Parasha: Bereshit · Aliyah: Second (Gevurah)

2.4. אלה תולדות השמים והארץ. These are the developments of the heavens and the earth. Our sages have already explained this verse homiletically. However, the plain meaning of the verse is not known.

It appears to me that the key lies in the fact that G'd had previously instructed the creatures i.e. heaven and earth respectively to also produce "offspring." The waters had been told to divide, to produce fish, etc, whereas the earth had been instructed to produce vegetation, mammals, etc. The Torah reiterates that what earth and heaven produce daily are only derivatives, תולדות, that there is nothing original about these phenomena so that we should not err and believe that both the waters and the earth possessed independent creative powers. Such an error would lead to heretic thoughts.

The reason that the Torah mentions only heaven and earth in this connection and not the waters is simply because the waters are part of שמים.

The word בהבראם may also be understood as בהם בראם, G'd created all these תולדות by employing heaven and earth as His agents.

וכל שיח השדה טרם יהיה בארץ. None of the plants of the fields existed as yet. This stresses again that until the Creator irrigated the earth by bringing on rain, none of the vegetation produced by earth was able to function, to grow. The verse also tells us that the living creatures on earth were G'd's creation as indicated by 2,19, that "G'd formed all the beasts of the field." Earth's contribution was to provide the golem-like body pending G'd's infusing these bodies with a breath of life. The same applied to the swarms of "living" creatures produced by the waters as well as the birds. Our sages have already stated that the birds are the result of co-operation by water and earth, i.e. swamps (Eyruvin 28). This is why the Torah described the birds as עוף השמים, birds of the heavens, in 2,19, although the directive had been issued to the waters in 1,20.

Why did the Torah mention here that there was as yet no human being on earth who would work the land, and why is there a second report about the creation of man in the next verse, i.e. וייצר השם אלוקים את האדם? If the Torah only wanted to inform us that the raw material man is made of was the dust of the earth, it could have done so in 1,27 where man's creation by G'd is reported instead of repeating the whole story about man being created.

I believe the answer lies in what our sages alluded to when they described אדם הראשון, original man, as the חלת העולם, earth's gift to G'd, i.e. a concept parallel to the priest's share of the dough (Eyruvin 18). Our sages therefore believed that just as the principle of donating the first of the dough to the priest in his capacity of G'd's representative on earth is a duty, creation itself is morally bound to "donate" to its Creator something similiar. We find the following passage in the tractate חלה 2,5: "If someone sets aside the quantity of חלה that he is obliged to set aside in the form of flour (instead of as part of the dough), it (this quantity of flour) is not considered sacred." In 3,1 of the same tractate we are told that until the dough (of wheat) has developed so that the meal and the water form one body, a non-priest may still eat of it on an ad hoc basis, even if חלה has not yet been set aside from it. If one eats from such dough subsequently (knowingly) one is guilty of the death penalty. The descent of rain on the vegetation of the earth is akin to the mixing (kneading) of a dough from which to make bread. This is why consumption of the proceeds of grain i.e. bread or cake, is prohibited until חלה has been set aside. It is equivalent to what the Mishnah Challah 3,1 called גלגול העיסה. Earth was unable to produce viable vegetation without G'd contributing the rain. It follows that it is prohibited to eat or otherwise enjoy any of earth's fruit until an appropriate gift to G'd has been set aside. The creation of man [from raw material made of all parts of the earth Ed.] was that gift, i.e. that חלה. Prior to man's creation the earth was טבל, untithed produce, forbidden, out of bounds to man. This is what our verse wanted to convey. Although earth produced the plants on the third day, G'd had not provided the rain at that time, not until immediately before He formed the human being. Creation of man, i.e. the חלה of the universe, enabled all the creatures to enjoy it henceforth. The Torah mentions that the entire surface of the earth was irrigated because if G'd had irrigated only parts of the earth, such an incomplete "dough" would not have freed the remainder from the requirement to contribute further amounts of חלה.

It is important to realise that G'd took "dust from the earth" to create man, as opposed to soil from גן עדן. This point is repeated again in 3,24 when Adam is expelled from גן עדן "to till the soil he had been taken from." There was no need to give חלה from any of the trees of גן עדן seeing it was totally holy already. This is why the Torah says (2,8) "G'd had planted a garden in Eden already previously (מקדם)," i.e. prior to the creation of man. He had prepared this holy region for Adam who was holy, being the חלה of the universe.

