This week’s parasha, Bo, describes the final three plagues that God brought upon Egypt. There is an allusion to this in the very name of the parasha, since the gematria of “Bo” (בא) is 3. It is not a coincidence that the Torah divides the Ten Plagues between two parashas, seven in last week’s and three in Bo. In fact, all things that are “Ten” in the Torah (such as the Ten Utterances of Creation, the Ten Commandments, or the Ten Trials of Abraham) follow the same pattern of 7 and 3. The pattern is based on the Ten Sefirot, where there are three higher mochin, “mental” faculties, above the seven lower middot, “emotional” faculties or character traits. Since the Ten Sefirot permeate all aspects of Creation, this same pattern reveals itself in many places.
This week we begin a new cycle of Torah readings with Beresheet, undoubtedly the most mysterious parasha of the Torah. We read of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, and how they were forbidden from consuming the fruit of the Etz HaDa’at Tov v’Ra, “Tree of Knowledge of God and Evil”. What was this tree? What was its fruit? And why were Adam and Eve barred from eating of it?
In Western artwork, the Forbidden Fruit is usually depicted as an apple. This has no origin in Jewish thought, and instead comes from the interplay of the nearly identical Latin words mălum¸“evil” (as in the English “malevolent”), and mālum, “apple” (also the root of English “melon”). Having said that, Jewish texts do describe the Garden of Eden as having the smell of an apple orchard (see Rashi on Genesis 27:27). Maybe this is why the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was associated with an apple tree—and why the Latin words for “evil” and “apple” are so similar!
In the Talmud, the Sages give three possibilities for the identity of the Forbidden Fruit (Sanhedrin 70a, Berakhot 40a). The first is that it was grapes. Apparently, Adam and Eve became drunk from wine, and this led to their sin. The Sages here admonish Noah for having planted a vineyard after the Flood (Genesis 9:20), for he should’ve known from Adam and Eve that this was a bad idea! The second opinion is that the Tree of Knowledge was a variety of wheat. This is based on the relatedness of the words chitah (חטה), “wheat”, and chet (חטא), “sin”. The third opinion is that it was a fig tree, since we read how Adam and Eve covered themselves up with fig leaves right after consuming the fruit (Genesis 3:7). Rabbi Nehemiah holds that, in poetic fashion, just as they sinned with the fig, they were covered up with the fig.
Of course, all three of these possibilities are problematic. Neither grape nor wheat is a “tree” in the traditional sense. And it is hard to imagine that the common fig would have once been the Forbidden Fruit. Conversely, the fig is generally portrayed in very positive terms in the Tanakh (see, for example, Deuteronomy 8:7 and Micah 4:4).
The simplest explanation is that the Tree of Knowledge was a completely unique tree, unlike any other in the world. Perhaps the Sages were trying to describe some of the qualities of the Fruit, and that it had elements of wheat, grape, and fig. Wheat can be turned into flour and made into bread, whose ability to rise is seen as a metaphor for an inflated ego (hence the deeper reason of removing chametz during Pesach). Grape can be turned into wine, the most common way for people to go under the influence and be drawn to sin. Figs are often associated with sexuality in mythology. Maybe the Forbidden Fruit symbolized pride, debauchery, lust—wheat, grape, fig. Interestingly, the initials of these three species in Hebrew can spell da’at (דעת), the Tree of “Knowledge”: Another name for wheat, or grain, in the Tanakh is dagan (דגן); grapes are ‘anavim (ענבים); and fig is te’enah (תאנה).
Blessing Bread and Returning to Eden
The Midrash expands on the Talmudic passage above (Beresheet Rabbah 15:7). It gives a further reason for why the Forbidden Fruit might be wheat. On the surface, the Midrash brings an old figure of speech that a person who lacks knowledge would be described as having never eaten bread. The deeper implication of this Midrash is that, unlike everything else, bread is a quintessentially human food. Animals also eat fruits, vegetables, meat, and milk, but only humans eat bread. Processing hard wheat into edible bread requires divine knowledge. This is symbolic of the divine knowledge found within the Tree of Knowledge.
Bread represents something very powerful: man’s ability to manipulate his environment for his own benefit. Animals do not have this ability; they are victims of whatever nature throws at them. Man alone is able to change nature. This could be as simple as baking bread, or as complex as seeding the clouds to make rain and manipulate the weather. The Tree of Knowledge represents this divine ability, and maybe this is why the Torah says that once man consumes of it, they will be like gods (Genesis 3:22).
Intriguingly, the Midrash goes on to a discussion of the hamotzi blessing recited on bread. Reading between the lines, the Midrash reveals that reciting hamotzi might very well be, from a Kabbalistic perspective, fulfilling a cosmic tikkun for the sin of Eden. God cursed the land following Adam and Eve’s sin, and when we recite birkat hamazon after eating a meal, we bless the good land that God gave us. This serves to “sweeten” (or reverse, or temper) that curse of Eden.
