The Tree of Knowledge/2/en

The Tree of Knowledge

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Sexual Desire

The fruit of the tree introduced sexual desire to mankind.

Sources:Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 2:9, 17Bereshit First Commentary 3:7Bereshit Second Commentary 2:9, 16-17Bereshit Second Commentary 3:7About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, RadakBereshit 2:9Bereshit 2:17Bereshit 3:7About R. David Kimchi, AbarbanelBereshit 2:1About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel #1,

Meaning of the root "דעת" – These sources point to the many places in Tanakh where the root ידע connotes sexual relations¹ to suggest that here, too, the knowledge gained by the tree was the "intimate knowing" of two people, i.e. Adam and Chavvah gained sexual desire.  A variation of this approach could suggest that the tree introduced the mating instinct, and that until the sin, Adam and Chavvah were not meant to have sex at all.

Meaning of "טוֹב וָרָע" – Abarbanel² claims that the "good and bad" refer to the fact that a proper amount of sexual desire can be positive but when the desire becomes excessive it is harmful.³

Intellectual knowledge prior to sin – All these sources maintain that man had intellectual knowledge before the sin, and that he already knew how to differentiate between good or bad.  If not, they claim, what sense would it have made for Hashem to prohibit or permit him different trees?⁴

"...וַיֵּדְעוּ כִּי עֵירֻמִּם הֵם" – Ibn Ezra and Radak points to this verse as proof of this position. After eating from the tree, the first thing that Adam and Chavvah gain awareness of was the fact of their nakedness.  Only with sexual desire did nakedness take on any import and lead to a feeling of embarrassment.⁵

"וְהָאָדָם יָדַע אֶת חַוָּה אִשְׁתּוֹ" – The first deed done by Adam after our story is to have relations with his wife, a direct result of the new knowledge that he gained.

"הֵן הָאָדָם הָיָה כְּאַחַד מִמֶּנּוּ לָדַעַת טוֹב וָרָע" – Ramban questions this approach from the fact that Hashem declared that in eating from the tree, man became similar to God.  Since Hashem does not have sexual desire, it would seem difficult to define the knowledge gained by the fruit in such a manner.  Abarbanel responds that Hashem is referring to His role as Creator.  Sexual desire leads to procreation, and in this man is similar to Hashem who brings life to all.

Measure for measure punishment? Chavvah's punishment of pain in childbirth and always desiring her husband is an appropriate one if the sin related to sexual desire.⁶  In fact, it could even be seen as a direct consequence of her deed rather than simply a punishment.

Eating from the Tree of Life – Abarbanel suggests that originally man was allowed to eat from the tree, and was meant to live forever, while Ibn Ezra and Radak view the tree as extending life or having life-induing properties, but not granting immortality.⁷

"כִּי בְּיוֹם אֲכׇלְךָ מִמֶּנּוּ מוֹת תָּמוּת"

• Early death – According to Ibn Ezra the verse should be read according to its simple sense, that originally man was supposed to die the same day that he ate from the tree.  Only due to his repentance was the punishment averted.⁸  Radak similarly suggests that an early (but not an immediate) death was decreed upon him.⁹
• Mortality – According to Abarbanel, in contrast, the verse does not mean that Adam was to die specifically on that day, but that upon eating from the tree mortality was decreed upon mankind.¹⁰  Until that point, man was meant to be immortal. He views this not as a punishment, but rather as a direct consequence of the sin.¹¹

"וַיִּקְרָא הָאָדָם שֵׁם אִשְׁתּוֹ חַוָּה" – These sources suggest that the naming of Chavvah, which appears to interrupt the story, is actually integrally related to the story of the sin. 

• According to Radak, it was only now, with the introduction of sexual desire, that Adam and Chavvah realized that they were to procreate and that Chavvah was to become "אֵם כׇּל חָי".  It is possible to go further and suggest that until the sin, mankind was not meant to procreate at all, but instead to eat from the tree of life and live forever.¹²
• Abarbanel explicitly disagrees and claims that Adam and Chavvah were always meant to cohabit and bear children regardless of the sin.¹³  He instead suggests that the name Chavvah relates to her garrulous nature which led her to sin. "חוה" means to tell or declare as in Tehillim 19:3, "יְחַוֶּה דָּעַת".

Why make the tree at all? Abarbanel explains that the tree had positive properties as well as negative ones.  Seeing and touching it provided the proper amount of sexual desire, and had Adam and Chavvah not eaten from the tree, they would have enjoyed its benefits without its negatives.

Free Will

Upon eating from the tree, humans attained the ability to choose between good and bad.  They were given free will.

