An apple? Maybe… but our tradition offers a whole orchard of possibilities! The rabbis of the Midrash (rabbinic interpretive commentary), in Bereshit Rabbah 15, really sink their teeth into this question.
Rabbi Meir, surprisingly, suggests it was wheat. Wheat! He argues that knowledge and intelligence are connected to eating wheat bread. "When a person does not have knowledge," he says, "people say: That person has never eaten wheat bread in all his days." It's a fascinating idea, isn't it? That the very grain that sustains us could also be the key to understanding. Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak even asks Rabbi Ze’eira, "Is it possible that it was wheat?" And Rabbi Ze’eira answers in the affirmative, explaining that the wheat in Eden grew to immense heights, like the cedars of Lebanon. So tall, it could be considered a tree!
This idea connects to a debate between Rabbi Neḥemya and the Rabbis, concerning the blessing over bread, "who brings forth [hamotzi] bread from the earth." Rabbi Neḥemya believes that finished bread grew directly from the ground in Eden, a bounty lost after the sin. The Rabbis, on the other hand, envision this happening in the Messianic future. As it says in (Psalms 72:16), "There will be bread [pisat] from grain upon the earth." It’s a beautiful vision of abundance and ease.
Then there's the curious case of the lefet, which means turnip. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak and Rabbi Shmuel bar Ami debate: Was the turnip once bread [lo pat]? Or will it be bread [lo pat] in the future? It's a playful, thought-provoking exploration of loss and redemption.
But wheat isn't the only contender. Rabbi Yehuda bar Ilai puts forth grapes, citing (Deuteronomy 32:32): "Their grapes are grapes of poison, clusters of bitterness for them" – those clusters brought bitterness to the world. A powerful image of the consequences of disobedience.
Rabbi Abba of Akko champions the citron. He points out that the Torah says the tree "was good for eating," implying the tree itself had a good taste. And, he asks, which tree has wood that tastes like its fruit? Only the citron! It’s a clever bit of reasoning.
And Rabbi Yosei? He suggests figs. His argument is contextual: Adam and Eve used fig leaves to cover themselves after the sin. It's like the story of a prince's son who sins with a maidservant. No other maidservant would take him in except the one he had sinned with. Similarly, after the sin, only the fig tree offered its leaves to Adam. As Rabbi Berekhya says, "Here is the thief who deceived his Creator." The other trees wouldn’t allow him to use their leaves to clothe himself!
Rabbi Avin specifies the berat sheva species of fig, as it brought seven [sheva] days of mourning to the world – because the sin introduced death and mourning into the world. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin, in the name of Rabbi Elazar, suggests the berat elita species, as it brought weeping [elita] to the world.
But the most intriguing idea comes from Rabbi Azarya and Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon, in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: that God never revealed, and never will reveal, the identity of that tree. Why? They bring up the law in (Leviticus 20:16) about bestiality: the animal is killed so it won't be paraded through the marketplace, reminding everyone of the sin. If God is concerned about the dignity of descendants, how much more so is He concerned about the dignity of Adam himself!
So, we're left with a multitude of possibilities, and perhaps, ultimately, the question itself is more important than the answer. Maybe the point isn't what the fruit was, but what it represents: the human capacity for choice, the allure of forbidden knowledge, and the enduring consequences of our actions. What do you think?
