Tanach · Rishonim on Tanach · Ibn Ezra · Torah
Ibn Ezra on Genesis 3/אבן עזרא על בראשית ג׳
אוהנחש. י"א כי האשה היתה מבינה ויודעת לשון החיות, ויפרשו ויאמר הנחש ברמיזה ואחרים אמרו שהוא שטן ואיך לא יראו סוף הפרשה, כי אלך ילך השטן על גחון, ואיך יאכל עפר ומה טעם לקללת, הוא ישופך ראש", ורבים השתבשו לחקור למה היה קולל הנחש, ואם היתה לו דעת שלמה, או צוה שלא ישיא האשה, ויאמר רב סעדיה גאון אחר שהתבררה לנו שאין דבור ודעת כי אם באדם לבדו, נצטרך לומר כי הנחש גם האתון לא דברו רק מלאך דבר בשבילם, והשיב עליו רב שמואל בן חפני, והנה קם ר' שלמה הספרדי בעלי השירים השקולים, וחכם גדול היה והשיב על רב שמואל, והישר בעיני שהם הדברים כמשמעם, והנחש היה מדבר, והיה הולך בקומה זקופה, והשָם דעת באדם שם בו, והנה הפסוק העיד כי היה ערום מכל חית השדה רק לא כאדם, ופי' ערום חכם שיעשה דבריו בערמה, ואל תתמה בעבור היות ערום אחר ערומים, והם שני טעמים, כי באלה הצחות בלשון, כמו "בלחי החמור חמור חמורתים (שופ', טו טז), וכן "על שלשים עיירים, ושלשים עיירים להם" (שם יו"ד ד), ועוד אם המלאך דבר על פיו אין חטא לנחש וזה המלאך לא יתכן להיות שלוחו של השם, ואין המלאך ממרה פי השם, והשואלים איך (וי"ג אנה) מצא הנחש את האשה איננה שאלה,
1NOW THE SERPENT. Some say that the woman understood and knew the language of the animals. They interpret And the serpent said as meaning, that the serpent spoke through signs.1 Others say that the serpent was in reality Satan.2 Now why don’t they look at what Scripture states at the close of this chapter (v. 14 and 15)? How is Satan to crawl upon his belly or eat the dust of the ground?3 Furthermore, what meaning is there to the curse they shall bruise thy head if the reference is to Satan?4 Many err and inquire why the serpent was cursed. They ask, was the serpent fully intelligent?5 Was he commanded by God to refrain from beguiling the woman?6 Rabbi Saadiah Gaon says since we know that only humans are intelligent and capable of speaking, we must conclude that neither the serpent nor Balaam’s ass spoke. He argues that in reality an angel spoke for them. However, Rabbi Samuel ben Hofni took issue with him.7 On the other hand, Rabbi Solomon ibn Gabirol, the great Spanish scholar and poet who wrote metered verse, arose and disagreed with Rabbi Samuel ben Hofni. It appears to me that we are to interpret the account of the serpent literally. The serpent spoke and walked in an upright position. The One who gave intelligence to man also gave it to the serpent. Scripture itself bears witness that the serpent, although not as intelligent as man, was more subtle (arum) than any beast of the field.8 The meaning of arum (subtle) is wise, i.e., one who conducts his affairs intelligently. Now do not be surprised that Scripture uses the term arum (subtle, in v. 1) after arummim (naked in Gen. 2:25) when each of these words has a different meaning. Scripture is being poetic. Similarly, With the jawbone of an ass (ha-chamor), heaps upon heaps (chamor chamoratayim) (Judges 15:16), and on thirty ass colts (ayarim), and they had thirty cities (ayarim) (Jud. 10:4). Furthermore, if an angel spoke via the mouth of the serpent, then the serpent did not sin.9 This angel could not be God’s messenger.10 Neither does an angel rebel against God.11 Those who ask, how did the serpent find the woman,12 are not asking a valid question.13
בוטעם אף כי יורה כי דבר דברים אחרים, ואמר בסוף קל וחומר שאמר לכם לא תאכלו פרי כל עץ כלל "לא הזכיר הנחש השם הנכבד והנורא כי לא ידעו, גם האשה הוסיפה על מצות השם, ולא תגעו בו, וכן הוסיפה אשת מנוח עד יום מותו (שופ' יג ז):
2The use of the term af ki (yea) shows that the serpent spoke other things to the woman and that at the end of his conversation with her said, “yea much more so (af ki)14 (yea) is a technical term used in a kal ve-chomer, an argument from a minor to a major premise. Cf. Job 25:6. Hence a conversation had to precede this final point. See Rashi. now that God said: Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden (v. 1).”The serpent did not mention the revered and feared name of God15 because he did not know it. The woman also added to God’s commandment, neither shall ye touch it.16, (Gen. 2:17). The woman said, God hath said: Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. The wife of Manoah did the same when she quoted the angel as saying, for the child shall be a Nazirite unto God from the womb to the day of his death (Jud. 13:7).17 (Jud. 13:5). He did not mention to the day of his death.
