Abba, said: "What does the passage (Ib., ib. 26, 30) Who hath woe? Who hath sorrow? Who hath quarrels? Who hath complaints? Who hath wounds without cause? Who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry late over the wine; they that become sick for mixed drink, mean? When R. Dimi came from Palestine, he said: "It was said in the West that he who tries to explain the passage above from the beginning to the end is correct, and he who tries to explain it from the end to the beginning is also correct. Eubar the Galilean lectured: Thirteen vavs are enumerated concerning wine. (Gen. 9, 20, 25) And Noah, who was a husbandman, began his work and he planted a vineyard. And he drank of the wine, and became drunken, and he uncovered himself within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told it to his two brothers without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon the shoulders of both of them, and went backwards, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned backwards, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and discovered what his younger son had done unto him. And Noah began his work, and planted a vineyard. R. Chisda in the name of Ukba (according to others Mar Ukba in the name of R. Zakkai), said: "The Holy One, praised be He! said to Noah: 'Noah, why didst thou not learn from Adam the First that all the troubles he had were caused by wine?'" This is in accordance with R. Maier, who maintains that the tree of whose fruit Adam partook was a vine; for we are taught in a Baraitha: R. Maier says: "The tree of whose fruit Adam partook was a vine (Ib. b) as there is no other thing which brings lamentation upon man except wine." R. Juda says: "It was wheat, since a child is not able to call mother or father before it has tasted wheat." R. Nechemiah says: "It was a fig tree, for they were mended (restored) by the same thing by which they were impaired (sinned), as it is written (Gen. 3, 7) And they sewed fig leaves together."
Bereshit Rabbah
What was that tree [of knowledge] from which Adam and Eve ate? Rabbi Meir said: It was wheat. When a person does not have knowledge, people say: That person has never eaten wheat bread in all his days.27This shows that wheat is a food that stimulates knowledge and intelligence. Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak asked before Rabbi Ze’eira, saying to him: ‘Is it possible that it was wheat?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘But is it not written that it was a “tree”?’ He said to him: ‘It [the wheat in Eden] rose to a great height, like the cedars of Lebanon.’28And therefore could rightly be described as a “tree.”
Rabbi Yaakov bar Aḥa said: There is a dispute between Rabbi Neḥemya and the Rabbis.29They were discussing the blessing over bread, which praises God for “bringing forth bread” from the earth. The difficulty is that bread does not, of course, grow from the ground. Rabbi Neḥemya said: [“Blessed be God…] who brings forth [hamotzi] bread from the earth, [meaning] that He brought forth bread from the earth in the past.30Hamotzi (“who brings forth”) can also connote an event in the past (see Numbers 23:22). When Adam was created and placed in the Garden, finished bread grew from the ground. This was discontinued when he sinned. The Rabbis say: [Blessed be God …] who brings forth [motzi] bread from the earth, [meaning] that He will bring forth bread from the earth in the future,31Motzi (“who brings forth”) can also connote an event in the future (see Exodus 6:7). In the Messianic future finished bread will grow from the ground. as it is stated: “There will be bread [pisat] from grain upon the earth” (Psalms 72:16).
Lefet32Lefet means turnip. In some dialects, the word pisat (translated in the Psalms verse under discussion as bread) also means turnip. The midrash explains the connection. – there is a dispute between two Amora’im, Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak and Rabbi Shmuel bar Ami. One said: Lefet – was it not [once] bread [lo pat]?33In Adam’s day one did not need to eat turnips, because there was bread growing from the ground. And the other said: Lefet – is it going to be bread [lo pat] in the future?34In the Messianic future, instead of turnips there will be bread growing from the ground.
Rabbi Yirmeya recited the blessing before Rabbi Zeira: Who brings forth [hamotzi] bread from the earth, and he praised him. [Did he act] in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya? This is bewildering.35In a dispute between an individual rabbi and the Rabbis as a group, it is the view of the majority that should be followed. In this case, Rabbi Neḥemya was arguing with the Rabbis. [No,] it was, rather, so as not to slur the [adjacent identical] letters.36The word before “hamotzi” is haolam, which ends with a mem. Were one to recite the word as motzi, the first letter of motzi would be slurred with the final letter of haolam. Using the word hamotzi solves that problem.
Rabbi Yehuda bar Ilai said: They [the forbidden fruits that Adam ate] were grapes, as it is stated: “Their grapes are grapes of poison, clusters of bitterness for them” (Deuteronomy 32:32) – those clusters brought bitterness to the world.
Rabbi Abba of Akko said it was a citron. That is what is written: “The woman saw that the tree was good for eating…” (Genesis 3:6).37Implying that the tree itself had a good taste. Go out and see which is the tree whose wood has a taste like its fruit, and you will find only the citron.