The Etrog as Forbidden Fruit
The same Midrash above also speaks at length about the possibility that the Fruit was a grape or fig. It adds that it could have been a fruit called berat sheva or a different variety called berat ali, the identities of which are no longer clear. Some comment that these are types of figs. Interestingly, Rabbi Abba of Acco says the Fruit was an etrog, the special citron we use on the holiday of Sukkot. He proves it by pointing out how the Torah states Eve saw the Tree of Knowledge was “good for food” (Genesis 3:6), as if the tree itself, and not just its fruit, was edible. Rabbi Abba says that, apparently, no wood is edible except for that of the etrog tree, so the Tree of Knowledge must have been an etrog!
The mitzvah of taking an etrog comes from the Torah’s statement that we should take a pri etz hadar, the fruit of a “precious”, “unique”, or “enduring” tree (Leviticus 23:40). For the Sages, only the etrog fit that description. The same description works for the Tree of Knowledge—certainly a one-of-a-kind and “enduring” species. We can take another mystical plunge into the Midrash and extract that the mitzvah of acquiring an etrog and performing netilat lulav on Sukkot is a spiritual rectification, or tikkun, for the primordial sin of Eden. It has been pointed out that we shake the lulav and etrog a total of 18 times (three times in each of the six directions), with 18 being the gematria of chai (חי), “life”. When Adam and Eve consumed the Forbidden Fruit, they brought death into the world. In turn, we take the etrog and bring life into the world. Fittingly, at no point in the holiday do we actually consume the etrog!
A Tree of Unification
The Midrash cited above concludes by saying all of the opinions are inaccurate, and that the Tree of Knowledge was, of course, its very own species. God “did not, and will not, reveal to man” the identity of this tree. Others hold that it wasn’t a tree at all, and the whole narrative is an allegory. The Tree of Knowledge is symbolic for something else.
The most popular explanation is that the Tree is symbolic of sexual union. The Arizal explains that da’at means sexual intimacy, which is why the Torah describes the union of husband and wife as “knowledge” (as in Genesis 4:1, 4:17, or 4:25). He states that sexual arousal begins in the mind, as does the process of generating seed, hence the relationship to “knowledge” (see Sha’ar HaPesukim on Beresheet). Indeed, today we know from a scientific perspective that the hormones governing the reproductive system and the production of sex cells emerge from the hypothalamus and pituitary in the brain.
From this perspective, Adam and Eve’s “fruitful” encounter is a metaphor for sexual intimacy. This seems to be the plain meaning of the text, which says how Adam and Eve recognized that they were naked, and goes on to state how they produced children. In his Creation Legends of the Ancient Near East (pg. 134), S.G.F Brandon (1907-1971) suggests that this is precisely why the central “punishment” of consuming the Forbidden Fruit was bringing death into the world. Until then, Adam and Eve were alone on a finite planet. Once they learned to procreate, Earth would get more and more populated until there would be no resources left. Death is, therefore, the most natural and fitting consequence. People must die to make way for new people, or else the world would quickly be at its limits. At the same time, when God says consuming the Fruit would make man godly, it means that it would give man the divine ability to create more humans!
Why Must Evil Exist?
If we read the Torah literally, what does it mean that Fruit was of a Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? The simplest explanation is that Adam and Eve did not originally have a concept of good or bad. While Eden was entirely good, and full of every possible delight and pleasure, Adam and Eve had no way of appreciating it, for they had never known any suffering. All of us today appreciate pleasure because we have experienced pain. For Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden was just bland.
In a strange kind of way, the world needs evil to exist, at least for a temporary period of time. God wanted a world that was entirely good and pleasurable, but paradoxically, such a world first needs to go through a period of evil and pain. Only afterwards can we truly appreciate the good, and fully revel in the delights of Eden. This is why God tells us that “I form light and create darkness, make peace and create evil, I am Hashem, who makes all these things.” (Isaiah 45:7) We therefore find ourselves in this temporary phase of (unfortunately) very great aches and challenges. In the grand scheme of things, these millennia are just a blip in the cosmic passage of time. Soon enough, this difficult—though necessary—phase will be over, and we shall return to a true Garden of Eden.
At the start of this week’s parasha, Ki Tavo, the Torah reminds us that God gave us the land of Israel, “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Deut. 26:9). When the Torah says honey, it likely does not mean honey from bees, but rather “honey” from fruit trees, particularly date honey and fig honey. This is illustrated by a well-known story from the Talmud (Ketubot 111b):
Rami ben Ezekiel once paid a visit to Bnei Brak where he saw goats grazing under fig trees while honey was flowing from the figs, and milk ran from them, and these mingled with each other. “This is indeed,” he remarked, “[a land] flowing with milk and honey.”
