והנחש היה ערום מכל חית ה שדה אשר עשה ה' אלוקים, It is in order to ask in what fashion the serpent conversed with Chavah. If G’d had opened the serpent’s mouth by means of a miracle, as He did when Bileam’s ass started speaking to him (Numbers 22,28), why did the Torah not report, as it did in that verse that “G’d opened the mouth of the serpent?” If, on the other hand, if, as in the view of Rabbi Saadyah gaon, the conversations reported in the Torah between both the ass and Bileam and the serpent and Chavah were conducted by an angel on their behalf, why was the serpent punished and cursed for all times? Besides, how is it possible that G’d assigned to an angel the task to seduce Chavah to sin against G’d? Furthermore, what reason was there to introduce the serpent into the story at this point? Why did the Torah have to write: “and the serpent was the wiliest of all the beasts of the field, etc.?” If the serpent was unable to speak, i.e. to communicate with Chavah in his own right, how do we know that it was such a clever creature? If we are to assume that the angel was dispatched to subject the woman to a test of her faith and obedience, how was the serpent to blame for the outcome? Besides, it would have been so much more appropriate for the angel to test Adam himself, seeing it was he who had been commanded by G’d not to eat from the tree of knowledge? Chavah had heard of this only second hand from her husband! The whole subject is extremely confusing, when we look only at what has been revealed to us by the text. We need to resort to the writings of the Kabbalists to make better sense of this whole episode.(Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 13)[in that chapter’s introduction, the point is made that jealousy and envy, some of the most destructive character traits, exist also in the celestial regions, and that when the angels who had not been delighted at man’s creation in the first place, saw how clever Adam was, and how he had named the animals immediately upon looking at them, they became afraid that their dominant role in G’d’s entourage would be jeopardized now. They therefore schemed to seduce man into sinning against His Creator in order to safeguard their role as being closest to G’d. Thereupon, Samael, the most powerful angel, the one who had 12 wings whereas all the others had only 6 wings, took his underlings with him to take a closer look at what went on in the terrestrial regions. He found that in those regions the serpent was by far the most intelligent of the beasts, and he could not find another beast as capable and willing to fall in with his wicked plans. We are informed there that the serpent was huge, and looked like a camel and Samael was riding on it. The sages, with their insight into then hidden aspects of the Torah, wanted to illustrate how G’d sometimes amuses Himself to make playful use both of the “camel,” i.e. the serpent, and its rider, i.e. Samael. Another comment offered by the sages (Shabbat 146) is that after the serpent had engaged in sexual relations with Chavah, it had left behind within her some of the spiritually poisonous residue, which had contaminated her personality. This was so pervasive that until the Jewish people accepted the Torah at Mount Sinai they had not been able to totally cleanse themselves of that poison. The other nations of the world never cleansed themselves of this spiritually poisonous material. Students of such mystical aspects of the Torah will understand what I refer to, but I have no intention to use my commentary to dwell on such matters, having been warned by my teachers not to reveal what the Torah clearly had not seen fit to reveal to one and all. We will relate to such allusions only in the same way as the sages have seen fit to do themselves. Hopefully, those who are attuned will understand what the sages had in mind to convey to us. Some commentators, cited by Ibn Ezra, say that the serpent did not speak at all, but managed to convey its meaning to Chavah by whistling, hissing to her. Chavah was clever enough, according to that view, to understand what the serpent was trying to communicate to her. It seems very far fetched to credit Chavah with understanding what the serpent tried to hint to her in such a fashion. It is even more far fetched to credit the serpent with understanding what Chavah answered her in Hebrew. The scholar Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra writes that the serpent did indeed speak, and it used to walk upright, just like man. Originally, G’d had equipped the serpent with superior knowledge and intelligence, i.e. “more crafty than any of the beasts of the field, but not as crafty as man.” this was also the opinion of our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 20,5) This is what they write: At the time G’d punished the serpent, He said to it: “here I had made you so that you are king of the all the beasts, something that you had not been satisfied with. I enabled you to walk upright just like man. You were not satisfied with this either. Now you will have to crawl on your belly and eat dust.” We must ask ourselves that if all this is so, why the Torah had not mentioned that the serpent had enjoyed such distinctions, that the Torah’s report of G’d’s creative activities makes no mention of this, as it did in Genesis 1,26 when man’s distinction over the other creatures is introduced by G’d saying “we will make him in our image, etc?” Furthermore, when G’d cursed the serpent, mention is meant of it having to crawl and having to eat dust. Why did the Torah not also mention that G’d deprived it of its superior intellect? This would have been the most severe part of the punishment and the Torah does not mention it at all? The most likely answer to all the points that we have raised is that the serpent was enabled, -miraculously,- on that occasion, to speak in a voice and language Chavah could understand, even though the Torah did not write specifically that “G’d opened its mouth,” as it did in connection with Bileam. seeing that this represented something far more extraordinary [Bileam’s ass speaking, which occurred in a world that was post Gan Eden, as opposed to an idyllic world where such miracles were not out of the ordinary. Besides, Bileam’s ass had saved her master from death by opening her mouth, whereas the serpent’s speaking had led to Chavah’s and her husband’s eventual death. Ed.] Still. The question remains why the serpent was punished if G’d Himself had put these words in its mouth? We need to answer that the serpent had already planned its craftiness how to set a trap for man to discredit it in the eyes of G’d so that it would replace man as the superior creature on earth. G’d was aware of all this, and all He did was to follow the principle in Shabbat 104 of בא לטמא פותחים לו, “when someone is bent on defiling something, one facilitates this for him.” Furthermore, G’d had to make sure that Adam (mankind) knew that the serpent had been punished with good cause. [this editor is astounded by the use of Kimchi of the quote in Shabbat 104 as it is my understanding that whereas when planning to do good one enjoys heavenly assists, when planning to do evil one is merely not interfered with. Besides, this saying applies to human beings who have freedom of choice; whoever heard of this saying applying to animals? Ed.]

