Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
The rest of God on the sabbath and the sanctification of the sabbath are described. Second, at verse 8, the planting of paradise and its four rivers. Third, at verse 18, the formation of Eve from the rib of Adam. Fourth, at verse 23, the institution of marriage in Adam and Eve.
Vulgate Text: Genesis 2:1-25
1. So the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the furniture of them. 2. And God completed on the seventh day His work which He had made, and He rested on the seventh day from all the work which He had done. 3. And He blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because in it He had ceased from all His work, which God created to make. 4. These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth: 5. and every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth, and every herb of the ground before it grew; for the Lord God had not rained upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the earth. 6. But a spring rose out of the earth, watering all the surface of the earth. 7. And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth, and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul. 8. And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein He placed the man whom He had formed. 9. And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold and pleasant to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 10. And a river went out of the place of pleasure to water paradise, which from thence is divided into four heads. 11. The name of one is Phison: that is it which compasseth all the land of Hevilath, where gold groweth: 12. and the gold of that land is very good; there is found bdellium, and the onyx stone. 13. And the name of the second river is Gehon: the same is it that compasseth all the land of Ethiopia. 14. And the name of the third river is Tigris: the same passeth along by the Assyrians. And the fourth river is Euphrates. 15. And the Lord God took man, and put him into the paradise of pleasure, to dress it, and to keep it. 16. And He commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat: 17. but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat: for in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death. 18. And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone: let Us make him a help like unto himself. 19. And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam, to see what he would call them: for whatsoever Adam called any living creature, the same is its name. 20. And Adam called all the animals by their names, and all the fowls of the air, and all the beasts of the earth; but for Adam there was not found a helper like himself. 21. Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, He took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it. 22. And the Lord God built the rib which He took from Adam into a woman; and brought her to Adam. 23. And Adam 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. Wherefore a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. 25. And they were both naked, Adam and his wife, and were not ashamed.
This chapter contains a recapitulation: for the formation of paradise took place on the third day; and the creation of Eve and the institution of marriage took place before the sabbath, on the sixth day, namely Friday, on which Adam was created. Moses therefore explains and narrates more fully here these things and other matters which he had touched upon briefly in chapter 1.
Verse 1: All the Furniture of Heaven and Earth Was Completed
1. ALL THE FURNITURE — that is, the stars and also the angels, who adorn heaven, just as birds adorn the air, fish the sea, and plants and animals the earth. For "furniture" (ornatus), the Hebrew is tsaba, that is, army, battle line, militia, power, adornment; for nothing is more ornate than an ordered battle line. Hence God is called the Lord of hosts (Deus exercituum), that is, of the angels and stars, which like soldiers serve God in an established order, move, rise, set, and not rarely fight for God against the impious, as I noted at Judges 5:20.
Verse 2: And God Completed on the Seventh Day His Work
2. AND GOD COMPLETED ON THE SEVENTH DAY HIS WORK. — "On the seventh day," namely exclusively: for inclusively God completed His work on the sixth day, as the Septuagint has it. For He began on Sunday and completed it on the sixth day, or Friday, so that on the following seventh day He rested, which from this rest of God was called the sabbath. The symbolic and arithmetical reason why the world was perfected in six days is given by St. Augustine, Book 4 of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, ch. 1; Bede, and Philo, in the book On the Creation of the World; namely, because the number six is the first perfect number: for it is composed of its first parts, namely unity, the binary, and the ternary; for one, two, and three make six.
Symbolically, the six days signify six thousand years, for which this fabric of the world will endure (for a thousand years before God are as one day, Psalm 89:4), so that when they are completed, the Antichrist will come, the day of judgment, and the sabbath, that is, the rest of the Saints in heaven. So teach St. Jerome in his Exposition of Psalm 89, addressed to Cyprian; Irenaeus, Book 5, final chapter; Justin, Question 71 to the Gentiles; St. Augustine, Book 20 of the City of God, ch. 7, and others. Hence also the six first parents -- Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Malaleel, Jared -- died, but the seventh, Enoch, was translated alive into heaven, because after six millennia of years of labor and death, eternal life will follow, says Isidore in the Glossa, ch. 5. See what was said at Revelation 20:6.
"His work" — of the creation of new species; for the work of governing, preserving, and producing new individuals God still carries out even now, as is clear from John 5:17.
HE RESTED — not from fatigue, but from work; hence the Hebrew is shabat, that is, He ceased. Aristobulus, cited by Eusebius in Book 13 of the Preparation for the Gospel, ch. 6, interprets "He rested" differently: He says it means that He gave to the things He had created rest, that is, stability, permanence, perpetuity, and a fixed, established, and unchangeable order. Wherefore the word "He rested" tacitly signifies the preservation of created things, together with God's continual cooperation with them in their proper actions and motions. For, as St. Augustine says in the Sentences, no. 277: "The omnipotence of the omnipotent Creator is the cause of the subsistence of every creature; if this power were ever to cease governing the things it created, at once the species and nature of all things would collapse. Thus what the Lord says, 'My Father works even until now,' shows a certain continuation of His work, by which He simultaneously contains and administers all things. In which work also His wisdom perseveres, of which it is said: 'She reaches from end to end mightily, and orders all things sweetly.' The Apostle also holds the same, when preaching to the Athenians he says: 'In Him we live, and move, and have our being.' Because if He were to withdraw His work from created things, we could neither live, nor move, nor exist. And therefore God is to be understood as having rested from all His works in this sense: that He would create no new creature, not that He would cease to sustain and govern those already created."
The same St. Augustine learnedly teaches in the Sentences, no. 145, that God is affected in the same way whether He is at rest or at work. "Therefore," he says, "neither a lazy vacation nor a laborious industry is to be conceived in God, who knows how to act while resting and to rest while acting; and what in His works is indeed prior or posterior is to be referred not to the Maker but to the things made. For His will is eternal and unchangeable, nor is it altered by shifting counsel." Hence Philo, in the book of Allegories, translates not "He rested" but "He caused to rest the things He had begun"; because, he says, God never rests, but just as it is proper to fire to burn and to snow to cool, so it is proper to God to work. The Hebrew, however, properly means "He rested," as the Chaldean, our Vulgate, and the Septuagint translate it.
Symbolically, Junilius, Bede, and St. Augustine (Book 4 of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, ch. 12) teach that this rest of God on the sabbath was a figure of the rest of Christ in the tomb on the sabbath day, after He had completed the work of our redemption on the sixth day through His passion and death.
Anagogically, this was a type of the rest of the Saints in heaven: for there they will keep an everlasting sabbath, about which more at Deuteronomy 5:12.
Verse 3: And He Blessed the Seventh Day
3. AND HE BLESSED THE SEVENTH DAY — that is, He praised, commended, and approved the seventh day, says Philo: thus we bless God when we praise Him. Second and better, "He blessed" means, as follows, He sanctified it -- He decreed the seventh day to be holy and a festival. For just as it is a great blessing for a man to be sanctified, so it is also for a feast day.
AND HE SANCTIFIED IT. — Not on this very seventh day, which was the first sabbath in the world, but afterwards, in the time of Moses, according to Exodus 20:8. So says Abulensis, who thinks these things are said here by anticipation. Second and better, others hold that God sanctified the sabbath already at that time, not in act and reality, but by His decree and purpose -- as if to say: Because God rested on the seventh day, He thereby designated that day as sacred to Himself, so that it would be appointed by Moses as a feast day to be observed by the Jews. So say Pererius, Bede, and Jerome Prado on chapter 20 of Ezekiel. Third and most plainly, God from the very beginning of the world, on this first sabbath day...
"Sanctified it," that is, He actually instituted it as a festival, and wished it to be observed by Adam and his posterity with sacred leisure and the worship of God, especially by recalling the benefit of His creation and of the whole world, completed on that day.
From this it is clear that the sabbath was a festival instituted and sanctioned originally not by Moses (Exodus 20:8), but by God much earlier, namely from the origin of the world, on this very first sabbath of the world. The same is gathered from Exodus 16:23 and Hebrews 4:3, as I showed there. So say Ribera in the same place, Philo, and Catharinus here. This precept of the sabbath was therefore divine, not natural but positive; hence by Christ and the Apostles the feast was transferred from the sabbath to Sunday.
WHICH GOD CREATED TO MAKE — that is, which He created by making, and by creating He made and perfected: for this repetition of the same verb by way of synonymy, whereby it says "He created to make," signifies this perfection of the work.
Verse 4: These Are the Generations of Heaven and Earth
4. THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS (that is, the creations) OF HEAVEN AND EARTH. — Whence it follows: "When they were created in the day," that is, in the entire time of the six days, about which see chapter 1. So Bede and others.
Those words refer to what preceded in chapter 1, forming as it were a conclusion to them, in this way: And such indeed were the origins of heaven and earth when they were created. The Hebrew word toledot, from the verb yalad, properly denotes "generations"; but because Hebrew history was customarily interwoven with genealogical tables, hence toledot in a broader sense denotes narration, history, and is used in such passages where there is no mention of generation. Cf. Genesis 37:2.
Verse 5: And Every Plant of the Field
5. AND EVERY SHRUB. — Connect these words with verse 4, thus: "In the day when the Lord made heaven and earth, and every shrub" (the Hebrew siach means something sprouted or germinating) "before it grew up in the earth," namely by the natural course and the power of seed, as it now grows. For Moses only wishes to say that the first production of shrubs and of paradise — to which he gradually descends — is to be attributed not to nature, not to the earth, not to seed, but to the power and operation of God. And he proves this from the fact that, since all herbs and shrubs come forth through the influence of heaven and the industry and cultivation of man, at that time there was not yet a man to sow and cultivate the earth; nor was there yet rain to water the sown crops.
Second, from the Hebrew it could be more plainly translated thus: on the day (the first of the world) when God made heaven and earth, every shrub of the field was not yet (for this is what terem means, as is clear from Exodus 9:30: "I knew that you did not yet [Hebrew terem] fear the Lord") in the earth, and every herb of the region was not yet sprouting, but a fountain was ascending from the earth.
Saadias translates in Arabic: nor did a fountain rise from the earth, repeating the negative particle from above.
For God before all things first created heaven and earth, and this fountain or abyss of waters, in whose womb and bosom — which contained the water of the whole region — it at some time flooded the whole earth by irrigating it; then He narrates more copiously every shrub and the other things which He had touched upon briefly in chapter 1.
Verse 6: But a Fountain Rose Out of the Earth
6. BUT A FOUNTAIN HAD RISEN FROM THE EARTH. — You will ask, what is this fountain?
First opinion. First, Aquila, the Chaldean, and some Hebrews, as well as Molina, Pererius, and Delrio, translate the Hebrew ed as "vapor" — namely, the vapor which the sun drew up from the earth by its force, which afterwards, condensed by the cold of night and dissolved into dew and moisture, irrigated the earth and its sprouts at the beginning of the world, until shortly after God gave rains to the earth to water it.
This vapor and dew therefore served at that time in place of rain and moisture, by which the newly created plants were nourished; for it was fitting that the first days of the world should be clear and serene.
You will ask: how is this vapor called a fountain by our translator and by the Septuagint? I answer: because it inundated the earth like a fountain. For thus Aristotle, in Book 1 of the Meteorology, ch. 1, calls the clouds, which arise from waters and are accustomed to turn back into waters, a circular and perennial river, or ocean, which flows and floats through the air.
Refutation. But this opinion is opposed by the fact that in the preceding verse Moses denied that there was then any rain or similar celestial moisture to water the earth. Furthermore, "vapor" is a very improper term for "fountain"; and the Hebrew ed does not signify vapor, but rather a torrent of waters (as is clear from Job 36:27), and thence a calamity and disaster which, like a torrent, overwhelms and engulfs men, as is clear from Jeremiah 47:16 and elsewhere. Hence Oleaster translates ed as "inundation."
Second opinion (improbable). Second, St. Augustine, Book 5 of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, ch. 9 and 10: At the beginning of the world, he says, there was properly one fountain, which at a set time, overflowing like the Nile, watered the sprouts of the earth. But that there was such a fountain that watered the whole earth by flooding it is scarcely credible.
Far more incredible is what the Glossa Interlinearis adds, that the whole earth was watered by this overflowing fountain until the time of Noah, so that before Noah there were never any rains in the world.
Third opinion (probable). Third, therefore better, in the same place St. Augustine, Philo, and Pope Nicholas writing to the Emperor Michael: A fountain, he says, that is, fountains, streams, and rivers were ascending from the earth: for all the waters, as I said at chapter 1, verse 9, were gathered into one place, as into one fountain or matrix. For Moses here only recapitulates and reviews in general the creation of things, which he had narrated in order in chapter 1, as if to say: God alone at the beginning of the world made every shrub everywhere in the whole earth; and I prove this from the fact that at that time there was not yet a man to plant these shrubs, nor rain to water them; but only a fountain, that is, various rivers and springs flowing from one great source-matrix (about which I spoke at chapter 1, verse 9) watered the whole earth here and there. But these could not, without rain, supply moisture for germination everywhere to lands remote from them; therefore God alone at that time produced these sprouts and shrubs.
