Hi Rainman, I don’t agree with this rendering of: `ets da`ath towb ra` 'akal yowm 'akal muwth muwth: of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
da`ath is from yada` ‘to know by experience’, ‘towb’ is entirely related to ‘experiencing with the senses’, and ra` means ‘gives misery’.
Another ‘understanding’ of `ets da`ath towb ra` 'akal yowm 'akal muwth muwth would be: Tree (or 'wood' etc.)agreeable experience misery consume time consume die die. And another would be: tree enjoyable sensual experience consume time consume die die. Yet another could be: Gallows agreeable experience to the senses misery devour time devour die die. We can assume `ets doesn’t mean ‘gallows’ because of the implied ‘enjoyment’, so we look for another meaning. And `ets has other wood-related meanings such as ‘flax’ ‘pages’. And coming as it does from, `atsah ‘closed’ whether one interprets `ets, as ‘tree’, ‘wood’ ‘flax’ 'fibre'‘book’ or something else altogether, intrinsically it implies ‘closed’. A better understanding of `ets da`ath towb ra` 'akal yowm 'akal muwth muwth would be: Closed book time experience consume time consume dead die. In my humble opinion, the best interpretation would be: Closed book past (and while it may be) pleasant to experience (it is nonetheless) evil to partake past time is dead (let it) die.
That aside, most people who believe in God would agree that He needs us to know whether our own actions are good or evil, if only to stop ourselves from repeatedly performing evil acts. Therefore, knowledge of subjective good and evil cannot be ‘forbidden fruit’. Knowledge of the good or evil of others could be forbidden because of our propensity to judge. If we are not present when another carries out an act we cannot know (with certainty) whether the act is good or evil. However, were we to go back in time and witness the act of another unfolding before our eyes, we would consider ourselves in a stronger position to know if the act were good or evil. It is that knowledge of the good and evil of another [that we would obtain by going back in time to ‘experience with our senses’ the act unfolding] that would be forbidden.
In my view, common knowledge is that which is known to the majority, such as the wheel, fire and the forward progression of time, which most people take for granted, because thankfully, time travel is still in the hands of the few.
da`ath is from yada` ‘to know by experience’, ‘towb’ is entirely related to ‘experiencing with the senses’, and ra` means ‘gives misery’.
Another ‘understanding’ of `ets da`ath towb ra` 'akal yowm 'akal muwth muwth would be: Tree (or 'wood' etc.)agreeable experience misery consume time consume die die. And another would be: tree enjoyable sensual experience consume time consume die die. Yet another could be: Gallows agreeable experience to the senses misery devour time devour die die. We can assume `ets doesn’t mean ‘gallows’ because of the implied ‘enjoyment’, so we look for another meaning. And `ets has other wood-related meanings such as ‘flax’ ‘pages’. And coming as it does from, `atsah ‘closed’ whether one interprets `ets, as ‘tree’, ‘wood’ ‘flax’ 'fibre'‘book’ or something else altogether, intrinsically it implies ‘closed’. A better understanding of `ets da`ath towb ra` 'akal yowm 'akal muwth muwth would be: Closed book time experience consume time consume dead die. In my humble opinion, the best interpretation would be: Closed book past (and while it may be) pleasant to experience (it is nonetheless) evil to partake past time is dead (let it) die.
That aside, most people who believe in God would agree that He needs us to know whether our own actions are good or evil, if only to stop ourselves from repeatedly performing evil acts. Therefore, knowledge of subjective good and evil cannot be ‘forbidden fruit’. Knowledge of the good or evil of others could be forbidden because of our propensity to judge. If we are not present when another carries out an act we cannot know (with certainty) whether the act is good or evil. However, were we to go back in time and witness the act of another unfolding before our eyes, we would consider ourselves in a stronger position to know if the act were good or evil. It is that knowledge of the good and evil of another [that we would obtain by going back in time to ‘experience with our senses’ the act unfolding] that would be forbidden.
In my view, common knowledge is that which is known to the majority, such as the wheel, fire and the forward progression of time, which most people take for granted, because thankfully, time travel is still in the hands of the few.
Again, this is just my opinion and perhaps a bit over-simplified. Anyone is free to discuss it and I don't have anything against it, but it would be a great help if you didn't start a new thread for every reply.