היה ערום, clever. Seeing that the word refers to intelligence, it is spelled with the vowel shuruk to distinguish it from the adjective arum naked, which is spelled with the vowel cholam. [in our editions of the Torah both words are spelled with the letter shuruk representing the vowel shuruk. Ed.] Seeing the word occurs in the plural, the letter מ does not have a dagesh, compare מחשבות ערומים in Job 5,12 where it means :“the designs of the crafty ones.” When the word is used to described nudity, the letter מ is written with a dagesh. Compare Job 22,6 ובגדי ערומים תפשיט, “You leave them stripped of their clothing.” When the Torah wrote here היה ערום, it meant that the serpent possessed extraordinary powers of imagination, totally superior to other animals in this respect. Our sages generally describe the fox as crafty, able to scheme, something other animals are not credited with doing. (Berachot 61) This is not the same as possessing didactic intelligence, something reserved for man. When the Torah adds the words מכל חית השדה, it excludes the domestic animals, בהמות as not possessing even a modicum of such powers of imagination, The serpent at that time was superior to the fox in its ability to scheme. אשר עשה ה' אלוקים, even though all these creatures had been constructed out of the same raw material, G’d had given added an advantage to different ones of these creatures. Some had been granted greater physical prowess, others greater power to scheme.

ויאמר אל האשה, the serpent deliberately avoided speaking to Adam, but spoke to the woman. It knew that it would be easier to seduce the woman because women’s minds are more easily swayed. (Shabbat 33) אף כי אמר אלוקים, the fact that the Torah commences its report of this conversation with the word אף is proof that there had been an exchange of words between the serpent and Chavah prior to this already. It is likely that Chavah had told the serpent about the great honour G’d had bestowed on them to place them within the Garden of Eden. To this the serpent had replied that it did not view this as proof that G’d loved them especially, but as proof of the contrary, that G’d hated them. Granted that G’d had elevated the human species as compared to the animals, but He had not elevated them to the status of becoming potential competitors of His by forbidding them to eat from all the good trees in the garden. The Torah decided to omit the introduction to the dialogue between the two and to concentrate on its essence. This is a style the Torah employs on a number of occasions. One example is the spies telling Joshua that they had heard while in Jericho clear evidence that G’d had as good as given the country into the hands of the Israelites already. They are not quoted as telling Joshua about their personal experiences during that mission. No doubt they had reported this. (Joshua 2,23) The meaning of the word אף here appears to b: “on the contrary, even more so.” We have a number of parallel verses in which the word אף is used in this sense, for instance Job 4,19 אף שכני בתי חמר, “how much less those who dwell in house made of clay.” Or, Kings I 8,27 אף כי הבית הזה אשר בניתי, “how much less this House which I have built.” The serpent did not refer to G’d’s holy name. Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra writes that this was because the serpent did not know G’d’s name Hashem. According to our explanations of the serpent’s sudden ability to speak in a manner comprehensible to Chavah being an ad hoc miracle, G’d did not allow the serpent to use His holy name. It is beyond our imagination to assume that G’d would allow a beast to bandy about His sacred name, something that is His exclusively. A careful reading of the text will reveal that even Chavah did not use the holy name of G’d. The bald-faced lie of the serpent was its claim that G’d had said מכל עץ הנן, that man had been forbidden to eat of any of the trees of the garden, this was part of its shrewdness, pretending as if Chavah had told her this, though the serpent was perfectly aware that Chavah had said no such thing. He wanted to challenge Chavah by saying “what good is your being in Gan Eden, seeing you cannot enjoy any of its fruit?”