אוהייתם כאלהים. כמלאכים:
1AND YE SHALL BE AS GOD. As angels.18
אותרא האשה. בלבה:
1AND WHEN THE WOMAN SAW. In her heart.
בונחמד העץ, בעבור שתשכיל ותפקחנה עיניה,
2AND THAT THE TREE WAS TO BE DESIRED. Because it had the power to make one wise, and her eyes would “open.”19 of le-haskil has the meaning of because. Therefore le-haskil (to make one wise) is to be interpreted “because it made one wise” (Krinsky). Her eyes would open is to be interpreted metaphorically. See verses 5 and 7.
גוטעם עמה שיחד אכלוהו וגלתה לו סוד הנחש, והנה לא היה אדם שוגג על כן נענש, ורבים אמרו כי עץ הדעת עץ תאנה בעבור שמצאו "ויתפרו עלה תאנה" (בראשית ג ז), ואלו היה כן היה הכתוב אומר ויתפרו עלה עץ הדעת, גם רבים אמרו שחטה היה, והנכון בעיני ששני עצים הם בתוך גן עדן ואינם במקום אחר על כל פני האדמה, והאחד עץ הדעת והוא יוליד תאות המשגל, וע"כ כסו האדם ואשתו ערותם, ופי' ויתפרו ידוע וכן שק תפרתי עלי גלדי (איוב טז טו), והמבקשים מחט מהבילים כי בעץ דק יעשו צרכם, וכאשר אכל אדם מעץ הדעת ידע את אשתו וזאת הידיעה כנוי למשגל ובעבור עץ הדעת נקרא כן, גם הנער כאשר ידע הטוב והרע אז יחל לתאות המשגל,:
3[UNTO HER HUSBAND WITH HER.] The meaning of with her is that they ate together of the fruit and that she disclosed to him the secret that the serpent had revealed to her. Adam thus did not sin unwittingly and was therefore punished for violating God’s command. Many commentators say that the tree of knowledge was a fig tree. They base their assertion on and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves girdles (v. 7).20 70b, By the very thing with which they sinned were they rectified. However, if this interpretation were correct, the Bible would say, “And they sewed leaves of the tree of the knowledge.” Many others say that it was a wheat plant.21 40a and Sanhedrin 70b. However, in my opinion the two trees in the midst of the garden were unique species not found anywhere else on the face of the earth. One of them, the tree of knowledge, possessed the power to instill sexual desire. Therefore the man and woman covered their nakedness. The meaning of va-yitperu (sewed) is well-known.22 Tafarti in I have sewed (tafarti) sackcloth upon my skin (Job 16:15) is similar. Those who ask where Adam and Eve got a needle (to sew their girdle) emit hot air. Adam and Eve could have used a sharp piece of wood. Upon eating of the tree of knowledge, Adam knew (yada) his wife. Yada (knew) is a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is called “knowledge” because sexual desire came from the tree of knowledge. Moreover, a young man begins to have sexual desire at the age at which he begins to “know” good and evil.23
דועץ החיים. שיוסיף חיים ויחיה האדם שנים רבות ואין מלת לעולם עד עולם ועד, והנה כן "ועבדו לעולם" (שמות כא ו) "וישב שם עד עולם" (ש"א א כב), ורבים אחרים, ומפרשים אמרו בפ' "כי ביום אכלך ממנו מות תמות", כי לא נברא על מתכונת שימות רק כאשר חטא נגזר עליו המות, ורבים ישאלו מה חטאו זרעו, ואלה דברי רוח, כי רוח אחד לאדם ולבהמה שבה יהיה וירגיש בעולם הזה, וכמות זה כן מות זה מלבד החלק העליון שיש לאדם מותר מן הבהמה, וכבר הביא אחד מרופאי יון ראיות גמורות שלא יתכן שלא יהיה לחיי האדם קצב:
4The tree of life extended life so that by partaking of it man would live for many years. Le-olam (v. 22) does not mean forever. We find this to be the case with the term olam in and he shall serve him for ever (le-olam) (Ex. 21:6),24 15a. and in and there abide for ever (I Sam. 1:22)25 (and live forever, v. 22) is to be rendered, “and he will live for a very long time.” and in many other verses,Some commentators insist that the verse for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die (Gen. 2:17) indicates that man was created immortal and that he became mortal as a punishment for his sin. Many ask, what sin did Adam’s children commit that they were punished with death? Now this is absurd. Man and beast both share a common spirit (life force) through which they live and experience sensations in this world. As animals are destined to die, so must man die. The advantage of man over beast lies in the portion from above (the soul) which man has been granted. A Greek physician has proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is impossible for man to live forever.26 as quoted by Maimonides, Guide to the Perplexed, Part III, Chap. XII. I.E. maintains that man was not originally created immortal.
אוישמעו מתהלך בגן., קול השם, וזה היה סמוך לערב בעת התנופף רוח היום, ומצאנו לקול הליכה, כמו "קולה כנחש ילך" (ירמי' מו בב) "קול השופר הולך וחזק מאוד" (שמות יט יט), ויאמר ר' יונה המדקדק הספרדי כי הטעם והאדם מתהלך בגן, גם הוא אמר שפי' ביום אכלך ממנו אלף שנים כדרך הדרש, ואחרים אמרו ביום ששי נברא וביום ששי מת, ואחרים אמרו אז תהיה חייב מיתה, ואחרים אמרו כי יש מות עונש, כמו "כי בן מות האיש העושה זאת" (ש"ב יב ה), ואחרים אמרו כי מאז תחול שתמות והביאו ראיה מהתינוק, והישר בעיני מה שאמרו הקדמונים שעשה תשובה, כטעם רגע אדבר:
1AND THEY HEARD THE VOICE OF THE LORD GOD WALKING. They heard the voice of God walking toward evening, at the time of the day when the breeze blows. Scripture employs the term holekh (walking) when referring to a voice as seen in The sound thereof shall go (yelekh) like the serpent’s (Jer. 46:22), and And when the voice of the horn waxed (holekh) louder and louder (Ex. 19:19). However, the Spanish grammarian, Rabbi Jonah ibn Janah, says that this verse is to be interpreted as follows: And they heard the voice of God as man was walking in the garden. He also interprets the day referred to in for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die (Gen. 2:17)27 as meaning a thousand years, as the Midrash does.28 19:14. Others say that Adam was created on a Friday and died on a Friday.29 Others say that the meaning of for in the day…thou shalt surely die is that on that day you will incur the death penalty. Still others say that die at times means punishment, as seen in the verse the man that hath done this deserveth to die (II Sam. 12:5).30 Still others say the meaning of this verse is that on the day you eat of this tree you will begin to die. They bring proof from a child.31, Chap. 4). Thus man’s decline sets in with his sexual maturity. Since, according to I.E., man’s sexual maturity came with the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, his decline, too, started at this time. According to my thinking the correct interpretation of this verse is to be found in the words of the Rabbinic sages who said that Adam repented.32 Their interpretation is in keeping with the words of Jeremiah who says, At one instant I may speak concerning a nation…to destroy it, but if that nation turn from their evil.. J repent of the evil that I thought to do unto it (Jer. 18:7, 8).
אויקרא. טעם אַיֶכָּה פתחון הדברים, וכן "אי הבל אחיך" (בראשית ד ט) והנה כחש קין והשיב לו השם "קול דמי אחיך צועקים":
1AND THE LORD GOD CALLED. Where art thou was a means of starting a conversation. Similarly, Where is Abel thy brother? (Gen. 4:9).33 was a means of starting a conversation. Similarly God knew where Adam was, and Where art thou was a means of starting a conversation. Behold, Cain denied his brother’s whereabouts, but God responded, the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto Me from the ground (Gen. 4:10).
