Dist. 17
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 17
DISTINCTIO XVII.
Cap. I.
De creatione animae, an de aliquo facta sit.
Hic de origine animae plura quaeri solent, scilicet unde creata fuerit, et quando, et quam gratiam habuerit in creatione. — Sicut hominis formatio secundum corpus describitur, cum dicitur1: Formavit Deus hominem de limo terrae, ita eiusdem secundum animam factura describitur, cum subditur: Et inspiravit in faciem eius spiraculum vitae.
Cap. II.
De insufflatione et inspiratione Dei; quando facta fuerit anima, an in corpore, an extra2.
Quaestio 1. Corpus enim de limo terrae formavit Deus, et animam inspiravit; vel secundum aliam litteram flavit, vel sufflavit, non quod faucibus sufflaverit, vel manibus corporeis corpus formaverit; spiritus enim non est lineamentis membrorum compositus. Opinio haeretica. Non carnaliter putemus, Deum corporeis manibus formasse corpus, vel faucibus inspirasse animam, sed pro homine de limo terrae secundum corpus formando iubendo, volendo, id est voluit et verbo suo iussit ut ita fieret; et inspiravit in faciem eius spiraculum vitae, id est substantiam animae, in qua viveret, creavit, non de materia aliqua corporali vel spirituali, sed de nihilo.
Putaverunt enim quidam haeretici, Deum de sua substantia animam creasse, verbis Scripturae pertinaciter inhaerentes, quibus dicitur: Inspiravit vel insufflavit etc. Cum flat, inquiunt, vel spirat homo, de flatum emittit; sic ergo, cum dicitur Deus flasse vel spirasse spiraculum in faciem hominis, ex se spiritum hominis emisisse intelligitur, id est de sua substantia. Impugnatur. Qui hoc dicunt, non capiunt, tropica locutione dici esse sufflavit vel flavit, id est flatum hominis, scilicet animam fecit. Flare enim est flatum facere, flasse est animam facere. Unde Dominus per Isaiam3: Omnem flatum ego feci. Non sunt ergo audiendi qui putant, animam esse partem Dei. Si enim hoc esset, nec a se nec ab alio decipi posset, nec ad malum faciendum vel patiendum compelli, nec in melius vel deterius mutari. Flatus ergo, quo hominem animavit, factus est a Deo, non de Deo nec de aliqua materia, sed de nihilo.
Quaestio 2. Sed utrum in corpore, an extra corpus, etiam inter doctos scrupulosa quaestio est. — Augustinus enim super Genesim4 tradit, animam cum Angelis Opinio 1. sine corpore fuisse creatam, postea vero ad corpus accessisse: «Neque compulsa est incorporari, sed naturaliter illud voluit, id est sic creata fuit, ut vellet; sicut naturale nobis est velle vivere. Male autem velle vivere, non naturae, sed voluntatis est perversae». Opinio 2. Alii vero dicunt, animam primi hominis in corpore fuisse creatam, ita exponentes verba illa: Inspiravit in faciem eius spiraculum vitae, id est animam in corpore creavit, quae totum corpus animaret; faciem tamen specialiter expressit, quia haec pars sensibus ornata est ad intuenda superiora. Sed quidquid de anima primi hominis aestimetur, de aliis certissime sentiendum est, quod in corpore creantur. Creando enim infundit eas Deus et infundendo creat. Dicendum est etiam, animam illam non sic esse creatam, ut praescia esset operis futuri iusti, vel iniusti5.
Cap. III.
In qua aetate factus fuit homo.
Solet etiam quaeri, utrum Deus hominem repente in virili aetate fecerit, an perficiendo et aetates augendo, sicut nunc format in matris utero. — Augustinus. Augustinus super Genesim6 dicit, quod Adam in virili aetate continuo factus est, et hoc secundum superiores, non Causae superiores. inferiores causas, id est secundum voluntatem et potentiam Dei, quam naturae generibus non alligavit, qualiter et virga Moysi conversa est in draconem. Nec
talia contra naturam fiunt nisi nobis, quibus aliter naturae cursus innotuit; Deo autem natura est quod facit. Non ergo contra dispositionem suam illud fecit Deus. Erat enim in prima causarum7 conditione, sic hominem posse fieri, sed non ibi erat necesse, ut sic Dubium 1. fieret; «hoc enim non erat in conditione creaturae, sed in beneplacito Creatoris, cuius voluntas necessitas est». «Hoc enim necessario futurum est quod vult et praescit. Multa vero secundum inferiores causas futura sunt, sed in praescientia Dei futura non sunt. Si autem ibi aliter futura sunt, potius futura sunt, sicut ibi sunt, ubi praescit ille qui non potest falli». «Sic ergo factus est Adam non secundum inferiores causas, quia non erat in rerum causis seminalibus, ut ita fieret, sed secundum superiores, non contra naturam operantes, quia in rerum causis naturalibus erat, ut ita posset fieri».
