Skip to content
Genesis, Creation, and Early Man

Paradise

In the garden (“paradise” in Greek) where Adam dwelt before his fall, we approach a subject that is subtle and mystical, and at the same time is a necessary key to understanding the whole of Christian teaching. This Paradise, as we shall see, is not merely something that existed before the fall; it exists even now and has been visited by some while still alive on this earth; and it is also (in a somewhat different form) the goal of our whole earthly life—the blessed state to which we are striving to return and which we shall enjoy in its fullness (if we are among the saved) at the end of this fallen world.

Our knowledge of Paradise, therefore, is in a sense fuller than our knowledge of the world of the Six Days of Creation; but at the same time it is of a mystical nature that renders “precise” statements about it very difficult to make.

Let us see here what the Holy Fathers say about it.

St. Ambrose reminds us, in the first chapter of his treatise on “Paradise,” that we must be very careful in discussing the “place” of Paradise and its nature:

On approaching this subject I seem to be possessed by an unusual eagerness in my quest to clarify the facts about Paradise, its place, and its nature to those who are desirous of this knowledge. This is all the more remarkable since the Apostle did not know whether he was in the body or out of the body, yet he says that he “was caught up to the third heaven” (2 Cor. 12:2). And again he says: “I know such a man-whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows—that he was caught up into Paradise and heard secret words that man may not repeat” (2 Cor. 12:3-5). … If Paradise, then, is of such a nature that Paul alone, or one like Paul, could scarcely see it while alive, and still was unable to remember whether he saw it in the body or out of the body, and moreover, heard words that he was forbidden to reveal—if this be true, how will it be possible for us to declare the position of Paradise which we have not been able to see and, even ifwe had succeeded in seeing it, we would be forbidden to share this information with others? And, again, since Paul shrank from exalting himself by reason of the sublimity of the revelation, how much more ought we to strive not to be too anxious to disclose that which leads to danger by its very revelation! The subject of Paradise should not, therefore, be treated lightly.1

Nevertheless, despite the difficulty of speaking about it, there are certain things we can know about Paradise, as interpreted by the Holy Fathers.

First of all, it is not merely a spiritual phenomenon which may be beheld now in vision as the Apostle Paul beheld it (of which more below); it is also a part of the history of the earth. The Scripture and Holy Fathers teach that in the beginning, before the fall of man, Paradise was right here on earth. St. Ambrose writes:

Take note that God placed man [in Paradise] not in respect to the image of God, but in respect to the body of man. The incorporeal does not exist in a place. He placed man in Paradise, just as He placed the sun in heaven.2

Likewise, St. John Chrysostom teaches:

Blessed Moses registered even the name of this place [Eden], so that those who love to speak empty words could not deceive simple listeners and say that Paradise was not on earth but in heaven, and rave with similar mythologies. … As you hear that “God planted a garden eastward in Eden,” the word “plant” understand of God in a God-be­fitting way, that is, that He commanded; but regarding the following words, believe that Paradise precisely was created and in the very place where the Scripture has assigned it. … And the word “plant” let us understand as if it had been said: He commanded man to live there, so that his view of Paradise and his stay there might furnish him a great satisfaction and might arouse him to a feeling of gratitude.3

The connection of Paradise with the earth is understood by St. Ephraim in such a literal way that he specifies, in his Commentary on Genesis, that as a place of trees it was created on the Third Day with the rest of the vegetable creation.4

But what connection can there be between this earthly Paradise with its growing trees, and the obviously spiritual Paradise that St. Paul beheld? We may see an answer to this question in the description of Paradise by a Holy Father of the highest spiritual life, St. Gregory the Sinaite, who visited Paradise in the same state of Divine vision as St. Paul:

Eden is a place in which there was planted by God every kind of fragrant plant. It is neither completely incorruptible, nor entirely corruptible. Placed between corruption and incorruption, it is always both abundant in fruits and blossoming with flowers, both mature and immature. The mature trees and fruits are converted into fragrant earth which does not give off any odor of corruption, as do the trees of this world. This is from the abundance of the grace of sanctification which is constantly poured forth there.5

A number of cases are known in the Lives of saints and righteous people of literal fruits being brought back by those who have been lifted up to Paradise-for example, the apples which St. Euphrosynus the Cook (ninth century) brought back and which were eaten by the pious as some holy thing with a nature quite different from that of ordinary earthly fruits (Lives of Saints, September 11).6

A striking experience of Paradise is found in the Life of St. Andrew the Fool for Christ of Constantinople (ninth century). This experience was written down in the Saint’s own words by his friend Nicephorus:

Once during a terrible winter when St. Andrew lay in a city street frozen and near death, he suddenly felt a warmth within him and beheld a splendid youth with a face shining like the sun, who conducted him to Paradise and the third heaven. “By God’s will I remained for two weeks in a sweet vision. … I saw myself in a splendid and marvelous Paradise. … In mind and heart I was astonished at the unutterable beauty of the Paradise of God, and I took sweet delight walking in it. There were a multitude of gardens there, filled with tall trees which, swaying in their tips, rejoiced my eyes, and from their branches there came forth a great fragrance. … One cannot compare these trees in their beauty to any earthly tree. … In these gardens there were innumerable birds with wings golden, snow-white, and of various colors. They sat on the branches of the trees of Paradise and sang so wondrously that from the sweetness of their singing I was beside myself. …7