אלבלתי עם למ"ד כטעם שלא, ובלא למ"ד כטעם רק,.
1SHOULDEST NOT. Bilti with a lamed prefixed to it (le-vilti) means “not to.” Without this lamed (bilti) it means “only.”
באֲכָל ממנו. שם הפועל וכן, לבלתי שמור מצותיו (דבר' ח יא):
2EAT. Akhol (eat) is an infinitive. It is like shemor (keep) in34 also is an infinitive. in not keeping (shemor) His commandments (Deut. 8:11).
אאשר נתת עמדי, אתה נתת הנותנת לי, וטעם עמדי בגן, והוא כמו עמי, אכן לא מצאנוהו כי אם בלשון יחיד המדבר.
1WHOM THOU GAVEST TO BE WITH ME. Thou gavest to me one who gave me the fruit to eat. The word immadi (to be with me) means the same as immi (with me). Its meaning is: to be with me in the garden. However, immadi, in contradistinction to immi, is found only in the first person singular.
בוָאוֹכל האל"ף סימן המדבר והנח הנעלם שיש אחריו תמורת אלף השרש, ובא עם קמץ קטן בעבור שהוא סוף פסוק, ולא יתכן שיבוא וי"ו קמוץ עם הפועל כי לעולם הוא בשוא:
2AND I DID EAT. The alef of va-okhel (and I did eat) is a first person imperfect prefix. Its vowel (a cholam) takes the place of the alef of the root that has been dropped. The khaf is vocalized with a tzere because and I did eat comes at the end of a verse. A vav prefixed to a participle is always vocalized with a sheva, and never with a kamatz.35 is a first person perfect and not a participle. I.E. makes this point because a participle is vocalized with a cholam over the first radical and a tzere beneath the second radical. Hence va-okhel at first glance appears to be a participle. I.E. points out that this is not so. As a participle it would not have a vav with a kamatz affixed to it since a connective vav is vocalized with a sheva. Since the vav of va-okhel has a kamatz beneath it, it must be a vav conversive, changing okhal, an imperfect, to va-okhal, a perfect. However, because va-okhal comes at the end of a sentence it is vocalized va-okhel.
אהשיאני פתני:
1BEGUILED ME. Persuaded me.
אארור. לנחש שיהי' חייו קצרים, והנכון שיהי' חסר בהליכתו.
1CURSED. The serpent was cursed with a short life.36 refers to the serpent’s life span. However, the correct interpretation is that the serpent was cursed in manner of locomotion.37 refers to the serpent’s means of locomotion.
בעל גחונך, החזה ולא נדע אם הנו"ן שרש כאדון או נוסף כזדון, והאומר שנקרא כן בעבור הרוח שיגיח ממנו זה דרך דרש, וכן אמרו על גיחון גם פישון מגזרת כי תפושו (ירמי' נ יא) גם פרת מגזרת פרו ורבו, והנה הנהר הגדול הוא חדקל עמד בפניהם ולא יכלו לעבור ויאמרו שתי מלות הן, שהמים חדים וקלים:
2UPON THY BELLY. Gechonekha (thy belly) means thy chest. We cannot determine if the nun of gakhon (thy belly) is part of the root of this word, as the nun of adon (lord) is, or if it is a paradigm nun like the nun of zadon (insolence).38 (insolence) comes from the root zayin, vav, dalet; therefore the nun of zadon is not part of its root. Those who say that gakhon is so called because of the air that rushes forth from it39, meaning to burst forth. They explained Gihon to mean the dashing river, Perat as the river whose waters are fruitful and multiply, and Pishon as the gamboling river. are indulging in homiletics. They similarly explain Gihon (Gen. 2:13). They also say that Pishon (Gen. 2:11) comes from the same root as tafushu (ye gambol) in Because ye gambol (tafushu) as a heifer (Jer. 50:11). Also, they say that Perat (the Euphrates, Gen. 2:14) comes from the same roots as Be fruitful (peru), and multiply (u-revu) (Gen. 1:28). But they are unable to cross the great river, the Chiddeckel (the Tigris) (Gen. 1:28), which stood before them.40 They decided that it is made up of two words, chad (swift) and kal (light), and means the river whose waters are swift and light.
