Tanach · Rishonim on Tanach · Ibn Ezra · Torah
Ibn Ezra on Genesis 3:22/אבן עזרא על בראשית ג׳:כ״ב
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.