ויטע השם אלוקים. The Lord G'd planted. The reason the Torah interrupts the sequence of G'd's planting all kinds of trees in that garden (verses 8 and 9 respectively) by mentioning that G'd placed Adam in גן עדן, is to make it clear that גן עדן had been created specifically in Adam's honour, in order to place him there. After having given us this information the Torah continues and tells us that G'd made all kinds of trees grow from the soil, that these trees looked attractive and were good as food, that G'd made rivers and the function of those rivers which emanated from גן עדן. The Torah then resumes its narrative about man in verse 15, telling us that G'd placed Adam there and assigned a function to him. The Torah repeats that G'd placed man in גן עדן only to confirm that the first time this was mentioned it was only to tell us that G'd had planted גן עדן in man's honour. Had this fact been mentioned only once we would have thought that G'd intended this garden also for other creatures, such as His angels, and that man was placed there temporarily. We would have thought that after man's expulsion, the garden would have remained as be a home for other creatures and for holy spirits. The Torah therefore is at pains to make us understand that the garden was planted exclusively for man's sake and awaits man's return at a suitable time in the future and that no other creature inhabits it in the meantime.

ויקח השם אלוקים….לעבדה ולשמרה. G'd took man…to work it and to guard it. The plain meaning of the verse appears to be that the garden was in need of someone to work it and to guard it, whereas the truth is that this was not the case. Why would it need a guard? Who was there to steal from it? Also, if the garden needed someone to work it, who has done this chore during the almost 6000 years that the garden has been unattended? What exactly was the nature of the work which had to be performed?

Know therefore that the entire description of the גן עדן is to serve as an example of a spiritual environment. The Torah wanted to illustrate that just as a physical environment such as earth requires a) toil, planting, irrigation, etc. in order to produce man's food supply, and b) protection against harmful substances that damage the plants, the same applies to an environment described as גן עדן. Nowadays גן עדן is the "soil," i.e. the environment for disembodied souls, seeing the bodies have been expelled. Even as such it requires both work and protection against negative influences. The specific work required in גן עדן consists of Torah study. The Torah demonstrates the validity of such illustrative figures of speech when Moses described his speech in Deut. 32,2 in these words: "May my discourse come down as the rain, my speech distil as the dew, like showers on young growth and like droplets on the grass." The "young growth" is a simile for the positive commandments. The author cites a number of examples where G'd is described as "planting" man's good deeds. The protective activity the Torah describes as לשמרה, refers to the observance of the negative commandments. Non-observance of the negative commandments of the Torah is apt to destroy the fabric of the spiritual environment represented by גן עדן. Our sages in Sotah 2 already tell us that sin, i.e. transgression of a negative commandment, extinguishes מצות though it does not extinguish the Torah. This latter statement does not mean that it is not within the power of such a sin to harm Torah at all, it only means that a single עבירה cannot accomplish that. Sustained sinful activity could certainly undermine the Torah absolutely.

At any rate the use of such terms as "to work it and to protect it" in connection with גן עדן is perfectly justified. At the time when G'd placed Adam in גן עדן, Adam was able to see how his positive actions contributed to the well-being of the garden. Once he had been expelled he was denied the ability to see the results of his activities. His spiritual part, however, was not denied the chance to accumulate good deeds and to eventually "see" the results in the Hereafter.

ויצו השם אלוקים על האדם. The Lord G'd commanded Adam. The Torah added the word לאמור, to say, and repeated the word for "to eat," by saying אכול תאכל. The Torah also repeated that violating the command would result in death by saying: i.e. מות תמות, instead of merely תמות. The reason is 1) that Adam should command Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge either; b) that the penalty would apply to her just as much as to Adam himself (who had heard the commandment from G'd directly). The repetition of these words also constitutes both a warning and a spelling out of the penalty, something that halachah demands when capital punishment is involved.

Another meaning of the repetition of the words מות תמות may be simply to give notice to Adam that should he eat from that tree he would cause his own mortality as well as the mortality of all those who would be descended from him in the future. This is, of course, what happened, and as a result we are all mortal until the day in the future when the pollution of the original serpent will have dissipated completely and G'd will banish death from earth (Isaiah 25,8).

ויאמר השם אלוקים לא טוב. The Lord G'd said: "It is not good for man to be alone, etc." This is difficult since G'd had mentioned already on the day He created man that the species had been created male and female (1,27). Another problem in the text is the expression אעשה, "I shall make for him a helpmate." The Torah then immediately proceeds to describe that the mammals and the birds were formed, i.e. ויצר השם אלוקים (2,19). This gives the impression that G'd intended one of these animals to be man's helpmate. Such a thought is not only extremely strange, but if true it would also result in one of those animals being deprived of its own mate! Besides, why did G'd have to put Adam to sleep and to remove part of his body? Could He not have formed woman as dust from the earth as He had formed man himself, especially since He formed Eve on the very same day He formed Adam (5,2) זכר ונקבה בראם? Our sages have given many homiletical explanations in answer to these questions, but they have not provided us with פשט, straightforward answers that justify the text as it stands.

