Part 3. Genetic
“….And the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.” 19. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto the man to see what he would call them: and whatsoever the man called every living creature, that was the name thereof”
“…20. And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not found a help meet for him. 21. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof. 22. And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23. And the man said, “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” 24. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh”
AK and genetics in the context of the Torah can be intriguingly explored, especially in light of modern scientific discoveries in this field. For instance, one might consider the account of the creation of AK as the dawn of human genetic history.
If we recall that the Torah speaks of the creation of the AK from the “dust of the earth,” modern science can offer an interpretation of this moment as the dawn of genetic diversification. From the perspective of genetics, each person is unique, yet we all share a common set of genes, emphasizing the unity of mankind, which began from a single “ancestor.” We can also consider the idea of the moral component “imprinted” in the human genetic code, which in the traditional interpretation of the Torah is linked to the concept of the soul given by the AK. This allows us to discuss issues of moral responsibility and freedom of choice at the biological level.
Based on the analysis of the Torah text offered below, we can assume that AK came to the realization that none of the animals were suitable for him as a mate through a process of observation and interaction with animals, which may have been metaphorically described in the Talmud as sexual intercourse (א “ר אלעזר מאי דכתיב (בראשית ב, כג) זאת הפעם עצם מעצמי ובשר מבשרי מלמד שבא אדם על כל כל בהמה וחיה ולא נתקררה דעתו עד שבא על חוה). The word ba, she-ba, specifically refers to sexual intercourse in the simple sense.
The idea that AKs were introduced to animals as a way of demonstrating genetic diversity and the need for specific genetic complementarity for reproduction can be interpreted as an understanding of the biological basis of species identification and reproduction. Moreover, AKs presented it was the genetic complex of animals, not the animals themselves.
From the perspective of genetics, each species on Earth possesses a unique set of genes (genetic code proper), regulated by a system of specific tags (epigenetic code) and organized into a specific set of chromosomes (chromosomal genetic code) that determines its physiological and reproductive characteristics. A unique species-specific set of genes, through the genetic code (via the correspondence of codons to amino acids in proteins), determines a specific set of proteins, and through them, the sum of specific phenotypic traits (at the biochemical, physiological, and morphological levels) of organisms of that species.
There are significant similarities between human and animal DNA. For instance, genetic differences at the level of DNA sequences between humans and chimpanzees are about 1%. Yet, we can still speak of the species specificity of the genome as a program for the realization of hereditary traits. The implementation of this program is also influenced by the “epigenetic code.” The epigenome is a set of molecular tags that regulate the activity of genes without altering the primary structure of DNA.
These tags can include methylation and demethylation of DNA bases (cytosine), acetylation, and deacetylation of chromatin proteins—histones. The significance of these marks lies in their ability to “turn off” or “turn on” certain genes. Such epigenetic changes are mainly conserved across a series of mitotic cell divisions but can also be passed on to the next generation, representing a system of regulation of inherited changes in gene activity. At a higher level of organization, the genome, as a complex of several DNA molecules (46 in humans) and specific proteins, is organized into chromatin, from which chromosomes are composed. At this level of genetic material organization, the karyotype (a set of chromosomes of a certain number, size, and shape) is a species-specific characteristic of the genome.
AK, observing different chromosome sets in various species, could “realize” that he needed an individual with compatible genetic material to create offspring, leading to the creation of Hawa.[1]
Since the division of precursors of sex cells (meiosis) requires a pair of chromosomes (in males during meiosis – it is a pair of XY; one sperm gets the X chromosome – at fusion with an egg carrying the X chromosome, it gives rise to a female organism (XX), in the other – Y, at fusion with an egg, it gives rise to a male organism – XY). Therefore, a woman must also have two sex chromosomes (for the normal process of reproduction, when two chromosomes diverge during meiosis).
This can be achieved by creating another copy of the X chromosome, ensuring both male and female have the same number of chromosomes – 46. It should also be noted that when “creating” a female organism – when two X chromosomes enter one zygote, one of them is randomly inactivated (this mechanism, existing in nature, is called “dose compensation of genes”). Thus, of the chromosomes determining sex in a woman, only one X chromosome functions, while in a man – both X and Y chromosomes (an allegory of subordination – proportionate support).
From the perspective of modern biology, each species is characterized by unique genetic features that determine its reproductive and physiological functions. Chromosomal differences between species prevent interbreeding: for example, different numbers of chromosomes in different species prevent them from successfully reproducing. AK, observing animals, could symbolically realize this biological incompatibility, which is described in the text as his inability to find a suitable mate among them.
Bringing the animals to AK for him to name them also symbolizes his role as a “naming agent” and grants him dominion over nature. However, since no animal could become his equal, this underscores the necessity of creating another human being who could truly be his counterpart—later accomplished with the creation of Havah.