Therefore, Paradise, while originally a reality of this earth, akin to the nature of the world before the fall of man, is of a “material” which is different from the material of the world we know today, placed between corruption and incorruption. This exactly corresponds to the nature of man before his fall-for the “coats of skins” which he put on when banished from Paradise (as we shall see) symbolically indicate the cruder flesh which he then put on. From that time on, in his cruder state, man is no longer capable of even seeing Paradise unless his spiritual eyes are opened and he is “raised up” like St. Paul. The present “location” of Paradise, which has remained unchanged in its nature, is in this higher realm, which also seems to correspond to a literal “elevation” from the earth; indeed, some Holy Fathers state that even before the fall Paradise was in an elevated place, being “higher than all the rest of the earth” (St. John Damascene, Orthodox Faith 2.11; see also St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis 2).8

Concerning the two trees—one of life and one of the knowledge of good and evil—we shall speak later.

This passage emphasizes that Paradise before the fall was located in a definite place on earth. The Fathers forbid merely allegorical interpretations of these four rivers. Thus, St. John Chrysostom says:

Perhaps those who love to speak from their own wisdom here also will not allow that the rivers are actually rivers, nor that the waters are precisely waters, but will instill, in those who decide to listen to them, the idea that they (under the names of rivers and waters) rerepresented something else. But I entreat you, let us not pay heed to these people, let us stop up our hearing against them, and let us believe the Divine Scripture.10

These four rivers are generally understood by the Fathers to be the Tigris, Euphrates, Nile and Danube (or, according to others, the Ganges); the area of the earthly Paradise, therefore, is in the cradle of ancient civilization. St. John Chrysostom says of this passage (in another treatise):

From this know that Paradise was not a small garden which had an insignificant area. It is watered by such a river that from its fullness come out four rivers.11

It would be fruitless to speculate how the one river of Paradise divided into four rivers which, as we know them today, have four distinct sources. The world of today is so different from the world before the fall, and even before the Flood in Noah’s time, that such geographical questions are not to be traced out.

What is more difficult for our modern mentality, formed by literalistic science, to puzzle out is how the Fathers can speak without distinguishing between Paradise as a geographical location (before the fall), and Paradise as a spiritual habitation of the righteous (at the present time). Thus, St. John Chrysostom, in the same treatise just quoted, speaks of the one river of Paradise being so abundant because it was prepared also for the later Patriarchs, Prophets, and other saints (beginning with the thief on the cross—Luke 23:43) who are to inhabit Paradise.12 Evidently our modern ideas have become too dualistic: we divide things too easily into “spirit vs. matter,” whereas the reality of Paradise partakes of both.

In this passage, as interpreted by the Fathers, we may see something of the spiritual occupation of Adam in Paradise. Before the fall there was no need for a physical tilling or cultivation of Paradise; this refers to Adam’s spiritual state. St. John Chrysostom writes (in a teaching identical to that of St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis):13

“To till.” What was lacking in Paradise? And even if a tiller was needed, where was the plow? Where were the other implements of agriculture? The “tilling” [or “working”] of God consisted in tilling and keeping the commandment of God, remaining faithful to the commandment. … Just as to believe in Christ is the work of God (John 6:29), so also it was a work to believe the commandment that if he touched (the forbidden tree) he would die, and if he did not touch it, he would live. The work was the keeping of the spiritual words. … “To till and to keep it,” it is said. To keep it from whom? There were no thieves, no passersby, no one of evil intent. To keep from whom? To keep it for oneself; not to lose it by transgressing the commandment; to keep Paradise for oneself, observing the commandment.14

St. Gregory the Theologian opens up a deeper understanding of this “work” of Paradise:

This being He placed in Paradise … to till the immortal plants, by which is perhaps meant the Divine conceptions, both the simpler and the more perfect.15

And, in general, the ascetic Fathers refer the “tilling” and “keeping” to the spiritual work of prayer. Thus, St. Nilus of Sora, commenting on this interpretation by the ancient Father St. Nilus of Sinai, writes:

Now this Saint brings forth from antiquity that one should till and keep; for the Scripture says that God created Adam and placed him in Paradise to till and keep Paradise. For here this St. Nilus of Sinai calls prayer the tilling of Paradise, and the guarding against evil thoughts after prayer he calls keeping.16

And Blessed Paisius Velichkovsky, commenting in his turn on these two Holy Fathers, writes:

From these testimonies it is clear that God, having created man according to His image and likeness, conducted him into a Paradise of sweetness to till the immortal gardens, that is, the most pure, exalted, and perfect Divine thoughts, according to St. Gregory the Theologian. And this means nothing else than that he remained, as being pure in soul and heart, in contemplative, grace-filled prayer, sacredly working in the mind alone, that is, in the sweetest vision of God, and that he manfully preserved this, it being the work of Paradise, as the apple of his eye, lest it ever decrease in his soul and heart. Wherefore, great is the glory of sacred and Divine mental prayer, whose verge and summit, that is, beginning and perfection, were given to man by God in Paradise, and so it is from there that it has its beginning.17

If one is tempted to find allegory in the account of creation and Paradise, nowhere is the temptation stronger than with regard to the two trees: one of “life” and one of “the knowledge of good and evil.” Yet the whole “realism” of the Patristic interpretation of Genesis, as well as the fact that Paradise was (and is) indeed a “garden” with material (or semi-material) trees, point to the fact that these trees were actually trees; and, as we have already seen, this very fact is emphasized by St. Gregory Palamas, speaking for St. Gregory the Theologian and other Fathers.

The account of the temptation in Paradise, therefore, is not an allegory—a spiritual lesson clothed in the tale of a garden—but an historical account of what actually happened to our first ancestors. What happened, of course, was primarily a spiritual event, just as Adam’s dwelling in Paradise was primarily a spiritual dwelling (as we shall see more dearly below); but the way in which this spiritual event occurred was indeed through the tasting of the fruit of a “forbidden tree.”

St. John Damascene well describes the double aspect, material and immaterial, of Adam’s dwelling in Paradise:

Some have imagined Paradise to have been material, while others have imagined it to have been spiritual. However, it seems to me that, just as man was created both sensitive and intellectual, so did this most sacred domain of his have the twofold aspect of being perceptible both to the senses and to the mind. For, while in his body he dwelt in this most sacred and superbly beautiful place, as we have related, spiritually he resided in a loftier and far more beautiful place. There he had the indwelling God as a dwelling place and wore Him as a glorious garment. He was wrapped about with His grace, and, like some one of the angels, he rejoiced in the enjoyment of that one most sweet fruit which is the contemplation of God, and by this he was nourished. Now, this is indeed what is fittingly called the tree of life, for the sweetness of Divine contemplation communicates a life uninterrupted by death to them that partake of it.18

Again, St. Damascene says of Adam in Paradise:

While in his body he lived on earth in the world of sense, in his spirit he dwelt among the angels, cultivating thoughts of God and being nurtured on these. He was naked because of his innocence and his simplicity of life, and through creatures he was drawn up to their only Creator, in Whose contemplation he rejoiced and took delight.19

The purpose of man’s dwelling in Paradise and eating of “every tree” was obviously not merely to be satisfied with the delights of this marvelous place, but to look and strive towards something higher; the very presence of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and of the commandment not to eat of it, indicates a challenge and a test which man must pass through before ascending higher. St. Damascene thus sets forth the ascension to perfection which was set forth before Adam in Paradise:

God says: “Of every tree of Paradise thou shalt eat,” meaning, I think: By means of all created things be thou drawn up to Me, their Creator, and from them reap the one fruit which is Myself, Who am the true Life; let all things be fruitful life to thee and make participation in Me to be the substance of thine own existence; for thus thou shalt be immortal. … He made him a living being to be governed here according to this present life, and then to be removed elsewhere, that is, to the world to come, and so to complete the mystery by becoming Divine through reversion to God—this, however, not by being transformed into the Divine Essence, but by participation in the Divine illumination.20

Thus Paradise—and indeed the whole earthly life of man—was made by God, in the phrase of St. Basil, “primarily as a place of training and a school for the souls of men.”21 Man was given in the beginning a path of ascent from glory to glory, from Paradise to the status of a spiritual dweller of heaven, through the training and testing which God might send him, beginning with the commandment not to taste of the one tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was placed in Paradise as in a state between that of heaven, where only the purely spiritual may dwell, and the corruptible earth—which came about, as we shall see, because of his fall.

What, then, was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and why was it forbidden to Adam? In the classical interpretation of St. Gregory the Theologian, God gave Adam in Paradise:

a Law, as a material for his free will to act upon. This law was a commandment as to what plants he might partake of, and which one he might not touch. This latter was the tree of knowledge; not, however, because it was evil from the beginning when planted; nor was it forbidden because God grudged it to us—let not the enemies of God wag their tongues in that direction, or imitate the serpent. But it would have been good if partaken of at the proper time; for the tree was, according to my view, Contemplation, upon which it is only safe for those who have reached maturity of habit to enter, but which is not good for those who are still somewhat simple and greedy; just as neither is solid food good for those who are yet tender and have need of milk.22

And St. John Damascene writes:

The tree of knowledge of good and evil is the power of discernment by multiple vision, and this is the complete knowing of one’s own nature. Of itself it manifests the magnificence of the Creator and it is good for them that are full-grown and have walked in the contemplation of God—for them that have no fear of changing, because in the course of time they have acquired a certain habit of such contemplation. It is not good, however, for such as are still young and are more greedy in their appetites, who, because of the uncertainty of their perseverance in the true good and because of their not yet being solidly established in their application to the only good, are naturally inclined to be drawn away and distracted by their solicitude for their own bodies.23

To sum up the Orthodox teaching on the two trees of Paradise, St. John Chrysostom writes:

The tree of life was in the midst of Paradise as a reward; the tree of knowledge as an object of contest and struggle. Having kept the commandment regarding this tree, you will receive a reward. And behold the wondrous thing. Everywhere in Paradise every kind of tree blossoms, everywhere they are abundant in fruit; only in the center are there two trees as an object of battle and exercise.24

This is a profound subject, which is very much bound up with our human nature. In fact, we see in human life today something of this very temptation that Adam had. Although Adam was not fallen then—and in this regard his state was different from our present state—nonetheless, his situation was similar to that of a young person of sixteen, seventeen, or eighteen years old who is brought up in goodness and then comes to the age when he must himself make the choice of whether to be good or not. It so happens that, because we have freedom, there must be a choice. One must consciously will to do good. You cannot simply be good because someone tells you to be good. Sooner or later in your freedom you must actively choose the good or else it does not become part of you. That is true of everyone except, of course, a child who dies quite young.