ותאמר, not so, said Chavah; G’d did not deny us the fruit of more than one single tree which is בתוך הגן שאמר לנו לא תאכלו מממנו ולא תגעו בו פן תמותון in the middle of the garden of which He has forbidden us to eat on pain of death. Perhaps it is in the nature of that tree that its fruit causes death to anyone eating from it. The meaning of the word פן in that verse is the same as אולי or שמא , “maybe.” G’d told Adam that he would certainly die if he ate from it, as the Torah wrote literally in 2,17 “on the day you will eat from it you will certainly die.” Seeing that she had not quoted the prohibition correctly as G’d had not said anything about maybe dying as a result of eating from the tree, we must assume that Chavah had invented this word meaning for it to apply to touching the tree, an addition which had been altogether her own. She meant to say that G’d so loves us that He denied us to touch the tree as a safeguard against eating from it. An alternate way of explaining the words פן תמותון is similar to פן תשיב את בני שמה which Avraham warned Eliezer about (Genesis 24,6) which meant “do not bring back!” or Genesis 30,24) פן תדבר עם יעקב, “do not speak to Yaakov, etc.,” G’d warning Lavan.

ויאמר, the serpent in its craftiness, said: לא מות תמותון, not as you say that G’d loves you so much that He forbade eating you to protect you from dying, but the reason is that not only will you not die from eating, but He made you more afraid so that you will not acquire the additional advantage by eating from it,

כי יודע...ונפקחו עיניכם He knows that your mental eyes will be opened to be like angel יודע טוב ורע, who know good and evil. The serpent had heard these words only from Chavah herself in her previous words. (verse 1)

ותרא האשה, she believed the words of the serpent and saw with her heart כי טוב העץ למאכל וכי תאוה הוא לעינים, as the Torah had already described this tree in its own words in 2,9 when we were told that all “the trees of the garden were pleasant to look at and good to eat.” The tree of knowledge did not distinguish itself in external appearance from the other trees of the garden. Therefore, Chavah argued, there is no reason to believe that we will die if we eat from it. She agreed that the serpent had spoken the truth when it said that the distinction of this tree must lie in the spiritual benefits its fruit bestow on us not in the taste of its fruit. The serpent must be right when saying that we will become G’d-like (verse 5). ותקח מפריו ותאכל, and afterwards she gave to her husband who at that time had been in some other location inside the garden; she brought him some of the fruit and told him what the serpent had said to her and why she had eaten from the fruit. They then ate from the fruit jointly. This is the meaning of the additional word עמה. In other words, Chavah ate from the fruit twice, whereas Adam ate from it only once. It is important to understand this. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 19,5) explained that the word גם which is supposed to add something means that she fed the fruit also to the animals and the birds. We need to reflect on this statement by our sages.

