In listening to a recorded shiur this week related to the opening verses of parashah Kedoshim “you shall be holy, for I, HaShem your G-d am holy” (Leviticus 19:2), I found myself once again considering the midrashic idea that wine may have been the Fruit of the Knowledge of Good and Evil which Adam and Eve partook of in the Garden. The motivation of Eve to partake of the forbidden fruit was presented in this teaching as her desire to eliminate the only barrier that existed between herself, her husband, and HaShem. In the Garden, Adam and Eve enjoyed an exceedingly intimate relationship with HaShem in which the three of them were involved in a singular mission and focus. Yet, although intimately involved with the humans He had created, HaShem was also separate from them. This barrier of G-d’s separateness and superiority in relation to Adam and Eve was realized in the prohibition regarding the fruit of the Etz HaDa’at. In order to overcome this barrier and enjoy complete and unhindered intimacy with the Creator, Eve partook of the fruit that promised to draw her even closer to Him by making her “like G-d” and convinced her husband to do the same.
What resulted was the opposite of what Adam and Eve had anticipated. By removing the one barrier between themselves and HaShem they did not attain further intimacy. Instead they experienced a devastating separation and alienation from G-d through the introduction of mortality and death into the world. Not only did Adam and Eve’s desire to draw closer to HaShem, through the removal of a barrier, produce alienation from G-d, it also produced a separation and alienation between the two of them as male and female. No longer would there be perfect equality, harmony, and partnership between them but instead Eve’s desire would be “for her husband” but he would “rule over her” (Genesis 3:16).
This first sin in the Garden presents a foundational principle regarding G-d and His holiness; that although intimate with the world, He is yet separate from it. Therefore when Moses admonishes the Children of Israel to “be holy for HaShem is holy” he is not commanding them to attain the same degree of holiness as the Almighty, which is impossible, but instead to attain the same manner of holiness as G-d Himself. This manner of holiness is found in the ability to achieve intimacy without sacrificing separateness – a simultaneous intimacy with the world that yet is separate from the world.
Wine, as understood midrashically to represent the first sin in the Garden is seen as a destructive influence throughout history, for under the effects of wine one’s guard comes down and normal barriers are disregarded. Such devastating effects of the fruit of the vine are witnessed in the lives of both Noah and Lot. Noah’s drunkenness led to the uncovering of his nakedness which his son Ham looked upon. According to one opinion of Chazal (b. Sanhedrin 70a) Ham had homosexual relations with his father in that drunken state. This might be understood as motivated by the desire of Ham to remove a barrier in the father and son relationship, the barrier of sexual intimacy. In attempting to remove this barrier and draw closer to his father, Ham experienced separation and alienation instead. Noah’s curse upon Ham’s descendents for his actions presented for the first time in human history the idea of racial inferiority through the concept of slavery.
Lot’s daughter’s also, in causing their father to become drunk on wine, attempted to break down the barrier of intimacy in the father/daughter relationship. This action resulted in alienation in the form of the mamzer (child produced from a forbidden relationship), one prohibited from marriage into the Jewish nation according to Torah. By attempting to draw closer to their father through breaking down a sexual barrier, Lot’s daughter’s instead brought the concept of social separateness into the world.
The effects of wine in the lives of Adam and Eve, Noah, and Lot present three areas of human relationships in which separateness must be upheld; a. in heterosexual intimacy between different families (Adam and Eve) b. in homosexual intimacy (Noah) and c. in heterosexual intimacy within the same family (Lot). When separation is not upheld in these areas, but disregarded in order to obtain further intimacy with another human being, the opposite consequence of devastating alienation will ultimately occur.
