LatineEnglish
QUESTION VII. Why Eve is said to have been built from Adam.1
QVAESTIO VII. Cur Eua dicatur aedificata ex Adamo.
CVR autem Scriptura dicat Euam esse aedificatam ex costa Adami, & non dicat eam esse formatam vel fictam, explicandum est: non enim putandum est sine causa diuinam Scripturam diuerso vocabulo in formatione Euae atque in creatione Adami vti voluisse. Respondet Chrysostomus: Quia factus est Adam ex limo, idcirco propriè dicitur eum Deus formasse vel finxisse; quoniam autem facta est Eua ex costa, re scilicet iam formata, & cui tantùm deerat perfectio & absolutio, propterea dicta est aedificata. Caietanus hanc reddit causam: Mulier, inquit, conceptae ac generatae proli est quasi domus eam continens, protegens, & fouens: rectè igitur velut instar domus aedificata dicitur. Catharinus ait, mulierem non per modum naturae, sed per modum artis esse procreatam; nec per generationem naturalem esse productam, sed per artificiosam Dei operationem esse formatam: quocirca non dicitur Adae filia; rectè igitur dicitur aedificata.
But why Scripture says that Eve was “built” from Adam's rib, and does not say that she was “formed” or “fashioned,” must be explained: for it is not to be thought that divine Scripture without cause willed to use a different word in the formation of Eve and in the creation of Adam. Chrysostom answers: Because Adam was made from slime, therefore God is properly said to have “formed” or “fashioned” him; but because Eve was made from a rib — a thing, namely, already formed, and to which only perfection and completion were lacking — therefore she is said to have been “built.” Cajetan gives this cause: The woman, he says, is to the conceived and generated offspring as it were a house, containing, protecting, and cherishing it: rightly, therefore, she is said to be “built,” as it were after the likeness of a house. Catharinus says that the woman was procreated not by the way of nature but by the way of art; and was not produced by natural generation, but formed by the artful operation of God: wherefore she is not called the daughter of Adam; rightly, therefore, she is said to be “built.”2
Rabbi Salomon, cuius sententia perplacet Lyrano, putat scienter ita locutum esse Mosen, quod mulier secundùm constructionem & conformationem corporis sui similitudinem quandam habeat aedificij, cuius inferior pars amplior & crassior est, videlicet vt firma sit ad sustinendam molem aedificij; pars autem superior angustior & tenuior est: ad eundem modum foeminei corporis pars inferior crassior & amplior est, superior verò tenuior & angustior, ob imbecillitatem nempe caloris mulieris, qui multam materiam sursum tollere ac dilatare non potest. Ve-[rùm...]
Rabbi Solomon, whose opinion greatly pleases Lyranus, thinks that Moses spoke thus knowingly, because the woman, according to the construction and conformation of her body, has a certain likeness to a building, whose lower part is wider and thicker — namely, that it may be firm for sustaining the mass of the building; but the upper part is narrower and thinner: in the same way the lower part of the female body is thicker and wider, but the upper thinner and narrower, on account, namely, of the weakness of the woman's heat, which cannot lift up and dilate much matter upward. But [...] [continues]3
[...Ve]rùm hanc interpretationem refellit locus ille Scripturae qui est in cap. 16. Geneseos, vbi Sara dixit Abrahae, Ingredere ad ancillam meam, si forte saltem ex illa suscipiam filios: vbi in Hebraeo est, Si forte aedificabo ex illa. Quo ex loco patet, verbum aedificandi non ad mulieres tantùm, sed ad viros etiam pertinere. Tostati huiusmodi est interpretatio: Vt aedificia fiunt ex materia rudi, quae per operationem artificis accipit figuram quam antea non habebat, sic illa costa non habens figuram mulieris, ita est à Deo conformata & concinnata, vt in speciem & naturam corporis muliebris euaderet.
[...But] that interpretation is refuted by that place of Scripture which is in the sixteenth chapter of Genesis, where Sarah said to Abraham, “Go in to my maidservant, if perhaps at least from her I may receive sons”: where in the Hebrew it is, “If perhaps I shall be built from her.” From which place it is evident that the verb “to build” pertains not only to women, but also to men. Tostatus' interpretation is of this kind: As buildings are made from rough material, which through the operation of the craftsman receives a figure which it did not have before, so that rib, not having the figure of a woman, was so conformed and arranged by God that it emerged into the species and nature of the female body.4
Translator’s notes
- Seventh question of the disputation (on Gen 2:22, 'aedificavit ... in mulierem'). ↩
- Decorated initial 'C.' Why 'built' (aedificata) of Eve, not 'formed/fashioned' as of Adam. Three answers: Chrysostom (hom. 15) — Adam from slime is 'formed,' Eve from an already-formed rib is 'built'; Cajetan — the woman is like a 'house' for offspring; Catharinus — she was made by art (God's operation), not natural generation, so not Adam's 'daughter' but 'built.' Marginal gloss: 'Chrysost. Homil. 15.' ↩
- A fourth answer (Rabbi Solomon = Rashi, favored by Nicholas of Lyra): Moses said 'built' deliberately, since the female body resembles a building — broader/heavier below for stability, narrower above — owing to woman's weaker innate heat, which cannot raise much matter upward. Page breaks at catchword 'Ve[rùm].' ↩
- Rabbi Solomon's view is refuted by Gen 16:2 (Sarah: Hebrew 'I shall be built from her,' i.e. get children) — 'build' applies to men too. Tostatus' answer: as a craftsman gives rough material a new figure, so God shaped the figureless rib into the female body. ↩