Fourth opinion (genuine/correct). Fourth, from the Hebrew it may be explained more plainly and solidly thus: "fountain," in Hebrew ed, that is, a torrent or inundation — namely, that primordial abyss of waters about which I spoke at chapter 1, verse 2 — was watering and covering the whole earth, as if the whole earth were one fountain. For Moses merely summarizes this as the first matrix of all things in this one verse, just as shortly before at verse 4 he recapitulated the creation of heaven and earth. For God before all things first created heaven and earth, and this fountain or abyss of waters. The meaning therefore is, as if to say: Just as God alone created heaven and earth and the abyss of waters, so He alone separated the water from the earth and uncovered the dry land, and produced from it the plants, paradise, man, and all other things, which afterwards He preserved and propagated through rain and dew. Hence, as I said at verse 5, from the Hebrew you may translate plainly and clearly thus: "On the day when God made heaven and earth, every shrub of the field was not yet in the earth, and every herb of the region was not yet sprouting, but a fountain" — that is, an inundation, namely the abyss of waters, which seemed to emerge and rise from the earth — "was watering and covering the whole earth."
Verse 7: And the Lord God Formed Man from the Slime of the Earth
7. AND THE LORD GOD FORMED MAN FROM THE SLIME OF THE EARTH, AND BREATHED INTO HIS FACE THE BREATH OF LIFE, AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL. — The Chaldean paraphrases: man became a speaking soul; because speech, equally with reason, is proper to man.
Here Moses returns to the work of the sixth day, in order to explain more clearly the formation of man.
The five causes of man. Note first: Moses here assigns the five causes of man. The efficient cause is God. The matter is the slime of the earth, that is, earth mixed with water; whence also the corpse of man dissolves into earth and water, as into its constituent elements. The form is the breath of life. The exemplar is God: for man is the image of God. The end is that he should be a living soul, that is, a living thing or animal, namely sensing, moving himself, knowing himself and other things, and exercising all the works of life (this is synecdoche), and that he should rule over the other animals and the whole world.
How was Adam formed? Note second: The Hebrew words literally read thus: God formed — molded — man as dust, or clay from the earth. For the Hebrew yitsar and the Greek eplasen properly pertain to the potter's craft and mean the same as "He molded." Whence it seems that God first formed the body of man in the manner of a statue from the slime of the earth, either by Himself or through the angels (as St. Augustine suggests, and from him St. Thomas, Part I, Question 91, article 2, reply to 1), just as sculptors mold clay figures. And this is what Job 10:9 says: "Remember that You made me like clay." And Jeremiah 18:2 compares God to a potter and man to clay. Hence also in Wisdom 7:1, Adam is called protoplastos kai gegenes — "first-formed" and "earth-born"; and by the Apostle in 1 Corinthians 15:47, he is called "of the earth, earthly."
Then God gradually introduced into this clay man the dispositions of flesh and of the human body, and finally, simultaneously with the last disposition, He introduced the heterogeneous forms of the individual parts of the body; and together with these He infused — by creating — and He created — by infusing — the rational soul. And so man was made perfect, consisting of a human body and a rational soul. So says St. Chrysostom here in Homily 12, and Gennadius in the Catena; and God alone accomplished this by Himself. Hence St. Basil, St. Ambrose, and Cyril teach that man was created by the Most Holy Trinity alone, without any other helper: they call the contrary opinion a Jewish error.
St. Clement on the structure of the human body. Moreover, St. Clement, in Book 8 of the Recognitions, depicts so graphically the wonderful and divine structure of man and of each of his members: "See in the body of man the work of the Craftsman: how He inserted bones like certain columns by which the flesh is supported and carried; then that an equal measure is maintained on each side, that is, right and left; so that foot corresponds to foot, hand to hand, and fingers to fingers, that each matches its counterpart in total equality. And also eye to eye, ear to ear, which are formed not only in harmony and agreement with each other, but also suited to necessary uses. The hands indeed are designed to be useful for work, the feet for walking, the eyes to serve for seeing, guarded by the sentinels of the eyebrows; the ears are so formed for hearing that, resembling a cymbal, they render the reflected sound of the received word louder, and transmit it to the sense of the heart."
Hear the following, equally artful and wonderful: "The tongue, however, striking against the teeth, performs the office of a plectrum for speaking; and the teeth themselves — some to cut and divide food, and pass it to the inner ones, while the inner teeth grind and crush it like a mill, so that what is delivered to the stomach may be more conveniently cooked — hence they are called molars. And the nostrils are made for the passage of breath, and for expelling and receiving it, so that by the renewal of air, the natural heat which comes from the heart may be kindled or cooled as the need requires, through the office of the lung; which is placed close to the heart so that by its softness it may soothe and cherish the vigor of the heart, in which life seems to consist — I say life, not the soul. For what shall I say of the substance of the blood, which like a river proceeding from a fountain, first carried through one channel, then distributed through innumerable veins as through irrigation channels, waters the whole territory of the human body with vital streams, administered by the work of the liver; which lies on the right side for the effective digestion of food and its conversion into blood?"
Who from all these things would not clearly recognize the work of reason and the wisdom of the Creator?
St. Ambrose on the body as microcosm. The same creation of man is elegantly described by St. Ambrose in Book 6 of the Hexaemeron, ch. 9, where among other things he teaches that "the fabric of the human body is like the world. For just as heaven rises above the air, and the seas above the lands — which are as it were certain members of the world — so also we see the head rising above the other parts of our body; and in this citadel there dwells a certain royal wisdom. Again, what the sun and moon are in heaven, the eyes are in man. The sun and moon are the two luminaries of the world; the eyes shine above like certain stars in the flesh, and illuminate the lower parts with clear light — sentinels who indeed keep watch for us day and night. How beautiful the hair! What is man without a head, when the whole of him is in his head? His forehead is open, which by its appearance reveals the disposition of the mind. A certain image of the soul speaks in the face. The double rows of eyebrows extend defenses over the eyes and lend them grace. Learned physicians say that the brain of man is placed in the head on account of the eyes. The brain is the origin of the nerves and of all the senses. Most people hold that the heart is the origin of the arteries and of the innate heat by which the vital organs are animated and warmed. The nerves are, as it were, the instrument of each of the senses; like strings and chords they arise from the brain and are distributed through the parts of the body to their individual functions. And therefore the brain is softer, because it receives all the senses: for the nerves report to it everything that the eye has seen, the ear has heard, the smell has inhaled, the tongue has sounded, or the mouth has tasted. The winding of the inner ears provides a certain rhythm and measure for modulation. For through the convolutions of the ears a certain rhythm is produced, and the sound of the voice entering through certain channels is articulated. Why should I describe the rampart of the teeth, by which food is broken down and the voice receives its full expression? The tongue is like the plectrum of one speaking, and a kind of hand for one eating, which offers and serves the flowing food to the teeth. The voice also is carried on a certain oar-stroke of the air, now stirring, now soothing the feelings of the hearer. And so the silent thoughts of the mind are marked by the speech of the mouth. What then is the mouth of man, if not a certain sanctuary of speech, a fountain of discourse, a hall of words, a storehouse of the will?"
He then proceeds from the head to the other members, and says: "The hand is the bulwark of the whole body, the defender of the head, which shines forth in noble deeds, through which we offer, receive, and dispense the heavenly Sacraments. Who can worthily explain the framework of the chest and the softness of the belly? What is so beneficial as that the lung should be joined to the heart by a close boundary, so that when the heart blazes with anger and indignation, it may be quickly tempered by the blood and moisture of the lung? And therefore the lung is softer, because it is always moist, at the same time to soften the rigidity of indignation. The spleen also has a fruitful proximity to the liver; while it takes what it feeds upon, it cleanses away whatever impurities it finds, so that through the finer fibers of the liver, the thin and subtle remnants of food may pass through to be converted into blood and contribute to the body's strength. And the encircling coils of the intestines, though without any knot yet bound to one another — what else do they show but the divine providence of the Creator, so that food should not pass through quickly and run down immediately from the stomach? For if that happened, constant hunger and a continual craving to eat would be generated in men."
And after some more: "The pulse of the veins is the messenger either of sickness or of health; yet though they are spread throughout the whole body, they are neither bare nor uncovered, and are clothed with such light membranes that there is the opportunity to examine them and speed in perceiving, since there is no thickness of tissue that could obscure the pulse. All the bones also are covered with thin membrane and bound with sinews, but especially those of the head are covered with light skin, whence, so that they may have some protection against shadows and cold, they are clothed with thicker hair. What shall I say of the service of the feet, which sustain the whole body without any harm from the burden? The flexible knee, by which above all else the Lord's anger is appeased, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow. For there are two things that above all else please God: humility and faith. Man has two feet; for beasts and brute animals have four feet, birds have two. And therefore man is, as it were, one of the winged creatures, who seeks the heights with his gaze, and flies with a certain wing-beat of lofty thoughts; and therefore it is said of him: 'Your youth shall be renewed like the eagle's,' because he is closer to heavenly things and loftier than eagles, who can say: 'Our conversation is in heaven.'"
Hebrew Adam = red earth. Note third: For "slime of the earth," the Hebrew is aphar min haadama, that is, "dust from the earth"; the Septuagint translates: "taking dust from the earth." But this dust, says Tertullian, God coagulated into slime and a kind of clay by adding an excellent liquid. For dry dust is unsuitable for molding: therefore this dust was moistened, and hence it was slime.
Adam was created from the red earth of Hebron. Furthermore, Adama (from which he was formed and called "Adam") signifies red earth. Hence it is the tradition of many that Adam was created from the red earth which is in the field of Damascus — not the city of Damascus, but a certain field so called, which is near Hebron. For the Hebrews hand this down, and from them St. Jerome in his Hebrew Questions on this passage, Lyranus, Hugo, and Abulensis here, and in chapter 13, Question 138, Burchardus, Bredembachius, Saligniacus, and Adrichomius in his Description of the Holy Land, under Hebron; where they also note the Valley of Tears near Hebron, in which they say Adam wept for a hundred years over the death of Abel. They confirm this from Joshua 14:15, where it says: "The name of Hebron was formerly called Kirjath-arba. Adam, the greatest among the Anakim, is buried there."
But the genuine sense of that passage is far different, as I shall say there: for Adam was not of gigantic but of normal stature; otherwise he would have been a monstrosity of a man. Therefore John Lucidus and others err who think Adam was a giant. But to the point: I for my part, apart from the Hebrews who are occasionally given to fables, would wish to have other ancient authorities for this tradition.
Morally, Jeremiah is rightly sent by God (and we with him), in chapter 18, to the house of the potter, to contemplate his own matrix and origin, namely clay, that he may be humbled, and that he may learn and teach that all men are in the hand of God, just as clay is in the hand of the potter. Elegantly, the philosopher Secundus, when asked by the Emperor Hadrian: "What is man?" answered: "An incarnate mind, a phantom of time, a watchman of life, a passing traveler, a laboring soul." Epictetus moreover says: "Man is a lantern placed in the wind, a guest of his place, an image of the law, a tale of calamity, a slave of death."
The breath of life. Note fourthly: "The breath of life" is not the Holy Spirit, as Philastrius maintained in his Catalog of Heresies, chapter 99, whose error St. Augustine refutes in book XIII of The City of God, chapter 24; but it is the rational soul itself, which in man is at the same time vegetative and sensitive. For from it arises breathing in and breathing out, which is both a sign and an effect of life; and hence the soul is called psyche from psychazo, that is, "I take in coolness," for by breathing we are cooled. In Hebrew it is called nescama, and nephes, from the root naphas, that is, "he breathed."
For "life," the Hebrew is chaiim, that is, "of lives," because the rational soul bestows on man a threefold life, namely that of plants, of beasts, and of angels. Others say "of lives" because the openings of the nostrils are two, through which life, that is air, is drawn in by breathing. But the nostrils are not the breath of lives, but its receptacle, as I shall presently say. It is called "the breath of life" because respiration is so necessary for life that we cannot live even for a moment without it, says Galen in his book On the Usefulness of Respiration, chapter 11. Hence he says: Asclepiades said that respiration is the generation of the soul; but Praxagoras said it is not the generation of the soul, but its strengthening.
The rational soul created by God alone. Note fifthly: From this passage it is clear that the rational soul is not drawn out from matter, nor is it from traducianism, that is, it is not generated and propagated from the soul of the parent, as light spreads and propagates light, as Tertullian supposed, and as St. Augustine doubted in book VII of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, chapter 1 and following. For it is certain, as St. Jerome teaches, and all other Fathers (and this is the sense of the Church), that the soul is not created by angels, as the Seleucians maintained, but is created from without by God alone and infused into the human being. For this is what the word "He breathed" signifies, or, as Cyprian reads, "He breathed into the face," that is, into the whole body. It is a synecdoche: for from the face, in which all the vital operations flourish, and especially respiration, as from the noblest part, the whole body is understood.
Five reasons for "He breathed." He breathed, therefore, first, to show, says Theodoret, that it is as easy for God to create a soul as for a man to breathe. Second, so that we understand the soul was not drawn out of matter, nor is it from traducianism, as Tertullian supposed (who for that reason believed the soul, equally with God, to be corporeal, indeed shaped and colored, on the grounds that nothing is incorporeal), and as St. Augustine doubted in book VII of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, chapter 1, but was created from without by God. Third, that our soul is something divine, as it were a breath of God — not indeed so that you should believe it to be a part torn away from the divinity, as Epictetus seems to have held, Dissertations 1, chapter 14; Seneca, Epistle 92; Cicero, Tusculan Disputations I and On Divination I — but that the soul is the highest participation in the divinity, with respect to its spiritual nature. Fourth, that breathing in and out is so necessary for life that we cannot live even a moment without it; whence Galen, in his book On the Usefulness of Respiration, chapter 1, says: "Asclepiades said that respiration is the generation of the soul, Nicarchus its strengthening, Hippocrates its nourishment." Therefore, by breathing God creates man, as if He had wished to show that He could no more do without man for the completion of the universe, than man can do without respiration. Finally, when God communicated His own breath and soul to man, He communicated Himself, as if He had placed His own heart within him.
For "into the face," the Hebrew is beappav, which Aquila and Symmachus translate eis mykteras, that is, "into the nostrils": for in the nostrils breathing is active, which is a sign of the soul dwelling within. But our Translator renders it better as "into the face": for the soul is present and shines forth not only in the nostrils, but in the whole face, and consequently in the whole person, but especially in the face and head. Wherefore St. Ambrose, in book VI of the Hexaemeron, chapter 9, says that the structure of the human body is like the world. For just as the sky rises above the air, and the seas above the lands, which are as it were the limbs of the world: so also we see the head rising above the other parts of our body, and being the most excellent of all, like the sky among the elements, like a citadel amid the other walls of a city. And in this citadel, he says, a certain royal wisdom dwells. Whence Solomon said: "The eyes of the wise man are in his head." Hence also Lactantius, in his book On the Workmanship of God, chapter 5, says: At the summit of the body's construction, God Himself placed the head, in which would be the seat of governance for the whole living being; and this name was given to it, as Varro writes to Cicero, because from here the senses and nerves take their beginning.
The soul is not a particle of the divine substance. Some supposed that our soul is a part of the divine substance, as if it were said that God here breathed forth, that is, communicated a part of His own breath, spirit, and soul to man. But this is an ancient heresy, and the error of the Poets, who say the soul is "a particle of the divine breath," and apospasma (that is, a part torn away) of the divinity. So Epictetus held, Dissertations 1, chapter 14; Seneca, Epistle 92; Cicero, Tusculan Questions I and book I of On Divination. "He breathed," therefore, means that God created the breath, spirit, and soul, as an effect of His omnipotence, from nothing within man.
Seven definitions of the rational soul. Hence St. Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, Eucherius, and Lyranus define the rational soul thus: "The soul is a God-shaped breath of life." Second, the Author of On the Spirit and the Soul, found among St. Augustine's works, volume III: "The soul, he says, is a certain incorporeal substance, partaking of reason, fitted for governing the body." Third, Cassiodorus: "The soul, he says, is a spiritual substance, created by God, the life-giver of its body." Fourth, Seneca: "The soul, he says, is an intellectual spirit, ordered toward blessedness both in itself and in the body." Fifth, Damascenus: "The soul, he says, is an intellectual spirit, always living, always in motion, capable of good and evil will." Sixth, the Author of On the Spirit and the Soul: "The soul, he says, is the likeness of all things." Seventh, others: "The soul, they say, is a spiritual substance, simple and indissoluble, capable of suffering and change in the body."
Just as the Greeks distinguished psyche (the soul) which belongs to all living creatures, from nous (the mind) which is proper to man and demons; and likewise the Latins distinguished anima (soul) from animus or mens (mind): so the Hebrews by nishmat chaiim seem to mean the vital soul of whatever kind it may be, and by nephesh, the rational soul.
Verse 8: And the Lord God Planted a Paradise of Pleasure
And that they might long for the heavenly paradise, of which that earthly one was a type and image.
AND THE LORD GOD HAD PLANTED A PARADISE OF PLEASURE FROM THE BEGINNING.
"He had planted," that is, He had furnished and adorned it with plants, trees, and all the delights created by Himself.
Etymology of "Paradise." PARADISE. — Note: "Paradise" is not a Greek word, from para and deuo, that is, "I water," as Suidas would have it; nor, as others say, from para ten diaitan poieisthai, that is, from the gathering of herbs, so named; but it is a Persian word, says Pollux, or rather a Hebrew one: for pardes in Hebrew means a place of pleasure, from the root para, that is, "it bore fruit," and hadas, that is, "myrtle" — as if you would say, a garden of myrtles, or one in which myrtles flourish. For the myrtle surpasses other trees in its fragrance and flavor and delights.
Paradise was in Eden. OF PLEASURE. — The Septuagint retains the Hebrew word, translating it as "in Eden," which is a proper name of a place, and this is indicated by the Hebrew bet, that is, "in," and it is clear that Eden is the name of the place in which paradise was located, as is evident from verse 10 in the Hebrew, and will be more apparent below. But our Translator and Symmachus take Eden not as a proper name, but as a common noun, and then it signifies "pleasure." Hence from the Hebrew Eden some derive the Greek hedonen, that is, pleasure. Theodoret, in Question 25, thinks Adam was formed in Eden, and was named from Eden. For Eden, he says, means "red." But he errs: for Eden does not mean "red" in Hebrew, but "pleasure." Again, Adam was named from Adama, that is, the red earth from which he was formed, not from Eden: for Adam is written with aleph, but Eden with ayin.
FROM THE BEGINNING — namely on the third day of the world, as I said at chapter 1, verse 11. Therefore the author of IV Esdras, chapter 2, verse 6, errs, who interprets it so as to assert that paradise was planted before the earth. The Septuagint translates "toward the East"; whence it is clear that with respect to Judea (for Moses writes with respect to Judea, and so designates the regions of the world) paradise was toward the East, and that the Eastern region was the first to begin to be inhabited by Adam and humanity.
Hence St. Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Damascenus in book IV of On the Faith, chapter 13, teach that Christians pray turning toward the East, so that they may remember paradise, from which they were expelled through sin.
Location of Paradise
One may ask, what, of what kind, and where is paradise?
First opinion. First, Origen thinks that paradise is the third heaven, into which St. Paul was caught up; that the trees are angelic virtues; that the rivers are the waters that are above the firmament. The same is taught by Philo and the Seleucian heretics, as well as St. Ambrose in his book On Paradise. But St. Epiphanius, Augustine, Jerome, and others condemn this interpretation as heretical: for it twists the plain history of Genesis into the fictions of allegory. Hence St. Ambrose must be excused, in that he presupposes the literal text and its literal sense, and only traces out the allegory of paradise.
Second opinion. Second, others cited by Hugh of St. Victor think that paradise was the whole world; that the river is the Ocean, from which those four most famous rivers arise. But this too is an error; for these four rivers flow out of paradise. Again, Adam after his sin was cast out of paradise; but Adam was not cast out of the world: therefore the world is not paradise.
Third opinion. Third, others cited by the Master of the Sentences in book II, distinction 17, judge that paradise is a place entirely hidden and elevated up to the sphere of the moon: so Rabanus, Rupert, Strabo; or at least, as Abulensis and Alexander of Hales hold, that paradise is elevated above the middle region of the air; and therefore the waters of the flood did not reach it. But in that case paradise would be not on earth, but in the air or sky. Moreover, it would be very conspicuous and well known, just as the sun, moon, stars, and comets are seen by all.
Fourth opinion. Fourth, St. Ephrem, cited by Moses Bar-Cepha in his book On Paradise, thinks that our whole earth is encircled by the Ocean, and that beyond it, in another land and another world, paradise exists. But this too is an error: for the four rivers of paradise are in our own land and world.
Fifth opinion. Fifth, Cirvelus Darocensis in his Paradoxes, Question 15, and Alphonsus a Vera Cruce in his book On the Heavens, section 15, think that paradise was in Palestine, near the Jordan, in the land of Sodom; they argue from Genesis 13:10. Others maintain it was on the island of Taprobane, others in America. But these four rivers are neither in Palestine, nor in Taprobane, nor in America.
Sixth opinion. Sixth, St. Bonaventure and Durandus in book II, distinction 17, think that paradise is under the equator. For they suppose that there the greatest mildness of climate exists, where the days are always equal to the nights. But this is as vague and uncertain as it is inconclusive.
The difficulty of this question depends on two rivers, namely the Phison and the Geon: for whoever knew these, would easily trace paradise from them.
The Four Rivers
I say first, the opinion of many Fathers and Doctors is that the Geon is the Nile, and the Phison is the Ganges. So think St. Epiphanius, Augustine, Ambrose, Jerome, Theodoret, Josephus, Damascenus, Isidore, Eucherius, Rabanus, Rupert, and others, whom the Conimbricenses cite and follow in their commentary on the Meteorology, treatise 9, chapter 10, and Ribera on Amos 6, number 44, and Bellarmine, On the Grace of the First Man, chapter 12. And it is proved first, because the Septuagint at Jeremiah 2:18, translate "Geon" for the Nile: whence even today the Abyssinians call the Nile "Guijon," according to the testimony of Francisco Alvarez, History of Ethiopia, chapter 122. But it could be responded that Geon is the name of several rivers: for near Jerusalem there was also a stream called Geon, or Gion (for these two are the same, since in both cases the Hebrew has the same word gichon), where Solomon was anointed king, III Kings 1:33, 38, 45; II Paralipomenon 32:30.
Second, because the Ganges properly encircles the land of Havilah, that is, India (as St. Jerome teaches at Genesis 10:29, and others commonly), which lies within the Ganges, where there is the finest gold; indeed the Ganges itself, according to Pliny, bears gold and gems. Moreover, the Ganges is called Phison, that is, "abundance," from the root pus, that is, "to flourish, to multiply," because ten great rivers empty themselves into the Ganges. So Josephus, book I of the Antiquities, chapter 2, and Isidore, book XIII of the Etymologies, chapter 21. In like manner, the Geon, that is, the Nile, encircles Ethiopia, or Abyssinia, where Prester John reigns. The flooding of the Nile is also most famous: and Ecclesiasticus attributes this very flooding to the Geon in chapter 24, verses 35 and 37.
You will say: how can the Ganges and the Nile, which are very far from the Tigris and Euphrates, arise from the same source and river of paradise as those? For the Ganges rises in the Caucasus, a mountain of India; the Euphrates and Tigris in the mountains of Armenia; the Nile from the Mountains of the Moon, toward the Cape of Good Hope; or rather from a certain lake in the kingdom of Congo, as those who explored those places in this century have noted. But these sources are very far from one another, and consequently from the river of paradise.
This is indeed a great difficulty, to which St. Augustine responds in book VIII of On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, chapter 7, along with Theodoret, Rupert, and others, that the Ganges and the Nile do arise from the earthly paradise, but are hidden in underground tunnels and channels, until they burst forth in the places already mentioned, and this by God's design to conceal paradise. Indeed Pausanias in his Description of Corinth, and Philostratus in book I of the Life of Apollonius, chapter 14, say that there are those who think that the Euphrates, having been hidden underground and then emerging above Ethiopia, becomes the Nile, which aptly corresponds to Sacred Scripture here in chapter 2, which suggests that these four rivers flow from one source. Nor is it surprising that the Ganges and the Nile are thus hidden and emerge so far away; for the Caspian Sea too is fed from the very distant Arctic Ocean through underground passages, as St. Basil, Strabo, Pliny, and Dionysius in his book On the Position of the Earth teach. Indeed many hold that all rivers, springs, and waters, even the most remote, arise from the sea and that underground abyss, through subterranean veins, as I said at chapter 1, verse 9. From this abyss, therefore, a great river first arose in paradise; for God wished, for the beauty of paradise, that rising from it, as the mother of the rest, it would divide itself into these four rivers; but after the sin of Adam, God either hid this river of paradise entirely underground, or wished it to be hidden, so that paradise might be more concealed.
But it seems incredible that this river of paradise, or rather the four rivers, would hide themselves underground over so vast a distance, and then emerge in such widely separated places. For, as Ptolemy teaches, between the Euphrates and the Ganges there is a space of 70 degrees, that is, more than 4,300 miles. The same can be said of the Nile.
It is proved that the Nile is not the Geon, nor the Ganges the Phison. Second, these four rivers arise so modestly in the places already mentioned and well known, that it is immediately apparent that they are first born there, and then gradually grow as tributaries flow in from here and there; therefore they are not born from that one great river of paradise.
