Free Choice, Evil Inclination, and the Satan
There is no free choice, if one cannot exercise his free will. Each man lives by his free will. Had Adam and Chavah not been endowed with free choice, they never could have defied the Creator’s will not to eat from the Tree of Good and Evil. He therefore had to resort to a plan to make them desire to eat from it to test their faith. He achieved this by using the personification of evil inclination without interfering with their basic freedom of choice. Everything is foreseen except for freedom of choice, for freedom of choice is granted in order to hold men accountable for what they do.
Adam and Chavah had the opportunity to be effected by their choice and free will, which would have made them liable to reward or punishment, as it is written, “I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Therefore, you shall choose life, so that you live, both you and your seed”.
“There is no free will, if the world is purely physical”. (Jewish saying)
Man is a free creature possessing freedom of choice. For this reason, the Creator left free choice in man’s hands whether to serve or rebel against Him, to do good or to do evil; all is entirely in the power of man’s free will. Free choice is therefore granted to all to be responsible for their deeds without being forced, unlike the angels and animals who do not have free choice and are created to act under supernal compulsion from heaven.
Good and evil are laid out for everyone to see
“What is forbidden, one must not; what is permitted, one need not”. Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi
There had been no death in the Garden of Eden. Yet, death came in paradise, through the serpent and the first humans. The Creator planted two trees in the garden He created: The Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. As Isaac Newton stated it, as the Tree of Life is mystical so is the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, for they are relatives by way of opposition being the tree of life and the tree of death respectively. The tree of knowledge became the tree of death, for in the day that they ate from it they became mortal.
The Scripture says that they were not ashamed of their nakedness until they ate from that tree of knowledge of good and evil, and understanding of who they were entered their minds. And from them all mankind came to be and inherited the same knowledge and understanding. But what if Adam and Chavah had not eaten the fruit from that tree; what would have been the world today? Would the Creator have given them the knowledge of what was in the tree? Tanach accepts the theoretical possibility of this but takes no position on it to the best of our knowledge, and therefore we will leave it unexplained.
The whole subject in in Genesis 3 is extremely confusing, when we look only at what the translations have been suggesting. But to make better sense of this whole episode of the beginning of the world, we need to resort to the Hebrew text of the narrative, which we will do in due course below, where we would like to posit another way to look at it. The matter will become clear once we understand why the serpent approached the woman with the words: “Is it true that Elohim has said, ‘Do not eat of every tree of the garden’?” Another difficulty in this narrative is that the Torah refers to this agent as “serpent”, i.e., a snake. What was the serpent that seems to be playing a secondary role in the story? It all began with these words of the serpent, to which we now turn.
The talking serpent
In what fashion the serpent talked with Chavah?
Let us understand the following difficulties in this story. If a serpent is unable to speak, as any other dumb creatures are, how do we know that the serpent in Genesis was such crafty, more cunning than all the living creatures of the field? Considering the unique standing of the whole episode in the Scripture, it follows that the serpent was indeed able to speak. But it is only with difficulty that we can obtain such a meaning from words such as, “And the serpent said, etc.”
Some commentators say that the woman spoke with a literal snake interpreting the above phrase, as meaning, that the serpent spoke with the woman, but also interpreting literally its ability to crawl on the ground and eat dust. Hence, the conclusion is made that the serpent in the opening of the world must have been a real snake. But we may wonder, which species of snakes eats dust, for we do not know such? And it is in order to ask an obvious question: In what fashion the serpent talked with Chavah? And why would the Creator punish a dumb animal He created? The reason why we find this important to emphasize will be made clear further on.
Others say that the serpent was in fact Satan, the fallen angel, who took the form of a serpent. But how is the incorporeal Satan to crawl upon his belly and eat the dust, and more interestingly, to have his head crushed? Is that even possible? However, those who interpret the account of the serpent literally take issue with the latter and claim that the serpent actually spoke and walked in an upright position. The argument: Because the One who gave intelligence to man must have also given it to the serpent, as it is written, “the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field”.