We may have to fall back on the opinions expressed in Berachot 61 that originally man was created with two faces in one body. The Talmud there offers two opinions as to what was removed from Adam, a tail or a face, respectively. This is a reasonable explanation because it justifies G'd's blessing or command to Adam to be fruitful and to multiply (1,28) at a time when woman had not yet been reported as a separate entity.

It is in keeping with G'd's propensity for preparing everything good ahead of time, and providing many more opportunities for man to do good than evil. However, we must ask why He separated the two bodies enabling Eve to fall victim to the temptation by the serpent? This leads us to examine the cause of Adam's (Eve) sin, what happened to him and all of mankind as a result. We have found that woman became the cause of all that the world lost because the serpent prevailed over her in a match of wits. This occurred because Adam was not at her side at the time of Eve's encounter with the serpent. He was asleep as a result of having had marital relations with his wife (Bereshit Rabbah 19,3). Another version in the Midrash there suggests that G'd had taken him on a tour of the earth. As a result the serpent encountered Eve on her own and succeeded in seducing her. If the Torah had reported man's creation and the subsequent separation of Eve's body sequentially, without interposing Adam's experiences on earth in the interval, many people would have argued that what happened was all G'd's fault. They would have said that if G'd had not separated her body from that of her husband, thereby making a drastic change in what He had created originally, the serpent would never have had a chance to seduce Eve. In order to forestall such an argument the Torah tells us first the reason that G'd separated Eve's body from Adam's, i.e. in answer to Adam's own request. His observations of how the animals lived, male and female as separate bodies, had made him desirous of a similar arrangement. G'd had only the best of intentions, as usual. This is also the reason the Torah told us already at the outset that man was equipped to procreate from the moment he was created. Being one and the same body obviously had some of the same disadvantages as being a Siamese twin. G'd therefore decided it would be better for man's helpmate to be כנגדו, an appropriate complement, rather than the other half of his body. In this way she could be a help to him at all times instead of being a hindrance on occasion. Eve's being a separate body was not dictated by Adam's need to procreate. Seeing that the separation of her body served only to please Adam we must ask why none of the other creatures could have been trained to perform that task for Adam while leaving Eve in the state she had been created. The Torah therefore describes in verses 19 and 20 that Adam did indeed search for a suitable helpmate amongst all the other creatures but did not find one that was acceptable to him. Naming the animals, i.e. identifying their essence, was part of that search for a suitable helpmate. Eve's existence as a separate body from Adam had therefore become mandatory from Adam's point of view. It is totally incorrect to blame G'd for subsequent developments, such as Eve finding herself temporarily alone, facing an evil influence whose existence she had been quite unaware of. The Torah's report about both Adam's and Eve's innocence, i.e. their lack of shame at being nude, are all facts the Torah supplies to enable us to better understand the causes that led to the sin. Human relationships are based on people facing each other, i.e. כנגדו. The Torah describes Adam's profound joy when he finally beheld the partner who up until then had been hidden from him, i.e. had faced backwards. From G'd's point of view the original arrangement was perfectly acceptable, He had not created an imperfect human species. Any change was entirely in response to Adam's frame of mind, to accomodate him. Our sages have supplied us with numerous reasons why G'd did not create an entirely new human being to serve as Adam's helpmate. When Solomon told us in Kohelet (4,9) טובים השנים מן האחד, that two are better than one, that they can help each other, this has nothing to do with G'd having created man's form in such a way that he could have impregnated the wife which was part of him but facing backwards.

Perhaps the objective reason G'd had created the human species as a pair in a single body was to distinguish between the functions of the bodies of the animals and the functions of the human body. Animals mate indiscriminately, i.e. a male will mate with any female available to him, the act of mating being merely a response to biological urges. The fact that the Torah on occasion stresses the זכר ונקבה element when mentioning animals as pairs such as when they entered Noach's ark, does not mean that they have exclusive partners. The average animal does not recognise a female of its species as specifically "his" female. This is not the way G'd wanted man to relate to the subject of mating. It would have been impossible for Adam to describe his wife as בשר מבשרי, flesh of my own, were it not for the fact that Eve had been part of his own body previously. The whole idea that man's זווג is arranged in heaven would have been impossible to understand but for the fact that the female of the species is considered man's "other half." This consideration may also be the reason that when the Torah legislated forbidden sexual relations (Leviticus 18) the subject is always the male. It is forbidden to engage in sexual intercourse with certain women as they could not possibly be your missing "half."