The Serpent & Pragmatism

More on THE SNAKE / Nachash or Nahash – and onomatopoeia!

** my question - Why does Michelangelo show the serpent as a woman?






Torah Study 6/7 with R. Marder

A review of some of the other stories in Tanakh where the snake is mentioned endorses the mythological references and the image of the serpent as evil and powerful.

In Genesis it is ‘cut down to size’ Nahash is just one of the wild beasts – nothing special Except that this serpent can communicate with Eve.

(side note – as we were discussing the ‘nakedness’ issue it was pointed out that there are opposing sayings: “a bald-face lie” and the “naked truth” - a brief research on this brings both sayings back to Shakespeare time – all I found on them)

The Strategy of the Snake to convince Eve...

• Snake addresses the woman – why – maybe a woman is more open to discussion on the topic? Maybe because the directive was given to Adam and Eve got the directive ‘second hand’ from Adam and not directly from God.
• Directions are a bit confusing in Gen 2:16
• Serpent asks: “Did God REALLY say that?” She wasn’t there – there is some doubt? Serpent is manipulating the words and sewing seeds of doubt.
• Eve says she can’t “TOUCH” the tree or she will die – a misinterpretation that the serpent can easily prove false. - This is a major lesson to be wary of adding prohibitions as it might cast doubt on the real issues. (fence around the Torah)
• This let the serpent point out that she was wrong, opening the doubt on the entire prohibition and leading to the ultimate eating from the fruit that was prohibited.

Of course this logic and discussion led to the subject of sex and moral conduct and the role of choices when it comes to right and wrong.

It is about setting boundaries. When is it good to experiment with the boundaries and when is it crossing into areas where it could mean disaster. This is the foundation of pragmatism.

The Serpent represents the voice of the human capacity to rationalize.