Parshas Bereishis 5781
I’ve always been amused by the arbitrary sprinkling of clothing in the cartoon animal kingdom. Mickey Mouse wears shorts and a top, while Bugs Bunny goes au natural. In such a world, degree of nakedness amongst these various creations could actually be ranked. In the real world, where every animal bears it all, no such comparison could possibly exist. And yet in Parshas Bereishis, the nakedness of one animal stands out above the rest:
וְהַנָּחָשׁ הָיָה עָרוּם מִכֹּל חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה ה׳ אֱלֹקים
בראשית ג:א
And the snake was more naked than any beast of the field that Hashem, G-d, had created.
Bereishis 3:1
To be sure, the term ערום in the pasuk above is generally translated as “clever” or “cunning” in order to make more sense in context. Hence, the snake is described as being more shrewd than the other animals. And yet the plain meaning of ערום as “naked” cannot be ignored. The selection of this word to describe the Snake can be no mere coincidence.
What, then, do we make of this description?
If you’ve taken seriously the season of the Yamim Noraim, you’ve likely thought a lot about sin and what drives it. How do we ultimately succumb to the sorts of errors we know to be wrong and contrary to our purported value system? Typically, I think, we flex our great muscles of rationalization and explain away the act as not truly being sinful. “This is a different circumstance,” or, “He really had it coming to him,” or, “That’s only a mitzvah for tzaddikim.” The behavior is reframed so that our definition of sinful behavior no longer matches, and we gain license to do as we please.
The Snake, however, puts forth a different approach, in a continuation of the very same pasuk quoted above:
וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל־הָאִשָּׁה אַף כִּי־אָמַר אֱלֹקים לֹא תֹאכְלוּ מִכֹּל עֵץ הַגָּן
בראשית ג:א
And [the Snake] said to the woman, “Even if G-d said, ‘Do not eat from every tree of the Garden.’”
Bereishis 3:1
The statement is an awkward one, like something of an unfinished statement. It would seem that the end of the Snake’s quote would be best capped with an ellipsis. Taken literally, the Snake appears to be arguing that G-d’s commands are irrelevant. Even if He indeed prohibited eating from the trees..do it anyway! Why subject yourself to the misery of obedience?
It is with this bug planted in Chava’s ear that the Torah describes her subsequent infatuation with the Tree of Knowledge, whose fruit G-d had commanded to not eat:
וַתֵּרֶא הָאִשָּׁה כִּי טוֹב הָעֵץ לְמַאֲכָל וְכִי תַאֲוָה־הוּא לָעֵינַיִם וְנֶחְמָד הָעֵץ לְהַשְׂכִּיל וַתִּקַּח מִפִּרְיוֹ וַתֹּאכַל וַתִּתֵּן גַּם־לְאִישָׁהּ עִמָּהּ וַיֹּאכַל׃
בראשית ג:ו
And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat and that it was desirable to her eyes and pleasing as a means of wisdom. She took from its fruit and ate and she also gave to her husband along with her and he ate.
Bereishis 3:6
If we connect these dots, the following scenario emerges: The Snake encourages Chava to be less concerned with G-d’s edicts and more concerned with the demands of her own heart. Setting her sights upon the tree, she feels an inner stirring, is taken with the tree and its fruit, and eats.
This is not a story of a sin that has been mentally bent into a shape that now resembles something less heinous; it is the story of lending greater importance to personal desires than to G-d’s commands. The former is a sin in disguise, dressed up to appear innocuous. The latter is a sin unveiled and without pretense; it is a naked sin.
I’d suggest that this is precisely why the Snake is described as being ערום. Clever, yes, but more importantly, he is naked. The Snake is representative of a particular path towards sin, one that doesn’t bother entering into an inner conflict between my wants and G-d’s, between responding to my own impulses and fulfilling G-d’s wishes.
Attitudes and sensibilities shift over time and every generation must be attuned to its unique challenges. In our world, it seems, the seduction of the Snake has reared its head more prominently than in generations past. Sensitivity to the needs of the individual—to be sure, a fine pursuit in of itself—has become a near obsession, to the point that objective standards of morality and decency are not as obvious as they once were.
What is the result of living in such a world? The danger of equating personal interests and moral norms. In our zeal to validate the individual, we have made it more difficult to turn a deaf ear to the Snake’s advances. By telling Chava that her every impulse is justified, we’ve failed to remind her that forbidden fruit is truly forbidden.
How do we defend against the Snake? Is it to insist on a one-size-fits-all approach to serving Hashem so that no room is left to confuse subjective ambition with objective good? No, this has never been the approach. The system of Torah is broad enough to allow for multiple parallel wavelengths that all achieve genuine Divine service.
But at the very least, we need to aware. Aware of the slippery slope that our generation is perched upon as we coddle the individual and justify every personal ambition. Some of those ambitions may well be beyond the pale of what Hashem considers proper, and that is a reality we need to embrace with clarity and courage. That my eyes, heart, and mind tell me I should eat is simply of no consequence if G-d has told me otherwise.