ותפקחנה עיני שניהם, their mental eyes. This is why the Torah continues with וידעו, “they knew,” and not with ויראו, “they saw.” They “saw” the same objects they had seen previously. However, after having eaten from the fruit of the tree of knowledge they experienced a biological urge to engage in sexual relations with one another. Adam’s organ stiffened as a result of this feeling of desire. This became a source of shame for them as it meant that one his organs was out of his control. The punishment in this instance fitted the crime. They had removed themselves from the control of their Creator by ignoring His instructions. As a result, an organ of theirs had removed itself from its owner’s control. Furthermore, engaging in sexual relations other than for the purpose of reproduction is a shameful activity. This is why they felt shame now. They felt ashamed to be seen in such a state by G’d and this is why they hid themselves.

עירומים, the word is spelled with the letter י here to make the syllable sound longer.

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.

וישמעו, some commentators explain what happened not as G’d’s voice “walking,” but as Adam and Chavah walking and hearing the voice of G’d while going for a walk. If that were correct, the word “they heard” should have been written after our being informed that they had been walking in the garden. Besides, the word מתהלך should have been in the plural mode. The correct interpretation of the verse is: while Adam and Chavah went for a walk they heard the voice of G’d “going for a walk.” We have a precedent for this, i.e. the “voice” of the serpent being described as “walking” in Jeremiah 46,22.

לרוח היום, towards evening, when the day becomes cooler and the breeze blows. He recognized at once that the voice belonged to G’d, and that G’d had come to speak to them about their sin. As a result, they hid among the trees of the garden out of shame over the fact that their genitals were exposed. Even though they had made these חגורות for themselves by sewing together the fig leaves, these were not enough to hide the areas of their bodies they felt ashamed of. They were perfectly aware, of course, that it is impossible to “hide” from G’d, else their entire intelligence would not have amounted to much. The Torah merely describes that they reacted in the time honoured human fashion when one is ashamed and wishes to hide the source of one’s shame. The reason why the Torah informs us that they heard G’d’s “voice” before they heard what He had to say, is that the Torah wishes to teach us something about good manners. 1) G’d wanted to give them an opportunity to hide; 2) one should not frighten people by addressing them suddenly without a person having had a chance to compose himself first in order to receive a visitor and to meet such a visitor after preparing for his visit. One should either knock on the door, or try and make voice contact by inquiring if the person is at home, etc. (Massechet Derech Eretz ) The reason why the Torah had to mention the expression רוח היום is that the wind carried the sound of the voice to them.

עץ הגן, the word עץ here does not refer to a specific tree, but to the category of “trees,” as opposed to other, smaller plants. They took refuge due to their feeling of shame.

ויקרא..איכה, He called out “where are you?” G’d used these words as an opener for the conversation, not because He was unaware of their whereabouts. We find a repeat of this when G’d opened His conversation with Kayin (Genesis 4,9) or with Moses (Exodus 4,2).

ויאמר..כי עירום אנכי, the word עירום is again spelled with the letter י serving to elongate the syllable commencing with the letter ע.

ויאמר...המן העץ, the letter ה in the word המן is like the letter ה in Kings I 29,19 הרצחת וגם ירשת, “did you really expect to get away with murder and inheriting (the murdered man)?” The question is merely rhetorical, it does not require an answer.

ויאמר...האשה אשר נתת עמדי, he meant to say that “You G’d are the cause of my sin, seeing that You have given me such a woman who seduced me to eat from the tree.”

ותאמר...הנחש השיאני, “if I did indeed seduce Adam it was only because the serpent seduced me first. You have created my seducer.”

ויאמר כי עשית זאת, he did not have an answer to this, no excuse whatsoever. Adam and Chavah, though their excuse was indeed feeble, at least had some sort of an excuse, whereas the serpent had no excuse whatsoever. This is why G’d immediately proceeded to curse the serpent, without even waiting if the serpent would try and come up with an excuse. This is what Solomon had in mind when he said in Kohelet 10,11: ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון, “a slanderer (the serpent) has nothing going for him at all (having bitten without provocation).” (compare Taanit 8) Our sages (Sanhedrin 29) say that the serpent did have an answer ready but that G’d did not give it a chance to use it seeing it had initiated this seduction. (The Talmud, quoting one of the possible excuses of the serpent, cites the well known phrase: “if the words of the student are at variance with those of the teacher, whose words does one have to heed?” Whatever excuse the serpent could have used, it had no answer to the accusation why it had engaged in seduction.)