Cap. IV.
Quare homo, extra paradisum creatus, in paradiso sit positus.
Hominem autem ita formatum tulit Deus, ut Scriptura8 docet, et posuit in paradiso voluptatis, quem plantaverat a principio. His verbis aperte Moyses insinuat, quod homo, extra paradisum creatus, postmodum Dubium 2. in paradiso sit positus. Quod ideo factum dicitur, quia non erat in eo permansurus, vel ut non naturae, sed gratiae hoc assignaretur.
Cap. V.
Quibus modis paradisus accipiatur.
Intelligitur autem paradisus localis et corporalis, in quo homo locatus est. «Tres enim generales de paradiso sententiae sunt: una eorum qui corporaliter intelligi volunt tantum; alia eorum qui spiritualiter tantum; tertia eorum qui utroque modo paradisum accipiunt. Tertiam mihi placere fateor, ut homo in corporali paradiso sit positus9», qui ab illo principio plantatus accipi potest, quo terram omnem, remotis aquis, herbas et ligna producere iussit. «Qui etsi praesentis Ecclesiae vel futurae typum tenet, ad litteram tamen intelligendum est, esse locum amoenissimum, fructuosis arboribus magnum et magno fonte fecundum. Quod dicimus a principio antiqua translatio10 dicit ad orientem. Dubium 3. Unde volunt, in orientali parte esse paradisum, longo interiacente spatio vel maris vel terrae, a regionibus, quas incolunt homines, secretum et in alto situm, usque ad lunarem circulum pertingentem; unde nec aqua diluvii illuc pervenerunt11».
In hoc autem paradiso erant ligna diversi generis, inter quae unum erat, quod vocatum est lignum Dubium 4. vitae, alterum vero lignum scientiae boni et mali.
Cap. VI.
De ligno vitae.
Lignum autem vitae dictum est, sicut docet Beda12 et Strabus, «quia divinitus accepit hanc vim, ut qui ex eius fructu comederet, corpus eius stabili sanitate et perpetua soliditate firmaretur nec ulla infirmitate vel aetatis imbecillitate in deterius vel in occasum laberetur».
Cap. VII.
De ligno scientiae boni et mali.
Lignum autem scientiae boni et mali non a natura hoc nomen accepit, sed ab occasione rei postea secutae. «Arbor enim illa non erat mala, sed scientiae Glossa. boni et mali ideo dicta est, quia post prohibitionem erat in illa transgressio futura, qua homo experiendo disceret, quid esset inter obedientiae bonum et inobedientiae malum. Non ergo de fructu, qui nasceretur inde, positum est illud nomen, sed de re transgressionem secutae13». Notandum. Cognovit enim homo, priusquam tangeret hoc lignum, bonum et malum; sed bonum per prudentiam et experientiam, malum vero per prudentiam tantum; quod etiam per experientiam novit, usurpato ligno vetito, quia per experientiam mali didicit, quid sit inter bonum obedientiae et malum inobedientiae. Si vero primi parentes obedientes essent nec contra praeceptum peccassent; non ideo tamen minus diceretur lignum scientiae boni et mali, quia hoc14 ex eius tactu accideret, si usurparetur. A ligno igitur pro- Dubium 5. hibitus est, quod malum non erat, ut ipsa praecepti conservatio bonum illi esset, transgressio malum. Nec melius consideratur, quantum malum sit inobedientia quam hoc modo, cum scilicet ideo reus factus esse homo intelligitur, quia prohibitus rem tetigit, quam si non prohibitus tetigisset, nec peccasset nec poenam sensisset. Si enim venenosam herbam prohibitus tetigeris, poena sequitur, etsi nemo prohibuisset15; similiter sequeretur, si etiam prohiberetur res tangi, quae non tangenti tantum, sed prohibenti obest, sicut aliena pecunia: ideo prohibitum est peccatum, quia prohibenti est damnosum. Cum vero tangitur quod nec tangenti obest, si non prohibetur, nec cuilibet, si tangatur; ideo prohibetur, ut per se bonum obedientiae et malum inobedientiae monstretur; sicut primus homo, a re bona prohibitus, poenam incurrit, ut non ex re mala, sed ex inobedientia poena esse monstretur, sicut ex obedientia palma.