But some argue that an angel spoke through the mouth of the dumb serpent. But if we are to assume, as in the view of some Sages, that the conversations reported in the Torah between the serpent and Chavah, here in Genesis, and likewise in Numbers between the ass and Bila’am, were conducted by angels on their (dumb animals’) behalf, why were the serpent and donkey punished and cursed? If an angel was sent to subject the woman to a test of her obedience, how was the serpent to blame for it? Besides, it would have been so much more appropriate for the angel to test Adam himself, seeing it was he who had been commanded not to eat from the tree of knowledge. If the serpent therefore was used only as a mouthpiece, then the dumb animal did not sin. The question is: Why the dumb animal was punished, if the Almighty Himself had assigned an angel to speak these words through it?
The matter would not cease to trouble us until we are compelled to interpret all the events of Genesis figuratively. This is similar to interpreting the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil not as a literal tree, as if a fruit tree can cause such havoc in human history, but rather as a symbol for a source of knowledge or some other concept. If so, that explains why the Creator prohibited man from having access to the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Primarily, we are not to regard the tree as poisonous or having some fatal properties resided in the fruit. Even in the case of the Tree of Life, the power is not to be sought in the physical tree, because no earthly fruit or tree possesses the power to give immortality to humans. Hence, we may deduce that the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil are used as metaphors for knowledge of life and knowledge of good and evil. Second, we should note that it was the Creator who made these trees and planted them in the garden: the Tree of Life in the midst of it and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in an unspecified location, perhaps next to it. Third, we should also note that there were no physical restrictions of access to the trees, except for the command not to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Also, it as a noteworthy fact that no command was issued with such a prohibition concerning the tree of life.
So, is the serpent in Genesis 3 a real snake, or other creature is meant in the story?
It is a common practice to name a new phenomenon according to other well-known phenomenon. The Torah, using a metaphor, calls the phenomenon נָחָשׁ nachash, in our verse. In the Hebraic mindset, thoughts, actions, and character are more important than the outward appearance. For instance, in the Gentile mind, the serpent in Genesis 3 is a snake. But in the Hebraic mind, nachash is also something that moves and behaves in a serpentine manner, i.e., like a snake, and bites like a snake. The reason why a serpent has been chosen for such a metaphor is that it is a creature which makes itself invisible and dangerous. Nachash is described as a creature with craftiness natural for the serpents (see also Mat 10:16). Its craftiness was manifested in the simple fact that the nachash turned to the weaker of the two humans, the woman, saying: “Has Elohim indeed said, …?” This must have led the narrator of the creation story to use it as a metaphor for a deceiver. The serpent spoke to the woman with wisdom and slyness.
First, we must understand why the Torah told us that nachash, the serpent, was so sly in its craftiness. Nachash was smart and intelligent and able to reason, when it said, “Is it true that Elohim has said, ‘Do not eat of every tree of the garden’?” The Torah does give the impression that nachash was able to speak like humans do. It urged the woman until she touched the fruit as if saying, “Just as there is no death in touching it, so there is no death in eating it. For if you eat from it, you will become wise and you will become like the angels, to distinguish between good and evil”. Nachash also walked upright on account of the command to crawl on its belly. Now, let us summarize: Nachash talks like a human, walks like a human, reasons like a human, and knows food like a human does. What is nachash? Is it a literal snake which tempted man, or Torah meant something else? In our opinion, it is possible that the explanation of the verses is that other creature was assigned to the task to test Chavah’s faith.
