The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/jaihare/thehebrewcafe.com/forum/inc/languages/english/replyban.lang.php:1) - Line: 1939 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.3.26 (Linux)
File Line Function
[PHP]   errorHandler->error
/inc/functions.php 1939 header
/inc/functions.php 2009 my_setcookie
/inc/functions_indicators.php 41 my_set_array_cookie
/showthread.php 665 mark_thread_read




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Adam & Eve: The Whole Story Doesn't Make Sense - until now
#11
(10-03-2020, 11:12 PM)Yehudani wrote: While he has some beautiful teachings, there are many teachings by Manis that don't sit well with me, this being one that sticks out.

He has also been placed on a blacklist for "erev rav" by some orthodox rabbis that don't consider him to be a kosher source of information, I don't want to rosh lashon hará but I will say that I personally don't feel comfortable with several of the things he teaches.

As another non-kosher source of information, that seems like leshon hara to me. Instead of invalidating him as a source (poisoning the well), why not oppose what he said in this specific video?
Reply
#12
I'm not commenting either way on who he is, just thought his own "midrashic" story was interesting.
Reply
#13
(10-06-2020, 09:19 AM)Yehudani wrote:
(05-06-2020, 02:35 AM)searchinmyroots wrote: Putting the midrash aside, the questions he asks seem pretty legit.

What did death mean to Adam?

G-d didn't say "if" you eat from it, He said "the day you eat from it".

Adam didn't have a yetzer hara yet.

G-d didn't say they would suffer, He said they would die. Why no warning, that wasn't part of the deal!

Did Adam and Eve know what life was like outside the garden?

Why would Adam name his wife Chava (life) if she helped bring death to the world?
I get the feeling, bearing in mind that Torah gives overviews and not detailed analysis of everything that Adam understood the consequences, that "you will die" didn't mean you'll go down and bite the dust as soon as you ear the fruit, more, you'll start to decay, you'll no longer be eternal and privy to being what you are. 
In fact, they did die in the sense that they were no longer what they were, and became what we are. 
They became something  that would die, would feel pain, etc. 

What is also forgotten is that when they were cornered, they all blameshifted, and Adam even blamed HaShem (the woman YOU gave me) so the punishments were handed out based on blame shifting and ingratitude, where they could have fallen to the floor in tears and begged for forgiveness. 

There is so much more to the story than a basic reading gives, there is a lot of subtlty, but as it's all given in a very short and fast moving narrative, we have to extract and analyse the details ourselves.

Yes, very good points.

Judaism seems to focus on the blame shifting while Christianity focuses more on their interpretation of "original sin".
Reply
#14
(10-06-2020, 07:26 PM)Yehudani wrote:
(10-06-2020, 12:38 PM)searchinmyroots wrote:
(10-06-2020, 09:19 AM)Yehudani wrote:
(05-06-2020, 02:35 AM)searchinmyroots wrote: Putting the midrash aside, the questions he asks seem pretty legit.

What did death mean to Adam?

G-d didn't say "if" you eat from it, He said "the day you eat from it".

Adam didn't have a yetzer hara yet.

G-d didn't say they would suffer, He said they would die. Why no warning, that wasn't part of the deal!

Did Adam and Eve know what life was like outside the garden?

Why would Adam name his wife Chava (life) if she helped bring death to the world?
I get the feeling, bearing in mind that Torah gives overviews and not detailed analysis of everything that Adam understood the consequences, that "you will die" didn't mean you'll go down and bite the dust as soon as you ear the fruit, more, you'll start to decay, you'll no longer be eternal and privy to being what you are. 
In fact, they did die in the sense that they were no longer what they were, and became what we are. 
They became something  that would die, would feel pain, etc. 

What is also forgotten is that when they were cornered, they all blameshifted, and Adam even blamed HaShem (the woman YOU gave me) so the punishments were handed out based on blame shifting and ingratitude, where they could have fallen to the floor in tears and begged for forgiveness. 

There is so much more to the story than a basic reading gives, there is a lot of subtlty, but as it's all given in a very short and fast moving narrative, we have to extract and analyse the details ourselves.

Yes, very good points.

Judaism seems to focus on the blame shifting while Christianity focuses more on their interpretation of "original sin".
Another interesting point to raise there, that is completely missed in Christianity, is that, if we count the serpent as a "person" for the sake of keeping language consistent, Adam was the third person to sin.

But the sin is usually referred to as the eating of the fruit. So in that case, it would be Adam who was the first.

If you think the sin was the "blame game", then yes, he was the third to do so.
Reply
#15
A favorite interpretation of mine was given by Rabbi Samuael Raphael Hirsch when the snake challenges Eve, paraphrased by Rabbi Fohrman from his book The Beast that Crouches at the Door.  


Genesis 3:1 - "Even if G-d said do not eat from any of the trees in the garden...[So what]? "Didn't he also create your desires and instincts? Why not listen to those; aren't they the authentic voice of G-d as well?"

The lesson being is a snake does what comes natural and listens to their instincts as do other animals, which is the way G-d created them while the human is to hear a different voice, that of the word of G-d.
Reply
#16
One of my favorite books Dana!