ארור אתה, the serpent would be deprived of the legs with which it had been created. The meaning of the words על גחונך תלך is that this will be the practical result of this curse. Whenever the Torah speaks of a curse it involves the loss of something, being deprived of something. On the other hand, every time a blessing is mentioned in the Torah it implies that the recipient will experience additional goodness, spiritually or materially. G’d cursed the serpent first, seeing it had been the cause for Adam and Chavah being punished. Our sages (Berachot 61) learn from here that one always begins with cursing the least important party deserving to be cursed, for instance the sages in Bereshit Rabbah 20,4 point out that the period of gestation of a large pure animal, such as a cow, one fit for consumption by Jews lasts 9 months, whereas their impure counterparts require 12 months before they are born after the mother animal has been fertilized. Smaller mammals require 5 months in the case of pure animals and dogs 50 days, cats 52 days, pigs 60 days, marten 70 days, deer and fox 6 months, whereas all the other creeping animals require 6 months before their embryos are ready for birth. Lions, elephants, cougars, etc., require 3 years, whereas the serpent requires 4 years to reproduce. Some animals require even 70 years according to that text. Furthermore, in the same section of Bereshit Rabbah we are told that the dog in line with other impure animals requires 50 days whereas the larger impure mammals require 12 months. Basing ourselves on the wordingארור אתה מכל הבהמה ומכל חית השדה would mean therefore that the snake’s disadvantage vis a vis other impure animals will be proportionate to that of other impure animals vis a vis the pure beasts. [the ratio supposedly is 7 to 1. If an impure large mammal requires a gestation period of 12 months, then the snake being cursed requires a period of 7 years, i.e. seven times 12 months. There are inconsistencies in that Midrash, as well as inaccuracies which I cannot account for. Ed.]

על גחונך¸ as the Targum says, i,e. “on your belly.” This is also the way the Targum renders Leviticus 11,42 הולך על גחון. This is all very similar to the Talmud Baba Metzia 59. Basically, the curse consisted of the serpent which had been the most superior of the animals, haughty because of its height and its ability to walk upright, was now reduced to move in the way lowly worms move on earth. The fact that the serpent had bragged about its superior status, caused it to be dealt with especially harshly, seeing it had exploited its position by plotting to cause havoc.

ועפר תאכל כל ימי חייך, the punishment fitted the crime. “You, the serpent were jealous of the human beings seeing they were allowed to eat the fruit of the trees in Gan Eden, and you schemed in order to seduce the woman into eating something forbidden; as a result you yourself will feed on the lowest kind of nutrient and the least tasty food on earth, i.e. dust.” If you were to argue that the very curse with which the serpent had now been afflicted was, in fact, a blessing in disguise, seeing that its food supply could be found all over, and it would never have to go hungry, Rabbi Chilfai in Bereshit Rabbah 20,5 has already explained that this is not as simple as it appears. The supply of earth is quite limited, what appears on the surface of the earth as a sort of powder is so only superficially, whereas lower down there are many ingredients which are quite inedible even for snakes. In fact, due to its ignorance of this, the snakes may inadvertently eat things which are harmful to their intestines.

כל ימיך, these apparently superfluous words teach that even in the Messianic era this curse will not be lifted. This is what Isaiah 65,25 had in mind when he described that future and mentioned that the snake will eat dust as its bread. As long as the species snakes, serpents, will not become extinct this will be its diet.