Third, Viegas on Apocalypse chapter 11, section 5, and other very learned men have noted that neither India, nor the Ganges, nor other regions or rivers that are beyond the Persian Gulf are called Eastern or the East in Scripture, but only those that are on this side of the Persian Gulf, such as Armenia, Arabia, Mesopotamia. The inhabitants of these, namely the Arabs, Idumeans, Midianites, and Armenians, are called Easterners, or sons of the East, with respect to the Jews: and paradise was in the East, as the Septuagint has it.
Fourth, if the Geon is the Nile, and the Phison the Ganges, then paradise encompassed all the regions lying between the Nile, the Euphrates, the Tigris, and the Ganges, namely Babylonia, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Media, Persia, and many others. Some admit this, but with little probability, as it seems: for paradise is here called a garden of pleasure; who ever saw such a vast garden?
Hence it follows that the Phison is not the Ganges, nor the Geon the Nile. Whence —
Paradise was near Mesopotamia and Armenia. I say second: Paradise seems to have been near Mesopotamia and Armenia. It is proved first, because these regions are called Eastern in Scripture, as I have already said; second, because the people expelled from paradise first began to inhabit these regions, both before the Flood, as is evident of Cain, who dwelt in Eden, Genesis chapter 4, verse 16, and after the Flood, as being situated near paradise, and therefore more fertile than the rest, as is evident from Genesis 8 and 11, verse 2. Third, because paradise was in Eden, as the Septuagint translates. But Eden was near Haran, as is evident from Ezekiel 27:23, Isaiah 37:12. And Haran is near Mesopotamia: for Haran, or Carrhae, is a city of the Parthians, where Crassus was slain. Fourth, because paradise is where the Euphrates and Tigris are, as is evident from verse 14 here; and these are in Mesopotamia and Armenia: for the Euphrates is a river of Babylonia, and the region between it and the Tigris is called Mesopotamia (as if you would say, situated in the middle of two rivers). Fifth, because these regions are most pleasant and most fertile. Sixth, because paradise does not seem to have been so far from Judea; just as Mesopotamia is not so far from Judea. For the Fathers hand down that Adam, having been expelled from paradise, and having wandered through several places, came to Judea, and there died and was buried on the mountain which was called by his descendants the Mount of Calvary, because the head of the first man was contained there, on which mountain Christ crucified atoned for and expiated the sin of Adam. So Origen, Cyprian, Athanasius, Basil, and others generally hand down, with the sole exception and dissent of St. Jerome, as I said on Matthew 27:33.
The Phison and Geon. I say third: It is not established which rivers are the Phison and the Geon; yet that they still exist is sufficiently clear from Ecclesiasticus chapter 24, verse 35. Again, it is not established whether these four rivers arise from the river of paradise; or whether the river of paradise merely flows into these four, or divides itself into them. For Moses only says that this river divides into four heads: and by four heads he means the four rivers themselves, which divide this one river of paradise into four branches, as it were, or heads, whether they arise and flow from it or not. For Moses himself seems about to explain it this way. Nevertheless, the opinion of Pererius, Oleastro, Eugubinus, Vatablus here, and Jansenius in chapter 143 of the Harmony of the Gospels, is probable: that the Phison and the Geon are rivers that arise from the convergence of the Euphrates and the Tigris.
The Phison is the Phasitigris. For which note that the Tigris and the Euphrates above the Persian Gulf finally come together into one, and then divide again, and change their name. For the one flowing down into the Persian Gulf is called the Phasis or Phasitigris (which seems to be the Phison), well-known from Curtius, Pliny, and others; this encircles the land of Havilah, that is, Chavilah, namely the Cholataeans, whom Strabo in book XVI places in Arabia, near Mesopotamia. The other, heading toward Arabia Deserta and the neighboring regions, seems to be what is here called the Geon: this encircles Ethiopia, not the Ethiopia of the Abyssinians which is below Egypt, but that which is around Arabia. For in Scripture the Midianites and others dwelling near the Persian or Arabian Gulf are called Ethiopians.
Paradise was at the confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates. Paradise therefore seems to have been at the place where the Euphrates and Tigris converge; for from that convergence they divide and separate into these four rivers: for upstream are the Euphrates and Tigris, and downstream are the Geon and the Phasitigris or Phison. For that these rivers, after they have come together, divide again, is clearly evident from the more accurate maps of Gerard Mercator, Ortelius, and others. For Mercator in his map 4 of Asia clearly shows the Tigris and the Euphrates meeting near Apamea, and dividing again near the city called Asia, and forming a fairly large island called Teredon; and finally flowing on both sides into the Persian Gulf, and there ending.
Add to this that it is likely these rivers were more divided in the time of Moses, because afterwards they changed their channel, and converged more, just as from the time of Moses many other rivers and seas have changed their place and channel, as Torniellus has noted. For that in the time of Moses these four rivers of paradise were clearly divided, is evident from the fact that he describes them as four separate and commonly known rivers, and presents them to the Jews so that they may recognize from them where paradise was located.
I say fourth: Even if it is not established in precisely what place paradise was, nevertheless it is certain as a matter of faith that paradise was a corporeal place, situated in some part of our earth toward the East, as the Septuagint has it. Again, it is certain that this place was most pleasant and temperate, and this partly from itself and its natural position, partly from the special providence of God, which had removed heat, cold, and every other inclemency from paradise: a place, I say, both for human beings and also for other living creatures.
Whether there were animals in paradise. Damascenus and St. Thomas, and Abulensis on chapter 13, Question 87, deny this. For they think that in paradise there would have been no quadruped animals, but only human beings. Abulensis, however, also admits birds to paradise, for melody, and fish in the rivers. But others commonly teach the opposite, with St. Basil in his book On Paradise, and St. Augustine in book XIV of The City of God, chapter 11. For the variety and beauty of animals brought great pleasure to man in paradise. Again, it is established that the serpent was in paradise.
"In paradise, says Basil, there were all kinds of birds, which with the beauty of their colors and their natural music, and the sweetness of their harmony, gave incredible delight to man. There were also displays of various animals. But they were all tame, obedient to man, living among themselves in concord and peace, and they both heard one another and spoke with sense. And the serpent was not then horrible, but gentle and tame, nor did it terrifyingly crawl along the surface of the earth as if swimming, but walked upright and lofty, standing on its feet."
Where note that St. Basil seems to say that in paradise the brute animals had reason and human speech; again, that the serpent did not crawl but walked upright: neither of which seems probable. Equally paradoxical is what Rupert asserts in book II of On the Trinity, chapters 24 and 29, that waters are by nature salty; but just as the liver is the fountain of blood, so the fountain — now the fountain of paradise — is the source of all fresh waters that exist throughout the whole world; and consequently that same fountain is the parent and author of all plants, trees, gems, and spices.
Whether Paradise Still Survives
One may ask second, whether the place and the pleasantness of paradise still survive? I respond, it is certain that the place survives, but about the pleasantness it is uncertain.
St. Justin, Tertullian, Epiphanius, Augustine, Damascene, St. Thomas, Abulensis, and others whom Viegas cites above, assert this; for they hold that by God's special providence, paradise was preserved intact from the flood at the time of Noah. For although the water of the flood exceeded other common mountains of men, as is said in Genesis chapter 7, it did not exceed paradise; or if it did exceed even this, it nevertheless did not corrupt it, because this is a place of innocence, in which even now Elijah and Enoch live most holy and most peaceful lives. So say all the Fathers already cited.
Irenaeus adds, in book V, chapter 5, that in this earthly paradise all the souls of the just are detained after death until the day of judgment, so that then they may enter heaven and see God. But this is an error of the Armenians condemned at the Council of Florence.
Others, and perhaps more probably, hold that paradise existed in its pristine beauty until the flood: for when God expelled Adam from it, He placed Cherubim before it to guard it. Again, Enoch is said to have been taken up into paradise — not the heavenly one, but the earthly one (Sirach 44:16). But in the flood of Noah, when the waters occupied the whole earth for an entire year, these same authorities hold that paradise too was overwhelmed, violated, and destroyed by them, and Moses sufficiently indicates this in chapter 7, verse 19. Add that paradise can now be found nowhere, even though the whole earth, especially around Mesopotamia and Armenia, is fully known and inhabited. So hold Oleaster, Eugubinus, Catharinus, Pererius, and Jansenius cited above, Francisco Suarez (III Part., qu. 59, art. 6, disp. 55, sect. 1), Viegas already cited, and others. For the waters of the flood, surging with such force for an entire year, and as Moses says, going and returning, leveled all trees, houses, cities, and even hills, and displaced nearly the entire surface of the earth: therefore they also overturned the form and beauty of paradise.
Cf. Huet, On the Situation of the Earthly Paradise; D. Calmet, Bible de Vence, volume I; and above all the most learnedly written work, Du Berceau de l'espece humaine selon les Indiens, les Perses et les Hebreux, by D. Obry, 1858.
Tropological interpretation. Tropologically, paradise is the soul adorned with every variety of trees, that is, of virtues. Hence that saying of Zoroaster: "seek paradise," that is, the entire chorus of divine virtues, says Psellus. From the same comes this: "The soul is winged; and when its wings fall off, it plunges headlong into the body; then finally, as they grow back, it flies back up to the heights." When his disciples asked him how, with well-feathered wings, they might obtain winged spirits, he said: "Water your wings with the waters of life." When they asked again where they might find these waters, he answered them by a parable: "God's paradise is washed and watered by four rivers: from there you will draw saving waters. The name of the river that flows from the North signifies 'the right'; from the West, 'expiation'; from the East, 'light'; from the South, 'piety.'"
Allegorical interpretation. Allegorically, St. Augustine (book 13 of The City of God, ch. 21) and Ambrose (book On Paradise) say: Paradise is the Church; the four rivers are the four Gospels; the fruit-bearing trees are the Saints; the fruits are the works of the Saints; the tree of life is Christ, the Holy of Holies, or it is wisdom itself, the mother of all good things (Sirach 24:41, Proverbs 3:18); the tree of knowledge of good and evil is free will, or the experience of transgressing a commandment. Again, paradise is the Religious Life, in which humility, charity, and holiness flourish. Hear St. Basil in his book, or rather homily, On Paradise, near the end: "If you were to think of some place fit for the saints, in which all who shone with good works on earth might enjoy the grace of God and live in true and spiritual delight, you would not stray far from a fitting likeness of paradise." So also St. Chrysostom, in Homily 69 on Matthew, discoursing on the happiness of monks, compares them to Adam dwelling in paradise. See St. Bernard, To the Clergy, chapter 21, and Hieronymus Platus, book 3, On the Good of the Religious State, chapter 19.
Anagogical interpretation. Anagogically, the same authors say: Paradise is heaven and the life of the blessed; the four rivers are the four cardinal virtues: namely, the Ganges is prudence, the Nile is temperance, the Tigris is fortitude, and the Euphrates is justice. See Pierius, Hieroglyphica, 21.
Or rather, the four rivers are the four gifts of the glorified body (Revelation, last chapter, verse 2). So St. Dorothea, when she was being led to martyrdom by the prefect Fabricius, rejoiced because she said she was going to her Spouse, whose paradise bloomed with the beauty of all flowers and fruits. When Theophilus the scribe mockingly asked her to send him some roses when she arrived there, she said: "I will send them." After she was beheaded, a boy appeared to Theophilus with a basket of fresh roses — and indeed in winter time (for she suffered on the sixth of February) — and said they were sent to him by Dorothea from the paradise of her Spouse. When he had offered them, the boy vanished from sight. Therefore Theophilus, converted to the faith of Christ, suffered martyrdom.
Verse 9: Every Tree Beautiful to Behold
EVERY TREE BEAUTIFUL TO BEHOLD AND PLEASANT TO EAT. — "And" here is used for "or": for Moses signifies that in paradise there were both trees beautiful and delightful, such as cedars, cypresses, pines, and other non-fruit-bearing trees, as well as fruit-bearing trees suitable for eating.
The Tree of Life
THE TREE OF LIFE ALSO — that is, the tree of life. One asks: what kind of tree was this, and of what nature?
I say first: It is a matter of faith that this was a real tree; for it is called a "tree" by the Hebrews, and the simple and historical narrative of Moses requires this. So hold all the ancients, against Origen and Eugubinus, who think the tree of life was symbolic, and that it only symbolically signified both the life and the immortality promised to Adam if he obeyed God.
I say second: It is called the tree of life, not because it was a sign of the life granted to Adam by God, as Artopoeus would have it; but "of life" means life-giving, a cause of life, preserving and prolonging life, because this tree extended the life of the one who ate from it for the longest time, and kept it free from diseases and old age, healthy, peaceful, and pleasant. See Pererius and Valesius, Sacred Philosophy, chapter 6.
Four effects of the tree. First, then, this tree would have made life long-lived; second, vigorous and robust; third, constant, so that one would never have incurred sickness or old age; fourth, joyful and cheerful — for it would have dispelled all sadness and melancholy.
I say third: This power and virtue of this tree was not supernatural, and therefore taken away after Adam's sin, as St. Bonaventure and Gabriel hold (in II, dist. 19); but it was natural to it, just as the power of healing exists in other fruits and trees; for it is called the tree of life from its own nature and native power. And therefore after the sin this power remained in this tree, and for that reason Adam was excluded from it and from paradise after he sinned, as is clear from chapter 3, verse 22. So say St. Thomas, Hugh, and Pererius.
Therefore nothing in paradise could have harmed or corrupted a man remaining in innocence. For against the action of the elements and the consumption of the radical moisture, he would have had the tree of life, which would have fully restored that moisture. Against the violence of demons, he would have had angelic protection. Against the attack of wild beasts, he would have had perfect dominion over them. Against the force of other men, he would have had paradise: for if anyone had wished to harm another, he would have forfeited justice and would immediately have been expelled from paradise, as happened to Adam. Against infection of the air, he would have had the most suitable temperate climate. Against poisonous plants, against flames, and other things that might have injured or overwhelmed him by accident, he would have had full prudence in all things, and the foresight to guard against everything — which if he had not exercised, he would then not have been innocent but imprudent, reckless, and culpable, and thus could have been harmed. Finally, God's protection would have surrounded and shielded him on all sides from harmful things.
How would it have prolonged human life? One asks second, by what means this tree would have prolonged human life. Many think that the fruit of the tree of life, once tasted and eaten, would have brought immortality to the eater. For just as, they say, the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the tree of death and the wages of death, so that once tasted it brought the necessity of dying, so conversely the tree of life was the reward of obedience, which would have transferred men from a mortal state to immortality. Hence Bellarmine (book On the Grace of the First Man, ch. 18) holds that men would have eaten from this tree of life only at the time when they were about to be transferred from this life to the state of glory. This opinion is favored by St. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Irenaeus, and Rupert, whom Abulensis cites and follows in chapter 13, where he treats all these matters at length.
I say first: It is more probable that this fruit, once tasted, would indeed have prolonged man's life for a long time, but would not have made him absolutely immortal. The reason is that this power was natural to this fruit, and was finite; and therefore by the continuous action of natural heat in man it would eventually have been consumed. Again, this fruit, like any other, was by its nature corruptible; therefore it could not have made man entirely incorruptible, but only, when eaten repeatedly, would have prolonged man's life further and further. So hold Scotus, Durandus, Cajetan, and Pererius.
I say second: The fruit of the tree of life restored full vigor to man: first, by supplying the original natural moisture, or something better; second, by sharpening, strengthening, and restoring to its original or even better state the natural heat that had been weakened by continuous action and struggle with other foods (which man would have ordinarily consumed even then, as St. Augustine teaches in book 13 of The City of God, ch. 20), and by maintaining and preserving it. Hence, if man had eaten from this tree at fixed intervals, though infrequent, he would have incurred neither death nor old age. Therefore Aristotle errs, who in book 3 of the Metaphysics, text 15, tacitly reproves Hesiod for saying that the gods who eat ambrosia are immortal, while others who lack ambrosia are mortal. For whatever feeds on food, Aristotle says, by its nature grows old, decays, and dies. But in this tree of life, which Aristotle did not know, this is clearly false; hence in chapter 3, verse 22, Moses here expressly teaches that Adam was expelled from paradise lest, by tasting the tree of life, he should live forever. Therefore the tree of life was able to prolong life forever.
You will object: The natural heat in man is gradually diminished by continuous action, and by acting on the fruit of the tree of life it would have been weakened. But this weakening seems unable to be repaired by food, because it can only be repaired by the conversion of food, that is, nourishment into the substance of the nourished body. But then the nourishment is similar to the nourished body, and consequently does not have greater power than the nourished body: therefore it cannot fully repair its weakened and diminished powers.
I reply first: It is false that nourishment, when converted and made similar to the nourished body, does not have greater power than it. For we see that when weak people take food, they are quickly revived, strengthened, and invigorated.
I reply second: This fruit of the tree of life was not merely food, but also a medicine of marvelous power, which before being converted into the substance of man, purified, restored, and strengthened the body and natural heat. Furthermore, that same substance afterward, converted into the substance of man, would have retained this same power and quality. Therefore by this natural power of its own, it would have repaired and restored man's nutritive powers far more than the action of natural heat and its weakening through food and nourishment could have diminished them. So says Ludovicus Molina.
What kind of eternity of life? One asks third, of what kind was this eternity that the eating of the tree of life would have conferred — absolute, or restricted and relative? Ludovicus Molina holds it was absolute, because, he says, this tree would always have restored man to his original vigor. But better, Scotus, Valesius, and Cajetan hold it was restricted, not absolute, because this tree would have prolonged man's life and vigor for some thousands of years, until God would have translated him to heaven, which is a kind of eternity. For the Hebrews, following common usage, call olam (that is, "eternal") a very long time whose end is not foreseen by man; see Canon 4. So in chapter 6, verse 3, the Lord says: "My spirit shall not remain in man forever (that is, for the long lifespan of the first fathers), and his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." Nevertheless, this tree could not have prolonged man's life absolutely for all eternity. The reason is that every mixed body, since it consists of contrary elements that fight against each other, is by its nature corruptible. But this most delicious and most beautiful tree was a mixed body: therefore it was in itself corruptible, and would have gradually, though very slowly, failed and lost its original vigor, and finally perished — just as oak trees, even though they are extremely hard, nevertheless gradually perish. Therefore it could not have preserved man from death and corruption for all eternity. For it could not give to man what it did not have in itself. And in this sense what Aristotle said is true: everything that feeds on food is mortal. Second, because otherwise it would follow that Adam, after his sin, if he had been permitted to live in paradise and eat the tree of life, would have lived absolutely forever. But this seems incredible, both because before he was expelled from paradise, the sentence of death had already been passed upon him, and because through sin the human body and nature is so weak and wretched, and subject to so many diseases, vices, and afflictions that wear down one's strength and gradually lead to death, that it would be necessary for him to die at last.
You will object: The fruit of the tree of life would always have restored the natural heat and radical moisture to their original vigor; therefore it could have prolonged man's life always and for all eternity, if man had eaten from it at the proper times.
I reply: the word "always" in the premise must be taken in a restricted sense, namely, always for as long as the full force and vigor of the tree of life would have lasted. For as the tree grew old and perished, man likewise would have grown old and perished. For just as even now certain electuaries and very succulent, spirited, and nourishing foods fully restore the radical moisture and natural heat (especially in the young), and restore them to their full strength — but for a certain time, namely until either the man grows old or the power and vigor of the food weakens (for then it cannot restore man's powers without him gradually failing and dying) — so things would have been likewise with the tree of life. With this one difference: that our foods and medicines restore vigor to man for only a short time, whereas the tree of life would have accomplished this for a long time, for many thousands of years. When those were completed, both man and the tree of life would have grown old and died. But God would have forestalled this old age and death by transferring man to heaven and eternal life. Since, then, God did not wish man to live in paradise absolutely forever, but only for a long time, it seems that He likewise endowed the tree of life with the power of prolonging life not absolutely forever, but only for a long time. So teaches Scotus and his followers.
Nectar and ambrosia from the tree of life. Finally, from this tree of life the poets invented their fables, and devised their nectar, ambrosia, nepenthes, and moly, as if they were foods of the gods that would make them immortal, ever young, joyful, and blessed.
Note that Adam did not taste this fruit of life, for shortly after his creation he sinned and was expelled from paradise, as is clear from chapter 3, verse 22.
Symbolic interpretations of the tree of life. Symbolically, then, the tree of life was a hieroglyphic of eternity, as is clear from what has been said.
Allegorically, the tree of life is Christ, who says: "I am the vine; you are the branches" (John 15). And: "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14). Again, the tree of life is the cross of Christ, which, raised in the middle of paradise — that is, the Church — gives life to the world. Wherefore the Bride, desiring to climb it, says in Canticles 7: "I will climb the palm tree and take hold of its fruit, sweet to my taste." The tree of life, finally, is the Eucharist, which gives life to the soul and the body; for by its power we shall rise to immortal life, according to that saying of Christ in John 6: "He who eats this bread shall live forever." So says St. Irenaeus, book 4, chapter 34, and book 5, chapter 2.
Tropologically, the tree of life is the Blessed Virgin, from whom Life was born — God made man, Christ Jesus. And the Virgin herself, as Germanus the Patriarch of Constantinople says, is the spirit and life of Christians. Again, the tree of life is the just person, who performs holy works that produce the life of grace and glory, according to that saying: "The fruit of the just is a tree of life" (Proverbs 11:30). Moreover, the tree of life is wisdom itself, virtue, and perfection, according to that saying about the same: "She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her" (Proverbs 3:18).
Anagogically, the tree of life is beatitude and the vision of God, which confers a blessed life on the soul, according to that saying: "To him who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of my God" (Revelation 2:7 and chapter 22:2). See the commentary there.
The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
AND THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL. — One asks, what kind of tree was this? The Jews fable that Adam and Eve were created without the use of reason, as if infants, but that from this tree they received the use of reason, by which they would know good and evil.
Second, Josephus (book 1 of Antiquities, ch. 2) holds that this tree had the power of sharpening intellect and prudence, and hence was called the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The Ophites held the same view, according to Epiphanius (Heresy 37); they worshipped the serpent instead of Christ, because the serpent was the author of man's acquiring knowledge, when it persuaded him to eat of the forbidden tree.
But I say first: The opinion of Rupert, Tostatus, and Pererius is probable, that by anticipation the tree is here called the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which was afterward so called because the serpent promised man, if he should eat from it, this knowledge -- although falsely and deceitfully -- saying: "You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil," whence after Adam had eaten from it, God, mocking him, said: "Behold, Adam has become as one of us, knowing good and evil."
I say second: It is more probable that it was not afterward, but now, called by God Himself the tree of knowledge of good and evil, both because God, just as He named the tree of life, so also named this one by its own name and designated it to Adam -- for no other name of this tree exists; and because again in verse 17 it is called by God the tree of knowledge of good and evil; and finally because by this name the serpent seems to have deceived Eve, as if saying: This tree is called the tree of knowledge of good and evil; therefore if you eat from it, you shall know good and evil. The serpent indeed promised her every kind of knowledge, even divine knowledge, whereas God had understood something far different by this name. Whence --
I say third: The tree of knowledge of good and evil seems to have been so named by God, both from God's own purpose in designating it, and from the event that followed, which God had foreseen. For God had determined, in order to exercise man's obedience, to forbid him the eating of this tree, and if man, being obedient, abstained from it, to increase and preserve his justice and happiness; but if, being disobedient, he ate from it, to punish him with death. Through this tree, therefore, man learned and knew by experience what he had before known only by speculation -- namely, what the difference is between obedience and disobedience, between good and evil -- and therefore this tree was called the tree of knowledge of good and evil, as if to say: the tree from which man will learn by experience what is good and what is evil. So the Chaldean paraphrase, St. Augustine (City of God XIV.17), Theodoret, Eucherius, and Cyril (Against Julian III). So also that part of the desert of Pharan was called "the graves of lust," because there those who had craved meat were slain and buried (Numbers 11:34).
I say fourth: Theodoret, Procopius, Barcephas, and Isidore of Pelusium, and Gennadius in the Catena of Lipomanus on chapter III, 7, probably hold that this tree was a fig tree. For immediately after eating from it, Adam, seeing himself naked, sewed himself a garment from fig leaves, as is said in chapter III, 7. For from the nearest and closest tree, Adam, so confused, seems to have taken these leaves and coverings for his nakedness; but no tree was nearer to him than the one from which he had just eaten; therefore it was a fig tree.
Others think it was an apple or fruit-tree, for in Canticles 8:5 it says: "Under the apple tree I awakened you." But the name "apple" is common to all fruits that have a softer rind, whence a fig is also an "apple"; but in this matter nothing can be asserted with certainty.
Mystically and tropologically, the tree of knowledge of good and evil was a hieroglyph of free will, as I have already said. For from its bad use Adam learned how great an evil disobedience and sin are; just as, conversely, from its good use the saints have learned and continue to learn how great a good obedience and the keeping of the law are. Wherefore this tree was equally a type of obedience and disobedience, as St. Ambrose intimates in his book On Paradise, chapter vi, about which our Benedict Ferdinand has collected much material here. For this reason the tree was placed in the middle of paradise, that is, amid the densest thicket of closely packed trees, where it would not always be before the eyes, lest it perpetually tempt the appetite with its so beautiful fruit -- as it would have done if it had been placed alone at the edge of the trees, or in a remote spot, where, conspicuous to all, it would have drawn everyone's gaze to itself.
Verse 10: And a River Went Out of the Place of Pleasure
In Hebrew, "from Eden." Paradise was in Eden; so the Septuagint. Our translator [the Vulgate] takes "Eden" not as a proper noun but as a common noun, and then it means "pleasure"; so the Septuagint, the Chaldeans, and others render it in verse 23, and from this the place was called Eden, because it was delightful and most pleasant.
An otherwise ingenious author talks nonsense who tries to prove, both from other arguments and from the similarity of names, that Eden and consequently paradise were in Edin, or Hesdin, which is a city of Artois.
TO WATER PARADISE -- either winding through various bends and curves, like the Meander; or moistening paradise through hidden channels.
Verses 11-14: The Four Rivers
Verse 11: Hevilah
Many hold it to be India; but, as I said at verse 8, Hevilah is rather a region here near Susiana, Bactria, and Persia, lying between Assyria and Palestine, opposite Sur. For so Hevilah is understood in 1 Kings 15:7 and Genesis 25:18; it was so called from Hevilah, the son of Joktan, of whom see Genesis 10:28.
IT SURROUNDS -- not by encircling or going around, but by flowing through and traversing. So "to go around" is used for "to traverse" in Hebrews 11:7 and Matthew 23:45.
The Phison seems to be the same river which by the Greeks and ancient geographers is called the Phasis, now the Aras or Araxes. It rises in the northern part of the Armenian mountains, joins the river Kur, and after taking its name, flows into the Caspian Sea. The Hevilah named here must undoubtedly be distinguished both from the one in Genesis 10:7 and from the one in the same chapter, verse 29. For both of those were located in Arabia. Therefore we prefer to follow the opinion that Michaelis brought forward in his Supplement to the Hebrew Lexicon, Part III, no. 688. Namely, in the vicinity of the Araxes, which, as we said, mingled with the Cyrus flows into the Caspian Sea, there is found a certain people and region somewhat consonant with the name Hevilah. The Caspian Sea itself is called Chwalinskoje More, from some ancient and not well-known people, the Chwaliskians, who formerly dwelt around this sea, says Muller, whose name is further derived from Chwala, of the same meaning as Slawa. -- On the Phison and Gehon, see Obry, op. cit.; Haneberg, History of Biblical Revelation, Book I, ch. II, p. 16 ff.
Verse 12: Bdellium
It is a kind of gum, or translucent resin, which drips from a black tree the size of an olive tree, with leaves like an oak, and fruit and nature like a wild fig. So Pliny, Book XII, ch. 9, and Dioscorides, Book I, ch. 69. The most praised bdellium is that of Bactria. For "bdellium" the Hebrew is bedolach, which Vatablus and Eugubinus translate as "pearl"; the Septuagint renders it anthrax, that is, "carbuncle." The same translators in Numbers 11:7 render it "crystal." But that bedolach is bdellium is clear from the very letters of both words.
Bdellium hardly seems to be so extraordinary a gift of nature that a region should be praised for producing it. Therefore some have suspected a textual error. Anything certain about this name can scarcely be determined.
Verse 13: Gihon
It seems to be derived from the Hebrew goach, that is, "belly" or "breast," because it is, as it were, a belly full of dirt and mud. Whence many think the Gihon is the Nile, which by itself, as if with its breast, broods over Egypt and fertilizes it. But what the Gihon is I discussed at verse 8.
Among all opinions about the Gihon river, the one that Michaelis put forward (ibid., Part I, p. 277) is the most probable. According to it, the great river of Chorasmia [Khwarezm], flowing into the Aral Sea -- called Oxus by the ancients, Abi-Amu by our geographers, and Gihon by the Arabs and even by the inhabitants to this day -- seems to be the Gihon of Moses. But Michaelis himself does not dare to determine anything certain, since those regions are still too little known to us. Cf. Obry, op. cit., p. 125.
Verse 14: Tigris
This river is so called from the tiger, the swiftest of animals, as Rupert and Isidore hold; or rather, as Curtius and Strabo say, from the swiftness of an arrow, which it imitates in its course -- for the Medes call an arrow "Tigris." In Hebrew it is called chiddekel (whence by corruption it is now called Tigel), that is, "sharp and swift," namely on account of its extremely rapid current.
Euphrates
From the Hebrew huperat, says Genebrardus, the word Euphrates is formed; whence it is still called Phrat, from the root para, that is, "it bore fruit," because like the Nile, overflowing, it waters and fertilizes the land. Therefore those who, following Ambrose, derive Euphrates from the Greek euphainesthai, that is, from "making glad," are wrong.
Anastasius of Sinai's anagogical reading
Anastasius of Sinai, Patriarch of Antioch under the Emperor Justinian, wrote eleven books or homilies of Anagogical Contemplations on the work of the six days, which are extant in volume I of the Library of the Holy Fathers; but they must be read with discretion and a grain of salt. For he asserts in them that the angels were created before the corporeal world -- which, although many formerly held it, is now certainly the contrary, namely that they were created together with the corporeal world.
Again, he implies that the angels were not created in the image of God, but man alone -- which is absolutely false; mystically, however, it is true, because only man consists of soul and body, and consequently only man has the image of the corporeal God, namely of Christ incarnate, as he himself explains. Furthermore, he repeatedly implies that paradise was not a corporeal place but should be understood spiritually. This in the literal sense is false and erroneous; anagogically, however, it is true. Whence the reader should remember the title itself, namely that these are his anagogical and allegorical contemplations, not literal expositions. Thus at the end of Homily 8, he asserts the four rivers of paradise -- that is, of the Church -- to be the four Evangelists: namely, that the Euphrates, meaning "fertile," is St. John; the Tigris, meaning "broad," is St. Luke; the Phison, meaning "change of mouth," is St. Matthew, who wrote in Hebrew; the Gihon, meaning "useful," is St. Mark.
Verse 15: The Lord God Therefore Took the Man and Placed Him in Paradise
From this and from chapter III, verse 23, it is clear that Adam was created not in, but outside paradise (many hold he was created in Hebron), and from there was transported by God on the same day through an angel into paradise, so that he might know that he was not a son of paradise but a colonist, gratuitously established by God, and that he should attribute the place of paradise not to his own nature, as if owed to him, but to the grace of God -- whence also for his sin he was expelled from it. Francis Arelinus gives many other reasons for this in his Questions on Genesis, pp. 300-301. This is the opinion of St. Ambrose, Rupert, and Abulensis. Eve, however, seems to have been created in paradise, verse 21.
THAT HE MIGHT WORK IT -- not to procure food, but for honorable exercise, pleasure, and experience; so that he would neither grow weary nor decline through idleness. So St. Chrysostom.
On the antiquity of agriculture
Note here regarding agriculture: first, its antiquity -- for it began with man and the world; second, its dignity -- both because it was established by God and commanded to Adam, and because Adam, from whom all nobility descends, together with Abel, Seth, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the most celebrated men of old, were farmers.
Paul Jovius relates in his Life of Jacopo Muzio, chapter 84, concerning Sforza of Cotignola, that when Sergiano, the grand seneschal, threw in his face the fable of the hoe to reproach the newness of his lineage, he replied: "In this origin of our race, as I see it, we agree, since Adam, the first of mortals, dug the earth; but I certainly -- which you cannot rightly deny -- became far more noble by my hoe than you by your pen and penis." By this jest he indicated that the man had acquired such great dignity through debauchery, and that his father had been a lowly clerk at the praetor's tribunal, condemned for forgery after falsifying a will.
Third, note the innocence of agriculture, that above other arts it was commended to innocent man in paradise, as injurious to none, but profitable to all. Hear Virgil (Georgics II):
O farmers, too fortunate if they knew their blessings!
For whom, far from discordant arms,
The most just earth pours forth from its soil an easy sustenance.
And again:
This life the ancient Sabines once cultivated,
This, Remus and his brother. Thus strong Etruria grew:
And Rome was made the fairest thing in the world.
Saturn led this life of gold upon the earth.
Hear Cicero: "Of all things from which any profit is sought, nothing is better than agriculture, nothing more fruitful, nothing sweeter, nothing more worthy of a free man."
Rightly therefore St. Augustine says: "Agriculture is the most innocent of all arts; yet the impious Faustus the Manichaean dared to condemn it," because he said that farmers violate the commandment of God: "Thou shalt not kill" -- for by it, he claimed, we are forbidden to deprive any living thing of life; and that farmers, by reaping crops, plucking pears, apples, and other plants, deprive them of their life. I shall say more about agriculture at chapter 9, verse 20.
Morally, on the cultivation of the soul
Morally, God teaches us here that the whole plan of our life is founded on a kind of agriculture. For just as among creatures only fruit-bearing trees and seeds need the labor and industry of man, so man needs the care and cultivation of himself. God indicated this to man when "He placed him in paradise to work it and guard it," and He made the luminaries "to be for signs and seasons" -- namely, to remind us of the proper time for sowing, reaping, etc. The field that we must continually cultivate by God's command is the soul; the fruit-bearing plants are sobriety, chastity, charity, and other virtues; the tares and weeds that everyone must uproot are gluttony, lust, anger, and other vices. The farmer is man; the rain is the grace of God, which suggests and instills into the mind good seeds, that is, holy inspirations, illuminations, and impulses, so that from these, as from seeds, the soul, made fruitful, may sprout and bring forth works of virtue. The winds are temptations, by which the trees -- that is, the virtues -- are purified and strengthened. The harvest will be the reward of eternal life; the heat of the sun is the ardor which the Holy Spirit suggests. Just as the farmer labors in sowing but rejoices in reaping, so also the just, "who sow in tears" the works of penance, patience, and toils, "shall reap in joy." Again, just as the sower patiently awaits the harvest, so also the just. Whence Ecclesiasticus 6:19 says: "As one who plows and sows, draw near to her (wisdom), and wait for (expect) her good (abundant) fruits; for in her work (cultivation) you will labor a little, and soon you will eat of her fruits (offspring)." And Paul in Galatians 6:9: "And let us not grow weary in doing good, for in due season we shall reap."
AND GUARD IT -- both from wild beasts, which were outside paradise, say St. Basil and Augustine; and from the very animals that were in paradise, lest they damage or defile its beauty and pleasantness.
Verse 17: Of the Tree of Knowledge Thou Shalt Not Eat
The Septuagint has: "you shall not eat" [plural], namely you, O Adam and Eve -- for it is probable that she was created before this commandment, as St. Gregory teaches (Moralia XXXV, ch. 10), although her creation is narrated afterward; for this first commandment of the world was given to Eve as much as to Adam.
St. Chrysostom (or whoever the author is) says excellently in his Homily On the Prohibition of the Tree, volume I: "God gives a commandment to test obedience; He imposes a law to explore man's will. The tree stood therefore in the midst, testing man's will. For it was testing whether man would listen to the One who threatened rather than to the devil who persuaded. And man stood between the Lord and the enemy, between life and death, between destruction and salvation. Now God threatens in order to save; now the serpent persuades in order to torment; now through God severity threatens life, now through the devil flattery threatens death. And indeed (O shame!) God threatens, and is despised; the devil persuades, and is heeded. With God there is severity, but benign; with the devil, flattery, but harmful." And shortly after: "For it would have been fitting that he should obey God, who had commanded all things to obey him; that he should serve the Lord, who had made him lord of the world; that he should contend with the enemy, so as to vanquish his foe; and finally, that he should receive rewards with God repaying. For virtue grows sluggish where opposition is lacking. So greatly are powers strengthened by frequent exercise." And then: "Adam did not keep watch to guard against the serpent's malice. He was simple; he was not shrewd against the devil. For he agreed with the devil who persuaded rather than with the Lord who threatened, and he lost the life he had, and received the death he did not know."
THOU SHALT SURELY DIE -- that is, you shall incur the sentence and necessity of certain death. Whence Symmachus translates: "you shall be mortal." So St. Jerome, Augustine, and Theodoret.
The death of body and soul is the punishment of Adam's sin
Note: God here threatens disobedient Adam with death -- not only bodily and temporal death, but also spiritual and eternal death of the soul in hell, and that certain and infallible. For this is what the doubling signifies -- "dying, thou shalt die," that is, most certainly thou shalt die. Adam therefore, sinning, immediately incurred as to his body the necessity of death, and as to his soul actually and really incurred death. From this it is clear that death for man in the state in which he was created by God is not natural, as Cicero and the philosophers held (add also the Pelagians), but is the punishment of sin, as the Council of Milevis defines in chapter 1, and St. Augustine teaches in his book On the Merits of Sinners, Book I, chapter 2.
On the contrary, the wicked who indulge their lust "work iniquity, and sow sorrows," both present and eternal, as our Pineda beautifully explains on Job 4:8, no. 4.
For although, considering nature and the contrary elements of which man is composed, he should have died and would have been mortal, nevertheless, considering God's decree, help, and perpetual preservation, if he had not sinned, he could not have died and would have been immortal. Whence the Master of the Sentences (Distinctions II, dist. 19) teaches that in paradise man had the "ability not to die," because he could refrain from sinning and thus from dying; in heaven he would have the "inability to die," because there, through glory and the gift of impassibility, there will be an impossibility of dying; in this life after the fall, he has the "ability to die and the inability not to die," because now the necessity of dying is in him. We are therefore born condemned to death.
Remember, O man, that you shall surely die, and that soon.