If the Torah does not speak of bee honey, while clearly stating that bees are not kosher for consumption, why is bee honey kosher? This is especially problematic in light of the Mishnaic principle that “whatever goes forth from the unclean is unclean, and whatever goes forth from the clean is clean”.
Yet, from other places in Scripture we see that bee honey is absolutely kosher. For example, we read in Judges 14:5-9 about Samson’s famous brawl with a lion on his way to Timnah. Samson killed the lion and later, on his way back home, saw that bees had strangely built a nest inside the lion carcass, at which point Samson took some of their honey and ate it, and even brought some to his parents.
Amazingly, in 2010 archaeologists discovered the earliest known beekeeping and honey-making apparatus in the world, dating back three thousand years—in Israel! Bee honey was clearly as popular among ancient Israelites as it is among modern-day Jews. How is it kosher?
Excretions of Flying Insects
The Talmud (Bechorot 7b) comments on the above Mishnah and discusses the nature of bee honey:
“Whatever goes forth from the unclean is unclean, and whatever goes forth from the clean is clean”… an objection was raised: Why did [the Sages] say that honey from bees is permitted? Because the bees store it up in their bodies but do not drain it from their bodies… The Divine Law expressly permitted honey, for it was taught: R. Jacob says, “Yet these may you eat of all the winged swarming things…” [Leviticus 11:21] This you may eat, but you are forbidden to eat an unclean winged swarming thing. But is not an unclean winged swarming thing expressly mentioned in the Scripture [as forbidden]? Rather we must explain [thus]: An unclean flying thing that swarms you must not eat, but you may eat what an unclean flying thing casts forth from its body. And what is this? This is bees’ honey.
This passage follows a long discussion which analyzes different excretions of non-kosher animals; whether they are thick or thin, and whether they come out like they came in, or if the animal had processed the substance in its body and transformed it. The Talmud suggests that bees take up the nectar and collect it in their sacs, but do not actually digest and “excrete” it. This is true, as we know that nectar is collected into a special sac, the “honey stomach”, where it is mixed with enzymes and transformed into honey, before being regurgitated into the honeycomb. (More specifically, the bees actually regurgitate the pre-honey substance into the mouths of other bees, multiple times, before the substance is put into the comb, then exposed to air currents from the bees’ beating wings in order to evaporate out the water and produce that final, thick and sweet product.)
Nonetheless, there is no doubt that one who eats honey is not just consuming flower nectar, but also ingesting compounds from the bee itself. The Talmud knows this, which is probably why it goes on to prove that honey is still kosher by creatively interpreting the Torah’s verses. It concludes that while flying insects themselves are not kosher to eat (except several species of locust, as explicitly stated in the Torah), the excretions of such flying insects are kosher. Interestingly, this relates to another special flying insect, whose excretions have been identified with none other than manna!
Manna from Heaven or Manna from Lice?
The Sinai Peninsula is home to a species of lice called Trabutina mannipara. This lice infests the Tamarisk trees that grow in the Sinai, sucking the tree’s sap, and in turn, excreting a white, honey-like substance. This edible substance is very sweet, and also very light and flakey, which means that it doesn’t last long before the sun dries it all up. Sounds familiar?
The Torah tells us that the Israelites consumed sweet, white manna in the wilderness, which was like frost and had to be harvested in the morning just as the dew ascended (Exodus 16:14, Numbers 11:7-8). Not surprisingly, the Trabutina mannipara lice has been nicknamed the “manna mealybug”, and its excretions are called mann by the Sinai Bedouins who still harvest and eat it.
Based on the Talmudic principle of the excretions of flying insects being permissible for consumption, the lice manna, like bee honey, is kosher. In fact, the Talmud (Berakhot 57b) overtly connects the two substances, stating that “honey is one-sixtieth of manna”.
Of course, the Torah states that manna was miraculously sent from Heaven, and the Talmud (Chagigah 12b) notes precisely where in the Heavens it was “ground up”. Besides, only about 500 pounds of “Sinai manna” is produced annually by the lice—not nearly enough to feed an entire nation of people subsisting off of manna almost exclusively.
Still, the existence of Sinai manna is no coincidence. A well-known Jewish dictum is that all things in the material world are only a reflection of spiritual entities above. Perhaps the lice manna is that physical counterpart of the Israelites’ Heavenly manna.
Honey, too, must have a spiritual counterpart. Rabbi Avraham Schorr points out that the gematria of dvash (דבש), “honey”, is 306, equal to the difference between guf (גוף), “body”, and neshamah (נשמה), “soul”. Honey is symbolic of that spiritual substance that “glues” the soul to the body. In just two weeks’ time, we will be dipping various foods in honey during the Rosh Hashanah meal, in part symbolizing our hope to be inscribed in the Book of Life, thus keeping the soul glued to its body for one more sweet new year.