On An Assumption Made (Very Commonly)
Disclaimer: All I have are my critical overthinking skills thrust upon me by years of Tanakh class in middle and high school. I am not an expert. I am a simple jew who does not know jack about christian stuff. If I inadvertently offend or bring up uncomfortable stuff the church doesn’t like to acknowledge I preemptively offer my sincerest apologies. Fair warning, I also use lots of fancy words because it shows off my Int stat, which makes me feel better about my Wis stat.
I’ve been rewatching a bunch of Sanders Sides videos recently, and every time I relisten to the song in Dealing With Intrusive Thots, there’s one line that keeps snagging my attention and reviving my frustration with a certain popular perception. Now, this is through no fault of Thomas, but this is a particular assumption that I see LITERALLY EVERYWHERE and it has drawn my ire for far too long. Though I harbor no illusions about more than four people seeing this post, maybe five if I’m lucky, I want to actually address it.
THERE IS NOTHING IN BIBLICAL CANON THAT SAYS OR EVEN HINTS THAT THE FRUIT FROM THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE WAS AN APPLE.
The portrayal of the fruit as an apple comes from a bit of latin wordplay, because the word for apple, ‘malus’, also meant evil. But Judaism has been around for a fair bit longer than the Roman Empire, which means that the ‘it was an apple’ argument is notably more recent than the Torah itself. The perception of the fruit as an apple is new, and there’s no canonical evidence to suggest that it’s correct. I’d even argue that, taking into account the location and timeframe the Torah is likely referring to and who was writing and reading it, the first jews probably didn’t know what an apple was, because apples don’t really grow around the middle east and Egypt.
But I would be remiss to simply say ‘it wasn’t that!’ and not propose an alternative. So for my argument, I would like to bring your attention to the ‘Shivat Haminim’, known in english as the Seven Species, and verses 3:5-7 of Genesis.
The Shivat Haminim are seven species of agricultural plants mentioned in the bible as religiously significant to jews. I figured that if I’m going to try and puzzle out the most likely species of the tree of knowledge, I should start with plants that already have a bit of a rep in judaism, and there is no conveniently forbidden species of fruit so I chose to go in the opposite direction, and look at species of celebrated fruits. Of the Shivat Haminim, four are fruits that grow on trees and are blessed with ‘borei pri haetz’ - dates, olives, figs and pomegranates. Please note I am not counting grapes because they grow on vines and the Torah is usually pretty clear about whether something is growing on a tree or a vine.
Assuming that the tree of knowledge is one of the four species mentioned above, how do we tell which one? Well, there’s one word in Genesis 3:6 that I think gives a clue.
וַתֵּ֣רֶא הָֽאִשָּׁ֡ה כִּ֣י טוֹב֩ הָעֵ֨ץ לְמַאֲכָ֜ל וְכִ֧י תַֽאֲוָה־ה֣וּא לָעֵינַ֗יִם וְנֶחְמָ֤ד הָעֵץ֙ לְהַשְׂכִּ֔יל וַתִּקַּ֥ח מִפִּרְי֖וֹ וַתֹּאכַ֑ל וַתִּתֵּ֧ן גַּם־לְאִישָׁ֛הּ עִמָּ֖הּ וַיֹּאכַֽל׃
When the woman saw that the tree was good for eating and a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable as a source of wisdom, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave some to her husband, and he ate.
(Credit goes to sefaria.org for being an excellent source, they have the original text, good translations and various commentaries)
The word I want to focus on here is מִפִּרְי֖וֹ (Mipir’o), which comes from the root פרי, which means fruit (not apple, just fruit) and has the prefix -מ, which means ‘from’. In short, the word means ‘from [the] fruit’, and if you look at the surrounding words the phrase translates as ‘and she took from the fruit and she ate’.
Not from the tree. She took from the fruit.
If there’s one thing my Tanakh teachers have taught me it’s that you can be as nitpicky about the Torah’s wording as you like and it will be taken seriously because the Torah is complicated and contradictory and if we don’t at least give every theory a chance nothing will make sense ever. So here I am, being nitpicky as all get out, because I want answers darnit and I will pry them from this cold unfeeling parchment with my bare yad (the metal pointer kind, to be clear, because if I actually touch it with my bare hands i’m pretty sure every sofer within a hundred miles will be out for my blood).
What is a kind of fruit that you take from to eat? One you have to peel open to pluck out the edible, tasty part? A fruit that is one of the Shivat Haminim?
Let’s back up for a moment. I can make this argument stronger. After all, I said I’d address Genesis 3:5-7, not just Genesis 3:6. What do 3:5 and 3:7 say?
Well, 3:5 is an explanation of what the fruit actually does.
כִּ֚י יֹדֵ֣עַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים כִּ֗י בְּיוֹם֙ אֲכָלְכֶ֣ם מִמֶּ֔נּוּ וְנִפְקְח֖וּ עֵֽינֵיכֶ֑ם וִהְיִיתֶם֙ כֵּֽאלֹהִ֔ים יֹדְעֵ֖י ט֥וֹב וָרָֽע׃
but God knows that as soon as you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like divine beings who know good and bad.”
This is reinforced by 3:7, which says, after they eat the fruit:
וַתִּפָּקַ֙חְנָה֙ עֵינֵ֣י שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם וַיֵּ֣דְע֔וּ כִּ֥י עֵֽירֻמִּ֖ם הֵ֑ם וַֽיִּתְפְּרוּ֙ עֲלֵ֣ה תְאֵנָ֔ה וַיַּעֲשׂ֥וּ לָהֶ֖ם חֲגֹרֹֽת׃
Then the eyes of both of them were opened and they perceived that they were naked; and they sewed together fig leaves and made themselves loincloths.
Now we know the snake wasn’t actually making stuff up, at least not about what the fruit did.
So, the fruit of the tree of knowledge specifically has an association with morals, the knowledge of what is righteous and what is wicked. That actually checks out with the pomegranate being the fruit of the tree of knowledge. In jewish culture pomegranates are traditionally said to have 613 seeds, one for each of the commandments, and are associated with righteousness, which fits with the tree of knowledge bestowing knowledge of morals.
So, in conclusion, it seems fairly likely to me that the fruit of the tree of knowledge was a pomegranate, not an apple.
