On Paradise

7. The Tree of Knowledge and the Limits of Human Judgment

Now there was in paradise the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. For thus you have it: For God brought forth a tree beautiful to the sight, and good for food, and the tree of life in paradise, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Afterwards we shall see whether this tree also was beautiful to the sight, and good for food, as the others were. For that will be discussed more fittingly at the place where we find man, having tasted of this tree, to have been deceived. Meanwhile we have nothing which we ought now to find fault with, even though we cannot know the reason. For neither in this creation of the world, if any things seem to us difficult of understanding, and incomprehensible to our intellect, ought we to condemn by any rash judgment, as the creation of serpents, and of some poisonous creature; since we men are not yet able to understand and to know for what reason each particular thing was made.

So then also in the divine Scriptures let us not readily find fault with anything which we cannot understand. For there are very many things which are not to be measured by our understanding; but are to be judged from the height of the divine ordering and word.

8. Why the Tree of Knowledge Was Permitted

Suppose then, however, without prejudice to the assertion to come, that this tree of the knowledge of good and evil displeases you for this reason, that after men tasted of it, they understood themselves to be naked; nevertheless, for the completion of the divine working, I shall tell you that this tree also sprang up in paradise, and was permitted by God for this reason, that we might be able to know the pre-eminence of good. For how, if there were no knowledge of good and evil, should we learn any distinction between good and evil? For neither should we judge that which was evil to be evil, unless there were a knowledge of good: but the knowledge of good could not exist, unless there were also good: nor again should we know that which was good to be good, unless there were a knowledge of evil. Take an example from the very constitution of the human body.

It has indeed a certain bitterness of gall, which, if you consider it in relation to the whole, is found useful for the health of man. So also that which we think evil, is for the most part not evil in every respect, but useful for the common good. For as gall is in a part of the body, and yet is of profit for the utility of the whole body: so God, knowing that the knowledge of good and evil would be of profit to the utility of all, established it in a part, that it might be of profit in common.

9. The Serpent as a Figure of the Devil

Finally, you find a serpent in paradise, assuredly not generated without the will of God. Now under the figure of the serpent is the devil. That the devil was indeed in paradise the prophet Ezekiel also teaches, who says concerning the prince of Tyre: Thou wast, he says, in the delight of paradise. Now we understand the prince of Tyre as a figure of the devil. Shall we, then, on this account also accuse God, because we cannot comprehend the treasures of his depth and knowledge, hidden and concealed in Christ, except those which he himself has deigned to reveal? He has, however, revealed them, that we might know that even the malice of the devil is of profit to men's salvation. Not that the devil wishes to profit, but that the Lord turns his malice, even while it resists, to our salvation. Finally, the malice of this one made the virtue and patience of the holy man Job more illustrious.

His malice exercised Job's righteousness; that he might contend and conquer, and that victory might be followed by a crown. For no one is crowned except one who has contended lawfully. Joseph's chastity too would never have come to our remembrance, had not the wife of his master, incited by the fiery darts of the devil, tempted his affection, had she not finally sought his destruction, so that the chastity of the man might be the more illustrious, who despised death for the sake of chastity. Would you know the counsel of God? Indeed, deaths seem to be prepared for righteous men by the devil's instigation, and even the slaying of children by their parents is carried out; yet the Lord tempted even Abraham by this same art, that he might demand that a son be sacrificed to him by that same father. By which temptation Abraham was proved faithful to the Lord, in that he was not turned back from the obedience of devotion even by pity for his beloved son.

So, then, was also the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in paradise; which was beautiful to sight, and good for food in appearance. For it was not good for food in use; since the eating of it appears to have been harmful to men. There is, then, that which harms individuals, but profits in common, as the devil harmed Judas, but crowned all the other apostles, who overcame his temptations of malice.

10. The Devil's Limited Power Over the Saints

And so we ought neither to doubt nor to find fault that the devil was in paradise; since indeed he could not shut off the way for the saints, lest anyone should ascend. For he did not, as a possessor, snatch away from the just their dwelling of habitation. Grant, indeed, that he turned away some vicious and desiring persons from dwelling in the possession above; yet far more august and far more beautiful is this, that he shall be excluded by the prayers of the saints, when that shall be fulfilled which is written: I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven. Let us not, then, fear him, who is so weak that he himself is to fall to the earth. He has indeed received licence to tempt: but he has not received power to overthrow, unless the weak disposition of its own accord gives way, not knowing how to summon help for itself.

And therefore it is necessary to know by what fraud he first tempted man, and what in man he thought should be tempted, in what order, by what art, that we may be able to be on our guard.

11. Serpent, Woman, and Man as Figures of Sense and Mind

Yet many who wish that the devil was not in paradise, although we have read that he was standing in heaven among the angels, lest they should seem to be offended by our discourse, may take according to their own will the interpretation of this reading. For there was one before us who related that the transgression was committed by man through delight and sense, taking in the figure of the serpent an image of delectation, and in the figure of the woman establishing the sense of the mind, which the Greeks call αἴσθησις: and he asserted that, the sense having been deceived, the mind, according to the history, was the one who transgressed, which the Greeks call nous, mind. Rightly, therefore, in Greek nous, mind took the figure of the man, αἴσθησις that of the woman. Whence also certain ones have interpreted Adam as the earthly nous, mind.

The Lord also, in the Gospel, set forth those virgins, with their lamps lit or extinguished, awaiting the coming of the bridegroom, as figures of the senses, either whole, of the wise, or corrupted, of the foolish. For if Eve, that is, the sense of the first woman, had had her lamps lit, she would never have entangled us in the coils of her transgression, nor would she have fallen from that immortality of virtue.

12. Paradise as the Soul, Adam as Mind, Eve as Sense

Paradise, then, is a certain fertile land, that is, a fruitful soul, planted in Eden, that is, in a certain delight, or a well-tilled land, in which there is delight for the soul. There is also nous, mind as Adam: there is also sense, as Eve. And lest you should have anything to turn back upon a weakness of nature, or upon a condition liable to the enduring of dangers, consider what supports this soul has.

13. Christ as the Fountain That Waters Paradise

There was a fountain which watered paradise. And what is that fountain, but the Lord Jesus Christ! He is the fountain of eternal life, as also is the Father; for it is written: For with thee is the fountain of life. And again: Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. And a fountain is spoken of, and a river is spoken of, which waters the fruitful tree of paradise, that it may bear fruit unto eternal life. This fountain, then, as you have read, for it says, a fountain proceeds out of Eden, that is, in your soul is the fountain. Whence Solomon says: Drink water out of thine own vessels, and out of the fountains of thine own wells. There is the fountain which proceeds from that well-tilled soul, full as it were of delight: this is the fountain which waters paradise, that is, the virtues of a soul springing forth with most eminent merit.

14. The Four Rivers as the Four Virtues

And this fountain, it says, is divided into four heads. The name of one is Phison: this is that which encircles the whole land of Evilath, where gold is found. And the gold of that land is good; there is bdellium there, and the onyx stone. And the name of the second is Geon: this is that which encircles the whole land of Ethiopia. And the third river is Tigris: this is that which goes toward the Assyrians. And the fourth river is Euphrates. These, then, are the four rivers, according to the Hebrews. But according to the Greeks, the Ganges flows toward India. Geon, however, is the Nile, which encircles the land of Egypt or Ethiopia. And Mesopotamia is so called because the Tigris and Euphrates enclose it; because it is set between these two rivers—a fact which even for those far distant its very name and common report have expressed.

But just as the fountain is called the Wisdom of God—for it is a fountain according to the Gospel, which says: "If any man thirst, let him come to me and drink"; it is also a fountain according to the prophet who says: "Come and eat of my bread, and drink the wine which I have mingled for you"—so, then, as Wisdom is the fountain of life, the fountain of spiritual grace, so also it is the fountain of the other virtues, which direct us toward the course of eternal life. From this soul, therefore, which has been cultivated, not from the one that is uncultivated, this fountain proceeds so as to water paradise, that is, certain thickets of diverse virtues, of which there are four heads into which this wisdom is divided. And what are the four heads of the virtues, if not one of prudence, another of temperance, a third of fortitude, a fourth of justice? These the wise men of this world, taking them from our writings, transferred into the books of their own.

And so, just as there is a fountain of wisdom, so also these four rivers are certain streams of virtue flowing from that fountain.

15. Phison as the River of Prudence

Phison, therefore, is prudence, and for that reason it has good gold, a shining carbuncle, and a green stone. For we often understand gold to signify the discoveries of the prudent. Whence the Lord also says through the Prophet: "I gave her gold and silver." And David says of the prudent: "If ye sleep among the midst of lots, ye shall be as the wings of a dove covered with silver, and her hinder parts with the color of gold": because he who has clung to the Old and the New Testament can proceed with an abundance of discourse into the very secrets of the wisdom of God. This, therefore, he calls good gold, not that coined gold which is corruptible and earthly. It has also, he says, a shining carbuncle, in which there lives a certain little fire of our soul. It has also a green stone, which by the appearance of its color seems to display something green and vital.

For shrubs which live are green, but whatever things die wither away; the earth is green while it flowers, and seeds too are green while they burst forth. And rightly is this river Phison placed in the first position, which according to the Hebrews is called Phison, that is, "change of mouth"; because it does not flow around one nation only, but flows also through Lydia. For prudence is not something narrow, but a rich abundance of usefulness, which benefits many. Therefore it is placed first, so that if anyone should have gone forth from paradise, a river, as it were, of prudence might receive him, lest he quickly wither away; but through this he might easily return to paradise. This river is frequented by many men, and is said to possess the greatest beauty and fertility. And therefore prudence is taken under the likeness of this river, which brought forth very many fruits at the Lord's coming. And it flows into the farthest parts of the earth, because through Wisdom all men have been redeemed.

Whence also it is said: "Their sound has gone forth into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world."

16. Geon as the River of Temperance

The second river is Geon, beside which the law was given to the Israelites, when they were established in Egypt; that they should depart from Egypt, and with loins girded eat the lamb, which is a sign of temperance. For it behooves those who are chaste and sanctified to celebrate the Lord's Passover. And therefore beside this river the observance of the law was first established; for this name signifies a certain gaping chasm of the earth. Therefore, just as a chasm swallows up the earth and whatever refuse or foliage is upon it, so chastity is accustomed to abolish all the passions of the body. And rightly there first the establishment of observance took place, because through the law carnal sin is swallowed up. Rightly, therefore, Geon, in which is the figure of chastity, is said to encircle the land of Ethiopia; that it may wash the debased body, and quench the fire of the vilest flesh. For Ethiopia is signified, in the Latin interpretation, as "debased" and "vile." But what is more debased than our body?