These aspects allow us to delve deeper into the text, seeing it not merely as a description of events, but as a profound lesson about human nature, genetic uniqueness, and the moral dimensions of man as a person.
Assuming that AK possessed universal knowledge in the context of allegory and could perceive and analyze genetic information at a level accessible to modern science, we can imagine the following scenario to explain his conclusion that animals were not suitable as mates.
Genetic Markers and Their Perception
Analysis of Chromosome Sets: AK could visually or cognitively evaluate the chromosome sets of animals and compare them to his own. He noticed that all animals had characteristic sex chromosomes (XX in females and XY in males in most mammals), but their genetic material, chromosome structure, and number of chromosomes (i.e., karyotypes) were different from his own, making them genetically incompatible for creating offspring.[2]
By analyzing the protein profiles and phenotypes of the animals, AK could determine that the functional and morphological characteristics of the animals differed significantly from his own, precluding the possibility of successfully conceiving with them and producing stable and healthy offspring.
Let’s break down each point in detail, imagining that AK had the ability to analyze and understand genetic information at the level of modern scientists.
Chromosomes are structures within the nucleus of cells, containing DNA intricately organized with proteins called histones. In eukaryotes, including animals and humans, chromosomes become visible under the microscope only during cell division, when the DNA is condensed into its most compact form.
Species differ in their number of chromosomes. For instance, humans possess 46 chromosomes, chimpanzees have 48, and dogs boast 78. Adam could determine the karyotype of each animal and compare them to his own, noting that the karyotypes of other species were incompatible with his own for reproductive purposes. When crossed, different chromosome sets lead to problems with cell division (meiosis and mitosis) and the formation of viable gametes. AK could analyze the structure of chromosomes, identifying genes responsible for key physiological functions and the potential for recombination. Differences in DNA structure and sequences between his own chromosomes and those of animals could indicate that successful recombination was not possible. Homologous recombination involves the exchange of identical parts of chromosomes, which leads to additional genetic diversity in the human population, ensuring that almost no two people are exactly alike. Such recombination is possible between homologous chromosomes. The chromosome sets of different species are non-homologous, making successful recombination impossible. In humans, non-homologous recombination can occur (due to errors), but this often results in damage—mutations that lead to hereditary diseases.
Genome size also varies among species, as does the organization of genes within chromosomes. For example, the human genome contains approximately 3 billion base pairs, whereas this can vary greatly in other mammals. AK could appreciate these differences and realize that animal genetic codes are too diverse and incompatible to create stable and viable hybrids.
Such an analysis of chromosome sets would allow AK to realize that successful reproduction requires not only physical but also genetic compatibility, which is impossible between different species due to such significant differences. These differences determine the genetic characteristics of an organism and are crucial for reproduction.
AK could identify and compare sex chromosomes (XY in males and XX in females) among different animals. He notices that all mammals have a similar sex determination system, but the specific genetic markers and chromosome structures differ. The realization that reproductive compatibility requires an individual with matching XX chromosomes may have been the key to understanding the need to create Hawa.
By studying the genes responsible for reproductive functions, AK could find that although animals have similar reproductive systems, the specific genetic sequences and their expression (which control the development of reproductive organs and behavior) are different. This confirms that successful reproduction requires a partner with compatible genes.
By studying genetic markers associated with fertility and offspring survival, AK concludes that only a living organism with similar genetic markers can be a suitable partner. This is based on a comparison of genes responsible for the immune system, fetal development, and other important aspects that determine successful reproduction.
By analyzing proteins, especially those involved in reproductive processes, AK might have noticed that only similarity at the protein level can guarantee compatibility. This includes proteins involved in fertilization processes, such as sperm and egg surface proteins.
Evaluation of Genomic Sequences
The genome, a magnificent tapestry of nucleotides in DNA, dictates how an organism develops, looks, and functions. AK, in his profound wisdom, analyzed this sequence by comparing animal genomes with his own. The differences he found resulted in varied protein synthesis and phenotypes, rendering each species unique and genetically incompatible for creating viable and healthy offspring.
Comparison of Genetic Markers of Immune Compatibility
Genetic markers, the silent sentinels of the immune system, play a crucial role in reproductive compatibility. Differences in these markers between species can lead to immunological incompatibility, thwarting the survival and reproduction of offspring. AK could discern that animals possessed entirely different markers, signifying that their immune systems were not compatible for successful reproduction and offspring survival.