Interestingly, Torah prefaces the admonition to be holy in the same manner that HaShem is holy, with a listing of various sexual relations prohibited to G-d’s people (Leviticus 18). These prohibitions involve; a. heterosexual intimacy between different families (not having relations with one’s daughter-in-law, sister-in-law, or with one’s neighbor’s wife), b. homosexual intimacy and c. heterosexual intimacy within the same family (not having relations with one’s own mother, sister, or aunt). Even within the marital relationship itself unrestricted intimacy is forbidden. Instead, the barrier of not approaching a woman during her time of menstruation is given in order to maintain the appropriate manner of holiness in marriage through intimacy that does not sacrifice separateness.
By sacrificing separateness for the sake of further intimacy Adam and Eve experienced alienation from HaShem and alienation between male and female, Ham experienced racial alienation, and those like Lot’s offspring, birthed from prohibited sexual relationships, experienced social alienation. All of which may be symbolized through the effects of partaking of the fruit of the vine. Instead of becoming more holy they became less holy, for in relationships between man and G-d and between human beings, intimacy void of separateness results in alienation, for true holiness requires intimacy to be preserved through separateness. [1]
How fascinating is this teaching in light of 1 Peter 1:13-16:
Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. (1 Peter 1:13-16 KJV)
In presenting the admonition of holiness from Leviticus 19:2 Peter does so with themes of sobriety and lust in view. In order to “be holy for HaShem is holy” one must be sober-minded (in the sense of abstaining from wine–Greek nēphō) and refrain from former lusts (in the sense of longing for that which is forbidden–Greek epithumia). How beautifully this weaves in to the concept that wine/grapes was the forbidden fruit, a fruit that caused Eve to be less than sober-minded in longing for that which was forbidden to her – a more intimate relationship with HaShem in which separation from Him, through the barrier of knowledge, would be superseded. Peter, therefore, seems to be warning believers in Yeshua to guard against these same things by focusing instead on the grace that will be brought to them in the future when Yeshua is revealed at his second coming – an event that will bring about the salvation of their souls (v. 9). Through Yeshua the horrible alienation from G-d due to death and mortality will end and man will once again be restored to an intimacy and purpose with Him as in the Garden of Eden. However this future relationship of intimacy will also involve an aspect of separateness between G-d and man; just as it did at first, for only through such a relationship can true holiness be realized. Even in the final chapter of Revelation, which presents the full extent of prophecy afforded to us regarding the World to Come, an intimacy with G-d is presented (man seeing His face and having His name upon their foreheads) while yet a separateness is maintained (G-d pictured as upon a throne while man rules as His servants).
With these thoughts in mind, in reflecting on church history, it would seem, tragically, that through the course of many councils, doctrines, and debates the very things that Peter warned against, were succumbed to. Perhaps this is due to the natural and innate desire of those who enjoy the favor of relationship with HaShem to draw ever closer to Him. Yet, instead of falling into the error of Eve, who desired to become like G-d in order to attain complete intimacy with Him, the “church” attempted to achieve such intimacy by means of G-d becoming like man in the person of Yeshua. Sober-mindedness gave way to the complex formulas of the Trinity and Hypostasis in order to fulfill the longing for that which was forbidden from the beginning – a fully intimate, barrier-free relationship with the Almighty Himself.
It would seem that in significant ways, the Etz HaDa’at was partaken of all over again, especially in the later doctrine of Transubstantiation in which the wine of communion was believed to mystically transform into the actual blood of Yeshua. In this way at every Mass the believer partook of HaShem through the most intimate of means by ingesting the very flesh and blood He occupied in the person of the Messiah, through the elements of the bread and the fruit of the vine. The result of such doctrines of intimacy and mystery resulted in spiritual alienation and separateness never before known to mankind. This separateness has played out in history through the awful paradox in which those who believed in the One True G-d and His Torah were considered completely alienated from those who believed in the same, One True G-d, and His Messiah, and vice versa.
______________________________________________________
[1] Adapted from Rabbi David Lapin, Kedoshim; Alienation and Intimacy, a Perspective on Kedusha (1992), audio recording, available at: http://www.iawaken.org/shiurim/view.asp?id=5833