ואיבה אשית, you, the serpent, made the woman feel as if you had her best interests at heart, as if you loved her; and as if your advice to her was motivated by love; I, G’d, will turn this love into hostility. בין זרעך ובין זרעה, between your offspring and between her offspring. The hostility between the serpent and the human species will not be an unalterable condition of life, seeing that in the Messianic era this enmity will be resolved and as we know from Isaiah 11,8 in those days an infant will suckle at its mother’s breast next to a snake’s lair without worrying. הוא ישופך ראש, when he finds you he will smash your head whenever he is able to, whereas ואתה תשופנו עקב, when you slither along the ground on your belly and are unable to harm him higher up, you will bite his heel. The words ישופך and תשופנו describe inflicting of injury and smashing respectively, as we know from Job 9,17 אשר בשערה ישופני, “for he crushes me for a hair.” [with minimal provocation. Ed.] All of these verses are dealt with by the kabbalah, the interpretation of the text along mystical lines.

אל האשה...הרבה, the word הרבה here is in the infinitive mode.

עצבונך והרונך, the word עצבון appears again in connection with man eating bread, (verse 17), both words describe the pain and discomfort associated when woman as well as man try to achieve their major tasks, woman to have children, man to produce food from the soil. Everything will be achieved only with toil and wearing oneself out in the process. Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra explained that the pain referred to is the pain involved in a virgin losing her hymen. The word הרונך, on the other hand, refers to her subsequent experience when pregnant and carrying a fetus in her womb. My own father, of blessed memory, explained the word עצבונך as applying to the discomfort experienced during pregnancy, and the word הרונך as applying to the long period the pregnancy lasts. [as opposed to the almost immediate birth after fertilization which occurred in Gan Eden when Chavah bore Kayin and Hevel. Ed.] Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 20,6) understand both words in a figurative manner, i.e. the frustrations experienced by the parents in raising their children in their image. They interpret the word תלדי as referring to the physical pain involved in giving birth, and the word בנים as referring to the mental anguish involved in raising these children.

תשוקתך, the meaning of the word is equivalent to תאותך, “your physical desire.

והוא ימשול בך, but he will rule over you, as a master over a slave telling him what to do. In Bereshit Rabbah 20,6 we are told that the numerical value of the word הרבה, i.e. 210 is an allusion that a fetus carried by its mother for 212 days before being born, is a viable baby.” [Each of the words הרבה ארבה, apparently counts as 1 also, in addition to the letters in the word הרבה. Ed.] This is the kind of baby born after 7 months pregnancy. Concerning babies born after 9 months of pregnancy, the Talmud Niddah 38 (also the same Midrash) states that a woman gives birth (normally) after 271, 272, or 273 days of pregnancy. Concerning impure large mammals the sages say that birth occurs 12 months after fertilization. Chiyah bar Ada, who attended the lecture of Rav and failed to comprehend what Rav explained to him. Upon trying again to explain the matter to him, Chiyah bar Abbah still did not understand it Upon being asked by Rav why he had such trouble understanding the matter, he said that his ass was in labour trying to give birth and he was nervous, fearing that the ass would die due to complications. Rav told him that an ass being overdue or giving birth a few days prematurely was nothing to worry about, seeing we do not know the precise day it is anyways beyond our power to arrange for the birth to occur on that precise date.. If she gives birth prematurely, she would not give birth in fewer days than corresponded to the respective lunar months. If she gave birth late, she would still not exceed the number of days in a solar year. Thereupon Chiyah bar Ada quoted the verse in Job 39,1 “do you know the precise season when the mountain goats give birth? Can you mind the time when the hinds calve?” [he meant that how can I be unconcerned?. Ed.] Rav answered him by quoting the very next verse in Job 39,2: “Do you know the season they give birth, when they couch to bring forth their offspring? He replied: “The one verse refers to smaller mammals, [whose period of gestation is shorter] the other verse refers to larger mammals, whose pregnancy is lengthier.

ולאדם אמר..מן העץ, the words מן העץ must be understood as “from the fruit of the tree.”

ארורה האדמה, the earth would be deprived pf part of its goodness. It would not respond to Adam’s efforts to cultivate it in full measure, i.e. many of the seeds he would plant would fail to germinate and grow. Bereshit Rabbah,20,8, quoted by Rashi, writes that instead of producing useful plants, the earth would henceforth also produce weeds and harmful plants. Not only that, but that these plants would germinate certain parasites.

