QUESTION II. Whether Adam was in paradise more than one day, and how much more.¹

QUAESTIO II. An plus uno die Adam fuerit in paradiso, & quanto plus.

...[the tree of life] created by God in Paradise, that Adam was ignorant of it, nay even that the devil was unaware: for if he had known the power of that tree, as he persuaded them to eat the forbidden fruit of the knowledge of good and evil in order to make them wretched, so he would have persuaded them to eat the fruit of life, in order to make them eternally wretched, and wretchedly eternal. He thinks also that the tree of life had the power, even by tasting its fruit once, of perpetuating man's life. The words of Rupert are thus: 'Now this must be noted, that he did not say only, Lest he put forth his hand, but, Lest perhaps, he says, he put forth his hand. Plainly by this it is clear that that tree of life was not such as is some herb, a medicament of health. For a medicinal herb, taken perchance, does not confer perpetual health, but, provided by care, is kept against an infirmity perhaps about to return. But of this tree he says, Lest perhaps he eat, and live forever. Therefore by no means (as some think) was the tree necessarily to be frequented, as a transitory medicament for perpetuating life, but, this being taken once, the body would live forever. Nonetheless, by this too it is understood that Adam hitherto did not know that tree to be the tree of life, when it is said, Lest perhaps. For that man is said perchance to have done or found something, who did not have in his consciousness that this very thing which follows was in the place or in the thing: as one who turns the earth wishing to sow, intending nothing else, and finds a treasure. But God said, Lest perhaps he put forth his hand, though certain that he would not put it forth knowingly, although as if doubting or solicitous, like a man, lest by chance it should come to pass. Therefore neither did Adam know, nor did the serpent-devil himself know, that the Lord God had also planted the tree of life in the midst of Paradise. For if even he had known, he would never have so halved the counsel of his malignity: but as he rashly persuaded them to that tree, to make them wretched, so he would have persuaded them to snatch this too, to make them eternally wretched, and wretchedly eternal.'¹¹

a Deo conditam in Paradiso, ignorasse Adamum quin etiam latuisse diabolum: Si enim is cognovisset vim eius arboris, ut suasit comedere fructum vetitum scientiae boni & mali ut eos miseros faceret: ita suasisset comedere fructum vitae, ut eos in aeternum miseros, & misere aeternos redderet. Arbitratur item, arborem vitae habuisse vim, vel semel percepto eius fructu, vitam hominis perpetuandi. Verba Ruperti sic habent: Nunc illud notandum, quod non dixerit solum, Ne mittat, manum suam: sed, Ne forte, inquit, mittat manum suam. Plane per hoc liquet, quod non sic fuerit illud lignum vitae, ut est herba aliqua sanitatis medicamentum. Siquidem medicinalis herba forte sumpta non perpetuam confert sanitatem, sed studio provisa servatur contra forte redituram infirmitatem. De hoc autem ligno dicit, Ne forte comedat, & vivat in aeternum. Ergo nequaquam (ut nonnulli arbitrantur) frequentandum erat necessario lignum, tanquam perpetuanda vita transitivum medicamentum, sed semel hoc sumpto viveret corpus in aeternum. Nihilominus & per hoc intelligitur, quod hactenus Adam nescierit lignum illud esse vitae, dum dicitur, Ne forte. Ille namque forte fecisse quid, & invenisse dicitur, qui in conscientia non habuit esse in loco vel in re hoc ipsum quod consequitur: veluti qui terram vertit serere volens, nec aliud intendens, & thesaurum invenit. Dixit autem Deus, Ne forte mittat manum suam, tamen certus quod non scienter mittere, licet quasi dubitans aut solicitus velut homo, ne casu id veniret. Igitur nec Adam cognovit, nec ipse serpens diabolus scivit, quod etiam lignum vitae plantasset Dominus Deus in medio Paradisi. Si enim vel ille scisset, nunquam consilium suae malignitatis ita dimidiasset: sed sicut illud lignum temere persuasit, ut miseros faceret: sic & istud praeripere suasisset, ut aeternaliter miseros, & misere aeternos efficeret.

'Nor indeed (Rupert adds) should it happen to anyone as a wonder, or seem incredible, that an inanimate and insensible tree could bring forth the fruit of eternal vivacity. For do not, even in this exile of our poverty, many things spring up, which by a natural power are proved to change the nature of our mortality into a somewhat better state? Is it not especially concerning those things which are rooted in the earth that medicine is engaged, which is not except from God? To say nothing of the rest, was not, by the powerful help of Mandrakes, the sterile womb of Rachel so improved that she conceived and bore, first Joseph and secondly Benjamin, though she bore him with peril of death? But even today physicians, for the commendation of their art, contend that it was not fabulous but true, what is read in the books of the Gentiles, that Aesculapius by the medicines of herbs raised the dead, and on this account was struck by lightning — namely, lest men should grow accustomed to an art by which they might escape the decree of death useful to themselves. Why therefore should it seem incredible to anyone that there could have been a material tree of life, which by its power would defend the man eating it from bodily death, until, having served his time after obedience, he might more fully enjoy, with the blessed Angels, in delight, the vision of the divine Majesty?' Thus Rupert.¹²

Nec vero (subdit Rupertus) mirandum cuiquam accidat, aut incredibile videatur, quod inanimatum & insensibile lignum vivacitatis aeternae fructum potuerit afferre. Nunquid enim non & in hoc paupertatis nostrae exilio multa nascuntur, quae naturali virtute mortalitatis nostrae naturam in statum meliusculum permutare comprobantur? Nonne circa ea maxime, quae in terra radicantur medicina, quae non est, nisi a Deo versatur? Ut de ceteris taceam, nonne Mandragorarum potenti auxilio, sterilis uterus Rachelis adeo melioratus est, ut conciperet & pareret, primumque Ioseph, & secundum Beniamin, licet eum periculo mortis enixa est? Sed usque hodie medici pro commendatione artis non fabulosum, sed verum illud fuisse contendunt, quod in libris Gentilium legitur, Aesculapium medicaminibus herbarum suscitasse mortuum, & ob hoc illum esse fulminatum, videlicet ne assuescerent homines artem per quam effugerent utile sibi mortis edictum. Cur igitur incredibile videatur cuiquam materiale lignum vitae esse potuisse, quod virtute sua manducantem hominem defenderet a corporali morte, donec emeritus post obedientiam, plenius iucunditate cum beatis Angelis frueretur divinae Maiestatis visione? Haec Rupertus.