Rabbi Yosei says: They were figs. It is a matter that is derived from its context.38After the sin, Adam and Eve used fig leaves to hide their nakedness (Genesis 3:7). This is analogous to the a prince’s son who sinned with one of the maidservants. When the prince heard, he expelled him and had him removed outside the palace. He circulated among the houses of all the maidservants, but none would receive him. But the one with whom he sinned opened her door and received him. So, too, when Adam the first man ate from that tree, the Holy One blessed be He expelled him and had him removed outside the Garden of Eden. He circulated among all the trees but none would receive him.39They would not allow him to use their leaves to clothe himself. What did they say to him? Rabbi Berekhya said: ‘Here is the thief who deceived his Creator.’ That is what is written: “Let no arrogant foot come to me” (Psalms 36:12) – the foot of one who was arrogant towards his Creator. “Let the hand of the wicked not move me” (Psalms 36:12) – you may not take a leaf from me. But the fig tree, whose fruit he had eaten, opened its door and received him. That is what is written: “They sewed fig leaves” (Genesis 3:7).
What [type of] fig was it ? Rabbi Avin said: It was the berat sheva species, as it brought seven [sheva] days of mourning to the world.40As a result of the sin, death, and the ensuing seven-day period of mourning, was introduced into the world. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: It was the berat elita species, as it brought weeping [elita] to the world.
Rabbi Azarya and Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: Far be it that God should have revealed [the identity of] that tree to any man, nor will He reveal it in the future. See what is written: “A woman who will approach any animal [to copulate with her, you shall kill the woman and the animal]” (Leviticus 20:16) – though the person sinned, what sin did the animal commit? [The animal did not sin,] but it is [killed] so that the animal should not pass through the marketplace, where people would say: This is the animal on whose account so-and-so was stoned.41And the memory of that woman would be sullied. If He is concerned about the dignity of his [Adam’s] descendants [even though they had committed a grievous sin], is it not all the more so regarding his [Adam’s] own dignity [after his sin]? That is a rhetorical question.
Rabbi Yaakov bar Aḥa said: There is a dispute between Rabbi Neḥemya and the Rabbis.29They were discussing the blessing over bread, which praises God for “bringing forth bread” from the earth. The difficulty is that bread does not, of course, grow from the ground. Rabbi Neḥemya said: [“Blessed be God…] who brings forth [hamotzi] bread from the earth, [meaning] that He brought forth bread from the earth in the past.30Hamotzi (“who brings forth”) can also connote an event in the past (see Numbers 23:22). When Adam was created and placed in the Garden, finished bread grew from the ground. This was discontinued when he sinned. The Rabbis say: [Blessed be God …] who brings forth [motzi] bread from the earth, [meaning] that He will bring forth bread from the earth in the future,31Motzi (“who brings forth”) can also connote an event in the future (see Exodus 6:7). In the Messianic future finished bread will grow from the ground. as it is stated: “There will be bread [pisat] from grain upon the earth” (Psalms 72:16).
Lefet32Lefet means turnip. In some dialects, the word pisat (translated in the Psalms verse under discussion as bread) also means turnip. The midrash explains the connection. – there is a dispute between two Amora’im, Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak and Rabbi Shmuel bar Ami. One said: Lefet – was it not [once] bread [lo pat]?33In Adam’s day one did not need to eat turnips, because there was bread growing from the ground. And the other said: Lefet – is it going to be bread [lo pat] in the future?34In the Messianic future, instead of turnips there will be bread growing from the ground.
Rabbi Yirmeya recited the blessing before Rabbi Zeira: Who brings forth [hamotzi] bread from the earth, and he praised him. [Did he act] in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya? This is bewildering.35In a dispute between an individual rabbi and the Rabbis as a group, it is the view of the majority that should be followed. In this case, Rabbi Neḥemya was arguing with the Rabbis. [No,] it was, rather, so as not to slur the [adjacent identical] letters.36The word before “hamotzi” is haolam, which ends with a mem. Were one to recite the word as motzi, the first letter of motzi would be slurred with the final letter of haolam. Using the word hamotzi solves that problem.
Rabbi Yehuda bar Ilai said: They [the forbidden fruits that Adam ate] were grapes, as it is stated: “Their grapes are grapes of poison, clusters of bitterness for them” (Deuteronomy 32:32) – those clusters brought bitterness to the world.
Rabbi Abba of Akko said it was a citron. That is what is written: “The woman saw that the tree was good for eating…” (Genesis 3:6).37Implying that the tree itself had a good taste. Go out and see which is the tree whose wood has a taste like its fruit, and you will find only the citron.