Therefore, when one comes to the age at which one must become a man, it is then that one must make the same choice Adam made—either to freely choose to do good or else to make the mistake of entering into evil, into a life of sin.

The Holy Fathers say that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is something which is only for mature people. Because we have freedom, it cannot be that we will not have knowledge of evil. The only choice is whether we have knowledge of evil through the mistakes of others, or through ourselves overcoming evil.

Everyone, in order to become a mature Christian and to be established in the way of doing good, has to know about evil. He has to know what it is that he has chosen not to do. And this knowledge can be without falling into great sins—if you are willing to take the examples of others. If you are able to see, almost as if it is your own experience, when someone else makes a tremendous sin, and if you are able to see the result of that sin, then you can make that part of your experience without falling into sin.

Evidently that is what Adam could have done. If he had resisted this temptation, he would have seen that there was a temptation, that is, that everything was not perfect, and that there was someone out to get him. Then, if a second temptation had come, he would have seen that the serpent (or whatever else was used by the devil) was out to make him fall. He would have begun to realize there was such a thing as evil: an evil will that makes him want to lose his Paradise. Through this he could have attained that knowledge of evil and eventually tasted of that tree.

The tree itself represents the knowledge of evil, since tasting of it meant disobeying the commandment. Adam learned about evil through his disobedience. He chose the way of sin and thereby discovered in bitter experience what it meant to be evil, and then to repent of that evil and come back to goodness.

So that is the path that Adam chose; and because of that our whole nature has been changed. Each person is free—the same as Adam—but we have been born in sins already. Even small children are filled with all kinds of evil things. Nonetheless, real evil does not come in until one consciously chooses to be evil. And that is the choice of adulthood.

Thus, in a sense everyone tastes of this tree, or else refrains from tasting of it and goes on the path of goodness. Unfortunately, the odds are very much against one’s surviving without falling into these evils, although there’s no reason to fall into them. We see now the evil all around us, and we have instructors and Holy Fathers to keep us on the path of good. A person can be raised in Christianity—like St. Sergius of Radonezh or other saints who were in monasteries from their childhood—and he can be surrounded by good examples. He can see the results of evils in others and can choose not to do that himself. Theoretically, it is quite possible. In bitter practice, however, usually it happens that we taste the tree by sinning ourselves.

In this passage, again, we should not look for the “contradiction” some rationalist scholars think they have found, as though the text describes the creation of the animals after the creation of man, contradicting the order of creation in the first chapter. The subject of this passage is the naming of the animals by Adam, and only incidentally does the text mention that these animals had already been created by God, and that they were not the “help meet” for Adam, which could only be someone of the same nature as he (woman, as mentioned in the next passage).

The animals are “brought” to Adam because their place is not in Paradise but in the earth outside; Paradise is meant for the dwelling of man alone—a preindication that man alone of all earthly creatures is meant for the Heavenly Kingdom to which he can ascend from Paradise through keeping the commandments of God. St. John Damascene writes that Paradise:

was a divine place and a worthy habitation for God in His image. And in it no brute beasts dwelt, but only man, the handiwork of God.25

And St. John Chrysostom teaches:

Adam was given the whole earth, but his chosen dwelling was Paradise. He could also go outside of Paradise, but the earth outside of Paradise was assigned for the habitation not of man, but of the irrational animals, the quadrupeds, the wild beasts, the crawling things. The royal and ruling dwelling for man was Paradise. This is why God brought the animals to Adam—because they were separated from him. Slaves do not always stand before their lord, but only when there is need for them. The animals were named and immediately sent away from Paradise; Adam alone remained in Paradise.26

The Holy Fathers interpret the naming of the animals by Adam quite literally, and see in it an indication of man’s dominion over them, his undisturbed harmony with them, and a wisdom and intellect in the first man which far surpasses anything since known to man. St. Ephraim writes of this:

The words “He brought them to Adam” show the wisdom ofAdam, and the peace which existed between the animals and man before man transgressed the commandment. For they came together before man as before a shepherd filled with love; without fear, according to kinds and types, they passed before him in flocks, neither fearing him nor trembling before each other. … It is not impossible for a man to discover a few names and keep them in his memory. But it surpasses the power ofhuman nature, and is difficult for him, to discover in a single hour thousands of names and not to give the last of those named the names of the first. … This is the work of God, and if it was done by man, it was given him by God.27

In other words, this was a sign of a truly Divine intelligence in Adam. St. John Chrysostom writes:

God does this in order to show us the great wisdom ofAdam … and also so that in the giving of names might be seen a sign of dominion. … Just think what wisdom was needed to give names to so many kinds of birds, reptiles, wild and domestic animals, and other irrational creatures … to give them all names, and names belonging to them and corresponding to each kind. … Just think of how the lions and leopards, vipers and scorpions and serpents and all the other even more ferocious animals came to Adam as to a lord, with all submission, in order to receive names from him, and Adam did not fear a single one of these wild beasts. … The names which Adam gave them remain until now: God confirmed them so that we might constantly remember the honor which man received from the Lord of all when he received the animals under his authority, and might ascribe the reason for the removal (of this honor) to man himself, who lost his authority through sin.28

Because man possesses in himself something of the animal nature, as we have seen, and this animal nature became dominant in him because of his fall, Adam’s naming of the animals also indicates the original dominance of man’s mind over this lower, passionate nature. St. Ambrose writes:

The beasts of the field and the birds of the air which were brought to Adam are our irrational senses, because beasts and animals represent the diverse passions of the body, whether of the more violent kind or even of the more temperate. … God granted to you the power of being able to discern by the application of sober logic the species of each and every object, in order that you may be induced to form a judgment on all of them. God called them all to your attention, so that you might realize that your mind is superior to all of them.29

Perhaps no passage of Genesis is more a touchstone of our interpretation of the whole book than this brief passage of the creation of Eve from Adam’s rib. If we understand it “as it is written,” as the Holy Fathers did, we will have no difficulty understanding the rest of the book in the same way. But if we have difficulty understanding it in this simple way—and our modern minds almost instinctively rebel against this simple interpretation—we will undoubtedly find much else in Genesis that we have difficulty understanding as the Fathers did.

This passage is also a stumbling block for those who wish to promote the evolutionist view of the origin of life and of mankind. In this view, man (at least in his body) is a descendant of lower animals; the “father” of the first man, therefore, must have been a non-human creature closely related to the higher apes. The whole point of this evolutionary view is that man and every living being developed from more primitive organisms by natural laws now known (or hypothesized) by science; to accept the evolution of the first man from lower animals, and then provide a wife for him by the miracle of taking one of his ribs—is surely something no evolutionist could agree to. If Adam “evolved naturally” from the beasts, then Eve must have done the same; but if you accept the miraculous account of Eve’s creation as described in Genesis, you open yourself by this very fact to understanding the entire Six Days of Creation in the Patristic, and not the naturalistic, way.

What do the Holy Fathers say of the creation of Eve? St. Ambrose writes:

Woman was made out of the rib of Adam. She was not made of the same earth with which he was formed, in order that we might realize that the physical nature of both man and woman is identical and that there was one source for the propagation of the human race. For that reason, neither was man created together with a woman, nor were two men and two women created at the beginning, but first a man and after that a woman. God willed it that human nature be established as one. Thus, from the very inception of the human stock He eliminated the possibility that many disparate natures should arise. … Reflect on the fact that He did not take a part from Adam’s soul but a rib from his body, that is to say, not soul from a soul, but “bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” (Gen. 2:23) will this woman be called.30

St. Cyril of Jerusalem, trying to make beginning Christians understand the virgin birth of Christ, writes:

Of whom in the beginning was Eve begotten? What mother conceived her the motherless? But the Scripture saith that she was born out of Adam’s side. Is Eve then born out of man’s side without a mother, and is a child not to be born without a father, of a virgin’s womb? This debt of gratitude was due to men from womankind: for Eve was begotten of Adam, and not conceived of a mother, but as it were brought forth of man alone.31

(We shall see later how the Church sees the parallel between Eve and the Virgin Mary, and between the miracles of the first creation and the miracles of the re-creation through Christ.)

St. John Chrysostom, while warning us that the word “took” must be understood in a way befitting God, Who has no “hands,” clearly indicates his literal interpretation of this passage:

Great are these words; they surpass every mind of man: their greatness can be understood in no other way than by beholding them with the eyes of faith. … “God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept.” This was not a simple ecstasy and not a usual sleep; but since the most wise and skilled Creator of our nature wished to take from Adam one of his ribs, therefore, so that he might not feel the pain and then be hostilely disposed to the one created from his rib, lest, remembering the pain, he hate the created being, God plunged Adam into a deep sleep and, as it were commanding him to be embraced by a kind of numbness, brought upon him such a sleep that he did not feel in the least what happened. … Taking a certain small part from an already prepared creation, from this part He made a whole living being. What power does the Highest Artist, God, have to produce from this small part the composition of so many members, to arrange so many organs of sense and form a whole, perfect and complete being which could converse and, because of its oneness of nature, furnish the man great consolation!32

In another treatise the same Father writes:

How did Adam not feel pain? How did he not suffer? One hair is torn out of the body, and we experience pain, and even if one is immersed in a deep sleep he wakes up from the pain. Moreover, such a large member is taken out, a rib is torn out, and the sleeping one does not wake up? God removed the rib not violently, lest Adam wake up; He did not tear it out. The Scripture, desiring to show the speed of the Creator’s act, says: “He took.”33

And St. Ephraim writes:

The man who up to now had been awake and was enjoying the shining of the light and had not known what sleep was,* is now stretched out naked on the earth and given over to sleep. Probably, Adam saw in sleep the very thing that was happening to him. When in the twinkling of an eye the rib was taken out, and likewise in an instant flesh took its place, and the bared bone took on the full appearance and all the beauty of a woman—then God brought and presented her to Adam.34

All this took place on the very day of man’s creation, the Sixth Day. To our limited minds the creation of man and woman is just as inconceivable, as miraculous, as “spectacular” as all the other creations of God when they were made in the beginning.