אואיבה.: הוא ישופך ראש. זרעה יככה בראש וכן אשר בשערה ישופני (איוב ט יז), דלא תראה מהכתוב אחריו, ויחסר הבי"ת כמו בי"ת הנמצא בית ד' (מ"ב יב יז):
1AND I WILL PUT ENMITY…THEY SHALL BRUISE THY HEAD. Her children shall smite thee upon thy head. Yeshufeni (bruise) in He that would break me (yeshufeni) with a tempest (Job 9:17) is similar to yeshufekha (shall bruise thee). Look at what follows and you will see that it is so.41. This proves that the verb yeshufeni means he will bruise me, or smite me. Since yeshufekha and yeshufeni come from one root, they have one meaning. Hence yeshufekha means shall bruise thee. A bet has been omitted from the word rosh (head) in they shall bruise thy head.42. With a bet it reads, They shall bruise thee upon the head. The bet is to be supplied by the reader. We find the same in into the house (bet) of the Lord43. However, it reads, bet Adonai. (II Kings 12:17).
בעקב. הוא הרגל ואם הראש ראשון זה אחרון, וכן "ואת עקבו מים (יהושע ה יג):
2HEEL. Ekev means the foot. If the head symbolizes the first, then the heel symbolizes the last. Akevo in their rear (akevo) lying in wait on the west (Josh. 8:13), is similar.
אהַרְבֶּה אַרְבֶּה, שם הפועל:
1I WILL GREATLY MULTIPLY. Harbah (multiply) is an infinitive.
בעצבונך. בעת הענוי, בצאת דם בתולים:
2THY PAIN. The pain a woman suffers when she is deflowered.44
גוהרונך. הנו"ן נוסף, כי ההריון כבד על האשה וכן הלידה:
3AND THY TRAVAIL. The nun of ve-heronekh (and thy travail) is not a root letter.45. Herayon refers to pregnancy and childbirth. Pregnancy is considered by our verse to be a punishment because it and childbirth are a burden to women.46 (Gen. 49:25).
דתשוקתך. משמעתך, והטעם שתשמעי כל אשר יצוה עליך כי את ברשותו לעשות חפצו:
4THY DESIRE. Thy obedience.47 to mean your husband’s desire will be your desire. Weiser suggests that the woman’s desire for her husband will be so strong that she will listen to everything that he commands her. This means you will obey whatever your husband commands you for you are under his authority to do his will.
אולאדם. ארורה האדמה, שלא תוציא תבואה רבה:
1AND UNTO ADAM…CURSED IS THE GROUND. It will not yield much produce.
בבעצבון תאכלנה. תאכל תבואתה, והיא דרך קצרה, וכן והיו באוכלי שולחנך (מ"א ב ז):
2IN TOIL THOU SHALT EAT OF IT. This is short for thou shalt eat of its produce.48. However, man does not eat the ground. Therefore I.E. says that our verse is abridged (Weiser). And let them be of those that eat at thy table (I Kings 2:7)49. The words “the food of” must be supplied by the reader. is similar.
אוקוץ. גדול וקטן ממנו דרדר, והוא לבדו דר כי אחיו נעדר,
1THORNS ALSO AND THISTLES. Kotz refers to large thorns. Dardar (thistles) are smaller than thorns. Its root is dalet, resh (dar). The other two letters of the word are not root letters.50 a thistle, dardar a small thistle (Filwarg). For alternate interpretations see Weiser. I.E. literally reads, He lives (dar) alone, for his brother is missing (ne’edar).
בוטעם בעצבון לפתח ולשדד ולזרוע, ועוד רעה הולה שיצמח קוץ בתוך התבואה
2[IN TOIL.] Thou shalt toil in opening, harrowing and sowing.51 In addition to this, man will also suffer the sick evil of finding thorns growing amidst the produce of the field.