What is so like Ethiopia, which is also black with certain shadows of sins?

17. Tigris as the River of Fortitude

The third river is Tigris, which goes toward the Assyrians, to whom the transgressing Israel was led captive. This river is said to be swifter than all others, and it is inhabited by the Assyrians, that is, "the directors"—for this is what the interpretation signifies. Therefore, whoever, by fortitude of mind, has taken captive the transgressing vices of the body, directing them toward things above, he is reckoned similar to this river. And therefore fortitude, too, flows from that fountain which is in paradise. But fortitude, with a certain rapid course, pierces through whatever resists, nor does its course cling to any obstacles of hindrance.

18. Euphrates as the River of Justice

The fourth river is Euphrates, which in Latin is called "fruitfulness" and "abundance of fruits," bearing forth a certain mark of justice, which nourishes every soul. For no virtue seems to have more abundant fruits than equity and justice, which profits others more than itself, and neglects its own advantages, preferring the common benefit. Many think that Euphrates is named ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐφραίνεσθαι, that is, "from rejoicing," because the human race rejoices in nothing more than in justice and equity. But as to the reason why, whereas the other rivers have the regions through which they pass described, the regions through which the Euphrates passes are not described, we have received this explanation: that its water is asserted to be life-giving, and such as nourishes and increases. Whence the wise men of the Hebrews and Assyrians have called it "Auxen"; while, on the contrary, the water of the other rivers is said to be otherwise.

Then too, because where there is prudence, there is also malice; where there is fortitude, there is also wrath; where temperance is, for the most part there is also intemperance, or other vices; but where justice is, there is the concord of the other virtues; therefore it is not known from the places through which it flows, that is, not from a part. For justice is not a part, but is, as it were, the mother of all. In these four rivers, then, four principal virtues are expressed, which have, as it were, enclosed the ages of this world.

19. The Age of Prudence From Abel to Noah

The first age, therefore, from the beginning of the world until the flood, was that of prudence, in which time the just are numbered: Abel, called just by God; and Enos, that is, "man made in the image of God," who hoped to call upon the name of the Lord God; and Enoch, who in Latin is called "the grace of God," taken up into heaven; and Noah, who was himself also just, and a certain "direction of rest."

20. The Age of Temperance From Abraham to Jacob

The second age is Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and the number of the remaining patriarchs, in whom a certain chaste and pure temperance of religion shone forth. For Isaac, unblemished, was given as a son by the promise to Abraham, bearing forth not so much a bodily birth as a gift of divine indulgence, in whom truly the figure of the unblemished one went before, as the Apostle teaches, saying: "For to Abraham were the promises made, and to his seed. He does not say, 'and to seeds,' as of many, but as of one, 'and to thy seed,' which is Christ."

21. The Age of Fortitude Under Moses and the Prophets

The third age is in the law of Moses and the other prophets. For time would fail me in recounting Gideon, Barak, Samson, David, Solomon, and Samuel, and the other prophets, Ananias, Azarias, Misael, and Daniel, Elijah and Elisha, who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in battle, turned to flight the armies of foreigners. Not without reason, therefore, is the type of fortitude found in these. For they were sawn asunder, as you have below, were tempted, died by the slaying of the sword. They wandered about in goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented, of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts, in mountains, in dens, and in caves of the earth. Rightly, then, do we place the type of fortitude in these.

22. Justice as the Bond of All the Virtues

But according to the Gospel, the figure worthy of justice is that virtue which is for salvation to every believer. For the Lord himself says: "Suffer it to be so now; for thus it becomes us to fulfill all justice"—which indeed is the second parent of the other virtues. In it, although any one of those we have named is the principal virtue, in it also the others are present; because the virtues themselves are joined and knit together with one another. For assuredly Abel was just, and Abraham most brave and most patient, and the prophets most prudent: but Moses, learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, esteemed the reproach of Christ a greater honor than the treasures of Egypt. And who was wiser than Daniel? Solomon too asked for wisdom, and obtained it. Thus we have spoken concerning the four rivers of the virtues, whose drink is profitable. And since Phison is said to have the good gold of the land, and the carbuncle, and the green stone, let us consider what this also may be.

23. Enos, Enoch, and Noah as Precious Stones

For Enos seems to us as it were the good gold, who prudently desired to know the name of God. Enoch, however, who was translated, and did not see death, is a certain carbuncle, a stone of good odor, which holy Enoch offered to God by his works, breathing forth a certain grace by deeds and by manner of life. Noah, indeed, as a green stone displayed a life-giving color. Since, at the time of the flood, he alone was preserved in that ark, as it were a life-giving seed for the future constitution of things. Rightly, then, is paradise, which is watered by many rivers, said to be "toward the East," not "against the East," that is, according to that East whose name is "the Orient," that is, according to Christ, who has poured forth a certain radiance of eternal light, and is in Eden, that is, in delight.

24. Man Made Outside Paradise, Woman Within

And God took the man whom he had made, and placed him in paradise to work and to keep it. You see that he who already existed is taken hold of. He was, then, in the land of his own molding. God's power therefore took hold of him, breathing into him the advances and increases of virtue: and then it placed him in paradise, that you may know that he who is thus taken hold of is, as it were, breathed upon by divine power. Note in this place that the man was made outside paradise, and the woman within paradise, so that you may perceive that it is not by the nobility of place, nor of race, but by virtue that each one obtains grace for himself. For indeed, the man, made outside paradise, that is, in a lower place, is found to be the better; while she who was made in the better place, that is, in paradise, is found to be the inferior. For the woman was deceived first, and she herself deceived the man.

Whence the Apostle Peter recorded that holy women, as the weaker vessel, subject to the stronger, should obey their own husbands as their lords. And Paul says: "For Adam was not deceived; but the woman, being deceived, was in the transgression." And from this it must be considered that no one ought to presume too readily upon himself. For behold, she who was made as a help for the man needs the protection of the man; because the man is the head of the woman: yet he who believed that he should have his wife as a help, fell through his wife.

Whence no one ought readily to trust himself to another, unless he has proved that other's virtue, nor should he who has been taken as a help arrogate anything to himself; but rather, if he finds one stronger than himself to whom he thought himself a protection, let him borrow grace from that one—just as the Apostle Peter also bids husbands to render honor to their wives, saying: "Husbands, likewise, dwelling with them according to knowledge, giving honor unto the wife as unto the weaker vessel, as being also heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers be not hindered."

25. Working and Guarding as the Two Duties of Man

Therefore man was placed in paradise, and woman was made in paradise. But even then, before the woman was deceived by the serpent, she had the grace of the man, since she was taken from the man: although this is a great mystery, as the Apostle said. And therefore she drew the cause of her life from him. And for this reason Scripture spoke of the man alone, because it placed him in paradise to work and to guard it. To work and to guard are not the same thing. For in working there is a certain progress of virtue, while in guarding a certain completion of the work is perceived, in that he guards, as it were, things already completed. These two things are required of man: that by his works he seek new things, and that he guard what has been acquired, which is the general rule.

Philo, however, since he could not grasp spiritual things with the Jewish disposition, kept himself within moral matters, so as to say that these two things are sought: work in the field, and guarding of the house. And although paradise, he says, had no need of rural labors, yet because the first man was to be the law of posterity, he therefore took on, even in paradise, the appearance of lawful labor, so that he might bind us to the working and guarding of the duty owed, and to the office of hereditary succession. These two things, therefore, are required of you, whether morally or spiritually. This also the prophetic psalm teaches you, for it is written: Unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain who build it. Unless the Lord guard the city, they watch in vain who guard it. You see that those labor who are in the process of working and building; but those watch who have already received the guarding of a finished work.

Whence the Lord also said to the Apostles, as to men now more perfect: Watch and pray, that you enter not into temptation; teaching that the office of a perfect nature and the grace of full virtue must be preserved, and that no one, even the more perfect, ought to be secure of himself unless he watches.

26. The Singular and Plural Forms of God's Command

And the Lord God commanded Adam, saying: Of every tree that is in paradise you may eat for food; but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. For in what day soever you shall eat of it, you shall die the death. As to why, where he commanded that one should eat of every tree, he said it in the singular, "You may eat"; but where he spoke of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he said it in the plural, "You shall not eat"—this is not an idle question. But if you attend carefully, it can be resolved by the authority of the Scriptures. For what is good, this is to be done; and what is good and is to be done is harmonious and cohering; but what is base is discordant, disordered, and separated. And therefore the Lord, always intending unity, commanded according to unity. Indeed, he who made both one works unity. And not only both, but all are one.

For he commanded that we all be one body and one spirit. But the Firstborn through all things, since he is in unity with the Father, is always most closely joined to the Father, because the Word was with God. Hence he says: I and the Father are one; that he might show the unity of majesty and divinity to be his with the Father. And he commanded that we too be one, and transferred into us, by the grace of adoption, the likeness of his own nature and unity, saying: Father, as I and thou are one, so let these also be one in us. Therefore, where he commands the good, he commands as it were toward the one, saying, "You may eat." For unity cannot transgress. But where he speaks of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he says it is not to be tasted, speaking as it were to many, "You shall not eat." For what is prohibitory is enjoined, as it were, upon many.

Yet I think something else, and I find already in the very word of God what was to come. He commanded Adam alone to taste of every tree, whom he knew would keep the command; but concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, that it was not to be tasted, he now speaks not in the singular but in the plural. For he knew that the woman would transgress, and therefore by the plural he shows that they would not keep the command, since the judgment of the many is divided.

27. Symmachus's Reading and the Unity of Father and Son

And as far as concerns the opinion of the Seventy men, what troubled us is resolved. But because Symmachus said both in the singular, we understand that he followed this, because in the Law also, when God addresses the people, he speaks in the singular, as you have: Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God, the Lord is one; and, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God. Nor does the interpretation of Symmachus prejudice me, who could not see the unity of the Father and the Son, although both he and Aquila sometimes confessed it in their speech. Nor let anyone think, from the fact that God addresses the people who were to transgress the divine commands in the singular, that this is opposed to what we said above; because the people of the Jews also violated precepts given even in the singular. For the Law is spiritual; and therefore God addressed the people by divine oracle, in one manner in speech, in another in predestination. Hence he says: Thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother's milk.