Here Adam names the first woman even as he had just named the animals, indicating at the same time her oneness in nature with him, owing to her literal origin from his body, and the institution of marriage, since in prophecy he foresaw that the marriage union would be necessary because of the fall.

Commenting on this passage, St. Ephraim writes:

“This now”: that is, the one who has come to me after the animals is not such as they; they came from the earth, but she is “bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh.” Adam said this either in a prophetic way or, as noted above, according to his vision in sleep. And just as on this day all the animals received from Adam their names according to their kinds, so also the bone, made into a woman, he called not by her proper name, Eve, but by the name of woman, the name belonging to the whole kind.35

St. John Chrysostom says of the same passage:

How did it come to his mind to say this? How did he know the future, and the fact that the human race would multiply? How did it become known to him that there would be intercourse between man and wife? After all, this occurred after the fall; but before that they lived in Paradise like angels, were not aroused by the flesh, were not inflamed by other passions either, were not weighed down by bodily needs, but being created entirely incorrupt and immortal, did not even need the covering of clothing . … And so, tell me, from whence did the idea come for him to say this? Is it not clear that, since before the transgression he was a participant of the grace of prophecy, he saw all this with his spiritual eyes?36

Thus we see that Adam was not only a great intellect, a great seer of the reality of this world who was given the ability to name the animals; he was also a prophet who saw the future.

Adam and Eve were created, like the whole of the first creation, in the bloom of youth and beauty, and already possessing the sexual distinction that would be needed in their fallen states, yet there was no desire, no passionate thought between them. This, in the view of the Fathers, is the clearest indication of their dispassionateness before the fall, and of the fact that their minds were directed first of all to the glory of the heavenly world above. St. Ephraim writes:

They were not ashamed because they were clothed with glory.37

St. John Chrysostom teaches the same thing:

Before sin and disobedience occurred, they were clothed in the glory on high, and were not ashamed; but after the violation of the commandment there came both shame and the awareness of their nakedness.38

And St. John Damascene writes:

God wanted us to be dispassionate like that, for that is passionless­ ness to the highest degree.39

Let us now sum up the state ofAdam in Paradise in the words of a recent Father, St. Seraphim of Sarov:

Adam was created to such an extent immune to the action of every one of the elements created by God, that neither could water drown him, nor fire burn him, nor could the earth swallow him up in its abysses, nor could the air harm him by its action in any way whatsoever. Everything was subject to him as the beloved of God, as the king and lord of creation, and everything looked up to him, as the perfect crown of God’s creatures. Adam was made so wise by this breath of life which was breathed into his face from the creative lips of God, the Creator and Ruler of all, that there never has been a man on earth wiser or more intelligent than he, and it is hardly likely that there ever will be. When the Lord commanded him to give names to all the creatures, he gave every creature a name which completely expressed all the qualities, powers, and properties given it by God at its creation. Owing to this very gift of the supernatural grace of God which was infused into him by the breath of life, Adam could see and understand the Lord walking in Paradise, and comprehend His words, and the conversation of the holy Angels, and the language of all beasts, birds, and reptiles, and all that is now hidden from us fallen and sinful creatures, but was so clear to Adam before his fall. To Eve also the Lord God gave the same wisdom, strength, and unlimited power, and all the other good and holy qualities.40

To some extent man even today can return to something of this paradisal state through the grace of God, as may be seen in the lives of many saints, which abound in miracles unbelievable to worldly men. The Life of St. George, for example (April 23),41 who was preserved unharmed in the midst of the cruelest tortures and even deaths, reminds us of Adam’s invulnerability in Paradise.

Still, however, in his fallen state man can attain to no more than a glimpse of the state ofAdam; only in the age to come will this Paradise be restored to us in its fullness, and then (if only we be among the saved) we will see what an angelic state it is (and was). St. Gregory of Nyssa writes:

The resurrection promises us nothing else than the restoration of the fallen to their ancient state; for the grace we look for is a certain re­turn to the first life, bringing back again to Paradise him who was cast out from it. If then, the life of those restored is closely related to that of the angels, it is clear that the life before the transgression was a kind of angelic life, and hence also our return to the ancient condi­ tion oflife is compared to the angels.42

In Orthodox ascetic literature, where the aim constantly kept in view is our restoration to Paradise, the unspoiled and dispassionate nature of Adam before the fall is held up as the model and goal of our ascetic struggle. St. Abba Dorotheus writes, in the very first words of his Spiritual Instructions:

In the beginning, when God created man, He placed him in Paradise and adorned him with every virtue, giving him the commandment not to taste of the tree which was in the midst of Paradise. And thus he remained there in the enjoyment of Paradise: in prayer, in vision, in every glory and honor, having sound senses and being in the same natural condition in which he was created. For God created man according to His own image, that is, immortal, master of himself, and adorned with every virtue. But when he transgressed the commandment, eating the fruit of the tree of which God had commanded him not to taste, then he was banished from Paradise, fell away from the natural condition, and fell into a condition against nature, and then he remained in sin, in love of glory, in love of the enjoyments of this age, and of other passions, and he was mastered by them, for he became himself their slave through the transgression.43

The awareness that Adam’s state in Paradise was the natural hu­man condition, and the one to which we may hope to return by God’s grace, is one of the greatest spurs to ascetic struggle. This awareness is thus of the most practical benefit to Orthodox Christians who hope to inherit God’s Kingdom. With the fall of man, Paradise ceased to be a reality of this earth and was placed out of our reach; but through the grace of God made available to Christians through the Second Adam, Christ, we may still hope to attain it. Actually, through Christ we are able not only to gain back the state ofAdam before the fall, but to attain a state even higher than that: the state which Adam would have attained had he not fallen.

Even in our fallen state, can we not be reminded of Paradise and our fall from it in the nature that surrounds us? In the animals it is not difficult to see the passions over which we should be masters, but which have largely taken possession of us; and in the peaceful murmur of the forests (where so many ascetic strugglers have taken refuge) can we not see a reminder of the Paradise of vegetation originally intended for our dwelling and food, and still existing for those able to ascend, with St. Paul, to behold it?

Footnotes

  1. St. Ambrose, Paradise 1, Fathers of the Church vol. 42, pp. 287-288 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1947—). ↩

  2. Ibid., p. 289. ↩

  3. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis 13.3-4, Tvoreniya 4, pp. 105-6 [Fathers of the Church vol. 74, pp. 175-76 (13.13-14)]. ↩

  4. St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis 2, Tvoreniya 6, p. 309 [Fathers of the Church vol. 91, pp. 99-100 (2.5.12)]. ↩

  5. St. Gregory the Sinaite, On Commandments and Doctrines 10, Dobrotolyubiye 5, 2nd ed. (1900), p. 181 [Philokalia 4, p. 213]; St. Theophan the Recluse, Dobrotolyubiye v Russkom perevode, do polnennoe (The Philokalia in Russian translation, supplemented), 5 vols. (Moscow: Athonite Russian Monastery of St. Panteleimon, 1877-1889; 2nd ed., 1883-1900; 3rd ed., 1913). ↩

  6. Euphrosynus was a simple man, but a man of God. He served as the cook in an Amorean monastery in the ninth century. One night, the spiritual father of this monastery saw himself in Paradise, and saw Euphrosynus there as well. Euphrosynus picked and gave him three apples from Paradise. When the spiritual father awoke, he saw three unusually beautiful and fragrant apples by his pillow. He quickly found Euphrosynus and asked him: “Where were you last night, brother?” “I was where you were, father,” the blessed God-pleaser replied. The spiritual father then revealed the entire incident to the monks, and all recognized the sanctity and godliness of Euphrosynus. But Euphrosynus, fearing the praise of men, immediately fled the monastery and hid in the wilderness, where he spent the remainder of his life. — Prologue from Ochrid ↩

  7. Quoted in Fr. Seraphim Rose, The Soul after Death, p. 145 [4th ed., pp. 137-38]. ↩

  8. St. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith 2.11, Fathers of the Church vol. 37, p. 230; St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis 2, Tvoreniya 6, p. 310 [Fathers of the Church vol. 91, p. 101 (2.6.4)]. ↩

  9. Old Testament: Septuagint (Greek) Version ↩

  10. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis 13.4, Tvoreniya 4, p. 107 [Fathers of the Church vol. 74, pp. 177-78 (13.15-16)]. ↩

  11. St. John Chrysostom, On the Creation of the World 5.5, Tvoreniya 6, p. 791 [trans. Robert C. Hill, p. 67]. ↩

  12. Ibid. 5.5-6, pp. 791-92 [trans. Robert C. Hill, pp. 67-68]. ↩

  13. St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis 2, p. 311 [Fathers of the Church vol. 91, pp. 101-102 (1.7)]. ↩

  14. St. John Chrysostom, On the Creation of the World 5.5, Tvoreniya 6, p. 791 [trans. Robert C. Hill, p. 67]. ↩

  15. St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 45: Second Oration on Pascha 8, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, P. Schaff et al., eds. Reprint, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1952-1956; Reprint, Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1994, 2 7, p. 425. (Hereafter NPNF.) ↩

  16. St. Nilus of Sora, The Skete Rule 9, Prepodobnyy Nil Sorskii pervoosnovatel’ skitskago zhitiya v rossii, i ustav ego o zhitel’stve skitskom (St. Nilus of Sora, founder of skete life in Russia, and his rule of skete life) (1864) [trans. George A. Maloney, p. 105]. ↩

  17. St. Paisius Velichkovsky, The Scroll, Six Chapters on Mental Prayer 2, in The Orthodox Word, no. 48 (1973), pp. 18-19 [Little Russian Philokalia 4, p. 31]. ↩

