Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume I

Book Three — Paradise

QUESTION V. Whether the Sages of the Gentiles had any knowledge of the tree of life

LatineEnglish

QUESTION V. Whether the Sages of the Gentiles had any knowledge of the tree of life.1

QUAESTIO V. An Sapientes Gentilium ullam arboris vitae notitiam habuerint.

VALDE probatur mihi quod scriptum reliquit Iustinus martyr in secunda Apologia pro Christianis, summa daemonis calliditate ac malitia esse factum ut multa a Poëtis Gentilium fabulosa et commentitia fuerint prodita, eorum quae traduntur in sacris libris quam similia: quo scilicet fides abrogaretur divinis litteris, in quibus traduntur multa omnem naturae et humanae intelligentiae vim et potestatem excedentia; reputantibus qui ea legerent nihilo plus ipsa esse credibilia priscorum Poëtarum fabulis et commentis, quorum essent consimilia. Hoc Iustinus multis probat exemplis: sed in praesentia unum, ad id quod nunc agitur pertinens, satis erit. Moses tradit fuisse in Paradiso arborem vitae, cuius fructus praestabat homini immortalitatem; hoc fortasse cum legisset Hesiodus aliique vetustiores Poëtae (istos enim omnes multis seculis Moses anteivit) id ad fabulas suas transtulerunt, commenti deorum cibum ac potum esse nectar atque ambrosiam: quibus rebus qui alerentur eos non modo immortalem, sed etiam viridem perpetuo ac florentem aetatem agere. Et nomina quidem ista figmentis belle congruunt: Nectar enim dictum est (auctore Suida) quasi νέους, id est bibentes ipsum faciens iuvenes, vel a particula negante νή et verbo κτείνω, id est interficio, quasi mortalitatem auferens nec sinens mori. Ambrosia vero dicta est quasi abrosia, id est sine morte, aut quia caret ea mortalis, Graece βροτός dictus.
I greatly approve what Justin Martyr left written in his second Apology for the Christians: that it was brought about by the demon's utmost cunning and malice that many fabulous and fictitious things were put out by the poets of the Gentiles, as similar as possible to the things handed down in the sacred books: namely, that faith might be taken away from the divine writings, in which many things are handed down exceeding all force and power of nature and of human understanding; those who read them reckoning these to be no more credible than the fables and fictions of the ancient poets, to which they were quite similar. Justin proves this by many examples: but for the present one, pertaining to what is now in hand, will be enough. Moses hands down that there was in Paradise a tree of life, whose fruit afforded immortality to man; this, perhaps, when Hesiod and the other more ancient poets had read it (for Moses preceded all of them by many ages), they transferred to their own fables, inventing that the food and drink of the gods was nectar and ambrosia—by which things those who were fed led an age not only immortal, but even green, perpetually flourishing. And indeed those names fit the fictions nicely: for Nectar is said (on the authority of Suidas) to be as if from νέους (young), that is, making young those drinking it; or from the negating particle νή and the verb κτείνω, that is, I kill—as if taking away mortality and not allowing one to die. And Ambrosia is said to be as if a-brosia, that is, without death, or because the mortal lacks it (in Greek called βροτός, mortal).2
Celebratur etiam a Poëtis Nepenthes herba seu potio, omnem adimens dolorem et luctum: nam luctus Graece πένθος, inde νηπενθής. Eodem spectat Moly herba laudatissima Homero, homines ad iuventutem revocans, cuius vires Plinius libro 25 cap. 4 multis verbis describit. Fabulantur etiam Poëtae nectar et ambrosiam ministrari diis in mensa ab Hebe Iunonis filia, quae vox iuventutem significat: ex quo significarunt omnem deorum naturam semper florere semperque suo robore pollere.
There is also celebrated by the poets the herb or potion Nepenthes, taking away all grief and mourning: for mourning in Greek is πένθος, whence νηπενθής. To the same point looks Moly, the herb most praised by Homer, recalling men to youth, whose powers Pliny, book 25, chapter 4, describes at length. The poets also feign that nectar and ambrosia are ministered to the gods at table by Hebe, the daughter of Juno—which word signifies youth: by which they signified that all the nature of the gods ever flourishes and is ever strong with its own vigor.3
NEC adversus arborem vitae, sicut adversus ambrosiam Poëtarum, valet argumentatio illa Aristotelis in tertio libro Metaphysico textu 15, quam supra memoravimus. Nam quod ait non posse esse immortale quicquid cibo indiget, si de naturali et absoluta immortalitate loquatur, libenter concedimus, et sine ulla dubitatione verum est. Sed Adamus, etiam in statu innocentiae in Paradiso habitans et fructu arboris vitae vescens, suapte natura tamen mortalis erat ac dissolubilis: esus autem arboris vitae servabat eum a morte, non quidem ad infinitum tempus, sed longissimo tamen aevo, quoad scilicet in spiritualem ac caelestem vitam et in perfectae statum immortalitatis transferretur.
Nor against the tree of life, as against the ambrosia of the poets, does that argument of Aristotle hold, in the third book of the Metaphysics, text 15, which we recalled above. For as to what he says—that nothing which needs food can be immortal—if he speaks of natural and absolute immortality, we gladly concede it, and it is true without any doubt. But Adam, even in the state of innocence, dwelling in Paradise and feeding on the fruit of the tree of life, was nevertheless by his own nature mortal and dissoluble: but the eating of the tree of life preserved him from death—not indeed for an infinite time, but yet for a very long age, until, namely, he should be translated into a spiritual and heavenly life, and into the state of perfect immortality.4
QUAERI posset, an Adam dum fuit in Paradiso gustaverit et comederit fructum arboris vitae? Sed facile est responsum, non comedisse. Primo, quia brevissimo tempore fuit in Paradiso, et fructus illius arboris non futurus erat cibus quotidianus ad hominem alendum, sed ad modum medicinae, ad occurrendum naturae defectibus, per longa temporum intervalla sumendus. Deinde, esus illius arboris permittendus erat homini, siquidem ipse legem de non edendo fructu arboris scientiae boni et mali servasset: quare prius probanda erat aliquandiu obedientia Adami, quam ut eum fructum comederet. Postea, si edisset Adam illum vitalem fructum, hauddubie longius quam ullus mortalium vitam produxisset, cum tamen brevioris vitae fuerit quam Mathusalem, Iared et Noë.
It could be asked whether Adam, while he was in Paradise, tasted and ate the fruit of the tree of life. But the answer is easy: that he did not eat it. First, because he was in Paradise for a very short time, and the fruit of that tree was not to be daily food for nourishing man, but, in the manner of a medicine, to be taken at long intervals of time, for meeting the defects of nature. Then, the eating of that tree was to be permitted to man only if he himself had kept the law about not eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: wherefore the obedience of Adam had first to be proved for some time, before he should eat that fruit. Afterward, if Adam had eaten that vital fruit, he would without doubt have prolonged his life longer than any of mortals—whereas he was of a shorter life than Methuselah, Jared, and Noah.5
Ceterum, ut de Arbore vitae, sic de Arbore scientiae boni et mali nonnullae quaestiones enodandae sunt.
But, as concerning the Tree of life, so concerning the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, some questions must be untangled.6