Sources:RambanBereshit 2:9, 17Bereshit 3:7, 16, 22About R. Moshe b. Nachman

Meaning of the root "דעת" – Ramban claims that "דעת"  refers to will or choice, pointing to the phrases "יְדַעְתִּיךָ בְשֵׁם"  in Shemot 33:12 and "מָה אָדָם וַתֵּדָעֵהוּ" in Tehillim 144:3 as evidence.

Meaning of "טוֹב וָרָע" – Ramban understands these simply to refer to good and bad.  Man was given free will to choose between a thing and its opposite for positive or negative

"הֵן הָאָדָם הָיָה כְּאַחַד מִמֶּנּוּ לָדַעַת טוֹב וָרָע"

Subjective Knowledge or Moral Conventions

Before the sin, humans had objective knowledge of truths and falsehoods, knowledge gained by pure analytical reasoning.  Afterwards their intellectual level dropped and became the subjective knowledge of moral convention, knowledge gained by custom and empirical observation.

Sources:Rambam1 2About Rambam Moreh Nevukhim, Ralbag

"וִהְיִיתֶם כֵּאלֹהִים יֹדְעֵי טוֹב וָרָע" – Rambam understands "" in the secular sense of the word to refer to political leaders.

Partial / Moral Knowledge

Sources:R. Saadia GaonCommentary Bereshit 2:17Commentary Bereshit 3:1Commentary Bereshit 3:22About R. Saadia Gaon, R. D"Z HoffmannBereshit 2:17Bereshit 3:7Bereshit 3:22About R. David Zvi Hoffmann

Objective Knowledge

Sources:Cassuto

Appreciation of Aesthetics

Sources:? Rashbam

No New Knowledge

The fruit of the tree did not change the intellect of man at all.

Sources:Midrash Tadshe, R. HirschBereshit 2:9About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch,

¹ For a few of many examples, see Bereshit 4:1, 4:17, 4:25, and 19:5.

² See Radak similarly who speaks in terms of permitted and prohibited sexual actions.

³ He, in fact, claims that the tree aroused sexual desire just by looking or feeling it, actions which Hashem did not prohibit knowing that a small amount of desire would be beneficial to man and lead him to couple with his wife. 

⁴ Abarbanel adds that man, by definition, is a being with free choice. He writes, "כל טובו ושלמותו של אדם היה במציאות הבחירה והיכולת על הטוב על הרע כפי יצרו ואם לא היה כן לא היה אדם".

⁵ Beforehand they were like toddlers who are not inhibited to take off their clothing in public.

⁶ See Abarbanel who

⁷ Radak explains that Hashem's words, "וְלָקַח גַּם מֵעֵץ הַחַיִּים וְאָכַל וָחַי לְעֹלָם" do not imply that man would live forever, but only that he would be able to live a longer time than he now deserved once he had sinned. ["לְעֹלָם" should not be understood as a long duration of time rather than "forever". See Shemot 21:6 and Shemuel I 1:22 where the word also appears not to mean forever.]

⁸ He also raises the possibility that the verse means that from the day that man ate from the tree he began to move towards death, i.e. that day was to be the beginning of the end.  However, given that Adam lived for many centuries after the sin, it would seem to difficult to mark such an early day in his lifetime as the turning point towards death.

⁹ According to him the verse does not meant hat death would come on the day that man sinned, but rather, on the day that he sinned an earlier death than originally planned was decreed.

¹⁰ Abarbanel points to Bavli ShabbatShabbat 55bAbout Bavli Shabbat which suggests that had Adam not sinned he would have lived forever. He suggests that the Tree of Life had rejuvenating properties, and Hashem would have guarded mankind from evil allowing him to live forever.

¹¹ Excesses disrupt the body's balance, so the increase in sexual desire would of necessity come to harm the body.

¹² Radak himself does not say this and views the tree of life as extending life, but not necessarily granting immortality.  Ibn Ezra also claims that Adam was always meant to be mortal.  [He is not explicit regarding the nature of the Tree of Life, but also appears to suggest that though it had life-inducing qualities, eating from it would not have led to immortality.]  Radak explains that Hashem's words, "וְלָקַח גַּם מֵעֵץ הַחַיִּים וְאָכַל וָחַי לְעֹלָם" do not imply that man would live forever, but only that he would be able to live a longer time than he now deserved once he had sinned.  ["לְעֹלָם" should not be understood as a long duration of time rather than "forever".  See Shemot 21:6 and Shemuel I 1:22 where the word also appears not to mean forever.]

¹³ He does suggest, though, that originally they might have been meant to just bear one or two offspring, since more would not have been necessary if they were to be immortal.  When Hashem decreed upon them mortality inteh aftermath of sin, there was a need to bear more children.