A Thought on the Parasha
Feel free to download and print
the Parashat
Bereishit sheet and share it with your friends and family.
When the world was freshly
minted and created, we heard the refrain with each act of creation, "And
God saw that it was good," and that the world as a whole was
"exceedingly good." Then, humans came and made a mess of everything,
and a different refrain is heard: And God saw "massive was the evil
of man on the earth, and all the thoughts of his heart were only evil
the entire day" (Bereishit 6:5). How did we get to this stage? How did man
bring evil - in his heart and in his actions - to the earth that God had made.
Undoubtedly, this is the result of eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and
Evil. Man now knows evil, and as a result, evil has entered into the
world. So God starts again. God wipes out the entire world and preserves
only Noach, hoping that this time humans will choose the good. All of
this, because of the tree.
What was the knowledge
that the tree imparted and how did it introduce evil into the world? There are
those that say that the eating from the tree gave humans free choice, gave them
the ability to choose between good and evil. But if this is the case, if
they did not have this ability prior, how could they have chosen to eat from
the tree, and how could they have been held accountable? A more satisfying
explanation is the one offered by Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch and, more
recently, the philosopher Michael Wyschograd. Rav Hirsch explains that the tree
did not give them the ability to choose, it gave them the ability to know,
that is, to judge. Until they ate from the tree, they only knew of God's
definition of right and wrong. They could violate God's commandment, but with
the clear knowledge that they were doing something wrong.
We, of course, make
choices all the time that we know are wrong: Cheating on our diet, speaking lashon
hara, and the like. These bad choices come from weakness of will, what
Greek philosophy terms akrasia. This
is the source of much wrongdoing. But it is not the only source. For when
humans ate from the tree, they began, for themselves, to determine what is good
and what is bad. They gained not moral choice, but moral judgment, an
ethical sensibility. Now, not only could they choose to disobey, but they might
also decide that what God has determined to be bad is, in their eyes,
good. They could do wrong, thinking that it was good.
The Biblical verses bear
out this interpretation. We are told, not only by the snake, but by God as
well, that the tree will make the humans "like God." What is it that
we know about God so far in the narrative? We know that God creates. We also
know that God assesses and makes judgments. "And God saw that it was
good." And what do we hear as soon as the woman chooses to eat from
the tree, "And the woman saw that it was good..." (Bereishit 3:6). The
tree has made them like God. Man and woman will from this day forward see, for
themselves, whether something is good or evil. They will make their own
moral decisions.
And what is wrong with
that? According to Hirsch, what is wrong is that the moral decisions of
humans will, oftentimes, be incorrect. We are not omniscient. We have our
own drives, lusts, and self-interest. What about the tree did the woman see
that was good? She saw "that it was good for eating, and that it
was pleasant to the eyes, and desirous for gaining wisdom."
It is good from a self-interested perspective, from a perspective of satisfying
desires, but not from a moral perspective. For Hirsch, the problem is that
we might decide that something is good, when it is, in fact, bad.
Wyschograd goes one step
further. He states that even were we to judge correctly, there is a sin in
making the judgment ourselves, in being independent moral agents. If we are to
be in a truly faithful relationship with God, then only God should define what
is good and what is bad. To judge other than God, even if we choose in the end
to obey, is to have left the Garden of Eden, to have left a perfect
relationship with God.
Read this way, the
narrative of the first two parshiyot of the Torah is one of a fallen
humankind. How much better would it have been had we never eaten from the tree,
had we not known of good and evil, had we never become independent moral
agents. But... really? Is this how we think of our own humanness? Don't we
feel that in not having the ability to make moral judgments we are giving up a
very central part of what it means to be human, of the value of being
human?
Rather than seeing the
eating from the tree as a "fall," Nechama Leibowitz offers a
different explanation of this newfound state. Isn't it odd, she asks, that God
has placed such an irresistible temptation in front of Adam and
Eve? Imagine a parent saying to a child: "I am leaving some delicious
candies right here in the center of the table - you can't miss them - they are
really delicious, and they will make you feel like an adult - but don't eat
them. I'm only going to be gone 5 minutes. Bye." Is there really any
question what the child will do?
The sin of the first man
and woman was inevitable. It was a necessary act of becoming independent, of
growing up. Adam and Eve had been living like children - everything was
provided, all decisions and rules were made for them, all they had to do was
obey the rules. But this is not the life of an adult. And to become independent,
to leave the home, inevitably some rebellion, rejection, statement of
separateness will have to take place. The sin was an act of individuation, it
was what allowed Adam and Eve to become adults, but it forced them to leave
home, where everything was perfect and taken care of for them. Now they
would have to go it on their own.
And when our children
leave home, we want them to think for themselves. We want them to make their
own judgments, their own decisions. Just one thing. We want those decisions to be
the same ones we would have made. This will be the challenge for humans from
here on in. As independent moral agents, we can make judgments, decisions, that
are not as God would have us choose. But the other side of the coin is that as
independent moral agents, we bring something important into our relationship
with God. We bring our own thoughts, ideas, and judgments. Many of them may be
bad and misguided, but some will be good, worthwhile suggestions and
contributions.
The first generations
after the sin tell the story of how easy it is for this independence to lead us
astray. Left totally to our own devices, we will make one wrong decision after
another, we will turn "good" into "bad." We continue to see,
to judge, but to see wrongly, and to act wrongly. "The sons of elohim saw
the daughters of men that they were beautiful; and they took as wives all those
whom they chose" (Bereishit 6:2). We have what to contribute, but for this
relationship to succeed, we will need more guidance. And thus, when God starts
the world all over again, God formalizes our relationship and God gives us
the needed guidance. God makes a covenant, a brit, and God
gives commandments. With these clear directives, with a relationship built on brit
and mitzvot, it is hoped that humans, if they act like responsible
adults, will be able to take a world that is good, and to build it.
This is the complicated
and complex reality in which we live as humans in a relationship with God. Even
with a covenant, even with commandments, we can continue to see, to judge and
to choose wrongly: "And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of
his father, and told his two brothers outside" (Bereishit 9:22). Of
course, because we can now think and make decisions for ourselves, it is also
possible that we can introduce something new, something that God has not
commanded, but that is nevertheless good: "And Noah built an altar to the
Lord ... And the Lord smelled the pleasing odor..." (Bereishit
8:20-21).
Consider the greatest
religious leader, Moshe. In the last verse of the Torah that we read just last
week we are told that no prophet has ever arisen in Israel like Moshe,
"for all that mighty hand, and in all the great and awesome deeds
which Moses performed in the sight of all Israel" (Devarim 34:12). This
verse extols Moshe as the faithful conduit of God's mighty hand and awesome
deeds, as the perfect vessel for God's mission. Rashi, however, turns this
verse on its head: "In the sight of all Israel - that his heart carried
him to break the tablets... and God approved of this decision, as it says,
"which you have broken," i.e., strength to you for having broken
them!" The last image of Moshe that Rashi leaves us with is that of a
leader who used his own judgment to act radically and decisively, not in
violation of God's command, but certainly without God's explicit command. Here
was a different type of seeing, a good type of seeing: "And Moshe saw the
calf and the dancing... and he cast from his hands the tablets"
(Shemot 32:19). And it was this act that was exactly what was needed at
this moment. "Strength to you for having broken them."
We are adults. We can
judge and choose, and we must face the responsibility of doing so wisely, with
a commitment to God's covenant and God's mitzvot. And because we are
adults, because we are able to think for ourselves, because we are able to
innovate and contribute in the moral and religious realm as well, we have the
ability not only to preserve the good of the world, but to increase the good
within it.
Shabbat Shalom!
Comments
Post a Comment