Translator’s notes

  1. The fifth question on the tree of life: did the pagan sages have any knowledge of it? (A digression on the pagan myths of nectar and ambrosia as garbled echoes of the Mosaic tree of life.) ↩
  2. Marginal gloss: "Nectar et ambrosia unde deducta nomina." Pererius approves **Justin Martyr** (2nd Apology): by the demon's cunning the pagan poets produced fables *similar* to Scripture, to discredit the sacred books (so readers would reckon the miraculous in Scripture no more credible than the poets' fictions). One example: Moses's tree of life, whose fruit gave immortality, was (perhaps) borrowed by **Hesiod** and older poets—who postdate Moses—into the gods' **nectar and ambrosia**, food of immortality and perpetual youth. The Greek etymologies (per the **Suda**): **νέκταρ** as if from **νέους** ("making drinkers young"), or from the negating **νή** + **κτείνω** ("I kill") = "not letting one die"; **ἀμβροσία** as *a-brosia*, "without death" (Greek **βροτός** = mortal). [Greek glyphs verified on the 300-dpi crop; the verb glossed "interficio" is κτείνω.] ↩
  3. More pagan parallels: **Nepenthes**, the herb/potion taking away all grief (Greek **πένθος** = grief, whence **νηπενθής** = "griefless"); **Moly**, Homer's most-praised herb that recalls men to youth (its powers described by **Pliny** 25.4); and **Hebe** (Juno's daughter, her name = "youth") who serves the gods nectar and ambrosia at table—signifying the gods' nature ever flourishes in its vigor. [Greek glyphs verified on the crop.] Continues onto next page (catchword "NEC"). ↩
  4. Marginal gloss: "Solvitur Aristotelis Argumentatio." **Aristotle's argument resolved** (Metaphysics 3, text 15, raised in Q.I): his claim that nothing needing food can be immortal is gladly granted *if* he means natural, absolute immortality. But Adam, even eating the tree of life in innocence, was by his own nature mortal; the tree preserved him from death not for infinite time but for a very long age—until he should be translated to a spiritual, heavenly life and perfect immortality. (So Aristotle's principle and the tree of life are compatible.) ↩
  5. Marginal gloss: "Verum [=Utrum] Adam cum fuit in Paradiso, comederit fructum Arboris vitae." **Did Adam eat of the tree of life?** No. (1) He was in Paradise only a very short time, and the fruit was not daily food but a medicine taken at long intervals. (2) Its eating was to be permitted only after he had kept the law against the tree of knowledge—his obedience had first to be tested. (3) Had he eaten it, he would have outlived any mortal—yet he lived a *shorter* life than Methuselah, Jared, and Noah (proof he never ate it). ↩
  6. Transition closing the disputation on the tree of life: as with the tree of life, so some questions on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil must now be resolved. ↩