28. Apelles's Objections to the Tree of Life and Death

From here the sequence of the heavenly precepts would seem easy, were it not that many raise a question, to which we must reply, lest they lead simple minds astray by malicious interpretation. For many, whose author is Apelles, as you have in his thirty-eighth book, propose these questions: How does the tree of life seem to contribute more to life than the breathing of God? Then, if God did not make man perfect, but each one acquires for himself the perfection of virtue by his own industry, does not man seem to acquire more for himself than God conferred upon him? Thirdly they object: If man had not tasted death, surely he could not know what he had not tasted. Therefore if he had not tasted it, he did not know it; if he did not know it, he could not fear it. In vain, therefore, did God hold forth death as a terror, which men did not fear.

29. The Tree of Life and the Natural Fear of Death

Let us learn, then, that God brought forth in that place the tree of life where he also brought forth the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. For you have that he brought forth the tree of life ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ παραδείσου, that is, in the middle of paradise. For among us ἐν μέσῳ is understood to mean that he brought it forth in the middle. Therefore in the middle of paradise there was both life and the cause of death. Understand that man did not make life, but could find it either by working or by keeping the commandments of God. But life was, as the Apostle said, hidden with Christ in God. Man, therefore, was either in the shadow of life for the sake of the life to come, since this life which is now ours on earth is a shadow, or he was in a certain pledge of life, because he had the breathing of God.

He had, therefore, a pledge of immortality; but placed in the shadow of life, he could not see and grasp, by any common touch and sight, the life hidden with Christ in God. And if he was not yet a sinner, he was nevertheless not of an incorrupt and inviolable nature, since he was one who afterward fell into sin, though he was not yet a sinner. Indeed, he was in the shadow of life; but sinners are in the shadow of death. For the people of sinners, as Isaiah teaches, sat in the shadow of death, to whom light arose through the grace of God, not through any merit of their own virtue. Therefore there is no distinction between the breathing of God and the food of the tree of life. Nor can anyone say that man could acquire more for himself than was bestowed upon him by divine bounty. Would that we could keep what we have received! For our labor profits us in this, that we may recover what was given.

As for the third thing proposed, namely that he who had not tasted death could not fear death, this is easily resolved from the common usage of nature. For it is implanted by nature in all living creatures that they shrink, as from something harmful, even from things they have not yet experienced as harmful. For whence, at its very birth, does the dove have terror of the hawk? Whence are wolves fearsome to sheep, and kites to chicks? But if in these creatures, which are irrational, there is a certain natural fear toward the opposite kind of creature, so that even irrational beings receive a sense of fleeing death, how much more in the first man, who was surely most full of reason, ought there to have been a certain natural notion that death was to be avoided.

30. Whether It Is Evil to Disobey a Good Precept

Again they raise other questions in this manner: It is not always evil not to obey a precept. For if the precept is good, obedience is honorable; but if the precept is wicked, not to obey is useful. Therefore it is not always evil not to obey a precept, but it is wicked not to obey a good precept. Now the tree that produces the knowledge of good and evil is good, since God knows both good and evil. Indeed he says: Behold, Adam has become as one of us. If, therefore, it is good to have knowledge of good and evil, and that which even God has is good, it seems that he who forbids it to men does not forbid rightly; and this they propose. But if they understand what it is to know, and what force this word has—if they understand it as they ought—for the Lord knew who are his; he indeed knew those who were made one out of many, in whom he dwells, and among whom he walks.

To know, indeed, does not consist in mere and superficial knowledge, but in the doing of those things which ought to be done. But it was fitting for man to obey the command; and by not obeying he transgressed. Therefore he who did not obey erred, because transgression is sin. But even if they wish to diminish the force of "knowledge," so as to think that only superficial knowledge of good and evil was forbidden, even then the fault of transgression lies in the fact that the command was not obeyed; because even a hasty knowledge of good and evil the Lord God thought should be forbidden.

31. The Comparison Between Adam and an Infant

Another question: He who does not know good and evil differs in nothing from an infant. But in the eyes of a just judge there is no fault in an infant. But the just Maker of the world would never have called an infant to account for a fault, on the ground that he had not known good and evil; because an infant is without any crime of transgression and fault. But since we said above that there is a twofold understanding of the knowledge of good and evil, if we take it as superficial knowledge, it is certainly false that there is no difference between him who has not known good and evil and an infant. But if it is false that there is no difference from an infant, then Adam was not an infant. If he was not an infant, then sin is certainly imputed to him as not being an infant. If sin is imputed, punishment follows the sin; because he is found worthy of punishment who did not take care to avoid sin.

It can also happen that even he who does not have knowledge of good and evil is not an infant; since before the child knew good and evil, he did not believe in malice. And again you have: For before the child shall know how to call his father and his mother, he shall take the strength of Damascus, and the spoils of Samaria. He, then, is perfect who works good, even if he has not attained knowledge of good and evil, as many, before they know the law, are a law unto themselves. For before the Apostle said, "Thou shalt not covet", he did not know that covetousness was evil. Indeed he himself says: I had not known sin but by the law. For I had not known concupiscence, if the law did not say, Thou shalt not covet. In this respect a child too can be perfect by the law of nature, before he knows that concupiscence is a crime, or commits the crime of concupiscence.

Therefore, according to superficial knowledge, God did not wish man to know what is evil, lest, being as it were imperfect, he should be unable to avoid it. But by not obeying the command we fall into fault; therefore we confess fault. But again, if we speak of a deep and profound knowledge of good and evil, which indeed profound knowledge makes one perfect, then not immediately is an infant, who could not attain to deep and profound knowledge, rightly condemned as if he were not an infant.

32. Faith, Not Understanding, Required for Obedience

Again they sow questions: He who does not know, they say, good and evil, does not even know this itself, that it is evil not to keep the commandment, nor does he know this itself, that it is good to obey the commandment. And therefore, because he did not know, they say, he who did not obey was deserving of pardon, not of condemnation. This question indeed has its resolution from the things we have mentioned before. For man could consider, from those things which God had before bestowed upon him, that he had received the breath of God, that he had been placed in the paradise of delight, that the highest obedience was owed to his author. And therefore, even if he did not know the force of good and evil, yet because the author of such great things had said concerning the tree of knowledge of good and evil that it should not be tasted, he ought to have kept faith with the one who commanded him. For not skill but faith was required of him.

He understood, at any rate, that God was preeminent over all, and therefore he ought to have regarded the person of the one commanding. And even if he did not understand the force and quality of the things commanded, he nevertheless knew that reverence was owed to the one who commanded. He had this notion in his nature, even though he did not have judgment of good and evil. Finally, the woman also said to the serpent: We shall eat of every tree of paradise; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of paradise, God said, We shall not eat of it. Thus, then, she knew that the commandment must be obeyed, in that she said: We shall eat of every fruit, which the Lord had commanded; but concerning the tree which is in the middle of paradise, she says it was commanded by God that it should not be tasted, lest they die the death.

Therefore, because she knew that the commandment was to be obeyed, she certainly knew that it was evil to transgress, and therefore, having transgressed, she is justly condemned.

33. Eve's Guilt in Tempting Adam to Sin

Take another point: If the eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was so operative that good and evil were thereby recognized—which Scripture seems to show, when it says: For when they both had eaten, their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked; that is, the eyes of the heart were opened, and they knew it was shameful for them to live naked—then without doubt, when the woman tasted of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, she sinned, and knew that she had sinned. She, therefore, who had come to know that she had sinned, ought not to have invited her husband into the fellowship of sin. But by enticing her husband and giving him what she herself had tasted, she did not avoid the sin, but repeated it.

For indeed, if you look truly at reason, she ought rather not to have drawn the one she loved into partnership in punishment, but rather to have recalled him—even though he was ignorant—from what she herself had come to know was sin; although this woman seems to have feared, knowing that after her guilt she could not remain in paradise, that she alone would be cast out of paradise. Finally, both hid themselves after their fault. Knowing, therefore, that she was to be excluded, she was unwilling to be deprived of the companionship of the husband whom she loved.

34. The Motives Behind Eve's Sin

Take again: It is not the knowledge of evil that is evil; but when the act fulfills the malice. For not immediately does he who knows evil, because it is evil, do it; but he who works what he knows to be evil sins. The incentive to doing what is evil is wont to be either wrath or desire. Nor is it immediately necessary that one who has knowledge of evil should do what he knows to be wicked, unless he is overcome either by wrath or by desire. Whence what we have said to be the incentive of sinning is either wrath or desire, or very often fear, although desire arises from fear, since each one wishes to avoid what he fears. And therefore we have rightly set down wrath and desire as the incentives of the two remaining vices. Let us consider, then, whether Eve was incited to vice by these goads.

But she was neither angry with her husband, nor was she overcome by desire: she erred only in the second respect, in that she gave to her husband to eat what she herself had already tasted. In the first case, desire had been the author of her error, so that she herself ate; and this was the cause of the subsequent sin. For what she had already tasted, she could not desire; and by tasting, she had come into the knowledge of evil. The evil, therefore, which she had perceived, she ought not to have turned upon her husband, nor to have made her own spouse a transgressor of the divine commandment. Knowingly, then, and deliberately she sinned, and knowingly she drew her husband into her own error. Otherwise the statement about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil will be found false, if even after she had eaten from that tree, she could not have knowledge of evil.

But if the statement is true, she certainly could not have had the cause of desire—although very many think she should be excused on this ground, that, loving her husband, she feared to be separated from him, and they put forward this as the cause of her desire, that she wished to be with her husband.

35. Disobedience, Not God, the Cause of Death

Again another question steals in: whence death befell Adam, whether from the nature of that kind of tree, or truly from God. If we ascribe this to the nature of the tree, the fruit of this tree seems to prevail over the vivifying breath of God; since, indeed, the one whom the breath had vivified, the fruit of this tree drew to death. But if we relate that God is the worker of death, they say that we accuse him by a twofold charge: that either he was so unmerciful that he was unwilling to forgive when he could, or if he could not forgive, he seems weak. Let us see, then, how this is to be resolved. Unless I am mistaken, the cause of death was disobedience; and therefore man himself is the cause of his own death, not having God as the author of his death.

For neither, if a physician has prescribed to a sick man what he should beware of, and that man has not thought he should abstain from the forbidden things, is the physician the cause of his death; rather, he himself is guilty of his own death. So God, like a good physician, forbade Adam to taste what would harm him.

36. The Use and Abuse of Knowledge

Take again: To know good is better than not to know it; and for him who knows the good, it is fitting to know what is evil, so that he may know to beware of what is evil, and, being prudent, may undertake the caution of guarding himself. On the other hand, it is not enough to know only what is evil, lest, when you know evil, you begin to be defrauded of the knowledge of good. It is fitting, therefore, that we know both, so that both because we know the good, we may flee what is evil, and from that which we recognize as evil, we may prefer the grace of the good. But you ought to know both in such a way that you both know them deeply, and carry out what you have known, and the act correspond to the knowledge. Otherwise Scripture indicates as more tolerable him who knows neither, than him who has come to know both only superficially.

For it is burdensome to know what you either cannot carry out or cannot avoid; it is burdensome to know without the use and work of a deep knowledge. Finally, it is a detriment to reputation for a physician to know what benefits and what harms a sick man, unless he uses that knowledge as he ought; and therefore knowledge is not good, unless you use it as is fitting.

37. The Tree of Knowledge Not Made in Vain

Take again: Not in vain was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil brought forth in the middle of paradise; and if it had been brought forth for any man whatsoever, the prohibition would be superfluous. But it was neither made in vain, nor made for anyone but the man who received the commandment, so that he might use it not alone, but along with the other things. For if you examine many things, you will find very many, indeed innumerable things, which can harm one who does not know how to use them. Nor will you find riches themselves fruitful, if a rich man, having the means of generosity, denies sustenance to the poor, excludes the needy destitute of help, extorts what belongs to others because he prevails by his power. Beauty itself and a more pleasing form of body more often draws one into vice than deformity does. Does anyone, then, desire to have children more deformed rather than more beautiful, and wish his own children to be poor rather than rich?

There are many things of this kind which are not to be attributed to the imprudence of the giver, but to the error of the one who uses badly. And therefore the one who uses is to be blamed rather than the one who bestows.

38. Judas as Proof Against Objections to the Old Testament

Again a question: Did God know that Adam would transgress his commandments, or did he not know? If he did not know, this is no assertion of divine power; but if he knew, and nevertheless, knowing, commanded things to be neglected, then God does not command anything superfluous. But he commanded something superfluous to that first-formed Adam, since he knew he would by no means keep it; but God does nothing superfluous; therefore Scripture is not from God. For this is what those who do not accept the Old Testament object, and they have inserted these questions. But these must be overcome by their own judgment and opinion. For since they do not refute the faith of the New Testament, they are to be refuted by example, so that they may believe the Old Testament also; since, when the divine precepts and deeds agree with one another, it is clear that both Testaments are to be believed as being of one author.

Let them learn, then, that a commandment prescribed even to one who was going to transgress it is neither superfluous nor unjust. For the Lord Jesus himself chose Judas, whom he knew to be a betrayer. If they think he was chosen through lack of foreknowledge, they detract from the divine power. But this they cannot suppose, since Scripture says: For Jesus knew who would betray him. Let these opponents of the Old Testament, then, be silent.

39. The Gentile Objection: Foreknowledge Does Not Compel Sin

But since it seems that an answer must also be given to the Gentiles, if perhaps they should raise this objection—those who do not accept the example, demand a reason—let them also receive by what reason the Son of God either commanded one who was going to transgress, or chose one who was going to betray. The Lord Jesus had come to save all sinners; he had to show his will even toward the impious. And therefore he ought not to have passed over even the betrayer, so that all might perceive that in the choosing even of his own betrayer he held forth the token of the salvation of all; nor was anyone wronged in this, neither Adam, because he received a commandment, nor Judas, because he was chosen. For God imposed upon neither the necessity, either upon the one of transgression, or upon the other of betrayal, since each, if he had kept what he had received, could have abstained from sin.

Finally, he knew also that not all the Jews would believe, and yet he said: I was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Therefore the fault is not in the one commanding, but the sin is in the one transgressing. And what was in God shows to all that he willed to free all. Nor do I say this because he did not know the coming transgression—indeed, I assert that he did know it—but he ought not, on that account, to have diverted upon himself the odium of the perishing betrayer, so that it should be ascribed to God that both fell. But now both are convicted and refuted; because the one received a commandment lest he should fall, and the other was also admitted to the office of apostleship, so that he might even be recalled by God's kindness from the disposition of betrayal; at the same time, so that while others are convicted, it might profit all. For sin would not have subsisted, if there had been no prohibition.

And if sin did not subsist, perhaps not only malice, but even virtue would not exist; which, unless there had been some seeds of malice, could neither subsist nor stand out. For what is sin, except the transgression of divine law, and disobedience of heavenly precepts? For we do not judge concerning heavenly commandments by the ears of the body; but since it was the Word of God, certain notions of good and evil have sprung up in us, while we understand naturally that what is evil is to be avoided, and we understand naturally that what is good has been commanded to us. In this, then, we seem to hear the voice of the Lord, in that he forbids some things, commands others. And therefore, if anyone does not obey those things which we believe were once commanded by God, he is judged liable to punishment.

But the commandment of God we do not read inscribed, as it were, on tablets of stone in ink, but we hold it impressed upon our hearts by the Spirit of the living God. Therefore our own opinion makes for itself a law. For if the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature the things that are of the law, then, not having such a law, they are a law to themselves, showing the work of the law written in their hearts. Human opinion, therefore, is to itself as it were a law of God.

40. Objection: One God Good, Another the Maker of Man

Again from this point they raise another question, so that alongside the point we have made—that his commandment consists in man's opinion—they may accuse this very opinion of having been impressed upon us by God as though it were a prescript of the divine law. He knew, they say, that man would sin, he who created him—did he know it or not? So that if you say he did not know, you would understand something unworthy of the majesty of God; but if you say that God, knowing that man would sin, nevertheless impressed upon him the common opinions of good and evil, so that on account of the admixture of evils he could not preserve the perpetuity of life, then just as in the first case you seem to signify a God not foreknowing the future, so in this case you seem to signify a God who is not good. And from this they argue that man's creation was not made by God.

For just as we showed above that they say there is no commandment of God, so here too they say: therefore man's creation is not from God, because God did not make evil. But man received the opinion of evil, when he was commanded to abstain from evils. By this device they attempt to assert one God who is good, and another who is the maker of man. To these it must be answered forthwith, according to their own opinion. For if they do not wish man to have been made by God, because man is a sinner, and they shrink from this, lest the good God should seem to have made a sinner, since they do not think him good who made a sinner—let them say whether they think the maker of man was made by God. For if that maker of man was made by God, as they say, how did a good God make the maker of evil?

Surely he is not good, for he who makes a sinner is not good; one must beware lest it be a graver thing to have made the maker of the sinner. For the good God ought to have prevented the birth of him who was bound to introduce the substance of sin. But if they say that the maker of evil was not begotten, it must be asked whether the good God was able, in whatever way, to check the incipient malice, or was not able? For if he was not able, he is weak; if he was able and did not do it, he is not good. Therefore, since these things do not agree among themselves, nor do the opinions of the heretics agree with one another, let us inquire whether there was perhaps a rational cause for which God permitted the malice of that maker—whether begotten or unbegotten—to enter into this world, though he could have prevented it.

41. God's Goodness Shown in Providing Remedy Through Repentance

Therefore, maintaining that there is one and the same God who is both good and the maker, let us establish this, if we can, in a way that suits the grace of both, nor let us avoid the odium of their accusation, who speak thus: How is God good, who not only allowed malice to enter into this world, but even permitted it to come to such confusion? But this accusation would have a place, if malice so infected the power of the soul and the innermost secrets of the mind that it could by no means be abolished, and the venom of incurable wounds lodged fixed in our mind and soul; for there would be a more fitting place for this complaint, if, though God could do all things, he nevertheless allowed man to perish.

But since our merciful God has reserved remedies for the rejection of error, and has not taken away the capacity of abolishing every contagion—how is it unreasonable or unjust, if he allowed our material nature to be tempted with a certain trembling of human frailty; so that afterward, like one collecting interest, grace might return through repentance of sins into the affection of man, and he, conscious of his own frailty because he trembled so easily by deviating from the sequence of the divine commandments, might fear to lose the heavenly commandments as though they were the anchor of his wavering soul; attributing more to divine mercy for having recovered what was lost, and claiming for himself something of the grace by which he returns.

42. The True Food of Paradise Is Doing God's Will

Now let us consider what that reason is, what it is that, when he gave a commandment to man, prescribing concerning that admirable and blessed life, that if he acted contrary to it he would die the death, he thought fit to command concerning eating and not eating. For there are those who think that this commandment by no means suits the Creator of heaven and earth and of all things; that it is by no means worthy of the inhabitants of paradise, since that life is like that of the angels. And therefore we cannot suppose this to have been earthly and corruptible food for eating; because those who neither drink nor eat will be like the angels in heaven.

Since, therefore, there is in food neither reward, because food does not commend us to God, nor great danger, because it is not what enters into the mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth—it seems without doubt that this was not commanded by so great an author, unless you refer this food to that prophetic one, since as a great reward the Lord promises to his saints: Behold, they who serve me shall eat: but you shall hunger. For this is the food in which eternal life is defined, of which whoever is defrauded shall die the death. Since indeed the living and heavenly bread is the Lord himself, who gives life to this world. Whence he himself says: Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you shall not have life eternal. There was, then, some bread which he had prescribed to be eaten by the inhabitants of paradise. What is it? Hear what he says: Man, he says, ate the bread of angels.

For it is good bread, if you do the will of God. Do you want to know how good this bread is? The Son himself eats this bread, of which he says: My food is that I do the will of my Father who is in heaven.

43. Explaining the Double Phrase You Shall Die the Death

Again let us see for what reason the Lord God said to Adam, you shall die the death: what difference there is between one saying, you shall die, and adding, you shall die the death. For we ought to show that there is nothing superfluous in God's commandment. This, then, is my opinion. Since death and life are two things contrary to one another, in simple speech we say that one lives from life, and dies from death. But if you wish to double each of the two, because life makes life, it is said, life lives, as you have it in the law. And because death makes death, it is said, he shall die the death. Nor is this doubling superfluous: for there is a life that tends to death, and there is a death that tends to life; because one both dies while living, and lives while dying. There arise, then, four distinctions: to live to life, to die the death, to live from death, to die to life.

Since, then, these things are so, we ought to exclude the prejudice of usage and custom; because usage has it that one commonly says "to live," both of him who lives to life, and of him who lives to death: and commonly one says "to die," whether of him who dies to death, or of him who dies to life. And so, out of those four, it signifies two, so as to say that the one living lives, without distinguishing better and worse, and to say that the one dying dies, without there seeming to be any distinction between a bad and a good death. For a certain undifferentiated life is signified, such as that of irrational creatures or even of infants, and likewise an undifferentiated death.

44. To Live to Life and Die to Death Explained

Setting aside, then, common usage, let us consider what it is to live to life, and what it is to die the death, and what it is to live to death, and to die to life. For I think, according to the Scriptures, that to live to life signifies that certain admirable and blessed life, and seems to show this exercise of living and the gift of breathing as it were joined with the grace of the blessed life, and mingled by a certain participation. For this is to live to life, to live by virtue, to have the acts of the blessed life in the life of this body. But, on the other hand, what else is it to die the death, but to signify, along with the death of the body, the deformity of the one dying, whose flesh is both deprived of the common gift of living, and whose soul cannot have the exercise of eternal life?

There is also one who dies to life, as one who lives in body, but dies in his own act: such are those of whom the Prophet says: They go down into hell alive. And that of whom the Apostle says: For she who lives is dead. A fourth remains, that there are also those who live even by death, as the holy martyrs, who indeed die that they may live. The flesh dies, but the grace of the dead lives. Therefore far be it from us to live as sharers of death: but rather let us die as sharers of life. For the saint does not wish to be a sharer even of this life, who says: I desire to be dissolved, and to be with Christ; for it is far better. And another: Woe is me, that my sojourning is prolonged! Grieving indeed, since he hopes for the fellowship of eternal life, that he is held back by the frailty of this life.

And therefore I can say, on the contrary, that although to live to life is good, yet to live to life may be ambiguous. For one can be said to live to life, that is, to serve, by means of this bodily life, toward eternal life. One can also be said to live to life, that is, to have either any, or a holy, desire of this bodily life; as, for example, if someone thinks he ought to live honorably for this reason, that he may attain length of life by good deeds—such are for the most part the weaker, whom this life delights.

45. Dying to Sin and Living to God in Baptism

As, then, we have understood what it is to live to life, let us understand what it is to die to death, or to live to death. For there can be those who die to death, and who live to life. For he who does not so live as to live according to the death of his soul, dies to death, because he is not liable to death, that is, the bond of wretched death has released him, he is not bound by the chains of eternal death. He has died to death, that is, he has died to sin, he has died to punishment: the contrary of which is to live to punishment, that is, when one lives for punishment, one lives for death. But he who dies for punishment, dies for death. There is also one who, placed in this life, dies to life, like him who says: I live, now not I, but Christ lives in me.

For he has died to sin, he lives to God, that is, death is dead in him, but the life lives which is the Lord Jesus. Therefore the life of those who live to God is good; the life of those who live to sin is bad. There is also a middle life, such as that of the other living creatures, as you have it written: Let the earth bring forth a living soul according to its kind. There is also the life of the dead, as the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; for God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. There are also those for whom there is a certain community of death and life, of whom the Apostle speaks, saying: If we have died together, we shall also live together.

For if we have been planted together, he says, in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: knowing that our old man has been crucified together with him; that the body of sin might be destroyed, that we should no longer serve sin. For he who has died is justified from sin. And just as we have spoken of many figures of life, so also we shall find figures of death. For death is called evil, according to that: The soul that sins, it shall die. And death is also spoken of in common usage, as you have it, for example: Because Adam lived so many years, and died, and was gathered to his fathers. Death is also spoken of by way of the sacrament of baptism, as you have it: We are buried together with him through baptism into death. And elsewhere: But if we are dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live together with him.

You see that it is called death by name, but this is truly our life.

46. Why Adam Alone Was Not Called Good

Again, another question, since the Lord said: It is not good for man to be alone. First of all, know this, that in the passages above, where God fashioned man out of the slime of the earth, he did not add: And God saw that it was good, as he did in each of his other works. For if he had said there that it was good, because man was made, this would be found to be contrary—that here he should say it is not good, when above he had said it was good. But understand this in the place where he made Adam alone. As for the rest, where he comprehends together both man and woman as made, although he does not say so specifically even there; yet because afterward you have: God saw all the things that he had made, and behold, they were very good, it is clearly declared that it is good both that man was made, and woman.

47. Woman Added for the Propagation of Mankind

But from this question another question again arises. For how is it that when Adam alone was made, it was not said that Adam had been made good; but afterwards, when the woman also was made from him, it was then declared that all things were good? Although in that place He praised the whole creation, and the making of the universe was approved, since the community of nature is spoken of in man: nevertheless it does not seem an idle thing to ask, for what reason, when Adam alone was made, not only was no declaration of goodness added to the work pleasing to Him, but it was even said that man alone was not good—since we know that before the woman was made, Adam did not err; but after the woman was made, she, having first transgressed the divine command, drew her husband also into error, and was the incitement of it. If therefore the woman is indeed the author of the fault, how does she seem to have been added for good?

But if you consider that the care of the whole is God's, you will find that what involved the cause of the whole ought to have been more pleasing to the Lord, than that in which was the cause of sin ought to have been condemned. And therefore, because from the man alone the propagation of the human race could not be, the Lord pronounced that it was not good for man to be alone. For God preferred that there should be many whom He could save, and to whom He might grant forgiveness of sin, rather than one Adam alone, who would be free from fault. Finally, because the same one is the author of both works, He came into this world, that He might save sinners. Lastly, He did not allow Cain, guilty of fratricide, to perish before he had begotten sons. Therefore, for the sake of the generation and succession of the human race, the woman had to be added to the man.

Finally, this the very words of God declare, when He says that it is not good for man to be alone. For even though the woman was to sin first, yet she who was to bear forth redemption for herself ought not to be excluded from the benefit of the divine working. For although Adam was not seduced, but the woman was seduced and fell into transgression, yet, he says, she shall be saved through the bearing of children, among whom she also brought forth Christ.

48. One Nature in Man and Woman from the Rib

Nor is it without purpose that the woman was made not from the same earth from which Adam was formed, but from Adam's own rib; that we might know that there is one nature of body in man and woman, one fount of the human race. Therefore not two were made in the beginning, man and woman, nor two men, nor two women, but first the man, then from him the woman. For God, wishing to establish one nature of men, beginning from one origin of this creature, removed the possibility of many and disparate natures. "Let us make him a helper," He says, "like unto him". We understand this as a help toward the generation of the human constitution. And truly a good help. For if you take "helper" as meaning something greater, a certain greater operation in the cause of generation is found to belong to the woman; just as the earth, which, by holding the seeds first received, gradually by its warmth causes them to grow, and brings them forth into a crop.

In this, then, is the good help of the woman, although she is also called a lesser helper; as we find also in human usage, that those of greater dignity generally take to themselves a helper of lesser merit.

49. Naming the Animals Reveals the Need for a Mate

Consider now why God still formed out of the earth all the beasts of the field, and all the birds of heaven, and brought them to Adam, that he might see what he would call them. For what reason was this done, since God brought only the beasts of the field and the birds of heaven to Adam? For the cattle existed according to their kind. Then you have further on: "Because Adam gave names to all the cattle, and to all the beasts of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper like unto him". What, then, is the explanation, except that the untamed beasts and the birds of heaven are brought to man by divine power? But over the tame cattle, to be gathered together, man also had power. Thus the former was the work of divine operation, the latter of human diligence.

At the same time understand for what reason all were brought to Adam: that in all of them he might see that the substance of nature consists of both, that is, of male and female, and might himself, by use and example, come to know that the companionship of woman was a necessary addition for him.

50. The Sleep of Adam and the Building of Eve

"And God sent," he says, "a sleep upon Adam, and he slept". What is this sleep, if not that, when for a little while we turn our mind to the joining of marriage, we seem, as it were, to bend and incline our eyes, otherwise intent upon the kingdom of God, toward a certain sleep of this world, and for a little while to sleep away from things divine, while we rest in worldly and secular matters? Then, after He had sent sleep upon Adam, and he slept, then the Lord God built the rib which He took from Adam into a woman. Well did He say "built," when speaking of the creation of the woman, because in man and woman a certain full perfection of a household seems to appear. He who is without a wife is regarded as being, as it were, without a house. For as man is thought more suited to public duties, so woman to domestic services.

Consider that He took a rib from the body, not a portion from the soul; that is, not soul from soul, but "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh, this shall be called woman."

51. The Beasts and Birds of Paradise as Figures of the Soul

We have therefore recognized the cause of human generation. But because it moves many who look more closely into the matter, as to how—if either it was at first a great gift of God toward men that men should be placed in paradise, or afterward it would seem to be the reward of great merits that each just man is caught up into paradise—the beasts also and the cattle of the field, and the birds of heaven, are said to have been in paradise. Whence many have wished paradise to be the soul of man, in which certain seeds of virtues have sprung up: and that man was placed both to work and to guard paradise, that is, the mind of man, whose virtue seems to cultivate the soul, and not only to cultivate it, but also, once cultivated, to guard it.

But the beasts of the field and the birds of heaven which are brought to Adam are our irrational motions, in that beasts or cattle represent certain differing passions of the body, some more turbulent, others even more languid. And the birds of heaven—what else do we reckon them to be, but vain thoughts, which, after the manner of birds, fly about our soul, and often carry it hither and thither by various motion? For this reason no helper was found like unto our mind, except sense, that is, αἴσθησις. Our nous, mind could find only this as like unto itself.

52. The Gift of Dominion and the Warning Against Judging

But perhaps you may object, that God also placed these things in such a paradise, that is, the passions of the body and a certain vanity of fluctuating or empty thoughts, and that He Himself was thus the author of our error. Consider what He says: "Have," He says, "dominion over the fish of the sea, and the birds of heaven, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth". You see that He gave you the power; that you ought to judge concerning all things, distinguishing the kinds of each by the sober determination of your judgment. God called all things to you, that you might know your mind to be above all things. Why did you wish to take to yourself and join to yourself those things which you found in no way like to you? He gave you, assuredly, a sense by which you might know all things, and judge of things known, and deservedly you were cast out from that fruitful field of paradise, because you were not able to keep the command.

For God knew that you were frail, He knew that you were not able to judge; therefore He said, as it were to frailer beings: "Do not judge, that you may not be judged". Therefore, because He knew that you were weak for judging, He wished you to be obedient to the command; therefore He set down a precept. For if you had not transgressed, you could not have fallen into the danger of uncertain judgment. And so, because you wished to judge, therefore He added: "Behold, Adam has become as one of us, knowing good and evil". You wished to arrogate judgment to yourself, therefore you ought not to refuse the penalty of a wrong judgment. Yet He set you facing paradise, that you might not be able to abolish its memory.

53. Paul's Rapture to the Third Heaven and Paradise

Finally, the just are often caught up into paradise, just as Paul also was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words. And you too, if from the first heaven to the second, from the second to the third, you should be caught up by the vigor of your mind—that is, because first each man is bodily, second animal, third spiritual—if you should thus be caught up to the third heaven, so as to see the brightness of spiritual grace (for the animal man knows not the things that are of the Spirit of God), and therefore the ascent of the third heaven is necessary for you, that you may be caught up into paradise: you will then be caught up without danger, so that you may be able to judge all things, because the spiritual man judges all things, but he himself is judged by no one.