What was that tree [of knowledge] from which Adam and Eve ate? Rabbi Meir said: It was wheat. When a person does not have knowledge, people say: That person has never eaten wheat bread in all his days.27This shows that wheat is a food that stimulates knowledge and intelligence. Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak asked before Rabbi Ze’eira, saying to him: ‘Is it possible that it was wheat?’ He said to him: ‘Yes.’ He said to him: ‘But is it not written that it was a “tree”?’ He said to him: ‘It [the wheat in Eden] rose to a great height, like the cedars of Lebanon.’28And therefore could rightly be described as a “tree.” Rabbi Yaakov bar Aḥa said: There is a dispute between Rabbi Neḥemya and the Rabbis.29They were discussing the blessing over bread, which praises God for “bringing forth bread” from the earth. The difficulty is that bread does not, of course, grow from the ground. Rabbi Neḥemya said: [“Blessed be God…] who brings forth [hamotzi] bread from the earth, [meaning] that He brought forth bread from the earth in the past.30Hamotzi (“who brings forth”) can also connote an event in the past (see Numbers 23:22). When Adam was created and placed in the Garden, finished bread grew from the ground. This was discontinued when he sinned. The Rabbis say: [Blessed be God …] who brings forth [motzi] bread from the earth, [meaning] that He will bring forth bread from the earth in the future,31Motzi (“who brings forth”) can also connote an event in the future (see Exodus 6:7). In the Messianic future finished bread will grow from the ground. as it is stated: “There will be bread [pisat] from grain upon the earth” (Psalms 72:16). Lefet32Lefet means turnip. In some dialects, the word pisat (translated in the Psalms verse under discussion as bread) also means turnip. The midrash explains the connection. – there is a dispute between two Amora’im, Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak and Rabbi Shmuel bar Ami. One said: Lefet – was it not [once] bread [lo pat]?33In Adam’s day one did not need to eat turnips, because there was bread growing from the ground. And the other said: Lefet – is it going to be bread [lo pat] in the future?34In the Messianic future, instead of turnips there will be bread growing from the ground. Rabbi Yirmeya recited the blessing before Rabbi Zeira: Who brings forth [hamotzi] bread from the earth, and he praised him. [Did he act] in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya? This is bewildering.35In a dispute between an individual rabbi and the Rabbis as a group, it is the view of the majority that should be followed. In this case, Rabbi Neḥemya was arguing with the Rabbis. [No,] it was, rather, so as not to slur the [adjacent identical] letters.36The word before “hamotzi” is haolam, which ends with a mem. Were one to recite the word as motzi, the first letter of motzi would be slurred with the final letter of haolam. Using the word hamotzi solves that problem. Rabbi Yehuda bar Ilai said: They [the forbidden fruits that Adam ate] were grapes, as it is stated: “Their grapes are grapes of poison, clusters of bitterness for them” (Deuteronomy 32:32) – those clusters brought bitterness to the world. Rabbi Abba of Akko said it was a citron. That is what is written: “The woman saw that the tree was good for eating…” (Genesis 3:6).37Implying that the tree itself had a good taste. Go out and see which is the tree whose wood has a taste like its fruit, and you will find only the citron. Rabbi Yosei says: They were figs. It is a matter that is derived from its context.38After the sin, Adam and Eve used fig leaves to hide their nakedness (Genesis 3:7). This is analogous to the a prince’s son who sinned with one of the maidservants. When the prince heard, he expelled him and had him removed outside the palace. He circulated among the houses of all the maidservants, but none would receive him. But the one with whom he sinned opened her door and received him. So, too, when Adam the first man ate from that tree, the Holy One blessed be He expelled him and had him removed outside the Garden of Eden. He circulated among all the trees but none would receive him.39They would not allow him to use their leaves to clothe himself. What did they say to him? Rabbi Berekhya said: ‘Here is the thief who deceived his Creator.’ That is what is written: “Let no arrogant foot come to me” (Psalms 36:12) – the foot of one who was arrogant towards his Creator. “Let the hand of the wicked not move me” (Psalms 36:12) – you may not take a leaf from me. But the fig tree, whose fruit he had eaten, opened its door and received him. That is what is written: “They sewed fig leaves” (Genesis 3:7). What [type of] fig was it ? Rabbi Avin said: It was the berat sheva species, as it brought seven [sheva] days of mourning to the world.40As a result of the sin, death, and the ensuing seven-day period of mourning, was introduced into the world. Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: It was the berat elita species, as it brought weeping [elita] to the world. Rabbi Azarya and Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: Far be it that God should have revealed [the identity of] that tree to any man, nor will He reveal it in the future. See what is written: “A woman who will approach any animal [to copulate with her, you shall kill the woman and the animal]” (Leviticus 20:16) – though the person sinned, what sin did the animal commit? [The animal did not sin,] but it is [killed] so that the animal should not pass through the marketplace, where people would say: This is the animal on whose account so-and-so was stoned.41And the memory of that woman would be sullied. If He is concerned about the dignity of his [Adam’s] descendants [even though they had committed a grievous sin], is it not all the more so regarding his [Adam’s] own dignity [after his sin]? That is a rhetorical question.