The saying of Xerxes on death
Historians relate that Xerxes, when he covered the land with his army and the sea with his fleets, gazing from a high place upon all this multitude, groaned and wept, saying repeatedly: "Of all these, not one will be alive after a hundred years."
Saladin
Saladin, king of Egypt and Syria, who took the Holy Land from the Christians around the year 1180, when about to die, ordered a standard with a funeral cloth to be carried through all his camps, and a herald to proclaim: "This is all that Saladin, ruler of Syria and Egypt, from all his empire, will now carry with him."
Death is a unicorn
Wherefore elegantly and aptly Barlaam, in the story of Josaphat, compares death to a unicorn that perpetually pursues a man. The man flees, and in fleeing falls into a pit, and by chance clings to a tree that two mice were gnawing. At the bottom of the pit was a fiery dragon, gaping to devour the man. The man saw all this, but foolishly, leaning over a little honey that dripped from the tree, he forgets all danger. The unicorn overtakes him; the tree is gnawed through by the mice; it collapses, and the man is seized and devoured by the dragon. The pit is the world; the tree is life; the two mice are day and night; the fiery dragon is the belly of hell; the drop of honey is the pleasure of the world. So John Damascene, chapter 12 of his History.
Verse 18: It Is Not Good for Man to Be Alone
He had said -- namely, already before, on the sixth day. For although Origen, Chrysostom, Eucherius, and St. Thomas (Summa I, q. 73, art. 1, ad 3) think that Moses here preserves the order of narration and therefore that Eve was produced after the sixth day of the world, nevertheless it is far more true that Moses here, as throughout the whole chapter, uses recapitulation, and consequently that Eve, just like Adam, was created on the sixth day. First, because in verse 2 it says God completed His work in six days and on the seventh day ceased from all work. Second, because in the other animals, birds, and fish, God on the fifth and sixth days created females as well as males. Third, because in chapter 1, verse 27, on the sixth day when Adam was created, Moses expressly says: "Male and female He created them," namely Adam and Eve. He wished, therefore, in this chapter to narrate at greater length, by way of recapitulation, the formation of both man and woman, which in chapter 1 he had touched upon in three words. So Cajetan, Lipomanus, Pererius here, and St. Bonaventure (Sentences II, dist. 18, q. 2).
IT IS NOT GOOD FOR MAN TO BE ALONE -- Because if Adam had been alone, the human species would have perished in him; and because man is a social animal. And so woman is necessary for the propagation of offspring. After that has been accomplished, and after the world has been filled with people, it began to be good for a man not to touch a woman, as St. Paul says (1 Corinthians 7), and spiritual eunuchs began to be praised (Matthew 19:12), and a glorious reward for continence was promised, both by Isaiah and by Christ and the Apostles. So St. Jerome Against Jovinian, and Cyprian in his book On the Dress of Virgins. "The first decree of God," says Cyprian, "commanded to increase and multiply; the second counseled continence. While the world is still young and empty, a multitude of fertility is generated -- we are propagated and we grow for the increase of the human race. But when the world is full and the earth replete, those who can practice continence, living after the manner of eunuchs, are made chaste for the kingdom."
Note the word "alone"; for from this it is clear that those err who, from what was said in chapter 1 -- "Male and female He created them" -- said that God created man and woman simultaneously, but joined together at the sides, and afterward merely separated them from each other. For Scripture says that Adam was then alone, and that Eve was not separated from Adam, but was wholly produced from Adam's rib, when God took her from him, that is, separated her.
LET US MAKE HIM A HELPER LIKE HIMSELF -- "Himself," that is, "him." For "like himself," the Hebrew is kenegdo, which first means "as if before him," namely that the woman should be present to the man and be a companion as a remedy and comfort for his solitude. Again, that the woman should be at the man's hand, to help and support him in all things. Whence the Chaldean paraphrases: "Let us make him a support that may be beside him."
Second, kenegdo can be translated "opposite" or "over against him," that is, placed opposite and corresponding to him. Whence our translator [the Vulgate] clearly renders it "like himself," namely in nature, in stature, in speech, etc.; for in all these respects a woman is like a man.
In four things, a helper to the man
Moreover, a woman is a help to a man: first, for the propagation and education of offspring; second, for the governance of the household; third, for the alleviation of cares, sorrows, and labors; fourth, for relieving the other necessities of life. Sin has turned this help into trouble, quarrels, and strife for many.
Verse 19: God Brought the Animals to Adam
19. WHEN THEREFORE ALL THE ANIMALS OF THE EARTH AND ALL THE BIRDS OF THE SKY HAD BEEN FORMED FROM THE GROUND. -- The word "birds" should be referred to "formed," but not to "from the ground"; for birds were not formed from the ground but from the water, as I said on chapter 1, verse 20. For Moses summarizes many things briefly by recapitulation; therefore his words must be interpreted in relation to their context: for from what was previously narrated, it is clear what each word refers to.
HE BROUGHT THEM TO ADAM -- "He brought" them not through an intellectual vision, as Cajetan holds, but really and physically, and this through the angels, or through the inclination and impulse that He impressed upon the imagination and affection of each animal. So St. Augustine, Book IX of On Genesis Literally, chapter xiv, and others everywhere.
That is its name -- the name befitting its very nature, that is to say, Adam gave to each one fitting names that would express the nature of each. So Eusebius, Book of Preparation, chapter IV.
Moreover, these names were Hebrew: for this language had been given to Adam, as is clear from verse 23 and chapter iv, verse 1.
See here the wisdom of Adam, by which he noted the natures of each animal and gave them fitting names; see also the exercise of his dominion over the animals: for he imposes a name on them as on subjects and his own property. God did not bring the fish to Adam, because fish naturally cannot live outside water: hence Adam did not here impose names on them, but names were given to them later.
Verse 20: But for Adam There Was Not Found a Helper Like Himself
That is to say, Adam was alone with the animals; Eve did not yet exist, nor any other human being with whom he might share the fellowship of life. From this it appears that Adam imposed names on the animals before the creation of Eve.
Verse 21: The Lord God Cast a Deep Sleep upon Adam
For "deep sleep" the Hebrew has tardema, that is, a heavy and deep sleep, which Symmachus translates as karon (stupor), and the Septuagint better translate as ekstasin (ecstasy). From this it is clear that the sleep was not merely sent upon Adam so that he would not feel his rib being removed and thus shudder and suffer; but also that together with the sleep he was caught up into an ecstasy of mind, by which his mind was not only freed in a natural way from the functions of the body and senses, but was also divinely elevated so that he saw what was being done, and by the prophetic spirit recognized the mystery signified by these events: he saw, I say, with the eyes of the mind, his rib being taken from him and Eve being formed from it; and through this he saw signified both his own natural marriage with Eve and the mystical marriage of Christ with the Church: for this is what the words of Adam, verse 23, and of St. Paul, Ephesians v, 32, signify. So St. Augustine, Book IX of On Genesis Literally, chapter xix, and at length in Tract 9 on John, and St. Bernard, Sermon on Septuagesima.
Adam did not see the essence of God
Indeed there are those who think that Adam in this ecstasy had seen the essence of God; Richard inclines toward this in Book II, dist. 23, art. 2, Question I, and St. Thomas does not reject it, Part I, Question XCIV, art. 1. But the contrary is far more true, namely that neither Adam, nor Moses, nor Paul, and therefore no one in this life has seen the essence of God, as I said on II Corinthians XII, 4.
How great was the knowledge bestowed on Adam
Adam was therefore a prophet and an ecstatic. Note how great was the knowledge Adam received from God: he received infused knowledge of all natural things, and from it he gave names to each one, as I said on verse 19; yet he did not receive knowledge of future contingencies, nor of the secrets of the heart, nor of the number of individuals, so as to know, for example, how many sheep or how many lions there were in the world, or how many grains of sand in the sea. In like manner, Adam received infused faith and knowledge of supernatural things: namely, the Most Holy Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ (not, however, his own future fall), and also the ruin of the angels. Likewise, he received infused prudence regarding all things to be done and avoided. Finally, he attained the highest degree of contemplation of God and the angels. So Pererius from St. Augustine and Gregory.
Allegorically, St. Augustine in the Sentences, Sentence 328: "Adam sleeps," he says, "so that Eve may be made; Christ dies so that the Church may be made. While Adam sleeps, Eve is made from his side; when Christ is dead, His side is pierced with a lance, so that the Sacraments may flow forth, by which the Church is formed."
HE TOOK ONE OF HIS RIBS -- Note first, against Cajetan, that these words are not spoken parabolically but properly as they sound. So the Fathers and interpreters teach everywhere.
You will object: Therefore Adam was monstrous before this rib was removed, or at least after it was removed he remained deficient and mutilated of his rib.
Catharinus responds that God restored to Adam another rib with flesh in place of this one. But since Moses expressly says: "He took one of his ribs, and filled up," not a rib, but "flesh in its place."
Hence, secondly, St. Thomas and others better respond that this rib of Adam was like a seed, which is superfluous to the individual but necessary for the generation of offspring. For in the same way, this rib of Adam was superfluous to him as a private person, yet it was necessary for him inasmuch as he was the head of human nature and the seedbed of all human beings, from whom both Eve and all other humans were to be produced. For Eve could not be produced as offspring now are through seed; God therefore ordained that she be produced from Adam's rib, for the reason about to be stated.
I say secondly: God together with the rib seems to have also taken the flesh adhering to the rib from Adam: for Adam himself says, verse 23: "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh"; therefore Eve was formed not only from Adam's bone and rib, but also from the flesh adhering to the rib.
Verse 22: He Built the Rib into a Woman
I say thirdly: From this fleshy rib, as from a foundation, God by adding other material to it -- either through creation, as St. Thomas holds, or rather from the surrounding earth and air (for after the first true creation of the six days, God produced no new portion of matter) -- He fashioned the woman with marvelous skill, just as He formed Adam from clay. Hence the Arabic version translates: He caused the rib taken from Adam to grow into a woman, that is, into a woman; this is not a barbarism but an Arabism. For the Arabs lack the preposition "in" which signifies change or movement toward a place. Hence they say: He went the city, meaning "to the city." He changed water wine, meaning "into wine." He made the rib grow a woman, meaning "into a woman."
I say fourthly: From this chapter II, verse 22, it seems to follow that God carried this rib to another place, slightly separated from the sleeping Adam, and there built Eve from it, and filled her with knowledge and grace, just as He had filled Adam, and there spoke with Eve; then, when Adam had been awakened, He led Eve to him, as to a bridegroom, so as to join them in indissoluble marriage, that is, to unite one man and one woman, and to abolish all polygamy as well as divorce. Hence Adam, marveling as if in ecstasy he had seen his rib being taken from him and Eve being formed from it, exclaimed saying: "This is now bone of my bones," that is, This Eve has been made from one of my bones, so that she might be my dearest and most closely joined bride. For the reason why Eve was made from the side and rib of Adam was so that God might teach us how great the love of spouses ought to be, and how holy, close, and indissoluble marriage ought to be; namely, that spouses, just as they are, as it were, one bone and one body, so they ought to have, as it were, one soul and one will, so that there might be, as it were, one soul for both, not in two bodies but in one and the same bone and body divided into two parts.
St. Thomas's five reasons why woman was formed from man
Hear St. Thomas, Part I, Question XCII, art. 2: "It was fitting," he says, "that woman should be formed from man, more so than in other animals.
"First, so that a certain dignity might be preserved for the first man: that according to God's likeness, he too might be the origin of his entire species, just as God is the origin of the whole universe; hence Paul also says, Acts XVII, that God made the human race from one man.
"Secondly, so that the man might love the woman more and cling to her inseparably, since he knew her to have been produced from himself; hence it is said in Genesis II: She was taken from man: therefore a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cling to his wife. And this was especially necessary in the human species, in which male and female remain together for their entire lives; which does not happen in other animals.
"Thirdly, because, as the Philosopher says in Book VIII of the Ethics: Male and female are joined together among humans not only for the necessity of generation, as in other animals, but also for the sake of domestic life, in which there are certain works of the husband and of the wife, and in which the husband is the head of the wife: hence it was fitting that woman should be formed from man, as from her origin.
"The fourth reason is sacramental. For by this is prefigured that the Church takes her origin from Christ; hence the Apostle says in Ephesians v: This is a great sacrament, but I speak in Christ and in the Church."
And in art. 3: "It was fitting," he says, "that woman should be formed from the rib of man. First, to signify that there ought to be a social union between man and woman. For woman should not rule over man, and therefore she was not formed from the head; nor should she be despised by man as being slavishly subject, and therefore she was not formed from the feet. Secondly, on account of the Sacrament: because from the side of Christ sleeping on the cross flowed the Sacraments, that is, blood and water, by which the Church was established."
Add: God wished in the production of Adam and Eve to imitate His own eternal generation and spiration; for just as He eternally generated the Son, and from the Son spirated the Holy Spirit, so in time He produced Adam in His own image, and thus begot him as a son, so to speak; and from him He produced Eve, who would be the love of Adam, just as the Holy Spirit is the love of God.