בעצבון תאכלנה, you will have to work the soil until you will be able, finally, to eat its produce, whereas up until now you did not have to toil in order to assure yourself of your food supply. All you had to do was to pluck the fruit from the trees in Gan Eden. When the Torah had spoken of Adam’s task in Gan Eden being לעבדה ולשמרה, (2,15) the amount of physical work required to attend to that task was minimal. Now he would have to work intensively, as illustrated by the metaphor “you will eat your bread in the sweat of your brow” (3,19).

תאכלנה, a reference to the harvest. We have similar constructions, where at first glance one might think that the text refers to eating what is inedible. Adam was not meant to eat אדמה, soil, anymore that the people who sat at King Solomon’s table were meant to eat the table. (Kings I 2,7) באוכלי שולחנך, refers to the people mentioned in that verse, eating from the food served on the king’s table. We find more such examples, such as Isaiah 36,16,ואכלו איש גפנו ואיש תאנתו, where the reference is not to people consuming their vineyard and their fig tree, but the fruit of their vineyard and the fruit of their fig tree, although the prophet mentions only the source of that fruit. We have elaborated on this in our volume on Hebrew grammar מכלל in the first section of that book.

כל ימי חייך, as long as the human species will exist on earth.

וקוץ ודרדר, in lieu of the seed you plant beginning to sprout, the earth will produce thorns and thistles, which are not only useless, but which harm the plants your seed will produce, so that you will have to engage in eradicating them

ואכלת את עשב השדה, you will eat the grass of the field instead of the fruit of the garden.

בזעת אפיך תאכל לחם, if you prefer to eat bread to eating grass, herbs, you will have to toil in the sweat of your brow in order to produce cereal grain which can be turned into bread. Even though the whole body will perspire, not just the brow, the Torah mentions the face especially, seeing that this is where his perspiration will be most visible. Furthermore, a face does not begin to perspire until one has exerted oneself considerably. Man will have to be fatigued by a variety of strenuous activities before finally being able to consume bread. He has to plough, to sow , to remove weeds, to cut the grain, to thresh the kernels in their husks, to winnow, to grind the kernels into flour, to knead the dough and to bake it.

עד שובך אל האדמה, seeing that you have chosen to prefer your close connection to earth rather than that to the celestial regions in which your soul originated, כי עפר אתה ואל עפר תשוב, when you die, no part of your heavenly origin will remain behind on earth. The reason why the Torah emphasized the physical element earth rather than any of then other elements which are part of the human body, is that earth, including the bones which are cold and hard and man’s basic skeleton, and are the element predominates in the human body.

ויקרא האדם, when Chavah had originally been placed before him, he had named her just as he had named all the animals, the name חוה, however, was her individual name, not the name of the female of the human species. It is possible to explain that after Adam and his wife had eaten from the tree of knowledge, Adam gave her this name, seeing that due to having eaten from that tree, their libido had been awakened, and they knew that they would reproduce themselves. This is why Adam added: אם כל חי, the meaning of the word חי here referring to the kind of living creatures who possessed the power of speech. Generic names for human beings such as חי here, are also found in Psalms 145,21 ויברך כל בשר, where David does not refer to the animals blessing the name of G’d, but only to the human species doing this. The same applies to Isaiah 66,23 יבא כל בשר, where the prophet predicts that all of humanity in those days will come once a month to Jerusalem or even weekly, to pay their respects to the Lord in Jerusalem. [probably those living near Jerusalem will come once a week, whereas those living farther away will come only once a month. Ed.] The letter ו in the word חוה instead of the letter י was to distinguish her from the beasts of the field.

