CHAPTER II
Some years ago a learned man asked me a question of great importance;
the problem and the solution which we gave in our reply deserve the closest attention.
Before, however, entering upon this problem and its solution I must premise that
every Hebrew knows that the term Elohim is a homonym, and denotes God, angels, judges,
and the rulers of countries, and that Onkelos the proselyte explained it in the
true and correct manner by taking Elohim in the sentence, “and ye shall be like
Elohim” (Gen. iii. 5)
in the last-mentioned meaning, and rendering the sentence
“and ye shall be like princes.” Having pointed out the homonymity of the term “Elohim”
we return to the question under consideration. “It would at first sight,” said the
objector, “appear from Scripture that man was originally intended to be perfectly
equal to the rest of the animal creation, which is not endowed with intellect, reason,
or power of distinguishing between good and evil: but that Adam’s disobedience
to the command of God procured him that great perfection which is the Peculiarity
of man, viz., the power of distinguishing between good and evil — the noblest of all
the faculties of our nature, the essential characteristic of the human race. It
thus appears strange that the punishment for rebelliousness should be the means
of elevating man to a pinnacle of perfection to which he had not attained previously.
This is equivalent to saying that a certain man was rebellious and extremely wicked,
wherefore his nature was changed for the better, and he was made to shine as a star
in the heavens.” Such was the purport and subject of the question, though not in
the exact words of the inquirer. Now mark our reply, which was as follows: — “You
appear to have studied the matter superficially, and nevertheless you imagine that
you can understand a book which has been the guide of past and present generations,
when you for a moment withdraw from your lusts and appetites, and glance over its
contents as if you were reading a historical work or some poetical composition.
Collect your thoughts and examine the matter carefully, for it is not to be understood
as you at first sight think, but as you will find after due deliberation; namely,
the intellect which was granted to man as the highest endowment, was bestowed on
him before his disobedience. With reference to this gift the Bible states that “man was created in the form and likeness of
God.” On account of this gift of intellect
man was addressed by God, and received His commandments, as it is said: “And the
Lord God commanded Adam” (Gen. ii. 16) — for no commandments are given to the brute
creation or to those who are devoid of understanding. Through the intellect man
distinguishes between the true and the false. This faculty Adam possessed perfectly
and completely. The right and the wrong are terms employed in the science of apparent
truths (morals), not in that of necessary truths, as, e.g. it is not correct to
say, in reference to the proposition “the heavens are spherical,” it is “good” or
to declare the assertion that “the earth is flat” to be “bad”; but we say of the
one it is true, of the other it is false. Similarly our language expresses the idea
of true and false by the terms emet and sheker, of the morally right and the morally
wrong, by tob and ra‘. Thus it is the function of the intellect to discriminate
between the true and the false — a distinction which is applicable to all objects
of intellectual perception. When Adam was yet in a state of innocence, and was guided
solely by reflection and reason — on account of which it is said: “Thou hast made
him (man) little lower than the angels” (Ps. viii. 6) — he was not at all able
to follow or to understand the principles of apparent truths; the most manifest
impropriety, viz., to appear in a state of nudity, was nothing unbecoming according
to his idea: he could not comprehend why it should be so. After man’s disobedience,
however, when he began to give way to desires which had their source in his imagination
and to the gratification of his bodily appetites, as it is said, “And the wife saw
that the tree was good for food and delightful to the eyes” (Gen. iii. 6), he was
punished by the loss of part of that intellectual faculty which he had previously
possessed. He therefore transgressed a command with which he had been charged on
the score of his reason; and having obtained a knowledge of the apparent truths,
he was wholly absorbed in the study of what is proper and what improper. Then he
fully understood the magnitude of the loss he had sustained, what he had forfeited,
and in what situation he was thereby placed. Hence we read, “And ye shall be like
elohim, knowing good and evil,” and not “knowing” or “discerning the true and the
false”: while in necessary truths we can only apply the words “true and false,”
not “good and evil.” Further observe the passage, “And the eyes of both were opened,
and they knew they were naked” (Gen. iii. 7); it is not said, “And the eyes of
both were opened, and they saw”; for what the man had seen previously and what
he saw after this circumstance was precisely the same: there had been no blindness
which was now removed, but he received a new faculty whereby he found things wrong
which previously he had not regarded as wrong. Besides, you must know that the Hebrew
word pakaḥ used in this passage is exclusively employed in the figurative sense
of receiving new sources of knowledge, not in that of regaining the sense of sight.
Comp., “God opened her eyes” (Gen. xxi. 19). “Then shall the eyes of the blind be
opened” (Isaiah xxxviii. 8). “Open ears, he heareth not” (ibid. xlii. 20), similar
in sense to the verse, “Which have eyes to see, and see not” (Ezek. xii. 2). When,
however, Scripture says of Adam, “He changed his face (panav) and thou sentest him
forth” Job xiv. 20), it must be understood in the following way: On account of the
change of his original aim he was sent away. For panim, the Hebrew equivalent of
face, is derived from the verb panah, “he turned,” and signifies also “aim,” because
man generally turns his face towards the thing he desires. In accordance with this
interpretation, our text suggests that Adam, as he altered his intention and directed
his thoughts to the acquisition of what he was forbidden, he was banished from Paradise:
this was his punishment; it was measure for measure. At first he had the privilege
of tasting pleasure and happiness, and of enjoying repose and security; but as his
appetites grew stronger, and he followed his desires and impulses, (as we have already
stated above), and partook of the food he was forbidden to taste, he was deprived
of everything, was doomed to subsist on the meanest kind of food, such as he never
tasted before, and this even only after exertion and labour, as it is said, “Thorns
and thistles shall grow up for thee” (Gen. iii. 18), “By the sweat of thy brow,”
etc., and in explanation of this the text continues, “And the Lord God drove him
from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground whence he was taken.” He was now with
respect to food and many other requirements brought to the level of the lower animals:
comp., “Thou shalt eat the grass of the field” (Gen. iii. 18). Reflecting on his
condition, the Psalmist says, “Adam unable to dwell in dignity, was brought to the
level of the dumb beast” (Ps. xlix. 13). “May the Almighty be praised, whose design
and wisdom cannot be fathomed.”
