Likkutei Sichos Vol. 10 – Bereishis 3
1. It has been discussed several times[1] that Rashi's way is to resolve in his commentary every difficulty in the plain meaning of the verses. Where some question arises in the plain understanding of the verses and he does not stop to explain and resolve it, that itself proves that in Rashi's view it is no question at all[2] — so much so that there is no need to remark on it and explain it, since the matter is understood and explains itself.
Accordingly, we need to clarify Rashi's reason for not remarking at all on the resolution of a seemingly simple question that arises in studying the verses of our parshah, as follows.
From the words "And the serpent said…"[3] (twice), with Rashi explaining nothing about the nature of this saying of the serpent (unlike many commentators[4]), it is evident that the word "said" means simply this: at that time the serpent by its nature[5] spoke, like a human being (although we do not find such a thing in any other animal). And since serpents now (who are "your offspring"[6] of that serpent) do not have the faculty of speech, we are forced to say that at some later time this faculty was taken from it. It is reasonable to say that this happened to the primordial serpent:[7] among the curses with which the serpent was cursed for its sin[8] was also the curse that it would no longer be able to speak. But if so, it is not understood: why did the verse not state that the serpent was also cursed in having its mouth closed from speaking? This is a question on the plain understanding of the verse, and we find no answer to it in Rashi.
One cannot answer that for this very reason (since it is evident from the species of serpents nowadays that the mouth of that primordial serpent "was closed" because of the curse for its sin) the verse need not state it, and that because the matter is so obvious Rashi need not explain why it was not stated in the verse.
For that only resolves why the verse (and Rashi) need not tell us something self-evident. But here the question is: why was this not mentioned in the words of "the L‑rd G‑d to the serpent," concerning what its punishment would be?
2. Now, seemingly one could answer that this punishment is included in the words "Cursed are you above all the cattle and above all the beasts of the field." Since it says "Cursed are you above all the cattle and above all the beasts of the field" — worse than all living creatures — it is understood that its mouth would be closed from speaking (as is the case with its having been "more cunning than all…," and after the curse its cunning was taken from it). Otherwise it would not be "cursed" above all; on the contrary, it would be more important than all of them through the advantage of the faculty of speech. Hence the Holy One, blessed be He, did not need to specify it separately.
But according to this, it is not understood: why did He specify the punishment of "On your belly shall you go"? This punishment too is included in "Cursed are you above all…," which also includes "every living thing that creeps," which has no legs[9] — so it is understood that the punishment of "cutting off the legs" is included as well, so that the serpent should have no superiority over the creeping things.
Granted, had this matter come as the Torah's narrative to us, it would have been necessary to state the punishment of "cutting off the legs," for without this we would not know that originally it had legs and was punished and they were cut off. But in what was said to the serpent (which is what is written in the verse), "Cursed are you above all" includes the punishment of "On your belly shall you go," as said above. If so, the words written after it, "On your belly shall you go," are superfluous.
From this it seemingly follows that "Cursed are you above all…" was said as a general introduction to the punishments detailed afterwards,[10] and these words themselves were not meant as the particular punishments. And the question returns to its place: why was it not stated in what was said that the faculty of speech would be taken from it?
3. In truth, however, it can be said that the explanation is as above (that "Cursed are you above all…" means the curse that its mouth would be closed). First we must note what the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the serpent at the start of His words: "Because you have done this (cursed are you above all…)." Seemingly these words are superfluous,[11] for it is understood and obvious from the continuation of the narrative that the punishment is for the sin.[12] It can be said that the intent here is to explain in what it is cursed above all, and why in this particular respect: in that very thing by which "you have done this," in that (measure for measure[13]) it will be "cursed."
Now, the main thing through which the serpent's whole act of causing Chavah to sin was possible (which came about in a certain way through its being cunning, as will be explained) was its faculty of speech; without it, it could not have come to Chavah with words of enticement.[14] Therefore, in light of the above, it is understood as a matter of course that the punishment "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all…" is aimed mainly[15] at its faculty of speech (and also at its cunning). That is, the serpent would be worse ("cursed") in this respect than all the cattle and beasts: not only would it not surpass them in the advantage of the faculty of speech, but it would even lack the ability that they have — to utter various sounds: lowing, roaring and so on — which the serpent no longer has, for its mouth was closed completely.[16]
Accordingly, it is understood that the curse "On your belly shall you go," since walking on legs did not bring about the sin of enticement, does not fall under "Because you have done this, cursed are you…," and so it had to be specified, just as the other curses had to be specified ("and dust shall you eat…, and I will put enmity…"), because they were not included in "cursed are you."
4. However, one can ask on the substance of the matter: why did it need to be cursed to be even worse (in lacking the ability to utter a sound) than all the beasts? Seemingly it would have been enough to punish it by taking away its faculty of speech (the thing that brought it to sin), and it would remain like all the cattle and the rest.