---
DISTINCTION XVII.
Chap. I.
On the creation of the soul, whether it was made from something.
Concerning the origin of the soul many questions are wont to be raised, namely whence it was created, and when, and what grace it had at its creation. — Just as the formation of man with respect to the body is described, when it is said1: God formed man of the slime of the earth, so the making of the same with respect to the soul is described, when it is added: And he breathed into his face the breath of life.
Chap. II.
On God's inbreathing and inspiration; when the soul came to be, whether in the body, or outside it2.
Question 1. For God formed the body from the slime of the earth, and breathed in the soul; or, according to another reading, blew, or blew upon — not that he blew through any throat, nor that he formed the body with bodily hands; for the spirit is not composed of the lineaments of bodily members. Heretical opinion. Let us not think carnally that God formed the body with bodily hands, or breathed in the soul through some mouth; rather, in respect of forming man's body from the slime of the earth, "by commanding and willing" — that is, he willed it and by his word commanded that it be so; and he breathed into his face the breath of life, that is, he created the substance of the soul, in which it might live, not from any bodily or spiritual matter, but from nothing.
For certain heretics supposed that God created the soul from his own substance, clinging stubbornly to the words of Scripture by which it is said: he "breathed in" or "breathed upon," etc. When a man blows or breathes — they say — he emits breath out of himself; so therefore, when God is said to have blown or breathed a breath into the face of man, he is understood to have emitted the spirit of man out of himself, that is, of his own substance. Refuted. Those who say this do not perceive that the phrases "he breathed upon" or "he blew" are spoken figuratively — that is, he made the breath of man, namely the soul. For to blow is to make a breath, and to have blown is to have made a soul. Hence the Lord through Isaiah3: Every breath have I made. Therefore those are not to be heard who hold that the soul is a part of God. For if it were so, it could be deceived neither by itself nor by another, nor be compelled to do or suffer evil, nor be changed for the better or for the worse. The breath therefore by which he gave life to man was made by God, not of God nor of any matter, but from nothing.
Question 2. But whether in the body or outside the body is a scrupulous question even among the learned. — For Augustine on Genesis4 hands down that the soul Opinion 1. was created together with the angels apart from a body, and afterwards came to the body: "Nor was it compelled to be incorporated, but naturally willed it" — that is, it was so created that it should will it; "just as it is natural to us to will to live. But to will to live ill belongs not to nature but to a perverse will." Opinion 2. Others, however, say that the soul of the first man was created in the body, thus expounding those words He breathed into his face the breath of life, that is, he created in the body a soul which should animate the whole body; yet he specifically named the face, because this part is adorned with senses for gazing on higher things. But whatever may be thought concerning the soul of the first man, of the rest it is to be held most certainly that they are created in the body. For in creating them God infuses them, and in infusing he creates. It must also be said that that soul was not so created as to be foreknowing of a future just or unjust work5.
Chap. III.
In what age man was made.
It is also wont to be asked whether God made man at once in the prime of manhood, or by perfecting him and advancing him through the ages, as he now forms him in the mother's womb. — Augustine. Augustine on Genesis6 says that Adam was made at once in the prime of manhood, and this according to the higher Higher causes. and not the lower causes — that is, according to the will and power of God, which he did not bind to the kinds of nature, just as Moses's rod also was turned into a serpent. Nor
are such things done against nature except for us, to whom the course of nature has become known otherwise; but to God nature is what he does. God therefore did not do that against his own disposition. For it was in the first condition of the causes7 that man should be able to come to be in this way, yet there it was not necessary that he should so come to be; Doubt 1. "for this was not in the condition of the creature, but in the good pleasure of the Creator, whose will is necessity." "For that is necessarily to come which he both wills and foreknows. Many things, however, are 'to come' according to lower causes, but in the foreknowledge of God they are not to come. But if there they are otherwise to come, they are rather to come as they are there, where he foreknows them who cannot be deceived." "So therefore Adam was made not according to the lower causes — because it was not in the seminal causes of things that he should so be made — but according to the higher, which do not work against nature, because it was in the natural causes of things that he should be able so to be made."