  18. St. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith 2.11, Fathers of the Church vol. 37, p. 232 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1947—). ↩

  19. Ibid. 2.30, p. 265. ↩

  20. Ibid. 2.11-12, pp. 233-35. ↩

  21. St. Basil, Hexaemeron 1.5, Fathers of the Church vol. 46, p. 9 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1947-). ↩

  22. St. Gregory the Theologian, Oration 45: Second Oration on Pascha 8, NPNF 2 7, p. 425. ↩

  23. St. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith 2.11, Fathers of the Church vol. 37, pp. 232-33 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1947—). ↩

  24. St. John Chrysostom, On the Creation of the World 5.7, Tvoreniya 6, pp. 793-94 [trans. Robert C. Hill, p. 69]. ↩

  25. St. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith 2.11, Fathers of the Church vol. 37, p. 230 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1947—). ↩

  26. St. John Chrysostom, On the Creation of the World 6.1, Tvoreniya 6, p. 799 [trans. Robert C. Hill, p. 73]. ↩

  27. St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis 2, Tvoreniya 6, pp. 313-14 [Fathers of the Church vol. 91, pp. 103-104 (2.9.3-2.10.1)]. ↩

  28. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis 14.5, Tvoreniya 4, pp. 115-16 [Fathers of the Church vol. 74, pp. 190-191 (Homilies 14.18-20)]. ↩

  29. St. Ambrose, Paradise 11, Fathers of the Church vol. 42, pp. 329-330 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1947—). ↩

  30. Ibid. 10-11, pp. 327, 329. ↩

  31. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 12.29, NPNF 2 7, p. 80. ↩

  32. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis 15.2-3, Tvoreniya 4, pp. 121-22 [Fathers of the Church vol. 74, pp. 198, 200 (15.6-7, 11)]. ↩

  33. St. John Chrysostom, On the Creation of the World 5.8, Tvoreniya 6, p. 796 [trans. Robert C. Hill, p. 71]. ↩

  34. St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis 2, Tvoreniya 6, p. 315 [Fathers of the Church vol. 91, p. 105 (2.12.1)]. ↩

  35. Ibid.[Fathers of the Church vol. 91, p. 105 (2.13.2-3)]. ↩

  36. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis 15.4, Tvoreniya 4, pp. 123-24 [Fathers of the Church vol. 74, pp. 202-203 (15.14)]. ↩

  37. St. Ephraim, Commentary on Genesis 2, Tvoreniya 6, p. 316 [Fathers of the Church vol. 91, p. 106 (2.14.2)]. ↩

  38. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis 15.4, Tvoreniya 4, pp. 123-24 [Fathers of the Church vol. 74, p. 203 (15.14)]. ↩

  39. St. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith 2.11, Fathers of the Church vol. 37, p. 231 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1947—). ↩

  40. St. Seraphim of Sarov [Conversation of St. Seraphim of Sarov on the Aim of the Christian Life 5], Little Russian Philokalia 1, pp. 81-82 [5th ed., p. 90]. ↩

  41. This glorious and victorious saint was born in Cappadocia, the son of wealthy and virtuous parents. His father suffered for Christ, and his mother then moved to Palestine. When George grew up he entered the military, where he attained, in his twentieth year, the rank of tribune, and as such he was in the service of the Emperor Diocletian. When Diocletian began his terrible persecution of Christians, George came before him and courageously confessed that he was a Christian. The emperor had him thrown into prison and ordered that his feet be placed in stocks and that a heavy stone be placed on his chest. After that, the emperor commanded that George be tied to a wheel, under which was a board with large nails, and he was to be rotated until his whole body became as one bloody wound. After that, they buried him in a pit with only his head showing above the ground, and there they left him for three days and three nights. Then George was given a deadly poison to drink by a magician. But through all of these sufferings, George continuously prayed to God, and God healed him instantly and saved him from death, to the great astonishment of the people. When he also resurrected a dead man through his prayers, many accepted the Christian Faith. Among these were Alexandra, the wife of the Emperor Diocletian; the chief pagan priest; the farmer Glycerius; and Valerius, Donatus and Therinus. Finally the emperor commanded that George and his own wife Alexandra be beheaded. Blessed Alexandra died on the scaffold before being beheaded, and St. George was beheaded in the year 303 A.D. The miracles which have occurred over the grave of St. George are countless. Numerous are his appearances, both in dreams and openly, to those who, from that time to today, have invoked him and implored his help. Inflamed with love for Christ the Lord, it was not difficult for this saintly George, for the sake of this love, to leave all: rank, wealth, imperial honor, his friends and the entire world. For this love, the Lord rewarded him with a wealth of unfading glory in heaven and on earth, and with eternal life in His kingdom. In addition, the Lord bestowed upon him the power and authority to assist all those in afflictions and difficulties who honor him and call upon his name. — Prologue from Ochrid ↩

  42. St. Gregory of Nyssa, On the Making of Man 17, NPNF 2 5, p. 407. ↩

  43. St. Abba Dorotheus, Teachings Profitable for the Soul 1, in Dushepoleznya poucheniya (Spiritual instructions), pp. 19-20 [trans. Constantine Scouteris, p. 69]. ↩