Finally, that Eve was created in paradise is taught by St. Basil, Ambrose, St. Thomas, Pererius, and others; and the narrative and sequence of Scripture supports this.
Adam therefore seems to have been transported to paradise immediately after his creation; and shortly thereafter Eve was formed from his rib. Hence Moses, right after this transfer of Adam, subjoins the formation of Eve from Adam.
Therefore Catharinus errs, who asserts that Eve was produced not on the sixth but on the seventh day. Cajetan also errs, who holds that Adam and Eve were produced simultaneously at the same instant of time.
Verse 23: This Is Now Bone of My Bones
THIS IS NOW BONE -- that is, Away from me with the animals previously brought before me -- they do not please me, they do not suit me, because they are unlike me in species and with their faces bent down toward the earth; they are devoid of speech as well as reason. This Eve is most like me, a sharer in reason, counsel, conversation, and speech, and finally a portion of my flesh and bone. So Delrio.
The Talmudists fabulously relate, according to Abulensis, that Adam before Eve had another wife, produced from the clay of the earth, named Lilith, with whom he lived for 130 years during which he was excommunicated for eating the forbidden fruit; and during that whole time, they say, he begot from her not humans but demons; then he received Eve, produced from his rib, and from her he procreated human beings. These are their ravings, by which they are forced to confess that they are brothers of demons, since their father Adam begot demons.
The word "now" therefore does not refer to a former wife, but partly to the animals, as I said, and partly to Eve, that is, This woman now, that is, this first time, was thus formed, namely from man: for those women who hereafter will be women, none of them will be generated in this way; but each will be procreated through natural generation from male and female. So St. Chrysostom, homily 15 on this passage.
Symbolically, St. Basil, in his oration on Julitta, from the words and mind of the matron Julitta, condemned to fire for the faith, says: "Woman was created by the Creator equally capable of virtue as man. For not only flesh was taken to build woman, but also bone from his bones; whence it follows that we women ought to return to the Lord no less than men the firmness of faith and constancy, as well as patience in adversity." Having said these things, consoling the weeping matrons, she leaped into the lit pile of wood, which, gleaming like a bridal chamber in splendor, embraced the body of St. Julitta and sent her soul indeed to heaven, while preserving her body, venerable in surpassing honor, unharmed and injured in no part for her relatives and kin; and indeed the earth at the arrival of this Blessed woman sent forth water so abundantly that the Martyr presents the image of a most loving mother, as she gently nourishes the inhabitants of the city like a nurse, as if with milk flowing abundantly for common use.
HENCE SHE SHALL BE CALLED VIRAGO, BECAUSE SHE WAS TAKEN FROM MAN -- The translator does not capture the full force of the Hebrew word: and thus from this passage it is clear that Adam spoke in Hebrew. For "virago" does not signify nature or sex, but manly virtue and courage in a woman. But the Hebrew word isscha signifies the nature and sex of woman, because it is derived from isch, that is, from "man," with the feminine he added, meaning: She shall be called "vira" [woman-from-man] (as the ancient Latins used to say, according to Sextus Pompeius), because she was taken from man. So Symmachus in Greek from andros [man] made andris, according to St. Jerome; Theodotion translates, she shall be called "assumption," because she was taken from man; for he derives isscha from the root nasa, that is, he assumed, took, carried; but the former translation of the others is genuine.
R. Abraham ben Ezra's wordplay on isch and isscha
Symbolically and elegantly, R. Abraham ben Ezra notes that in the word isscha there is contained the contracted name of God, Yah, who is the author of marriage; and as long as this name remains in the marriage (and it remains as long as the spouses fear God and love one another), for so long God is present at and blesses the union. But if they hate each other and forget God, then the spouses cast away that name; and thus when the yod and he, which form Yah, are removed, all that remains from isch and isscha, that is from man and woman, is esh esh, that is fire and fire -- namely the fire of quarrels and trouble in this life, and in the next life, eternal fire.
Verse 24: Therefore a Man Shall Leave Father and Mother
These are not the words of Moses, as Calvin holds, but of Adam, or rather of God, who confirms Adam's words and draws from them the law of marriage, and ratifies it by His own decree. For Christ attributes these words to God, Matthew XIX, 5. This therefore is the law and partnership of marriage: that if circumstances require it, a spouse is bound to leave father and mother for the sake of the other spouse. This should be understood in terms of cohabitation and the fellowship of life; for in an equal case of famine or other similar necessity, one should rather help father and mother, as the authors of one's life, than one's spouse, as St. Thomas teaches, II-II, Question XXVI, art. 11, ad 1.
AND HE SHALL CLING TO HIS WIFE -- The Septuagint translates proskollethesetai, which Tertullian aptly renders as "he shall be glued to." For the Hebrew dabaq signifies the closest possible union. Thus Sarah was joined to Abraham, Rebecca to Isaac, Sarah to Tobias, Susanna to Joachim.
Examples of the love of spouses
Hear also the pagans. Theogena, wife of Agathocles, king of Sicily, would by no means allow herself to be torn from her sick husband, saying that in marrying she had entered a partnership not only of prosperity but of every fortune, and that she would willingly purchase at the peril of her own life the chance to receive her husband's last breath.
Hypsicrataea, wife of Mithridates, king of Pontus, followed her conquered and fleeing husband through all adversities.
Memorable is the example of the Spartan women, who freed their captive husbands by exchanging clothes with them, and themselves submitted to take the captives' place.
Thus Penelope clung to Ulysses; hear the poet:
Penelope, betrothed, desired to follow Ulysses,
Unless her father Icarius preferred to keep her with him.
He offers Ithaca, the other offers Sparta, the anxious maiden waits:
On one side her father, on the other her husband's mutual love urges.
So sitting down she veils her face, covers her eyes;
These were the signs of modest shame.
By which Icarius recognized that Ulysses was preferred over himself,
And he erected an altar to modesty on that spot.
Illustrious was the example of Gracchus the Roman, in whose house two snakes were found; when the augurs answered that one of the couple would survive if the snake of the other's sex were killed: Rather, said Gracchus, kill mine; for my Cornelia is young and can still bear children. This was to spare his wife and serve the republic, while always playing the good husband, whom the ancients considered a great man in public life.
Dido, sister of Pygmalion, having gathered much gold and silver, sailed to Africa and there founded Carthage; and when she was sought in marriage by Hyarbas, king of Libya, she built a funeral pyre in memory of her late husband Sychaeus and cast herself into it, preferring to burn rather than marry another. A chaste woman founded Carthage; again the same city ended in the praise of chastity.
For the wife of Hasdrubal, when Carthage was taken and set on fire, seeing that she was about to be captured by the Romans, seizing her two little sons, one in each hand, threw herself into the fire burning beneath her own house.
The wife of Niceratus, unable to bear the injury done to her husband, took her own life, lest she should have to endure the lust of the thirty tyrants whom Lysander had imposed on the conquered Athenians.
AND THE TWO SHALL BE ONE FLESH -- That is, two, namely man and wife, shall be in one flesh, that is, in one body, that is, they shall be coupled and mingled together in cohabitation, in common life, in offspring, in the conjugal union.
Thus husband and wife shall be one flesh. First, through carnal union; so the Apostle explains in 1 Cor. 6:16. Second, they shall be one flesh synecdochically, that is, they shall be one person, one civil person. For husband and wife are civilly reckoned as one, and are one. Third, because a spouse is master of the body of his companion, and thus the flesh of one is the flesh of the other, 1 Cor. 7:3. Fourth, effectively: because they generate one flesh, namely offspring.
Note: Among human bonds, the tightest and most inviolable is the bond of marriage. Hence God made Eve from Adam's rib, to signify first, that husband and wife are not so much two as one. Second, that they are indivisible and inseparable; for just as one flesh cannot be divided and still remain one, so a spouse cannot be separated from a spouse, because he or she is one flesh with the spouse. For division, namely divorce and polygamy, are contrary to unity. Third, that they ought to be one in love and will. See Rupert here. Hence Pythagoras said that in the friendship of marriage there is one soul in two bodies.
Hence it is clear that what Nyssen asserts is not true (if indeed he is the author of the book), in his work On the Creation of Man, ch. 17, and Damascene, bk. 2 On the Faith, ch. 30, and Euthymius on Psalm 50, and St. Augustine, bk. 9 On Genesis against the Manichees, ch. 19, and in On True Religion, ch. 46 -- namely that in the state of innocence there would have been no sexual union, but that humans would have been procreated in some angelic manner. For here it is expressly said that "the two shall be in one flesh," which the Apostle explains as referring to sexual union, as I have said. Hence St. Augustine retracts his opinion in bk. 1 of the Retractations, ch. 10, and the Doctors now commonly follow this. Therefore Faber Stapulensis errs in his Commentary on the book of Richard of St. Victor On the Holy Trinity, who dreams and says that, if Adam had not sinned, he would have begotten from himself without a woman a male like himself; and Almaricus, who opined that in that state there would have been no difference of sex.
Again, St. Thomas, Part I, Question 98, art. 2, thinks that in the state of innocence, with bodily integrity preserved (which is called virginity), there would still have been conception and birth. But, as Pererius rightly notes, this also conflicts with this passage and with the nature of human generation. Therefore generation would then have been similar to what it now is, except without concupiscence. Hence virginity would not have existed then, because it would not have been a virtue in that state. For virginity is now a virtue because it restrains the concupiscence of lust; but then there would have been no concupiscence or lust to restrain; therefore there would have been no continence or virginity then. Hence Pererius plausibly judges that in that state as many females as males would have been born. For all would have entered marriage, and that a singular one, namely one man with one woman, according to what God here instituted.
Verse 25: They Were Both Naked and Not Ashamed
AND THEY WERE BOTH NAKED, AND WERE NOT ASHAMED -- because in the state of innocence there was no lust, no concupiscence: for from this arises shame and embarrassment, if the members in which lust reigns are exposed and laid bare to others. So St. Augustine, in On Genesis According to the Letter, near the beginning.
Therefore the Adamites are foolish, shameless, and impure, who, like Adam, are no longer ashamed of being naked -- when Adam immediately after his sin was ashamed and covered himself with garments, as St. Epiphanius rightly says in refuting similar people, bk. 2, heresy 52.
From here Plato seems to have drawn his notion of nakedness in the Politicus, which he attributed to all men of the golden age.
Isidore Clarius also wrongly thinks that Adam and Eve had as a garment a certain divine splendor and glory, such as God clothed St. Agnes and other virgins with when they were led to the brothel and stripped, and such as He will clothe the bodies of the Saints with in the resurrection. For this is imagined without basis and in vain; for where there is no shame, no concupiscence, no cold, there no garment or light is needed.
Seven excellences of the state of innocence
Finally, Pererius beautifully enumerates in the preface to book 5 seven excellences of the state of innocence. The first was full wisdom; the second, grace and friendship with God; the third, original justice; the fourth, immortality and impassibility of soul and body -- not intrinsic, such as exists in the glorious bodies of the blessed, but extrinsic, arising partly from God's protection, partly from man's prudence and foresight, by which he would have guarded himself from harmful and injurious things. And these resided in man himself; but the three remaining were outside man, namely: fifth, habitation in paradise and eating of the tree of life; sixth, God's special care for man. Whence followed the seventh, namely that man could not have experienced concupiscence, nor sinned venially, says St. Thomas, nor erred, nor been deceived -- but concerning uncertain matters he would have either suspended judgment or formed a doubtful one. For these things do not seem able to be produced by a habit or created quality implanted in man, but only by the assistance and protection of God.
Understand this concerning the state of full and perfect innocence, in which Adam was created, namely that he was free from all evil, both of guilt and of punishment and misery. For otherwise, if God had permitted him to fall into a state of semi-complete innocence, he could have sinned venially, and also erred and been deceived, as Scotus rightly teaches. On which matter see Francis of Arezzo on Genesis, p. 450.
Seven virtues of Christ that would not have existed in the state of innocence
On the contrary, through Christ a greater grace has been restored to us than was given to Adam, and thus we now have seven virtues that would not have existed in the state of innocence: the first is virginity; the second, patience; the third, penitence; the fourth, martyrdom; the fifth, fasting, abstinence, and all mortification of the flesh; the sixth, religious poverty and obedience; the seventh, mercy and almsgiving -- for then there would have been no poor or wretched people, to whom we now abound, so that we may exercise mercy toward them.
Finally, a greater and more effective grace is now given to fallen man than was given to Adam, as is evident in the Martyrs and other illustrious Saints. Hence the capacity for meriting is also now greater, both by reason of greater grace and by reason of the difficulty of the work -- although in the state of innocence the capacity for meriting would have been greater by reason of the readiness of the will. For the will would then have been entirely upright, having no passions contrary to virtue, and would have been carried to the virtues by the ready impulse of nature and grace, and thus would have elicited many intense, great, and heroic acts of all the virtues.