2

Was the Tree of Knowledge less than or equal to 3 years of growth in Bereishit 2:17?

We learn in Vayikra 19:23 about the age of forbidden Trees : "When you enter the land and plant any tree for food, you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden for you, not to be eaten." ( וְכִי־תָבֹ֣אוּ אֶל־הָאָ֗רֶץ וּנְטַעְתֶּם֙ כָּל־עֵ֣ץ מַאֲכָ֔ל וַעֲרַלְתֶּ֥ם עָרְלָת֖וֹ אֶת־פִּרְי֑וֹ שָׁלֹ֣שׁ שָׁנִ֗ים יִהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶ֛ם עֲרֵלִ֖ים לֹ֥א יֵאָכֵֽל )

Ibn Ezra states : " Scripture proceeds to things that are planted, and discusses the forbidden fruits. It is well known that fruit which grows on trees less than three years old is harmful and contains no nutrition "

  • By knowing the age of forbidden trees in context to Vayikra 19:23, could we establish in Bereishit 2:17 that the Tree of Knowledge was less than or equal to 3 years of growth?
2
  • Is the Ibn Ezra quote relevant for the question? – robev Mar 1 at 20:30
  • @robev - Yes, because Ibn Ezra establishes a "well known" concept regarding the fruit of "trees less than three years old". - Ibn Ezra's commentary inspired this question. – חִידָה Mar 1 at 21:24
2

B"H

Well after all it did cause the entire concept of fatality throughout the entire world, so I guess it wasn't so healthy...

But in reality Adam wasn't commanded regarding the laws of arleh, since that's only a commandment for the nation of Yisroyrayl after the giving of the Torah etc.... like it says right before that "from all of the trees of the garden, you shall eat", as well as in the beginning of the verse cited in the question itself, ""When you enter the land and plant any tree for food, you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden for you, not to be eaten." ( וְכִי־תָבֹ֣אוּ אֶל־הָאָ֗רֶץ וּנְטַעְתֶּם֙ כָּל־עֵ֣ץ מַאֲכָ֔ל וַעֲרַלְתֶּ֥ם עָרְלָת֖וֹ אֶת־פִּרְי֑וֹ שָׁלֹ֣שׁ שָׁנִ֗ים יִהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶ֛ם עֲרֵלִ֖ים לֹ֥א יֵאָכֵֽל )", the prohibition, even for the nation of Yisroyayl, only applied {originally} when they entered the land

also it says clearly, even in the simple reading of the verses themselves, as well as in Rashi, that in the beginning of creation all of the trees grew to maturity almost instantly, so it's entirely possible that the statement of the Ibn Ezrah, that fruit from trees less than 3 years old don't have nutrients, didn't apply to the fruit that grew in the [times of the] Garden of Aydin

So in short: yes it was definitely less than 3 years old, as all of the trees were created [on the third day underground but grew to full maturity {see Rashi}] on the sixth day, the same day Adam was created, and the same day he ate from it, but that doesn't mean the reason for it's prohibition was because of Orlah, as mentioned above

Blessings and Success

5
  • "yes it was definitely less than 3 years old" you don't know that if that's true, and you see nothing from the verses if that's true or not. Adam HaRishon and Chava weren't 0 years old when they were created. They were created mature, just like the trees. The Rosh brings a Midrash that they were twenty years old. Maybe the trees were as well, making them not shayach to Orlah. – robev Mar 1 at 20:34
  • @robev Adam and chawvuh lived for 0 years before they were created, that's different than being created mature, the laws of oyrluh only apply to trees that are less than 3 actual years old, it doesn't mention anywhere in halacha that I'm aware of that it's different if the tree matures faster, we know each creation day was about 24 hours, that we created underground on the 3rd and grew to full maturity on the 6th – bluejayke Mar 1 at 22:13
  • "only apply to trees that are less than 3 actual years old," if Hashem created a tree that is actually three years old, then why would there be orlah. Are you saying Adam and Chava (chawvuh) were ketanim, pattur from Mitzvos, since they were 0? They were created mature, so how long they lived is irrelevant. So too a tree. – robev Mar 2 at 6:28
  • @robev Adam and chava were not created twenty years old, since the was only 6 days of existence before they were created, they were created with the maturity of 20 year olds, regarding the mitzvos that's anther question, perhaps it was an exception, do goyeem have laws of chinuch anyways? – bluejayke Mar 2 at 22:46
  • 1
    I think we're using terms differently. You're taking twenty years old to mean from the time of their creation. With that premise, you're saying that orlah doesn't apply to trees which are less than three years from their creation. I'm challenging that premise, especially according to the rishonim which say that orlah is because the fruits are bad in their first three years. Why would that be true with trees which were created mature? Who cares how long it has been since they were created. Furthermore, no one said anything about chinuch. Goyim ketanim aren't chayav for sheva mitzvos. – robev Mar 3 at 8:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .