5787/2026
In Parashat BeReishit, the Torah relates the famous story of Adam and Chavah’s mistake in the Garden. The narrative begins at the end of the second Perek with a sort of ominous foreshadowing: “The two of them were, Arumim, naked, yet they felt no shame” (2:25). The Torah then contrasts their nakedness, the term Arumim, with the snake’s “Arum” (3:1), commonly translated as slyness. Let us set this aside for the moment. Then the snake takes advantage of Chavah’s naiveness. The snake first questions G-d’s command, then undermines it by claiming that G-d’s promised punishment would not actually happen, and then eats from the fruit of the tree. She did so in order that “VeNifkichu Eineichem ViYitem Ke’Lokim” (3:5), the couple would be enlightened and become like G-d, and “know good and bad”. She became so enticed by the snake’s words (Rashi quoting BeReishit Rabbah 19:3) that she gave in and indulged along with Adam. But, as part of the snake’s offer, their eyes were (figuratively) opened to their nakedness. It’s back. “Arumim”. So why is the Torah putting so much emphasis on this term?
I would like to suggest that Arumim in this context is referring to a lack of, or naked, in terms of Ma’asim Tovim possessed by the characters. Back in the second Perek, Adam and Chavah are described as Arumim, because they haven’t done anything substantial. Yes, Adam named the animals, but that has no bearing on his spiritual status with G-d. So far, G-d has given a few ground rules for the function of humanity on Earth, but for Adam and Chavah specifically, He has given but one Mitzvah. They feel no shame, because they are the first humans in this experiment, so they don’t have a concept of morality or as the snake puts it: “good and bad” (BeReishit 3:5). They don’t understand what it means to fulfill or keep a Mitzvah, so all they simply know is that G-d wants them to ‘follow the rule’.
The snake is described as Arum not because it has a moral compass, but because it operates with sharp intellect, completely “naked” (Arum) of any moral obligation/Mitzvot. The snake knows what G-d wants, however, he positions itself as a competitor with G-d, fighting for influence over humanity, and turning Adam and Chavah away from G-d. They are so easily influenced because of their such limited comprehension of G-d and morality at this stage (Moreh Nevuchim 1:2). As soon as they eat from the fruit, their eyes are finally opened to understand their Arumim, both physically and spiritually. Now, they can distinguish between good and bad, and they failed to keep their singular Mitzvah and chose bad over good.
Then they hear G-d, “Mithalech BaGan” and they hide from Him. They are so scared of disappointing Him that they can’t interact with Him. G-d calls out, “Where are you?”, and Adam cannot hide any longer and tells Him, “I feared because I was naked”. G-d challenges, “How would you know that unless you ate from the tree?”. The issue: Adam and Chavah were already covered up (3:7)! Perhaps, had Adam been talking about his actions, it makes sense that he might refer to Ma’asim Tovim.
There is something that is also a bit interesting here. In 3:8, the Torah uses the term “Mithalech”. This is odd because the Pasuk could’ve just said, “Holech”, walked in the Garden. Rabbi David Forman suggests that Mithalech is in the Hitpa’el formation of Hebrew verbs. Hitpa’el form could be reflexive, meaning that something is happening to the individual, but that doesn’t make sense that G-d would be walked. But Hitpa’el also refers to a bilateral interaction. According to Rabbi Forman, G-d was attempting to walk with someone or something. Who is that? Adam and Chavah. G-d was reaching out to them, sticking His hand out to them, KaviYachol, for He wants to connect to them. But when they hear Him, they hide. Why? Recall back to 2:25. They were Arumim, and felt no shame. At this moment of tension, they feel this shame because they recognize their wrongdoing. And yet, G-d still reaches out. Yes, He warned them that they would surely die if they were to eat from the tree (2:17), but He set that partially aside in favor of mercy, giving them a second chance. The snake was introduced as “Arum MiKol Asher Asah Hashem Elokim”(3:1). The snake was acutely aware of G-d’s mercy. When Hashem is referred to as יקוק, it is a sign of his mercy (Shemot Rabbah 3:6). When addressing Chavah, the snake hides יקוק, and exclusively refers to G-d as Elokim. Chavah absorbs this skewed perception of G-d and looks at G-d through this same lens. To Adam and Chavah, they see a vengeful G-d, not a compassionate creator. They are too afraid of being confronted because they are afraid of the repercussions.
But when they are confronted, Adam and Chavah avoid any sense of accountability. He blames her, she blames the snake (3:12-13). Only then does G-d punish them, but it is nowhere near to the original death penalty promise. G-d was leaning them in to embrace Him, for in His mercy they would be forgiven. In almost a child-like fashion, they keep blaming others for their wrongdoings, ignoring G-d right in front of them. (They did have an age of 9 total hours between the two of them so it is hard to criticise them, see Sanhedrin 38b). They neglected the most important thing: G-d’s compassion.
While Adam and Chavah missed their chance for Teshuvah in the Garden, Chazal intentionally structured our Tefillot to ensure that we don’t repeat their mistake.
By this time of year, we just went through the rollercoaster that is Tishrei. On Yom Kippur, we did something that Adam and Chavah did not; we took accountability for our actions. We said Vidui 11 times in around a 30 hour period. All G-d wants from us to bring ourselves closer to Him. We may have sinned, but G-d is the ultimate “Salchan U’Machalan”. During Ne’ilah, we quoted two top-tier Pesukim from Yechezkel:
“Emor Aleihem, Chay Ani Hashem Elokim, Im Echpotz BeMot HaRashah, Ki Im BeShuv Rashah MiDarko VeChayah” (33:13). “HeChafotz Echpotz Mot Rashah Neum Hashem Elokim, Haloh Beshuvo MiDrachav VeChayah” (18:23).
“Say to them: As I live, declares Hashem Elokim, it is not My desire that the wicked shall die, but that the wicked turn from their [evil] ways and live… Is it my desire that the wicked shall die?—says Hashem Elokim. It is rather that they shall turn back from their ways and live”!
(Chazal were onto something when they formulated Ne’ilah. They had to decide what goes on at the most important part of the year and scored an A+.)
Yes, Adam and Chavah sinned, and yes, G-d did say that if they didn’t listen to the Mitzvah, they “shall surely die”. But G-d wants Teshuvah, not punishment. (Yes, G-d uses Midat HaDin when necessary) but G-d created the world with Teshuvah as a pre-set (Nedarim 39b). When we do fall into sin, it is not like we are doomed to death and we will be smited with lighting bolts. In Attached, Rabbi Yakov Danishevsky, LCSW, discusses what it means to connect to G-d. He argues that Mitzvot are the pathway to creating a consistent and meaningful relationship with Him. “In Chassidut, the word ‘Mitzvah’ is interpreted not only as commandment, but also as a connection”. This is what Chazal means when they write “S’char Mitzvah, Mitzvah” (Pirkei Avot 4:2). The reward we receive for fulfilling G-d’s instructions is an everlasting connection with Him, because “the greatest gift G-d can give us is G-d” (Danishevsky, 19).
Throughout the Third Perek, Adam and Chavah try to connect with G-d. They eat from the tree so they can be like G-d. But then they sin and instead of turning to G-d for His mercy, they push away from Him. They hide. Rabbi Danishevsky looks at two commonly-used words for sin: Aveirah and Cheit. They really mean to miss the mark (either by passing by or slinging a stone, respectively). You don’t connect to G-d. “S’char Averah, Averah” - when you miss the connection with G-d, you are alone (Danishevsky, 19).
Ultimately, the story of Perek Gimmel is an overarching picture of human relational avoidance. Adam and Chavah’s tragedy wasn’t the sin itself, but when they misunderstood the very nature of the G-d who placed them there. Viewing G-d solely through the Midat HaDin goggles, they experienced a form of spiritual nakedness, their utter lack of Ma’asim Tovim, as a cause for shame and hiding, rather than an invitation for Teshuvah. They mistook a missed connection (Aveirah/Cheit) as a permanent Galut, failing to see G-d walking in the Garden reaching out to them.
As we close the door on the Tishrei season with Parashat BeReishit, this lesson becomes urgent. We go from the spiritual highs of Ne’ilah and Simchat Torah, into Cheshvan, a month without Yamim Tovim where missing the mark or feeling distant from G-d is at its peak. The lesson of the Garden is that G-d does not demand flawless execution. G-d desires authenticity. When we inevitably fall, it is imperative to resist the urge to hide behind self-justification or shifting blame. Instead, we must own our “nakedness” and recognize G-d’s Midat HaRachamim that is there even at our lowest moments and step back into relationship with Him.