ויעש ה' אלוקים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור, seeing that they had been naked, but had made themselves the aprons made from fig leaves, to cover only their genitals, G’d now provided them with protective clothing for their entire bodies, probably also having in mind different climatic conditions outside the garden. ולבישם, “He dressed them in those coats. There is no point in asking how G’d made these coats. Surely, by comparison to the entire universe which G’d had created, making leather coats was a very insignificant accomplishment by comparison. When we find a sage saying in the Midrash (Torah Shleymah by Rabbi Menachem Kasher items 176,and 186 on our chapter) that these garments were made of skin, i.e. that man had consisted of bones and flesh without an outer layer of skin. G’d now provided the skin as a protective cover. (attributed to Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 20) [the Talmud Niddah 25, discussing when an aborted fetus is to be treated as a human being in some respects, states hat the fetus is not covered with a skin until it is fully formed inside the mother’s womb. Ed.] We do not understand how this solves any problem at all. They would have been worse off than before, even their genitals having remained exposed, as these too are covered by skin. Some scholars claim that the skin was skin of the serpent which G’d had removed from it and clothed Adam and Chavah in it. Yet other scholars claim that G’d commanded one or two of the larger mammals to remove their skin, and that Adam and Chavah then proceeded to dress themselves in those skins. There is no need for all these fancy explanations, i.e. speculations. G’d simply issued a directive and the tunics came into existence, just as the material from which the first set of Tablets was made by G’d had to come into existence by miraculous means. Our sages (Sotah 14) record the opinions of the great scholars Rav and Shmuel, the former saying that the meaning of כתנות עור is “coats, tunics, made from material removed from skins.” Shmuel said it refers to raw material from which the skin (man’s) derives pleasure. To be specific, it refers to cotton. Our sages also say (Midrash hagadol on this verse) that these garments belonged to the things that were created in the twilight zone of the 6th day of creation, immediately before the onset of the Sabbath. Rabbi Simlai (Sotah) uses the opportunity to tell us that the Torah commenced with acts of personal kindness by G’d for His creatures, and ends in the same vein. Here, in Bereshit, we are told about G’d, personally, providing clothing for Adam and Chavah, whereas at the end of the Torah we read of G’d, personally, burying Moses. (Deut. 34,6)

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.”

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.

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.

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.

וישלחהו , the expression here means “expelled.” It is also used in this sense in Jeremiah 16,6 שלח מעל פני, “expel from my presence.

לעבד את האדמה, seeing Adam had not been content with light duties in Gan Eden, while he lived from the fruit of the trees, something which was effortless, and he had preferred to violate G’d’s commandment, he would now have to leave the garden and perform hard work, as already indicated in verse 17. אשר לקח משם, to the same place he had been taken from by G;d when He had brought him to Gan Eden. Alternately, the meaning of these words could be in accordance with Onkelos, “the place from which he had been created;” a reference to the earthly part of him, not the divine part of him.

ויגרש את האדם, this is not a repetition, but the Torah explained that simultaneously with Adam’s expulsion from the garden G’d had placed the cherubs there as guardians מקדם, in the East. It is possible that the entrance of the garden was in the east, and that is why the cherubs were placed at the entrance. They were beings who appeared to the onlooker just like cherubs, in order to put fear into Adam, to discourage him from attempting to return to Gan Eden, this is why it continues with the words לשמור את דרך עץ החיים ואת להט החרב המתהפכת, the revolving sword blades held by the cherubs were meant to frighten Adam. Seeing that the sword was not real, but only appeared so to Adam, the Torah speaks of the להט החרב, “the blade of the sword,” and not the sword itself. The word להט does not describe something of substance but something imaginary, flashes of the spectacle being what is frightening to behold. When this “fire, flame” keeps revolving around itself, as described here, this increases the fear inspired in the person watching such a spectacle. In Ezekiel 32,10 we have a similar expression עופפי חרבי, when G’d is described as frightening people by “brandishing My sword.” There is an additional element in this, i.e. the spectacle is meant to inspire feelings of remorse over what he had done in Adam. Once Adam felt remorse, the way would be paved to full repentance. Once he had done תשובה the frightening spectacle would disappear and he would return to the garden from time to time, alternating between performing work there and working the soil outside. (one opinion in Bereshit Rabbah 21,8) All these matters have also been discussed in their mystical dimension in the writings of the Kabbalists. In Bereshit Rabbah 21,9 the word להט is understood as applying to certain angels, as mentioned in Psalms 104,4 עושה מלאכיו רוחות, משרתיו אש לוהט, “He makes the winds His messengers, fiery flames His servants.” המתהפכת, a reference to G’d’s servants revolving, be they mane, women, or spiritual, disembodied beings such as winds, or even angels.