Chap. IV.
Why man, having been created outside paradise, was placed in paradise.
And God took man thus formed — as Scripture8 teaches — and placed him in the paradise of pleasure, which he had planted from the beginning. By these words Moses plainly intimates that man, having been created outside paradise, was afterwards placed in paradise. Doubt 2. And this is said to have been done because he was not to remain in it, or in order that this might be ascribed not to nature but to grace.
Chap. V.
In what senses paradise is to be taken.
Now paradise is understood as a local and bodily place, in which man was set. "For there are three general opinions concerning paradise: one of those who would have it understood only bodily; another of those who would have it only spiritually; a third of those who take paradise in both ways. The third pleases me, I confess, so that man was set in a bodily paradise9" — which can be taken to be from that beginning when, the waters being removed, he commanded the whole earth to bring forth grasses and trees. "Which, although it bears the figure of the present or future Church, must nevertheless be understood according to the letter to be a most pleasant place, great with fruitful trees and abounding with a great fountain. What we say from the beginning the ancient translation10 says toward the east. Doubt 3. Whence they hold that paradise is in the eastern part, secluded by a long intervening space, whether of sea or of land, from the regions which men inhabit, and set on high, reaching up to the lunar circle; whence even the waters of the flood did not reach to that place11."
In this paradise, moreover, there were trees of various kinds, among which there was one which was called the tree Doubt 4. of life, and another the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Chap. VI.
On the tree of life.
The tree of life was so called, as Bede12 and Strabus teach, "because it received divinely this power, that whoever should eat of its fruit, his body should be made firm with stable health and perpetual soundness, and should not slip into the worse or into decay through any infirmity or weakness of age."
Chap. VII.
On the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil did not receive this name from nature, but from the occasion of the thing which afterwards followed. "For that tree was not evil, but was called of the knowledge Gloss. of good and evil because, after the prohibition, the transgression was to be in it, by which man, by experience, should learn what was the difference between the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience. The name therefore was not placed upon it from the fruit which would be born from it, but from the thing that followed the transgression13." Note. For man knew, before he touched this tree, good and evil — but the good by prudence and experience, the evil by prudence only; which also he came to know by experience, the forbidden tree having been usurped, because by the experience of evil he learned what lies between the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience. Yet even if the first parents had been obedient and had not sinned against the precept, it would nonetheless have been called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, since this14 would befall through the touch of it, if it should be usurped. From the tree, therefore, Doubt 5. he was forbidden — a thing which was not evil — so that the very keeping of the precept should be a good to him, and the transgression an evil. Nor is it better considered how great an evil disobedience is than in this manner: when, that is, man is understood to have been made guilty for this reason, that, having been forbidden, he touched a thing which, if he had not been forbidden, he would neither have sinned in touching nor would have suffered any penalty. For if you touch, having been forbidden, a poisonous herb, the penalty follows even though no one had forbidden it15; likewise it would follow if a thing should be forbidden to be touched which is harmful, not only to the one touching but to the one forbidding, as is another's money: a thing is therefore forbidden as sinful because it is harmful to him who forbids. But when there is touched something which is not harmful to the one touching if it be not forbidden, nor to anyone whatsoever if it be touched, then it is forbidden in order that the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience may be made manifest through it itself; just as the first man, forbidden from a good thing, incurred a penalty, so that the penalty might be shown to be not from an evil thing but from the disobedience — as the palm of victory is from obedience.
---
- Gen. 2, 7. — Hoc et seq. cap. Magister sumsit ex August., VIII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 1. 2. 3; et deinde a verbis Sed utrum in corpore etc. ex eodem libro, c. 24. Cfr. et Hugo, I. de Sacram. p. 6. c. 3; cod. Erf. remittit ad Gandolph. II. Sent.Gen. 2, 7. — This and the following chapter the Master took from Augustine, On Genesis according to the Letter VIII, cc. 1, 2, 3; and thereafter, from the words But whether in the body etc., from the same book, c. 24. Cf. also Hugh, On the Sacraments I, p. 6, c. 3; codex Erf. refers it to Gandulph, II Sent.