Note: The Hebrew phrase, “The nachash deceived me”, is pronounced phonetically like this: הִשִּׁיאַנִי hishiani הַנָּחָשׁ hanachash. The noun nachash comes from the identical primitive root which means to hiss. Hence, the Hebrew word נָחָשׁ nachash, came to be associated with snakes, serpents, from the fricative sound they make: the hiss. As a verb, נָשָׁא nashah, means to lead astray, to delude, or morally to seduce, beguile, deceive. With this meaning, nachash means “to whisper a magic spell” or “to prognosticate”, “to divine, enchanter, as it is used in Gen 44:15, Lev 19:26, Num 24:1, Deu 18:10. Hence, nachash is more of a person rather than of an unintelligent creature, i.e., a snake. We now return to the text.
So, what is nachash? This can be best illustrated by the example of a king who tells his subject not to eat until he eats with him when told. Then the king tells his minister to go and entice the commoner to eat. Who is this “minister” in our case? Until that moment in Genesis 3, the only intelligent beings that were created were two humans and the heavenly host of angels (Hebrew, מַּלְאָכִים mal’achim, literally messengers). In our view, the Torah tries to tell us something beyond what is immediately obvious. For we know that only humans are intelligent and capable of speaking and reasoning, and a snake could not speak being unintelligent. We therefore must conclude that in reality a messenger, an angel, must have been sent to speak to the woman.
Evil inclination and the satan
Nachash itself is a way of describing evil inclination on account of its very meaning: to lead astray, to delude, or morally to seduce, beguile, and deceive. The reason why a serpent was chosen to personify evil inclination is that just as a snake which makes itself invisible, blending in with its environment, and hurts when at least expected, so does the evil inclination was created to ambush where and when one does not expect it in order to test us, to lead us into trials. And this is a job for a prosecutor. The reason therefore that the Almighty created such an angel, who was to act as a cunning creature, was to introduce in this world the freedom of choice which will present to mankind two opposite alternatives: to do good or to do evil and with all forms of temptation in-between. This negative job for the fulfilment of this task was assigned to an angel from the highest rank who would act as a prosecutor in the heavenly court of law (Refer to the Book of Job to see how the Eternal used hasatan to test Job’s faith in Him). Hasatan, is therefore not a rebellious angel who is at war with the Creator, for that is impossible, but an accuser, assigned to this job.
Bava Batra 16a:8 states that hasatan, the evil inclination, and the angel of death are one, that is, they are three aspects of the same essence. Hasatan is the one who is tasked with the job to try man and then accuses him before the heavenly court, if they fail, as it is written: “So the Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord, and smote Job with vile sores” (Job 2:7). He is also the personification of evil inclination, as it is written there: “The impulse of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continuously” (Genesis 6:5).
The Torah (Num 21:6) called the serpent שָׂרָף, saraph, a name also applicable to the angel of death in Isa 6:6. The Hebrew, שָׂטָן satan, is derived from the root שָׂטָה satah, meaning to “turn away” (Pro 4:15), which implies the notion of turning and moving away from the right direction; thus the assignment of hasatan (this Hebrew word always appears as hasatan, the satan, and never denotes a personal name of an angel) is to turn man away from the way of truth, and leads him astray in the way of error. This is hasatan’s role: to test people and then to accuse them of the wrongdoing they have done. In other words, the satan is the one whom the Supreme Judge uses to test the people. Thus, in Judaism hasatan is seen as the evil inclination (Hebrew, yetser hara), the negative force through which the Most High gives the ability to do good or do evil, as it is said, “I have set before you today life and good, and death and evil” (Deu 30:15). This subject of free will requires a lengthy exposition, but it is all explained in our commentary in various places.
Nakedness and craftiness
The chapter of creation closes with a description of Adam and Chavah being naked arumim (plural), and in the very next verse, the same word arum (singular) appears to describe the serpent’s craftiness. Compare the two verses:
And they were both naked, [עֲרוּמִּים arumim], the man and his wife, but they were not ashamed. (Gen 2:25)
And the nachash was more cunning [עָרוּם arum] than all the beasts of the field. (Gen 3:1)
The translation of these two verses does poor justice to the Hebrew text, as it is seen in the juxtaposition: the same Hebrew word has been translated in two different ways. What is the connection between “naked” and “crafty” in Hebrew? The idea of a connection between crafty and naked comes from the common origin of these Hebrew words. The word עָרוּם arum, crafty, cunning, prudent, is a passive participle of the verb עָרַם aram, a primitive root which means to be or make bare but used only in the derived sense through the idea of smoothness, hence “naked”. Another Hebrew word that comes from aram is עֵירֹם eirom, which means nudity, naked[ness]. Hence, in Hebrew “craftiness”, arum, and “nakedness” and “nudity”, eirom, are very closely related terms.
Now, when it was said that the serpent was cunning, what is the connection of this matter of nakedness? What does this juxtaposition teach us but that the nachash saw them naked engaging in a love-game alluded to in the use of the terms “the man and his wife” as opposed to “the man and the woman”. According to the oral tradition (Genesis Rabbah 18:6), the rabbis have learned that this verse is saying that nachash desired Adam’s wife, because she was very beautiful. Rashi explains that the snake was jealous of them, for it saw them copulating together and desired her. But this is not sufficient, for it would have been proper for Scripture to say that explicitly. Besides this would change the whole narrative. This makes us wonder! Every creature was created after its own species to desire its species only, and the serpent was not lacking its female. And if it was on account of their having intercourse before the eyes of all, the serpent also did not know shame. And where does the verse allude to sexual intercourse? In our opinion, there is no need for this. Some Sages went as far as to say that nachash engaged in an actual coitus with the woman. But we take an issue with this, for the want of trustworthy accounts in the Torah. Perhaps, the last thing we would expect the Torah to say would be that Kayin and Hevel were half-humans. We leave this question open on which side the facts lie, for these views are less in harmony with the context. It is therefore not binding for us and cannot be offered as proof.
Man gained self-consciousness but lost eternity
If readers do not know how to be careful with these ideas but take them beyond their proper concepts, they will inevitably become confused and misled. The Almighty does not send a messenger, an angel, to induce Adam and Chavah to sin, much less he himself to sin. Neither does an angel rebel against Him, nor does he undertake his own initiatives. The angel therefore would not have seduced the woman on his own accord. If angels were to rebel, the Almighty might not be omnipotent. This cannot be! Angels are created beings; they do not rebel against their Creator, as a pot does not rebel against the potter. The Eternal created His messengers to serve Him and do His will only; angels do not have their own agendas, as it is written in Job 1:12: “Only upon himself (Job) do not put forth your hand”. We can refute any notion of angels possessing free agency apart from the Almighty by quoting many verses. But we will not prolong our argument, instead we will merely point to the articles in the series, Oneness of the Creator | Time of Reckoning Ministry.
So, where does the nachash’s craftiness (nakedness) come from? Adam and Chavah ate from the tree, and they knew they were naked. What is the meaning of “and they knew that they were naked”? The answer is that they gained self-consciousness (the embarrassment deriving from the feeling that others are critically aware of you). They became spiritually naked. They were confused and ashamed, for they did not know what “naked” was, for they did not know what to be clothed was either, when their Creator clothed them. And the Eternal made garments of skin for the man and his wife and dressed them for they were naked and aware of it. These skins replaced the fig leaves, which Adam and Chavah had made for themselves (Gen 3:7) from the tree of which they had eaten. But from where did the Eternal get the skins?
According to another oral tradition, the Eternal sewed the clothes from the skin that the serpent sloughed off. He took the skin which the snake sloughed off and made it into garments of skin and clothed them so that they should not be ashamed anymore.