Observation of Protein Expression and Phenotypic Traits
Proteins, the tireless workers of living organisms, are synthesized based on the genetic code. AK, through his keen analysis of protein expression, could see that the proteins expressed by animals were vastly different from his own, resulting in differences in morphology, physiology, and behavior. These phenotypic differences made reproductive interactions impossible. Proteins determine the structure of tissues, the function of organs, and even behavioral traits critical for attracting mates and successfully reproducing within a species. Differences in protein expression between AK and animals could encompass everything from muscle and bone structure to systems regulating body temperature and environmental responses. For instance, proteins involved in pheromone formation could be markedly different, rendering chemical communication between AK and animals ineffective. This realization underscores that without a shared language of biological and chemical signals essential for attraction and reproduction within a species, creating a productive and functional family unit is impossible.
Chromosome Homology and Gene Specification
Chromosomes may have homologous regions that indicate similar origins or evolutionary pathways. AK, by analyzing chromosome homology in himself and animals, could find that although some genes may be similar (e.g., genes encoding basic cellular functions or proteins), the structural and functional contexts of these genes differ significantly. This difference underscores that even when genes are similar, their expression and regulation in different species result in very different physiological and behavioral manifestations.
Comparative Genomics
Through comparative genomics, AK could analyze how different species have evolved their unique genetic traits to adapt to their environments. This analysis would show that successful reproduction requires not just chromosome compatibility, but also the coherence of ecological and biological adaptations. Differences in these adaptations make interbreeding between species biologically unproductive and potentially dangerous to the genetic stability of the offspring.
Molecular Biology Techniques
If we imagine that AK had universal knowledge, he could have used analogs of molecular biology techniques that exist today, to analyze and compare genomes in detail.[3]
Adam was also aware of those methods of genome analysis that civilization had not yet developed.
Bioinformatics and Computer Modeling
Using bioinformatics methods and computer modeling, AK could accurately analyze and predict the results of genetic interactions between different genes. A specific set of genes and regulatory elements forms a specific gene network system characteristic of each species. Using bioinformatics methods, AK could accurately analyze and predict the potential results of crossbreeding, possible genetic conflicts, and incompatibilities in the formation of unified functional network genetic structures consisting of heterogeneous subsystems of different species.
Ethical and Philosophical Reflections
Ultimately, Adam could also reflect on the ethical and philosophical dimensions of his knowledge and capabilities. The realization that genetic compatibility is critical to maintaining the health and stability of a species underscores the significance of the biodiversity and specialization that evolution has shaped among living things. This understanding emphasizes the importance of respect for natural processes and the need to cherish biological life on Earth.
Thus, even in a hypothetical scenario, the decisions and conclusions of AK are supported by sophisticated and multifaceted analyses that emphasize the complexity of living nature and the need for a deep understanding of biological and genetic processes to make informed decisions. This deep and comprehensive analysis of genetic information at different levels of its organization emphasizes that successful and healthy reproduction requires not only compatible chromosomes, but also the coherence of many other biological and genetic factors that are specific to each species. This realization was key to AK’s understanding of the need for a partner who is genetically and biologically similar to him, which ultimately led to the creation of Hawa as a perfectly compatible partner.
Conclusions
Let’s combine all aspects into a single, coherent part of the article, focusing on AK’s genetic research and his search for the perfect mate, which was the basis for the allegory of the sexual search in the Torah. AK, with his deep knowledge, concludes that creating compatible human offspring requires not just physical proximity, but deep biological similarity. This insight confirms the allegory of sexual exploration as a metaphor for the deep exploration of biological compatibility. The latter can also be metaphorically visualized as finding the right key to the lock, which is AK.
He allegorized sexual relations with animals. Sex in this case can be considered as a genetic analysis of the animal for compatibility. By analyzing for genetic compatibility for reproduction, AK conditionally entered into sexual relations with each animal. It can be assumed that sex described in the Talmud is an allegory, used because of the obvious impossibility to convey the reality of what happened, since the events took place more than 5,000 years ago.
The story of the creation of Adam and Havah in the Torah holds a profound allegorical meaning, which, when examined through the lens of modern genetics, reveals new dimensions. AK, in his quest to understand that animals were not suitable for mating, did not engage in sexual relations with them but conducted a series of studies with universal knowledge. He performed thorough genetic analyses to find the key among the animals that would suit him and enable reproduction. AK analyzed biological material (using methods such as chromosomal analysis, genomics, epigenomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, physiomics, interactomics, etc.) responsible for reproductive functions, examining how they affect the development of reproductive organs and behavior. He discovered that only humans possess genes and their products capable of maintaining compatibility at the reproductive level with himself.
AK’s research confirmed that only deep genetic and biochemical similarities could produce a compatible human partner. The results of this “sexual matching” of the key to the lock led AK to conclude that no animal could be a suitable partner for him. In this context, he realized that what was needed was an individual genetically similar to him, yet different but compatible for the possibility of procreation and diversity of offspring, leading to the creation of Hawa from his own genetic material.
This not only emphasizes the uniqueness of human nature but also illustrates a deeper allegory embedded in the Torah texts. The creation of Havah from AK’s “rib” symbolizes not only a physical but also a genetic connection, emphasizing the idea that the ideal partner, despite genetic, physiological, and morphological differences, must be not just similar but identical in key genetic and biochemical characteristics.
Moreover, it not only ensured biological compatibility but also symbolized the deep connection and equality between man and woman, highlighting the special importance of these aspects in human relationships and society. It emphasized the moral and ethical lesson about the significance of a profound connection between partners, which lies at the heart of successful and lasting relationships.
All these aspects lead to the realization that AK, as a representative of humanity, needed a partner who was not only similar on a biological level but also capable of equal intellectual and emotional interaction. The creation of Hawa from AK’s “rib” in this context symbolizes not only genetic similarity but also the idea that human relationships require a deep interconnectedness and compatibility that cannot be achieved with other species. This interpretation of events not only showcases the uniqueness of human nature but also emphasizes the moral and philosophical significance of conscious choice and partnership based on mutual understanding and respect.
From the vantage point of the present day, it can be argued that AK’s analysis not only substantiates the necessity of the creation of Hawa as the only possible commensurate support but also shows how ancient texts contain ideas that find confirmation in the most modern scientific research. This makes the story not an outdated myth but an eternally relevant illustration of profound scientific and philosophical principles whose importance only grows as our knowledge of man and nature advances. This approach allows us to view biblical allegories through the lens of modern scientific knowledge, enriching traditional interpretations of the texts and providing new angles for contemplating the relationship between science and spirituality.
Let me conclude with one allegorical judgment that may be useful for logical “linkage” to the parts that follow.
The metaphor of “sexual search” as finding the key to the lock leads not only to the conclusion that Hawa is the only key that fits the “lock” of AK and opens it for the continuation of the race. Thus, through Hawa, it becomes possible to open the world to the emergence of new “observers.” As a result, after a single “observer,” a second one—Hawa—appears. But her appearance (and only in dualistic unity with AK—the key to the lock) enables the emergence of offspring, the continuation of the race, and the filling of the world with “observers,” thus allowing the fullness of the Divine to enter the world. Additionally, it is Hawa who is the “key” passed down through the female line from generation to generation, realizing the possibility of the continuation of the race.
REFERENCES
[1] The “rib taking” scene can be interpreted as an allegorical description of cloning and genetic engineering using AK’s genetic material to create a genetically compatible Hava for reproduction. In interpreting this aspect, the following observations must be made. In “rib taking” and subsequent cloning, it is only possible to obtain an absolutely identical genetic individual. In this context, the following interpretation is possible: cloning (obtaining an absolutely genetically identical individual – by taking genetic material from AK) and its further modification by genetic engineering methods to create a different but genetically compatible individual. That is, if only cloning is used, a genetically identical organism (46 chromosomes, sex chromosomes are XY) can be created from a “rib” of AK. What is necessary for female development is in the X chromosome, for male development – Y chromosome is additionally necessary. Autosomes – 44 chromosomes (22 pairs) of non-sex chromosomes in men and women are the same, which characterizes genetic compatibility in reproduction, and the difference between men and women – only on sex chromosomes, which determines both their sexual difference, and simultaneously and their complementarity for the continuation of the species. If by methods of genetic engineering to remove the “male beginning” (Y chromosome), it is possible to create an additional copy of the X chromosome to obtain the same number of chromosomes (necessary for the normal course of reproduction processes at the cellular level of meiosis and mitosis). Thus, we come to the fact that “from the rib” of AK an organism genetically similar to AK and compatible for further reproduction and, at the same time, different from it was created. This not only emphasizes the unity of the human race, but also reflects modern achievements in the field of genetic engineering, where it is possible to create another organism from the cells of one organism.
[2] Evaluation of genomic sequences. With the assumption of universal knowledge in AK – he may have had the ability to analyze genomic sequences at the nucleotide pair level. He saw that DNA orders in animals differed from his own. Most notably, these differences manifested themselves in the more complex organization of regulatory (governing and organizing the work of other genes) sequences. This confirmed their unsuitability as a pair for reproductive purposes.
Comparing genetic markers of compatibility: AK could also assess biological markers of compatibility such as, for example, features of the immune system, which differ between animals and humans. These markers are important for successful compatibility, reproduction and survival of offspring.
[3] For example, various types of polymerase chain reaction, DNA sequencing, RNA sequencing, DNA microarrays, FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization), on the basis of which new approaches to genome analysis are being developed, including GWA study (genome-wide association studies), transcriptomic technologies, etc. These methods allow not only to identify specific DNA sequences but also to assess genetic diversity at the molecular level, which gives an accurate picture of genetic compatibility. These methods allow not only to identify and compare specific DNA sequences, but also to assess genetic diversity at the molecular level, which gives an accurate picture of genetic compatibility.