And perhaps, as one still frail, you will hear unspeakable words which it is not lawful for a man to utter: and then keep in reserve what you have received, and guard what you have heard. Paul the apostle kept guard, lest he should fall, or certainly cause others to err. Or perhaps Paul says this, "which it is not lawful for a man to utter", because he was still established in the body, that is, he saw the passions of this body, he saw the law of his flesh warring against the law of his mind. For I prefer this to be understood, lest we seem to be casting forth still some terror of a future danger.

For if there is security even because of this life, so that we fear no snares of a future transgression after this life: then whoever shall be in paradise by ascent of virtue will hear those hidden and secret mysteries of God: will hear the Lord saying, as to that thief turning from crime to confession, and from robbery to faith: "Today you shall be with me in paradise".

54. The Serpent's Wisdom and the Devil's Envy of Man

"Now the serpent was wiser than all the beasts that were upon the earth, which the Lord God had made, and the serpent said to the woman: Why has God indeed said, that you should not eat of every tree that is in paradise?" When it says the serpent is wiser, you understand of whom it speaks, that is, of that adversary of ours who possesses only the wisdom of this world. But pleasure and delight also are well said to be wise, because the wisdom of the flesh also is called wisdom, as you have: "Because the wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God". And they are cunning in seeking out kinds of delights, because they are eager for pleasures. Whether, then, you understand delight—it is a certain thing opposed to the divine command, and hostile to our senses. Whence holy Paul says: "I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin".

But if you refer it to the devil, he is the true enemy of the human race. And what is the cause of these enmities, if not envy? As Solomon says: "By the envy of the devil death entered into the world". Now the cause of envy was the blessedness of man placed in paradise, and therefore, since the devil himself could not hold on to the grace he had received, he envied man, in that man, though formed of clay, was chosen to be an inhabitant of paradise. For the devil considered that he himself, who had been of a higher nature, had fallen down into these secular and worldly things; while man, of a lower nature, hoped for eternal things. This, then, is what he envies, saying: "Shall this lesser being obtain what I could not keep? Shall this one migrate from earth to heaven, while I, fallen from heaven, am on earth? I have many ways by which I can deceive man.

He was made of clay, the earth is his mother, he is wrapped about with corruptible things. And even if his soul is of a higher nature, yet it too can be liable to a fall, being placed in the prison of the body; whereas I could not avoid my own fall." There is, therefore, a first way, that he be deceived, while he desires things greater than his condition. Here indeed is a certain striving of ambition. Then, that he desire what belongs to the flesh, which he does not have. Finally, in what do I seem wiser than all, except by circumventing man, and striving by cunning and fraud? And so he contrived not to assail Adam first, but attempted to circumvent Adam through the woman. He did not assail him who had received the heavenly command face to face; but he assailed her who had learned from her husband, not from God, what she was to observe.

For you do not have it that God spoke to the woman, but that He spoke to Adam; and therefore the woman is to be reckoned as having learned through Adam.

55. The Manifold Kinds of the Devil's Temptations

Recognizing therefore this kind of temptation in this passage, you will also find very many kinds of temptation in other passages. Some are worked through the prince of this world, who has vomited forth certain poisons of wisdom into this world, so that men might think true what is false, and their affection might be captured by a certain semblance of humanity. For he does not always enter as an open enemy: but there are certain powers which feign love and pretend favor, so that little by little they may pour the poison of their iniquity into our thoughts, from which arise those sins which are born either from delight, or from a certain facility of mind. There are also other powers which, as it were, wrestle with us. Whence the Apostle also says: For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, and the rulers of this world, of this darkness, against the wickedness of spiritual beings in the heavens.

For they wish by a certain contest to break us, and, as it were, to crush a certain body of our soul. Whence Paul also, like a good athlete, had learned not only to avoid the blows of the opposing powers, but even to strike the adversaries. Whence he also says: I strike blows, not as one beating the air. And therefore, like a good athlete, he deserved to attain the crown. Therefore the temptations of the devil are manifold. And for this reason the serpent is held to be double-tongued and deadly, because the devil's minister speaks one thing with his tongue and meditates another in his heart. There are also other ministers who hurl, as it were, the arrows of their words, infected with the poison both of heart and of voice—of whom the Lord says: Generation of vipers, how can you speak good things, when you are evil?

56. The Woman's Answer and the Origin of the Fall

And the serpent said to the woman: Why indeed did God say, You shall not eat of every tree that is in paradise? And the woman said to the serpent: Of every tree of paradise we shall eat; but concerning the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God said: You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die. When you have heard that the serpent is wiser than all beasts, here now seek out his cunning. He pretends to speak the words of God, and weaves in his own deceits.

For when God had said: Of every tree that is in paradise you shall eat for food; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die the death; the serpent, as if questioning the woman, when God had said: Of every tree that is in paradise you shall eat; but of one tree you shall not eat—inserted a lie, so as to say: Of every tree you shall not eat; whereas God had commanded that only the one tree of the knowledge of good and evil was not to be tasted. By what method he deceived is no wonder, since it is the custom of those who attempt to circumvent someone, to deceive. The serpent's question, therefore, is not idle.

But that you may know that there could have been no fault in the commandment, the woman answered, as you have it: Of every tree of paradise we shall eat; but concerning the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God said: You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die the death. In the commandment indeed there is no fault, but in the reporting of the commandment. For, as much as the present reading teaches, we learn that we ought to join nothing to the commandment, even for the sake of caution. For if you add anything, or take anything away, it seems to be a kind of transgression of the commandment. The pure and simple form of the commandment must be kept, or the series of the testimony must be reported. For often a witness, while adding something of his own to the sequence of events, discolors the whole credibility of the testimony by the falsehood of a part. Nothing, therefore, ought to be added, even what seems good.

For what offense does it have, at first appearance, that the woman added: Neither shall you touch it at all? For God had not said, You shall touch, but, You shall not eat. But nevertheless the fall begins here as its starting point. For what she added, she added superfluously; or by adding from her own, she understood the command of God only half-fully. The sequence of the present reading, then, teaches us that we ought neither to take away anything from the divine commandments, nor to add anything. For if John judged this concerning his own writings: If anyone, he says, shall add to this, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and whoever shall take away from the words of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the book of life; how much less ought anything to be taken away from the divine commandments! Hence, then, began the first transgression of the commandment.

And many think that this fault was not the woman's, but Adam's; that Adam said this to the woman, wishing to make her more cautious, so that he added that God had commanded: Neither shall you touch it at all. For we have it that Adam, not Eve, received the commandment from God. For the woman had not yet been formed. Indeed, the reading does not report the very words of Adam by which he told the form and sequence of the commandment to the woman; but we understand that the sequence of the commandment passed through the man to the woman. Let others, however, see what they think; to me, nevertheless, it seems that the fault began from the woman, that the lie was begun by her. For even if it seems uncertain concerning the two, still the sex reveals which was more likely to err first. Add to this that she is bound by the prior judgment, since her error was also found first afterward.

For the woman is the author of error to the man, not the man to the woman. Whence Paul also says: Adam, he says, was not deceived; but the woman, being seduced, was in the transgression.

57. Why God Did Not Forbid Touching the Tree

Now let us see whether, apart from the addition which was appended to the commandment, that which was added seems to have caused harm. For indeed if it is good: Neither shall you touch it, and it was profitable for caution, why did God by no means forbid this—indeed, by not forbidding, seems to have permitted it? So both must be inquired into: for what reason he neither permitted nor forbade it. For there are those who say: For what reason did he not also order that what he made should not be touched? But when you have heard that in that tree was the nature of the knowledge of good and evil, it can be reckoned that he did not wish you to touch evil. For it is enough for us to see Satan falling like lightning from heaven, according to the word of the Lord, and giving food not to the children of light, but of night and darkness; because it is written: He gave him as food to the peoples of the Ethiopians.

This, then, was said of him, that he did not command it to be touched. But as to why he did not forbid it, receive what I understand. There are many things which do harm, if we wish to drink of them before we know what they are. For it happens often even with foods and drink. Indeed, if you know beforehand that a thing is bitter, you put on patience; and if you understand that those bitter things are beneficial, you put on endurance, lest the sudden bitterness offend you and you begin to reject things that would be profitable. It is profitable, therefore, to know beforehand, so that from what you have known will be profitable, you do not disdain even the bitter things. But these things can do less harm; consider what could do greater harm unless it is foreseen.

58. The Danger of Misreading Scripture Without Discernment

There is a certain gentile who is tending toward the faith: he is a catechumen, he wishes to receive a greater fullness of doctrine and faith; let him beware lest, while wishing to learn, he learn badly, and learn from Photinus, learn from Arius, learn from Sabellius; let him not hand himself over to such teachers, whose authority he holds in a certain regard; and, led by a certain presumption of teachers, may not know how to judge what has been impressed on his tender perceptions. Let him first, therefore, see with the eyes of the mind what follows: let him see where life is: let him at last touch the vital parts of the divine readings, that he may be offended by no perverse interpreter. Sabellius reads to him: I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and says there is one person. Photinus reads: For there is one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus. And elsewhere: Why do you seek to kill me, a man?

Arius also reads that he said: For the Father is greater than I. Indeed the text is read plainly: but for what reason it was said, he ought first to weigh with himself, so that he may notice the reason of what was said. He is led by a certain authority of teachers; and it would have profited him not to have sought, rather than to have found such a teacher. But even a gentile, if he takes up the Scriptures, reads: An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. He reads also: If your right hand scandalizes you, cut it off; he does not understand the sense, he does not perceive the mysteries of the divine word, he falls worse than if he had not read it.

And therefore he taught in what manner they ought to investigate the Word of God, not perfunctorily, not without foresight, but diligently and carefully: What was, he says, from the beginning, what we have heard, and what we have seen with our eyes, we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life: and we have seen and bear witness, and declare unto you. You see that he first, as it were with certain hands, handled the Word of God, and afterward declared it: and therefore perhaps the word would have done no harm to Adam and Eve, if, handling it diligently with certain hands of the mind, they had first touched it.

For the weak, by handling and inquiring more diligently, can investigate the nature of each thing which they do not understand. Certainly those who were weak ought to have examined beforehand in what manner they might touch that tree in which they had learned there was the knowledge of evil. For even the knowledge of evil can often profit us. And therefore we read of the deceptions of the devil, either in this reading, or in the prophecy, that we may learn how we can beware of his arts. For his temptations must be known, not that we may follow them, but that, being taught and instructed, we may beware.