גוטעם את עשב השדה הוא הלחם. כי בגן חיותו מפרי העץ,
3[THE HERB OF THE FIELD.] Bread. For prior to this, man sustained himself with the fruits of the Garden of Eden.
אוטעם בזעת אפך שהוא צריך לטרוח לזרות ולטחון וללוש ולבשל ולא כמאכל הבהמות, ופי' בזעת ידוע מדבריהם ז"ל, והוא על משקל שינה, ושרשו "יזע" וכמוהו "לא יחגרו ביזע" (יחז' מד יח), עד שיבואו לידי זיעה, ואחר שידענו שהאדם נברא מהד' שרשים מה טעם כי ממנו לקחת, והתשובה כי העצמות תולדותם מהעפר ועל כן הם כבדות, ואין להם הרגשה והם מוסדי הגוף, הלא תראה "ותקרבו עצמות עצם אל עצמו" (יחז' לז ז) כי הם דמות בית בנוי, ואח"כ "והנה עליהם גידים ובשר עלה ויקרם עליהם עור" (שם ח) וכן והעליתם את עצמותי (בראשית נ כה):
1[IN THE SWEAT OF THY FACE SHALT THOU EAT BREAD]. Unlike the animals, you will have to work at winnowing, grinding, kneading and cooking before you can eat. The meaning of ze’at (sweat of) can be ascertained from Rabbinic sources.52 for sweat. It follows the paradigm of shenah (sleep). Its root is yod, zayin, ayin. Ba-yazah in they shall not gird themselves with anything that causeth sweat (ba-yazah) (Ezek. 44:18) is similar. The meaning of the verse is, they shall not come to sweat. We know that man is created out of the four elements. What, then, does Scripture mean by for out of it (dust) was thou taken?53 The answer is that man’s skeletal frame is created out of earth (dust). Hence the bones are heavy54 and lack sensation. The skeletal frame is the foundation of the body. Look, Scripture states, and the bones came together, bone to its bone (Ezek. 37:7). The bones are like the frame of a house. Thus after the bones came together and, lo, there were sinews upon them, and flesh came up, and skin covered them above (Ezek. 37:8). Similarly Scripture states, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence (Gen. 50:25).
אויקרא חוה. הוי"ו והיו"ד מתחלפים, וכן הנה יד ד' הויה (שמות ט ג), ואתה הוה להם למלך (נחמי' ו, י) ולא קראה ביו"ד כי מה הפרש יש בין, שמה ובין שם החיות:
1EVE. The yod and vav are interchangeable.55 because she was the mother of all chai. If this is the case then she should have been called chayyah. Thus I.E. points out that the vav and yod interchange and that chayyah and chavvah are one and the same. We thus find hoyah and hoveh interchanged in behold, the hand of the Lord is upon (hoyah) thy cattle (Ex. 9:3), and in and thou wouldest be (hoveh) be their king (Neh. 6:6). The reason she was called Chavvah and not Chayyah is to distinguish her name from the noun meaning animal (chayyah).
באם כל חי. מבני אדם:
2THE MOTHER OF ALL LIVING. Humans.
אכתנור עור. יש אומר כי בתחלה הי' עצם ובשר ועתה קרם עליהם עור, וי"א כתנות לעורם, ואחרים אומרים כי יש בהמה בדמות אדם, והשם צוה ונפשט עורה ואין לנו לבקש בזאת רק נאמין שהשם עשה לאדם גם לאשתו כתנות עור, ומי ימלל גבורותיו, ומי יספר מעשיו ונפלאותיו, ואין חקר לגדולתו:
1GARMENTS OF SKIN. Some say that Adam and Eve originally consisted of bone and flesh, and God now covered them with skin.56 Others say garments of skin means garments for their skin.57. Still others say that there exists an animal which has a form similar to that of man, and God commanded that it shed its skin.58 However, one should in reality not bother to inquire into this matter. We ought to believe that God made garments of skin for Adam and Eve. Who can recount all of God’s mighty acts? Who can tell of all of his wonders? There is no end to God’s greatness.