Did you know Rabbi Fohrman just released a new one?

I'll be getting my copy soon!

https://korenpub.com/products/genesis-a-...-companion
Reply
#17
(10-09-2020, 01:04 AM)searchinmyroots wrote: One of my favorite books Dana!

Did you know Rabbi Fohrman just released a new one?

I'll be getting my copy soon!

https://korenpub.com/products/genesis-a-...-companion

I did not know that!   Thanks for letting me know Searchin.    I'll order the book too.  I love him and the amazing work he does.  He keeps me motivated with the Hebrew language.
Reply
#18
(10-09-2020, 09:46 AM)Yehudani wrote:
(10-09-2020, 12:23 AM)Dana wrote: A favorite interpretation of mine was given by Rabbi Samuael Raphael Hirsch when the snake challenges Eve, paraphrased by Rabbi Fohrman from his book The Beast that Crouches at the Door.  


Genesis 3:1 - "Even if G-d said do not eat from any of the trees in the garden...[So what]? "Didn't he also create your desires and instincts? Why not listen to those; aren't they the authentic voice of G-d as well?"

The lesson being is a snake does what comes natural and listens to their instincts as do other animals, which is the way G-d created them while the human is to hear a different voice, that of the word of G-d.

Very nice - pre- "eyes opening" they still had a yetzer hara? My understanding was that the serpent (samach mem?) represented the yetzer hara as an external being that was trying to creep in, and after that, the yetzer hara animal instinct / selfish desire was then inside us and no longer needed to possess a snake? Although those that believe in a literal devil / samach mem (?) do seem to believe that he is physical and serpentine too, but I really don't know much about Kabbalah to really comment... 

That said, if there wasn't even a shadow of yetzer hara in Eve, would she have coveted being like G-d? This interpretation invites some new questions.

Same here, in that I've never studied Kabbalah.  Rabbi Fohrman does quote and study from the Midrash as well as Rashi, Maimonides and others.

I don't really get from reading Rabbi Fohrman's book the yetzer hara as being an external force. Yetzer is a form of yotzer which means to create. Yetzer Hara literally means, the drive to create, [in] evil [form].  What I gather is the sum total of our passions, drives and instincts.

To quote, "Yetzer Hara is creativity gone awry."

There is so much more to this he has written about.  His writing style does read like a mystery, a story line with some great analogies.
Reply
#19
Shalom All, something to consider.  Both the man and the woman were NAKED before they disobeyed.  Nakedness is the opposite of being clothed, and G-d does desire that we be clothed in righteousness (Psa 132:9 & Isa 61:10), and Adam and Eve were not clothed, yet they felt no shame.  Why were they not ashamed?  Would it be because they had NOT yet disobeyed a command?  Their eyes were not yet opened to their "Yetzer Hara," and all it took was for them to eat (breaking the command), and they then REALIZED they were naked, and did what is a normal reaction, they tried to cover their nakedness.

I'm not any expert in Hebrew, but a professor of Hebrew @ Washington University has taught that the Hebrew word to describe the serpent is the same word used to describe the man and the woman (naked).  The only difference is being singular versus plural (as I can remember), yet it does state that the serpent was the MOST naked.

Putting all of this together, does it not become apparent that G-d did PLAN for the man and woman to experience "Yetzer Hara" by creating them with flesh that was naked.  And is it not the PLAN of G-d to teach us about having the knowledge of good and evil so that we can LEARN how to be CLOTHED in righteousness?  Who really wants to remain as a naked sinner following after "Yetzer Hara" for an eternity?  So it looks like G-d needed to create mankind to be against Him (naked and sinful), before He could teach us of His righteous ways, and then be CLOTHED, and not naked.

Just something to think about.  Blessing in the Name, ImAHebrew.
Reply
#20
I definitely like this midrashic interpretation, ImAHebrew. I'm also certainly no expert, but years ago I did study Hebrew for a few years and thus I'm always looking for occasions to look at it again to maintain or regain something of what I learned and hopefully learn a little more. 

In Genesis 2,25, the narrator says that the human and his wife were עֲרוּמִּ֔ים (ꜥᵃrûmmim), which is usually translated here as 'naked', but that translation might be suspect. It is the plural of what the serpent is described as in 3,1, the very next verse: עָר֔וּם (ꜥārûm, clever, crafty, cunning, prudent)). Later on, when the human and his wife realize they are naked, a slightly different word is used in 3,7, which definitely means naked: עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם (ꜥērummim, naked plural. Subsequently in 3,10.11 this same word is used in the singular when the human and God also both say that he was עֵירֹ֥ם (ꜥêrōm, naked singular).

The Hebrew words in 2,25 & 3,1 certainly look similar to the words used in 3,7.10.11, but I don't think they are really the same word. However the author does seem to be using a word play between the similarity of the slightly different words for 'crafty' and 'naked'. Perhaps a copyist changed the word in 2,25 while already thinking of the word in 3,1. Another copyist in the Dead Sea Scrolls may have made the opposite mistake in writing [ער[ום (ꜥārûm) in 3,11 (1Q1 f2:1).

Perhaps Jason will come along to teach us more!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)