Rabbi Yosei says: They were figs. It is a matter that is derived from its context.38After the sin, Adam and Eve used fig leaves to hide their nakedness (Genesis 3:7). This is analogous to the a prince’s son who sinned with one of the maidservants. When the prince heard, he expelled him and had him removed outside the palace. He circulated among the houses of all the maidservants, but none would receive him. But the one with whom he sinned opened her door and received him. So, too, when Adam the first man ate from that tree, the Holy One blessed be He expelled him and had him removed outside the Garden of Eden. He circulated among all the trees but none would receive him.39They would not allow him to use their leaves to clothe himself. What did they say to him? Rabbi Berekhya said: ‘Here is the thief who deceived his Creator.’ That is what is written: “Let no arrogant foot come to me” (Psalms 36:12) – the foot of one who was arrogant towards his Creator. “Let the hand of the wicked not move me” (Psalms 36:12) – you may not take a leaf from me. But the fig tree, whose fruit he had eaten, opened its door and received him. That is what is written: “They sewed fig leaves” (Genesis 3:7).
What [type of] fig was it ? Rabbi Avin said: It was the berat sheva species, as it brought seven [sheva] days of mourning to the world.40As a result of the sin, death, and the ensuing seven-day period of mourning, was introduced into the world. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: It was the berat elita species, as it brought weeping [elita] to the world.
Rabbi Azarya and Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: Far be it that God should have revealed [the identity of] that tree to any man, nor will He reveal it in the future. See what is written: “A woman who will approach any animal [to copulate with her, you shall kill the woman and the animal]” (Leviticus 20:16) – though the person sinned, what sin did the animal commit? [The animal did not sin,] but it is [killed] so that the animal should not pass through the marketplace, where people would say: This is the animal on whose account so-and-so was stoned.41And the memory of that woman would be sullied. If He is concerned about the dignity of his [Adam’s] descendants [even though they had committed a grievous sin], is it not all the more so regarding his [Adam’s] own dignity [after his sin]? That is a rhetorical question.
Bereshit Rabbah
“The eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; they sewed fig leaves, and they made themselves loincloths” (Genesis 3:7).
“The eyes of both of them were opened” – Had they been blind? Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and Rabbi Berekhya in the name of Rabbi Akiva said: This is analogous to a villager who was passing by a glazier’s shop which had a basket filled with goblets and cut glass in front of it, and he grabbed them with his cane and shattered them. He [the glazier] got up and grabbed him. He said to him: ‘I know that I will not be able to get any benefit out of you,26You have no money to pay me for the damage you have done. but come with me [into my shop] and I will show you how much goodness you have destroyed.’ So, too, He showed them [Adam and Eve] how many generations they had destroyed [through their sin].27By introducing death into the world. It is in this sense that their "eyes were opened.”
“They knew that they were naked” – they had been stripped bare of even that one commandment that they had received.
“They sewed fig [te’ena] leaves” – Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: It is the leaf that brought grief [to’ana] to the world.
Rabbi Yitzḥak said: [God said to them, in effect:] ‘You have ruined your handiwork, take a thread and sow it up.’28This is a metaphor. Just as when one tears clothing, one is expected to repair it, Adam and Eve were expected to find a solution for the problem they had created – the issue of their being naked.
“And they made themselves loincloths [ḥagorot]” – Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Ḥagora [singular], is not written here, but rather ḥagorot [plural] – several straps: istikhon, galyon, sedinim.29These are names of various types of belts or girdles, worn by men. And just as they made these for the man, so, they made for the woman: tziltzelin, kolasin, sekhanin.
“The eyes of both of them were opened” – Had they been blind? Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and Rabbi Berekhya in the name of Rabbi Akiva said: This is analogous to a villager who was passing by a glazier’s shop which had a basket filled with goblets and cut glass in front of it, and he grabbed them with his cane and shattered them. He [the glazier] got up and grabbed him. He said to him: ‘I know that I will not be able to get any benefit out of you,26You have no money to pay me for the damage you have done. but come with me [into my shop] and I will show you how much goodness you have destroyed.’ So, too, He showed them [Adam and Eve] how many generations they had destroyed [through their sin].27By introducing death into the world. It is in this sense that their "eyes were opened.”
“They knew that they were naked” – they had been stripped bare of even that one commandment that they had received.
“They sewed fig [te’ena] leaves” – Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: It is the leaf that brought grief [to’ana] to the world.
Rabbi Yitzḥak said: [God said to them, in effect:] ‘You have ruined your handiwork, take a thread and sow it up.’28This is a metaphor. Just as when one tears clothing, one is expected to repair it, Adam and Eve were expected to find a solution for the problem they had created – the issue of their being naked.
“And they made themselves loincloths [ḥagorot]” – Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Ḥagora [singular], is not written here, but rather ḥagorot [plural] – several straps: istikhon, galyon, sedinim.29These are names of various types of belts or girdles, worn by men. And just as they made these for the man, so, they made for the woman: tziltzelin, kolasin, sekhanin.