אויאמר. כאשר יהיה אֶחָד בפתח קטן, יהיה בטעם, וענינו מוכרת, ואם יהיה בפתח גדול, יהיה סמוך, וכן כְּאַחַד שבטי ישראל (בראשית מט טז), על כן לא יתכן מדקדוק הלשון להיות פירושו כמו אֶחָד ומה טעם יהיה לו והיה בעל הטעמים ראוי לדבק ממנו עם לדעת,
1AND THE LORD GOD SAID…AS ONE OF US. When one (echad) is in the absolute, it has a cantillical note which indicates the foregoing and it is vocalized with a segol beneath the alef. However, when it is vocalized with a pattach beneath the alef (achad) it is in the construct. Similarly, As one of (ke-achad) the tribes of Israel (Gen. 49:16). Hence, according to the rules of grammar, the word ke-achad (as one of) cannot have the meaning of as one.59 in this way: “Man has become one on earth.” Cf. Rashi. Man is one on earth as I am one in heaven. I.E. disagrees, for ke-achad is in the construct. Additionally, if ke-achad is in the absolute, then it is meaningless.60 is in the absolute, then Scripture reads, man is like one. This is a meaningless statement. Furthermore, if ke-achad is in the absolute, the notes should have connected mi-mennu (of us) to la-da’at (to know).61. A word in the absolute is not connected by a cantillical note to the word that follows. Since ke-achad is connected to mi-mennu it must be in the construct. Mi-mennu is a plural,62 as a singular.
בופי' ממנו לשון רבים, כמו איש ממנו (בראשית כג ו), וכבר ביארתי בס' היסוד למה נדגש נו"ן הרבים, ואנשי מזרח הקוראים אותו בלא דגשות יטעו, וטעם הפסוק כמו והייתם כאלהים יודעי טוב ורע או פי' על מחשבתו, ואל תתמה על, מלת ממנו, כי כמוהו "נעשה אדם בצלמנו" (בראשית א כו), הבה נרדה (בראשית יא ז), וזה דבור השם עם המלאכים:
2The word mi-mennu can be rendered of us or of him. as in ish mi-mennu (none of us) (Gen. 23:6). I have already explained in The Book of Foundation why the nun of mi-mennu receives a dagesh when in the plural.63 should have been spelled with two nuns. The dagesh makes up for the missing nun (Weiser). I.E. makes this point here because the word mi-mennu has a dagesh. He does not want one to think mistakenly that it is a singular because of this dagesh. See next note. The Babylonian grammarians who do not place a dagesh in it are in error.64 in mi-mennu when it is singular and omit the dagesh when it is plural. I.E. says that the Palestinians who place a dagesh in both instances are correct. The meaning of the verse (v. 22) is the same as ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil (v. 5).65 On the other hand, God might be saying what was in Adam’s mind.66 The use of the term of us presents no problem. It is similar to Let us make man in our image (Gen. 1:26) and Come, let us go down (Gen. 11:7). God in all these cases is addressing the angels.
אוישלחהו. כל שלוח ואחריו מ"ם כמו גרוש והוא לגנאי כמו שלח מעל פני (ירמי' טו א), ולא כאשר אמר חכם גדול ספרדי שהוא לשון כבוד, כמו הולך. עמם לשלחם (בראשית יח טז), וכמו וישלחהו וילך בשלום (ש"ב ג כג), שאם כן יהיה כבוד האדמה גדל מכבוד גן עדן, ואם אמר למה נכתב "ויגרש את האדם" אם פירושו וישלחהו ויגרשהו, כן פירושו כאשר גרשו השכין את הכרובים
1THEREFORE THE LORD GOD SENT HIM FORTH. When the word shelach (sent forth) is followed by a mem, it has a negative connotation and means banished, as in cast them out (shalach) of My sight (Jer. 15:1). The great Spanish scholar who interpreted sent him forth in our verse in a positive way, as in and Abraham went with them to bring them (le-shallecham) on the way (Gen. 18:16), and in and he hath sent him away (va-yeshallechehu), and he is gone in peace (II Sam. 3:23), erred. For if he was right then the place Adam was going to was a better place than the Garden of Eden. If this sage should ask, if the meaning of sent him forth is he banished him, then why does Scripture go on to say, So He drove out the man (v. 24)?67 means drove out, then Scripture is being redundant. The answer is that when man was driven from the garden (v. 4), God placed the cherubim at the east of the Garden of Eden.68