- Secundum codd. Magister incipit cap. II. in media propositione ultima capituli I., scil. cum verbis: ita eiusdem factura etc.According to the codices the Master begins chap. II in the middle of the last sentence of chap. I, namely with the words so the making of the same etc.
- Cap. 57, 16, secundum Septuaginta; Vulgata: Et flatus ego faciam.Isaiah 57, 16, according to the Septuagint; the Vulgate reads: Et flatus ego faciam ("And I shall make breath").
- Loc. cit. c. 25. 27. Cod. Erf. addit: Hoc non asserit Augustinus. — Paulo superius post extra corpus cod. C adiicit sit anima. — Quae sequuntur inveniuntur loc. cit. c. 28.Loc. cit. cc. 25, 27. Codex Erf. adds: Augustine does not assert this. — A little earlier, after outside the body, codex C inserts be the soul. — What follows is found at the same place, c. 28.
- Cfr. supra dist. IV. et infra dist. XXIII. c. 4. — Propositio praecedens est Augustini, loc. cit. c. 26.Cf. above, dist. IV, and below, dist. XXIII, c. 4. — The preceding proposition is Augustine's, loc. cit. c. 26.
- Libr. VI. c. 13. 14. 15. 17. — Postea alluditur ad Exod. 7, 10.Book VI, cc. 13, 14, 15, 17. — Afterwards there is an allusion to Exodus 7, 10.
- Plurimae edd. cum Vat. creaturarum, refragantibus codd.Very many editions with the Vatican read creaturarum ("of creatures"), against the codices.
- Gen. 2, 8.Gen. 2, 8.
- August., VIII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 1. n. 1. 4., et habetur in Glossa ord.Augustine, On Genesis according to the Letter VIII, c. 1, nn. 1, 4, and it is contained in the Glossa ordinaria.
- Id est Septuag. Cfr. August., loc. cit. c. 3. — Subinde, post volunt edd. 1. 8 subiiciunt quidam.That is, the Septuagint. Cf. Augustine, loc. cit. c. 3. — Immediately after, following they hold, editions 1 and 8 insert certain (people).
- Beda, Hexaem. ad Gen. 2, 9, et est in Glossa. Ad verba in alto situm etc. cod. Erf. annotat: Illud non est Bedae, sed Strabi in quadam Glossa ibid. Lunarem hyperbolice dictum est, i. e. altius omni terra, secundum Damascenum. cfr. Coment. dub. 3.Bede, Hexaemeron on Gen. 2, 9, and it is in the Gloss. To the words set on high etc. codex Erf. notes: This is not from Bede but from Strabus in a certain Gloss on the same passage. Lunar is said hyperbolically, that is, higher than all the earth, according to Damascene. Cf. the Commentary dub. 3.
- Beda, Hexaem. ad Gen. 2, 9, et habetur hoc sicut et Strabi sententia in Glossa ord. Sumtae sunt hae sententiae ex August., VIII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 3.Bede, Hexaemeron on Gen. 2, 9; and this, like the opinion of Strabus, is contained in the Glossa ordinaria. These opinions are taken from Augustine, On Genesis according to the Letter VIII, c. 3.
- Ex Glossa ord. ad Gen. 2, 9. Cfr. August., XIV. de Gen. ad lit. c. 14. n. 31. In eod. libr. c. 15. invenies et quae sequuntur. Cfr. August., ibid. c. 13. n. 28. 29. Ultima verba cap. respiciunt Prov. 21, 28: Vir obediens loquetur victoriam.From the Glossa ordinaria on Gen. 2, 9. Cf. Augustine, On Genesis according to the Letter XIV, c. 14, n. 31. In the same book, c. 15, you will also find what follows. Cf. Augustine, ibid. c. 13, nn. 28, 29. The closing words of the chapter regard Prov. 21, 28: The obedient man shall speak of victory.
- Solummodo Vat. haec.Only the Vatican edition reads haec ("these things").
- Edd. 1–9 ita habent: prohibuisset, similiter sequeretur. Si etiam. Subinde Vat. et codd. A C prohibetur pro prohiberetur.Editions 1–9 read: prohibuisset, similiter sequeretur. Si etiam. Likewise, the Vatican and codices A, C read prohibetur in place of prohiberetur. ---