解析知識樹
Parsing the tree of knowledge
作者：Steve Hays    誠之譯自：
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2020/03/parsing-tree-of-knowledge.html
https://yimawusi.net/2021/03/27/parsing-the-tree-of-knowledge/
 
創二9、17  園子當中又有生命樹和分別善惡的樹（直譯：善惡知識的樹；《新譯本》作：知善惡樹）。……只是分別善惡樹上的果子，你不可吃，因為你吃的日子必定死！」
9 The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil...17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” (Gen 2:9,17).
 
創三1-7 1 耶和華神所造的，唯有蛇比田野一切的活物更狡猾。蛇對女人說：“神豈是真說，不許你們吃園中所有樹上的果子嗎？”  2 女人對蛇說：“園中樹上的果子我們可以吃， 3 唯有園當中那棵樹上的果子，神曾說：‘你們不可吃，也不可摸，免得你們死。’”  4 蛇對女人說：“你們不一定死！ 5 因為神知道你們吃的日子眼睛就明亮了，你們便如神能知道善惡。”  6 於是女人見那棵樹的果子好做食物，也悅人的眼目，且是可喜愛的，能使人有智慧，就摘下果子來吃了；又給她丈夫，她丈夫也吃了。 7 他們二人的眼睛就明亮了，才知道自己是赤身露體，便拿無花果樹的葉子，為自己編做裙子。
Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” 2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” 4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths (Gen 3:1-7).
 
1. 這段經文的意義相當隱晦。由於經文缺乏明確的定義或說明，解經家對這段經文都感到困惑。與心理小說不同，聖經敍事者往往不會告訴讀者，故事中的主角在想什麼，因此讀者就像一個看見並旁聽到這個行動的旁觀者，只能隔靴搔癢。
1. This is rather cryptic. Commentators puzzle over it due to lack of definition or explication. Unlike psychological novels, biblical narrators often refrain from telling the reader what characters are thinking, so the reader is like a bystander who sees and overhears the action. It remains on the surface.
 
2. 「善惡的知識」（《和合本》作：分別善惡）是什麼意思？從這棵樹上吃了果子之前，亞當和夏娃缺乏什麼樣的經驗？他們從什麼角度來說，眼睛就「明亮」了呢？撒但那試探者對他們撒謊嗎？
2. What is meant by the knowledge of good and evil? What was lacking in the experience of Adam and Eve prior to eating from the tree? In what sense were their eyes opened? Did the Tempter lie to them?
 
3. 一些解經家專注於單詞研究，但是回答這些問題的意義並不大。一些解經家推測，亞當和夏娃在道德上處於不成熟狀態，在一種縮減了責任的狀態。
3. Some commentators focus on word-studies, but you can't get much milage out of that to answer these questions. Some commentators speculate that Adam and Eve were morally immature, in a state of diminished responsibility.
 
4. 分別善惡樹並不會賦予人善與惡的知識。相反，亞當和夏娃乃是藉著行了被禁止的事來發現或體驗惡的內涵。這與這樹的本質無關，反而與他們挑釁行動的本質有關。當他們違反禁令時，他們就藉著自己不法的行動發現到或體驗到邪惡的本質。
4. It's possible that the tree of knowledge doesn't confer the knowledge of good and evil. Rather, they discover or experience what evil means by doing what's forbidden. It's not so much about the nature of the tree, but the nature of their defiant action. When they violate the prohibition, they discover or experience the nature of evil through their wrongdoing.
比起違反禁令之前，他們如今處在了不同的精神和道德狀態裏。他們無法倒轉時間，回到從前的經驗裏。
They are now in a different mental and moral state than before they transgressed the prohibition. They can't turn back the clock to their prior inexperience.
 
5. 因此，他們的眼睛「明亮」了，這不是說分別善惡樹本身給了他們善惡的知識，而是因為他們現在明白做了被禁止的事情是怎樣的一種感覺。這的確是一種改變，是尊重禁令與違反禁令之間的對比。
5. So their eyes are opened, not in the sense that the tree in itself confers knowledge of good and evil, but because they now know what it feels like to do something forbidden. That's a change. The contrast between respecting the prohibition and defying the prohibition.
 
6. 此外，他們明白受到欺騙是怎樣的一種感覺。從某種意義來說，那試探者並沒有撒謊，只是在欺哄他們。牠講的是一半的真理。之後發生的事著實令人失望，因為那並不是他們所期待或盼望的。從某種意義上來說，撒但履行了他的約定，但他們太天真了，無法體會他們為何作了這個交易。他們乃是通過後知後覺而不是先見之明獲得了洞察力，但此時想要劃清界限，為時已晚。
6. In addition, they find out what it's like to be deceived. In a sense, the Tempter didn't lie to them, but he tricked them. He told a half-truth. What happened was a letdown. Not what they were expecting or hoping for. In a sense he held up his end of the bargain, but they were too naive to appreciate what they are in for. They gain insight through hindsight rather than foresight, at which point it's too late to recross the line.
 
7. 就其本身而言，他們的行動幾乎沒有改變任何事。他們如今知道做了某件被禁止的事是怎樣的感覺。僅此而已。但這是非常令人失望的。那是非常空洞的。就像在一個空無一人的十字路口闖了紅燈一般。
7. In itself, their action changes next to nothing. They now know what it feels like to do something forbidden. That's all. But that's disappointing. That's very thin. Like running a red light at a deserted intersection.
 
8. 但是，既然違反了禁令就應當受到懲罰。因此，他們的行為生出了恐懼感。對善與惡的認識讓他們對將要發生的事有了預感。而事實上，報應倏忽而至，他們立刻被逐出了花園，被禁止接近生命樹。從此之後，他們必須與荒涼的環境、衰老和死亡作鬥爭。
8. However, violating the prohibition is punishable. So their action fosters a sense of dread. Knowledge of good and evil instills foreboding about what awaits them. And, indeed, retribution is swift, as they are banished from the garden. Shut off from access to the tree of life. From hereon out they must struggle with inhospitable conditions, aging, and death.