But this question is resolved as a matter of course by what the Torah already wrote by way of introduction to this passage. On the verse "And the serpent was more cunning than all the beasts of the field that the L‑rd G‑d had made," Rashi comments: "More cunning than all — according to its cunning and its greatness was its downfall: more cunning than all, more cursed than all." In plain terms, Rashi's intent is
[not to explain the intent of the whole verse "And the serpent was cunning…"[17] For if so: a) he should have copied from the verse also the words "And the serpent (and added) …"[18] (or at least copied "was cunning…"), and then it would be understood that he comes to give a reason why this whole matter was written; b) according to this, it would have been enough had the verse said "And the serpent was more cunning than all the beasts of the field," without adding "that the L‑rd G‑d had made"; c) and above all: the intent of the verse in saying "And the serpent was cunning…" is understood plainly. Since it is astonishing how the serpent could deceive Chavah, who was of great stature, being the work of the "hands" of the Holy One, blessed be He (as it says,[19] "And He took one of his ribs… and the L‑rd G‑d built… into a woman"[20]), the verse first says that "the serpent was cunning" — and not merely cunning, but "more than all the beasts of the field that the L‑rd G‑d had made"[21] — and therefore it was able to deceive her.[22] Rather, his intent is to explain]
— what is the reason for the verse's emphasis "And the serpent was more cunning than all…,"[23] and not simply "And the serpent was cunning," or "very cunning," and therefore it was able to deceive Chavah?[24]
To this Rashi explains that the verse (by adding the words "more cunning than all") comes to answer the question raised above (at the start of this section) — why was its downfall so great that it became worse than all the beasts? And the answer is: "According to its cunning and its greatness was its downfall." Therefore the verse adds that it was "more cunning than all," to tell us that, correspondingly, it was afterwards punished to be "more cursed than all."
5. In light of the above we can also understand Rashi's explanation of the word "cunning" — "its cunning and its greatness." At first glance, what does "and its greatness" mean? One cannot say that it means greatness in physical size, or in physical strength and the like, for then what is its relevance here, in this introduction that comes to explain how it could deceive Chavah?
Nor can one say that "and its greatness" is an explanation of the word "its cunning," for then why write "its cunning" at all (which is the verse's own word, "cunning")? To explain it he should have written only the word "its greatness,"[25] and it would be understood by itself that it comes to explain the word "cunning."
Also: from where does Rashi know — in the plain meaning of the verses — that another matter is alluded to in the word "cunning"?
In light of the above, however, this is understood. Since the intent of this verse is to explain what gave the serpent the power and ability to cause Chavah to sin, we must say that besides being cunning[26] it had another quality, in which and through which it could express its cunning — that is, it had the faculty of speech. This is alluded to in the word "cunning": cunning in all the details of this description, in potential and in actuality. And this is what Rashi means in his explanation, to spell out the things that brought it and helped it to cause Chavah to sin: "its cunning and (also) its greatness" — that is, a "greatness" (an advantage in "cunning," which reveals and activates the cunning) in which it was distinguished and excelled above all living creatures. It is self-evident that this refers to the faculty of speech[27] that it had.[28]
[It is also well understood why we do not find it stated explicitly in the wording of the curse that its cunning would be taken from it: this punishment too is included in "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all…," since cunning was the main cause of its doing this.]
And this is why Rashi concludes "more cunning than all, more cursed than all": by "more cunning than all" he means the two things that brought it to sin — the cunning and the faculty of speech — and correspondingly it was cursed with "more cursed than all," as above; here too the intent is to the two things that caused it to "do this."
6. The lesson from this comment of Rashi:
Our Sages said:[29] "The measure of good is greater than the measure of retribution." From this it is understood that if through sin it was punished and turned from "more cunning than all" to "more cursed than all," then all the more so on the side of good: through a good deed one can be turned from one extreme to the other — from the very lowest level, "more cursed than all," to rise and become "more cunning (in holiness) than all."
This lesson is alluded to specifically in the matter of the "serpent," for we find something of this kind with it (in another place). When the serpents bit the Jewish people in the desert,[30] the cure for their bite was the making of the copper serpent by Moshe Rabbeinu.[31] It has been explained[32] that this too was a matter of transformation from one extreme to the other: the "serpent" itself, whose nature is death (for it caused the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, which brought death to the world), was transformed so that through it there came about an act of life.[33]
And since "the Holy One, blessed be He, prepares the cure before the blow,"[34] already within the sin itself, at the time the serpent caused a great descent, the above idea was alluded to: that one can be transformed from one extreme to the other, to rise from the place of sin and death and bind oneself with the very Essence of the Ein Sof, which is above the level of the source of life, from where comes the power "to revive the dead"[35] — that is, through looking upward in complete teshuvah and the like.[36]
(From a talk of Shabbos Parshas Bereishis, 5733)