The curse
At this point in the discussion, it is necessary to understand the nature of the conflict between the satan and man. It will not be far stretched to assume that the satan (through the metaphor of “snake”) showed the first man and woman immoral ways of copulation (through the metaphor of the forbidden fruit) to morally seduce them, on account of the meaning of the very word “nachash”. He still does this even today through the promotion of homosexuality, transgenderism, and even bestiality. That what the satan showed Adam and Chavah was immoral is deduced from the context of the story, namely, that they felt naked and ashamed of themselves. This guilt of being naked and ashamed did not come from having had a sexual act, because the first people were told to be fruitful and multiply. This guilt must have come from having done something that had already been forbidden. But Adam and Chavah could not have possibly known what was forbidden unless the satan first showed them something they were not supposed to see by opening their eyes, that is, by giving them knowledge of evil, not good. Then and only then, they could have felt guilty and ashamed. Before the satan’s act of deception, they were naive and innocent, because as such they were born.
And the Almighty said to the nachash,
Because you have done this, you are cursed more than all livestock and more than every beast of the field. On your belly you are to go and eat dust all the days of your life. (Gen 3:14)
There are two words in question here. The Hebrew word for “belly” in this verse is גָּחוֹן gachon. Probably, it comes from the primitive root גִּיחַ giach, to gush forth (as water), generally to issue, to break forth, labor to bring forth, come forth. This word also means external abdomen, belly as the source of the fetus. We can also compare גִּיחַ giach to גִּיחוֹן Gichon, which comes from it, and means stream; Gichon is also a river of the Garden and a valley or pool near Jerusalem. The idea is that from gachon the life breaks forth. Gachon is also the place where the birth pangs begin, and the water in the mother’s womb breaks through. Hence, this curse upon the nachash to crawl on its belly is not to be taken literally but metaphorically, since the satan is not a snake but an angelic being. Hence, the metaphorical expression of the curse is to be understood, as follows: the satan was cursed in the place through which he deceived the woman.
The Hebrew word for “cursed” used in the above verse is אָרַר arar. But first what does “to curse” mean, since arar is always translated as such? The dictionaries do not help much for the same reason. “Curse” is an abstract term often used for eternal condemnation in hell. But in Hebrew, this word has a concrete meaning as found in Gen 5:29, where we read regarding the birth of Noach, “This one does comfort us concerning our work and the toil of our hands, because of the soil which the Eternal has cursed”. What was the condition of the soil (adamah, “ground”) in the generations from Adam to Noach? It was not as nearly good as the ground before Adam’s sin; the quality of the soil was greatly diminished compared to the original creation (see also Num 5:18-19). Likewise, we suggest, nachash was diminished in rank after he completed his task. We have no clear understanding of what is meant by this and will leave it unexplained. Let the reader not hope that we can explain everything, for that is a hard and extensive labor, and indeed, absolutely impossible.
To sum up: the Torah made it its task to commence what is further elaborate in the Scripture and known as free will bestowed upon man at the creation of the world. Man is born with the freedom of choice of doing good or evil evenly balanced before him. If the scale is tipped towards one side, man loses his free choice and therefore his free will. The evil inclination is the force that causes man to make the choice. He will be tempted by the prosecutor (the very personification of evil inclination) and accused before the heavenly court, whenever he sins. Otherwise, man would not have a free choice. The Creator makes His plan for us around our choices. When one makes a choice, His plan works for this particular choice.
As a final thought, Rashi offers a compelling interpretation of the passage in Deuteronomy 30:19, saying: “Even though you have free choice, nevertheless, I instruct you to choose the portion of life”. It is like a man who says to his son, “Choose for yourself a fine portion of my estate”, and then directs him to the best portion, saying to him, “This is the portion which you should choose for yourself!”
Torah is predicated upon the foundation of free choice. However, after the Eternal had chosen Israel to be His people, He took from them as a nation the power of free choice so that they cannot walk out of the Covenant.
Knowledge known to only a few will die out. If you feel blessed by these teachings of Time of Reckoning Ministry, help spread the word!
May we merit seeing the coming of our Mashiach speedily in our days!
This page contains sacred literature and the Name of the Creator. Please, do not deface, discard, or use the Name in a casual manner.