59. Whether the Forbidden Fruit Could Be Eaten With Others

There are those, at this point, who have a doubt, whether God said that one was to eat of every tree in such a way that, along with every other tree, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was also to be tasted; or whether he said that one was to eat of every tree, but that of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil alone one was not to taste? Who do not think even this to be a matter of useless reasoning, that although the food of this tree was harmful, yet if it were eaten together with the others, it could not be harmful: since indeed it is said that an antidote, theriac, is customarily made from the body of a serpent, which indeed poison and the body of the serpent, when taken alone, harms; when mixed with other things, it is for health and safety.

The knowledge of good and evil, too, if it has some wisdom in it, if one always aims at life, if one pursues the other kinds of virtues, is by no means judged useless. For this reason, therefore, many have thought that this too can be understood, so that God may seem to have forbidden this: that the tree of knowledge of good and evil should not be tasted alone, apart from the others—not to have forbidden it together with the others. And this they think was said for this reason, because God says to Adam: Who told you that you are naked, unless it be that of the tree of which I commanded you, of this alone, not to eat, you have eaten? Which would seem to be a place for interpretation, unless the woman, in what precedes, when the serpent said: Why indeed did God say, You shall not eat of every tree that is in paradise—had answered: Of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God said: You shall not eat of it.

In which, although the woman's faith, about to transgress, seems weaker, yet I will not strip Adam of all his virtues, so that he should seem to have attained no virtue in paradise, to have tasted nothing of the other trees, and to have fallen into fault before having attained any fruits. I will not, therefore, strip Adam, lest I should strip all the human race, which is innocent before it receives the sense of the knowledge of good and evil. Nor was it said idly: Unless you be converted, and become as this little child, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. For a child, when he is cursed, does not curse back; when he is struck, does not strike back; he knows nothing of the temptations of ambition and rapine.

60. Knowledge of Good and Evil Unsuited to the Imperfect

Whence I think it more true that he did not command the tree to be eaten even along with other fruits. For although knowledge is good for the perfect, it is nevertheless useless to the imperfect. I would dare to call every man imperfect, since Paul himself, as though imperfect, says: Not as though I had already attained, or were already perfect: but I follow after, if I may lay hold. And therefore the Lord says to the imperfect: Judge not, that ye be not judged. Therefore knowledge is useless to the imperfect. Finally: I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. And below: For without the law sin was dead. For what would it have profited me to know what I could not avoid? What would it have profited me to know that the law of my flesh was warring against me?

Paul is attacked, and sees the law of his flesh warring against the law of his mind, and himself being brought into captivity in the law of sin, nor does he presume upon his own conscience; but through the grace of Christ he trusts that he shall be delivered from the body of death: and do you suppose that anyone possessing knowledge could be unable to sin? Paul says: For the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do: and do you think that knowledge, which increases the odium of the offense, profits a man? Grant, however, that the perfect man cannot sin. In Adam God foresaw all men, and therefore it was not fitting for the human race indiscriminately to have the knowledge of good and evil, which they could not exercise, as they ought, because of the vices of the flesh.

61. The Serpent's Lies and the Promise of Godhood

Let us learn, then, that the temptations of the devil are full of lying; for scarcely one thing seems true out of all that he promised, the rest he composed as falsehoods. For thus you have it: And the serpent said to the woman, Ye shall not die the death. Behold one falsehood; for the man who followed the promises of the serpent died the death. Then he added: For God doth know, said he, that in what day soever ye shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened. This alone was true, because below you have: Because both did eat, and their eyes were opened. But this was true in a way that harmed. Finally, it is not useful for all to have their eyes opened; because it is written: They shall see, and not see. But immediately a lie was glued on, because he added: And ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

In which one may notice that the serpent is the author of idolatry, in that a certain cunning of the serpent seems to have led men into the error of many gods. And in this too he deceived, for man was not as gods. For not only did men cease to be as gods, but even those who were as gods, to whom it was said: I have said, Ye are gods, lost their grace.

62. Eve Eats the Fruit and Gives It to Adam

And the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes to look upon, and fair to behold. Weak was the author of a judgment who was passing judgment about that which she had not tasted. And therefore it is not easy for a thing to seem fit to be taken up for any work, unless we have handled it more carefully, unless we have tested it with an inward affection. Taking, it says, of the fruit thereof she did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her, and they did both eat. It is well passed over where Adam was deceived; because he fell not by his own fault, but by the fault of his wife.

63. Their Eyes Opened and Their Nakedness Revealed

And their eyes, it says, were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And before indeed they were naked, but not without the coverings of the virtues. They were naked because of the simplicity of their manners, and because nature knew not the garment of deceit. But now the human mind is veiled with many wrappings of pretense. Therefore after they saw themselves stripped of that sincerity and simplicity of an entire and incorrupt nature, they began to seek worldly and manmade things, with which to cover the nakedness of their mind: sewing delight to delight, and the shadowy pleasures of this world leaf to leaf, as it were, with which they might overshadow the secret parts of generation. For how did Adam have the eyes of the body shut, who saw all living things so as to give them names? How did they know, that is, with an interior and higher knowledge, that they lacked not a tunic, but the veilings of the virtues?

64. The Fig Leaves and the Fruit of the Spirit

And they sewed, it says, fig leaves, and made themselves girdles. The order of divine readings teaches us for what kind of thing we ought here to take the fig: since Scripture has recorded that the just are those who rest under the vine and the fig tree (Micah iv, 4), and Solomon has said: Who plants a fig tree, and does not eat of its fruit, and the Lord came to a fig tree; but was offended for this reason, that He found not fruit, but only leaves. Adam therefore teaches me what leaves are, who after he sinned, made himself a girdle of fig leaves, when he ought rather to have tasted of its fruits. The just man chooses the fruit, the sinner the leaves. What is the fruit? The fruit, it says, of the Spirit is charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, temperance, love. He had no fruit, who had no joy. He had no faith, who had transgressed the commandment of God. He had no temperance, who had tasted of the tree forbidden to him.

65. The Sinner's Excuses as Fig Leaves

Therefore whoever transgresses the commandment of God is despoiled and stripped bare; and he becomes shameful to himself: he wishes to cover himself with certain fig leaves, perhaps with certain empty or shadowy words, which, sewing together with fabricated lies, and constructing word upon word, the sinner weaves together to cover the consciousness of his mind, and as a veil for his deed, that he may cover his shameful parts. For he throws leaves upon himself who, wishing to veil his fault, either recalls the devil as author of his offense, or pretends the allurements of the flesh, or brings forward some other persuader as the source of his error. And he frequently draws examples from the divine Scriptures, by which he alleges that just men fell into fault, saying, if perhaps he has been caught in fornication: And Abraham lay with the handmaid, and David loved another man's wife and took her for his own. For he sews certain leaves to himself, certain examples from the order of the prophetic Scriptures, thinking their fruit need not be sought.

66. Bodily Interpretation of the Law as Barren Leaves

Do not the Jews too seem to you to sew leaves together, while they interpret the words of the spiritual law in a bodily way? Their interpretation loses all fruit of greenness, condemned to the curse of eternal dryness. Good interpretation, therefore—that is, the spiritual fig—is fruitful, and under it the just and holy rest. He who has planted it in the souls of each, as Paul says: I have planted, Apollo watered, shall eat fruit from it. But a bad interpretation cannot bear fruit nor keep its greenness.

67. Adam's Girding With Leaves Instead of Chastity

What is more grave, then, is that Adam girded himself with this interpretation in that very place where he ought rather to have girded himself with the fruit of chastity. For in the loins, with which we are girded, certain seeds of generation are said to be; and therefore Adam was badly girded there with useless leaves, where he should have signified not the fruit of future generation, but certain sins, which remained until the coming of the Lord and Savior. But after the Lord came, He found the fig tree untended: being asked not to order it cut down, He permitted it to be cultivated. And therefore now we are girded not with leaves, but with the divine word; for the Lord Himself says: Let your loins be girded, and your lamps burning. Whence also He forbids us to carry money in our girdles; for our girdle ought to keep, not worldly things, but eternal ones.

68. Adam Hides From the Voice of God

And they heard, it says, the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise in the evening. What is this walking of God, who is always everywhere? But I think there is a certain walking of God through the course of the divine Scriptures, in which a certain presence of God is at work; when we hear that He Himself beholds all things, and the eyes of the Lord are upon the just: when we read that Jesus knew their thoughts: when we read: Why think ye evil in your hearts? Therefore while we recall these things, we recognize God as it were walking. The sinner had fled, then, not because he could hide from the sight of God, but he desired to hide within his own conscience, he was unwilling for his deeds to shine forth.

For it belongs to the just to see face to face; because the mind of the just is not only present to God, but even disputes with God, as it is written: Judge for the fatherless, and justify the widow, and come, let us reason together, saith the Lord. Therefore when the sinner reads these divine Scriptures, he hears the voice of God as it were walking in the evening. What is "in the evening," except that he recognizes his fault late, and late comes a certain shame of the past error, which ought to have prevented the error? For while the fault is boiling in the body, and the soul is agitated by the passions of the body, the sense of the one erring does not think of God—that is, does not hear God walking in the divine Scriptures, walking in the minds of each. For God says: For I will dwell in them, and walk among them, and will be their God.

Therefore when the dread of the divine power returns into the sense of the soul, then we blush, then we struggle to hide ourselves, then, set amid the thoughts of our sins, in the midst of the tree of paradise where we sinned, we are caught, desiring to hide, and thinking that God does not seek out hidden things. But the searcher of souls and thoughts, penetrating even to the division of the soul, says: Adam, where art thou?

69. The Nature of God's Speech to Man

How does God speak? Is it by a bodily voice? Certainly not, but by a certain power more excellent than the voice of a body can be, He pours forth oracles. This voice of His the prophets heard; this voice the faithful hear, the impious do not understand. Finally, in the Gospel you have it, that the evangelist heard the Father saying: And I have glorified it, and will glorify it again; but the Jews did not hear. For they said: It thundered. There, then, just as above you have it that God was perceived as walking, who was not walking: so He was heard speaking, who was not speaking.