בומלת כרובים י"א כנערים, תרגום ארמית כרביא. ולפי דעתי שהיא מלת לל צורות כולם. ויחזקאל שאמר בתחלה ופני שור לא, התחלפה הצורה, שהעגל לא נעשה בימיו, ואח"כ באמרו פני הכרוב (יחז' יו"ד, יד) בה"א הידיעה הצורה צורת שור כאלו אמר הצורה שהזכרתי בתחלה על כן כל צורת שור כרוב, ואין כל כרוב צורת שור, והראייה הגמורה שאמר באחרונה "כי כרובים המה" (שם שם פסוק כ), ופה אמר הכרובים והם המלאכים הידועים, ובידם חרב יש לה להט ולה שתי פיות, וזה פי' המתהפכת, והמפרשים שאומרים כי על השמש דבר איננו אמת:
2[THE CHERUBIM.] Some say that cherubim means like images of youths,69 13b. The Talmud says that the Hebrew word keruv is like the Aramaic ke-ravyah, ke (like), ravyah (a child). which is the translation of the Aramaic ke-ravyah. However, I believe that the word is a general term for any image. Ezekiel, who first says that he saw the image of an ox (Ezek. 1:10) and later speaks of a cherub (Ezek. 10:14), refers to one and the same image. The image was not changed from that of an ox to that of a cherub because an ox would be a reminder of the sin of the golden calf, as this sin was not committed in Ezekiel’s day.70 13b states, “One verse says…and they had the face of an ox (Ezek. 1:10). Elsewhere it is written…the face of a cherub (Ezek. 10:14). Resh Lakish said: Ezekiel entreated concerning it and changed it into a cherub. He said before Him, Lord of the Universe, shall an accuser become an advocate.” I.E. notes that the Talmudic interpretation is not in keeping with the literal meaning of the Bible. When Ezekiel speaks of the cherub (10:14) he has in mind the image he had mentioned previously (the image of an ox in 1:10). Therefore every image of an ox is a cherub, but not every cherub is an image of an ox. Proof of this is that Ezekiel refers to all images that he had seen as cherubim (10:20).71 Our verse speaks of the cherubim, which implies the cherubim known to all, i.e., angels.72 They had a flaming two-edged sword in their hands. The meaning of which turned every way is that the sword had two edges. Those who say that the flaming sword refers to the sun are incorrect.73
אמקדם. פי' ממזרח, ודע כי כל מה שמצאנו כתוב הוא אמת וכן היה ואין בו ספק, ויש לו סוד, כי מאור השכל, יצא החפץ ומהשני העולה למעלה, כי תנועת החפץ לפנים הוא גם עלה תאנה לאות ונקרא השלישי בשם הבחינה, כי בתחלה יש כח בלי מפעל, והמבין זה הסוד יבין איך יפרד הנהר, וזה סוד גן עדן, וכתנות העור גם יורה זה הסוד שיש יכולת באדם שיהיה לעולם, והמשכיל יבין כי זה כל האדם:
1AT THE EAST. Mi-kedem means at the east.74 Note, the story of the garden of Eden is to be interpreted literally. There is no doubt that it happened exactly as described in Scripture. Nevertheless, it also has a secret meaning.75, desire) frequently acts contrary to the intellect, due to the paradox of various faculties within man struggling for control. Volition (desire) is animated by the intellectual faculty but it is opposed by lust which originates from the appetitive and sensitive dimensions (Gen. 3:24).” Man’s goal in life is thus to seek “knowledge of God” and to subdue “all interfering passions” (p. 14). It alludes to the following: Intellect (the Garden of Eden)76 gave birth to desire (the tree of knowledge). Desire gave birth to man’s actions. It is via his actions that man can elevate himself, for the force that propels his desire is in front of him.77 The fig leaves prove this.78 Man’s actions are also called the testing ground, for by them man is tried. Intellect and desire are only potential.79 The one who understands the secrets of the tree of knowledge will understand the secret of the four rivers that divided into four parts (Gen. 2:10).80 This is the secret of the Garden of Eden and the garments of skin.81 There is also an allusion in all of this to man’s potential immortality (the tree of life). The intelligent will understand that this is the ultimate purpose of man’s life on earth.82