70. The Meaning of God's Question to Adam

But let us consider what He says: Adam, where art thou? In these words there is still a remedy of health for those who hear the word of God. Finally, the Jews, who have shut their ears against hearing, do not deserve even today to hear. Then, those who have hidden themselves have a remedy. For he who hides himself blushes; he who blushes is converted; as it is written: Let them be confounded, and let them all be turned back very speedily. Then, this very fact that He calls is a sign that He will heal, because the Lord calls those on whom He has mercy. In saying, however, Where art thou? He who knows the secret does not ask for a place; nor did God have His eyes shut, so as not to see the one hiding. Finally, for this reason He said: Adam is become as one of us; because he opened his eyes. And here indeed he opened his eyes, that he might see his fault, which he could not avoid.

For, I know not how, it is rather after we have sinned that we recognize our offenses: and then we understand that to be sin, which before we sinned we did not think to be sin. Certainly we did not think it was to be condemned as sin; for if we had condemned it, we would not have committed it. But God sees the faults of all, and knows the offenses of all: He has His eyes upon every soul, upon the hidden things of all. What, then, is: Adam, where art thou? That is, not in what place, but in what state you are. It is not, therefore, a question, but a rebuke. From what goods, He says, from what blessedness, from what grace have you fallen back into what misery? You have abandoned eternal life, and have been entombed in death, buried together with error. Where is that confidence of yours, once at peace with itself? This fear confesses the fault, the hiding place confesses the transgression. Where, then, art thou?

That is, I ask not in what place, but in what condition. To what have your sins brought you, that you flee your God whom before you sought? Perhaps it may move one why Adam is rebuked first, though the woman tasted first? But it was fitting that the weaker sex should begin the transgression, and the stronger begin the shame and the excuse; so that the woman was the cause of the error, the man of the shame.

71. Eve's Confession Compared to Cain's Denial

And the woman said: The serpent deceived me, and I ate. A pardonable fault is that which confession of the offense follows. Therefore the woman was not despaired of, who did not keep silence before God, but rather confessed her sin, and her sentence proved more healable than not. It is good to be condemned in one's sin, and to be scourged in one's offense, that we may be scourged along with men. Accordingly Cain, because he wished to deny his crime, was judged unworthy to be punished within his sin: but he was let go without a prescribed penalty, perhaps not so much because of the greater crime of fratricide (for that he committed against his brother) as of sacrilege, in that he believed God could be lied to, saying: I do not know; am I my brother's keeper? And therefore his accusation was reserved for the accuser, the devil; that he might be scourged along with his angels, he who was unwilling to be scourged with men.

Accordingly of such it is said: There is no declining of their death [lacuna], and they shall not be scourged with men. Different, then, was the reasoning of the woman, who, although she had fallen into the fault of transgression, still had from the trees of paradise the food of virtue remaining to her; and therefore she declared her sin, and it was reckoned to her for pardon. For he is a just accuser of himself who begins his speech with confession. For no one can be justified from sin unless he has first confessed the sin. Whence the Lord says: Declare your iniquities, that you may be justified.

72. The Sentence on Eve and the Mystery of the Church

Therefore, because Eve herself confessed her offense, there follows a milder and more profitable sentence, one which would condemn the error, yet not deny pardon, so that, turned back to her husband, she should serve him. First, that error should not easily delight her; then, that placed under a stronger vessel she should not lead her husband astray, but rather that she herself also should be ruled by her husband's counsel. In this indeed I plainly recognize the mystery of Christ and the Church. For there is signified the future conversion of the Church to Christ, and a religious servitude made subject to the Word of God, which is much better than the freedom of this age. Accordingly it is written: You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him alone shall you serve. This servitude, therefore, is a gift of God. Accordingly the observance of this servitude is numbered among the blessings; for Isaac also, in the place of blessing, gave it to his son Esau, that he should serve his brother.

Accordingly he was asking for a blessing; even though he had learned that only one had been appointed for him, still he asked for another, saying: Have you only one blessing, Father? Through this servitude, then, he who had earlier sold his birthright for the sake of gluttony, and through zeal for rustic hunting had lost the grace of blessing, believed that he would become better than himself, if he should venerate in his brother the type of Christ. For by this servitude the Christian people is strong, just as the Lord also said to His disciples: Whoever wishes to be first among you, let him be servant of all. Accordingly, it is charity that works this servitude, which is greater than both hope and faith. Whence it is written: Through charity serve one another. This, then, is the mystery which the Apostle says is in Christ and in the Church. For she indeed truly was before in transgression, but she will be saved through the generation of children in faith, and charity, and sanctification, together with chastity.

The generation of mankind, having transgressed indeed in the fathers, is saved through the sons; so that what it had offended in among the Jews, it might correct in Christian posterity.

73. The Serpent as Symbol of Bodily Delight

The serpent, she says, persuaded me: and this seemed pardonable to God, because He knew that there are many ways of the serpent for deceiving (for he transfigures himself into an angel of light, and his ministers are as ministers of righteousness) imposing false names on individual things, so that he calls rashness virtue, and imposes the name of diligence upon avarice. For the serpent deceived the woman, the woman led the man from truth into transgression. The type of bodily delight was taken up by the serpent; the woman is a symbol of our sense-perception, the man of the mind. Delight, then, moves the sense; sense transmits to the mind the passion it has received. Delight, therefore, is the first origin of sin, and so do not wonder why first the serpent is condemned by God's judgment, second the woman, third the man. According to the order of the error, the order of condemnation also has been kept. For delight is wont to take the sense captive, and the sense the mind.

But that you may know that the serpent is a type of delight, note his condemnation.

74. The Serpent's Sentence to Crawl and Eat Earth

Upon your breast, He says, and upon your belly you shall crawl. Who are they who walk upon their belly, but those who live for the belly and gluttony, whose god is the belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things, and, weighed down with food, are bent toward things earthly? Well, then, He says to delight, which, intent upon foods, seems to eat the earth: Upon your breast, and upon your belly you shall crawl, and you shall eat earth all the days of your life. Every excuse of the devil must be taken away; lest perhaps he be able to allege something for his malice, so as to say that his iniquity came from his condemnation; and that he therefore persists stubbornly in harming men, because he was condemned in order that he might harm—which seems near to the opinion, if we take this sentence as one merely of condemnation. For God did not condemn the serpent to this end, that he might harm; but He showed what he would become.

And indeed that temptation, that it profits men more, we have shown above: but still, when we have read what is written, God saying: Those who honor me I will honor, and the one who despises me shall be deprived of honor, it is permitted us to reckon something from these words. For God works what is good, not what is evil. Let, then, the divine words teach you, that He works glory, and leaves punishment behind. Those who honor me, He says, I will honor, declaring the honor to be of His own good working. And of those who despise me, He did not say, I will deprive of honor; but, they shall be deprived of honor; not imputing their injury to His own working, but showing what would come to be.

Therefore here He did not say: I make you crawl upon your breast and upon your belly, and eat earth all the days of your life: but: You shall crawl, He says, and you shall eat; so that He seems rather to have foretold what would happen concerning the serpent, than to have prescribed what he would do. For earth, He says, shall be food for you, not the soul: for this too is of profit to sinners. Whence the Apostle also delivered such a one unto the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. And He says the serpent crawls on breast and belly, not so much on account of the shape of the body, as because through earthly thoughts he fell from that heavenly blessedness. For the breast is frequently taken as a certain recess of wisdom. And so the Apostle reclines his head upon the breast of Christ, not casting it down to the earth.

Therefore if the wisdom of the devil is compared to the most savage beasts, in which the breast is beneath the feet: even men too who mind earthly things, and are not lifted by inward affection toward heaven, seem to crawl on their bellies over the earth; we ought surely to fill the belly of our soul not with the corruptible things of this age, but rather to satisfy it with the Word of God. Well, then, David, taking up the person of Adam, says: My soul has been humbled in the dust, my belly has cleaved to the earth. For it has cleaved while it is conformed to the serpent, who feeds upon earthly iniquity. And therefore the Apostle says we ought to be conformed to Christ, that the virtue of Christ may stand forth in us. This sentence is not thought heavy against the serpent, since even Adam, who sinned more lightly, is condemned with such a sentence.

75. Sorrow in Labor as the Sentence Upon Adam

For it is written: Cursed is the earth in your works: in sorrow shall you eat of it all the days of your life. Certainly there seems to be a certain similarity of sentence: but yet within that very similarity there is a great distinction. For it matters whether one eats earth, as was said to the serpent, that he will eat earth: or as was said to man, in sorrow shall you eat. For that addition, In sorrow, makes the distinction. Consider what force the distinction has. It is better for me to eat earth in sorrow, than in delight, that is, so that in a certain act and bodily sense I may seem to be grieved, rather than delighted, in sin. For many, on account of excessive iniquities, do not take up the consciousness of sin. But indeed he who says: I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection, is grieved in penitence for our sins; because he did not have such great sins of his own that he ought to be grieved for these.

Accordingly he persuades us too that this sorrow is useful, which is according to God, not according to the world. You ought, he says, to be made sorrowful unto repentance according to God; for sorrow according to God works salvation, but the sorrow of the world works death. But also from the Old Testament learn that those attained to grace who were grieved in bodily labors; while those remained in punishment who took delight in the works of this world. Accordingly the Hebrews, who groaned in the labors of Egypt, obtained the grace of the just. And because they ate bread in sorrow, they were given spiritual food: but the Egyptians, who celebrated such works with exultation, serving a detestable king, obtained no pardon.

76. The Progress From Earth to Grass to Bread

But there is also this distinction, that to the serpent it is said that he will eat earth; but to Adam He says: In sorrow shall you eat, and with sweat shall you eat, and you shall eat the grass of the field; so that we may understand there is a certain progress in these, and that when we eat earth, we seem to be in a certain malice: when grass, in a certain progress: but when bread, when fortitude shall have been made perfect. Let us, then, also have this progress of this life, as Paul also had, who says: Yet I live, now not I, that is, not I who formerly ate earth: not I who ate grass, since all flesh is grass: but Christ lives in me, that is, that living bread lives which came down from heaven, wisdom lives, grace lives, righteousness lives, resurrection lives.

77. The Curse on the Serpent and the Ground

Next consider that man is not cursed, but the serpent is cursed: nor is the earth cursed in itself; but, Cursed, He says, in your works, which was said to Adam. Then is the earth cursed, if you have earthly works, that is, worldly works. And it is cursed not universally; but so that it produces thorns and thistles, unless it has been made tractable by human diligence of labor. But if we have worked it, in labor indeed and sweat, yet still we shall eat bread. For the law of the flesh fights against the law of the mind. And we must labor and sweat, that we may chastise the body, and bring it into subjection, and sow the things that are spiritual. For if we sow carnal things, we shall reap what is carnal: but if we sow spiritual things, we shall reap what is spiritual.