Книга 3

“And God said, Let the water bring forth living things; and let the birds fly over the earth, across the firmament of heaven. And God created the great fish and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters of the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth. And there was evening, and there was morning: the fifth day” (Gen. 1.20–23). Now creatures moved by the spirit of life appear both in the lower region of the world and, above all, in the waters, because water is the element closest to the quality of air, and air is so closely associated with the sky, in which the luminaries are located, that it is itself called heaven; I just don’t know whether it can be called a firmament. Meanwhile, the same object, which we call heaven in the singular, is also called heaven in the plural. For, although in this book the sky, separating the upper and lower waters, is spoken of in the singular, yet the psalm says: “Praise Him, heavens of heavens and waters that are above the heavens” (Ps 149.4). And if by the heavens of heavens we correctly understand the starry and, as it were, upper heavens, the airy heavens and, as it were, the lower ones, then in the same psalm, as we see, such (lower) heavens are also mentioned. From this it is clear that the air is called not only sky, but also heavens; just as we say “earths,” denoting nothing more than the very object that is called earth in the singular, when (the globe) is called both “the globe of the earth” and “the globe of the earth.” The aerial heavens, as we read in one of those messages that are called canonical, once perished from the flood (2 Pet 3:5, 6). Of course, the liquid element, which then increased so much that it rose fifty cubits above the highest mountains, could not reach the stars. But since it filled all or almost all of the air space in which birds fly, it is written in the above-mentioned message that the heavens of that time perished. I don’t know how this can be understood otherwise, except that the quality of denser air has turned into the nature of water; otherwise, the heavens did not then perish, but only rose higher when water took their place. It is better, therefore, in accordance with the authority of the above-mentioned message, to think that the then heavens perished and in their place, with a decrease in evaporation, new ones were installed, as it is written there, than to think that they rose higher and that the nature of the upper sky gave way to them. So, when creating the inhabitants of the lower part of the world, which is designated by the general name of earth, it was necessary for animals to appear first from water, and then from earth, because water is so similar to air that from its evaporation, as has been proven, the air becomes dense, produces wind, thickens clouds and can support the flight of birds. Therefore, although one of the secular poets correctly said that Olympus rises above the clouds and “silence reigns at its top” (since they claim that at the top of Olympus the air is so thin that neither the clouds darken it nor the wind disturbs it, and that it cannot support the birds and people who accidentally rise there with the movement of that denser wind to which they are accustomed in ordinary air), yet there is air both there and from it pours water is similar in quality to it, and therefore during the flood it turned into this liquid element. For one should not think that there was any space higher than the starry sky when the waters rose higher than the highest mountains. However, the question of the transformation of elements is still open and has not been clarified even by those people who devoted their leisure time to a very thorough study of this subject. Namely: some say that every element can change and turn into any other; others maintain that each element has something special that is in no way transformed into the quality of another element. In due course, perhaps we will enter, if the Lord pleases, into a more thorough consideration of this subject; Now, in the course of this consideration, it is enough, I believe, to touch on it as much as necessary in order to make clear the order maintained by the writer of everyday life, according to which it was necessary to speak about the creation of aquatic animals before the creation of terrestrial animals. In no case should it be thought that in this Scripture any element of the world, consisting of the four most famous elements, is omitted, just because heaven, water and earth are mentioned here, but air is not. Our Scripture often calls the world either heaven and earth, or also adds the sea. Therefore, the air in it refers either to the sky, if only in the highest spaces there are layers that are calm and completely quiet, or to the earth, in view of that stormy and foggy layer, which, due to moist evaporation, becomes dense, although it is itself more often called the sky; Therefore, it is not said: “Let the water produce reptiles, a living soul, and the air produce birds that fly over the earth,” but it is said that both kinds of animals were produced from water. Thus, everything that is turbulent and fluid only in the waters, or vaporous and rarefied and hanging (in the air), so that the former is distributed among reptiles, and the latter among flying ones, is attributed (by the writer of everyday life) to the wet element. There are also those who connect the five known bodily senses with the four elements as follows: the eyes are said to be related to fire, and the ears to air; They attribute smell and taste to the moist element, and smell is attributed to the moist vapors with which the space where birds fly is saturated, and taste to fluid and dense liquids, for everything that we feel in the mouth, in order to obtain a taste sensation, must be combined with the moisture of the mouth, even if it was initially dry. However, fire penetrates everywhere, causing movement. With the loss of heat, the liquid also freezes, and while the other elements can become hot, the fire cannot cool: it goes out completely rather than cools from contact with something cold. Finally, the fifth sense, touch, most of all corresponds to the earthly element; therefore the sense of touch in a living being belongs to the whole body, which consists mainly of earth. They even say that one cannot see without fire, nor have the sense of touch without earth; hence, all elements are mutually inherent in one another, but each receives its name from what it contains more of. That is why, with the loss of heat, when the body cools, the feeling also becomes dull, since the movement inherent in the body slows down as a result of heat, that is, the effect of fire on the air, air on the moist (element), and water on everything earthly is weakened, because the subtler elements penetrate the coarser ones. And the more subtle something is in the bodily nature, the closer it is to the spiritual nature, although there is a huge difference between one and the other nature, because the first is a body, and the latter is not. Hence, since the ability to sense does not belong to the body, but through the body to the soul, then, despite ingenious considerations that attribute sensations to various bodily elements, the feelings themselves are aroused through a subtler body by the soul, to which the power of sensation belongs, although the soul itself is incorporeal. Thus, the soul begins its movement in all senses from the subtle (element) - fire, but does not achieve the same thing in all. Thus, in vision, with compressed heat, it reaches its light. In hearing, from the warmth of the fire it descends to the most transparent air. In the sense of smell, it crosses the layer of clean air and reaches the environment of moist vapors, of which our coarser air consists. In the taste it reaches an area of ​​denser moisture, and having penetrated and crossed this medium, when it reaches the earthly mass, it excites the last sense - touch. So, the nature and order of the elements were not unknown to the one who, narrating the creation of visible (objects), which by their nature possess within the world the ability to move in the elements, speaks first of celestial bodies, then of water and, finally, of terrestrial animals - he says this not because the air is lowered to him, but because if there is a layer of the purest and completely calm air, where, as they say, birds cannot fly, then this layer is adjacent to the highest sky and under The name of heaven in Scripture refers to the highest part of the world, just as the name of earth generally designates everything from which, in descending sequence, fire, hail, snow, fog, stormy wind and all abysses originate, and, finally, dry land, which is called earth in the proper sense (of the word). Thus, the upper air, on the one hand, is not lowered, since it is called heaven, on the other hand, it is not mentioned during the creation of animals either because it belongs to the celestial part of the world, or because it does not have inhabitants, which the writer of everyday life is now talking about; the lower air, which absorbs the vapors rising from the sea and land and becomes so dense that it can withstand the (weight) of birds, receives living beings only from water. For the bodies of birds are carried by the moisture in the air, in which birds are supported on their wings when flying, just as fish are supported on a kind of wings when swimming. Therefore, the Spirit of God, who inspired the writer, says that birds (and fish) are made from water. Their nature takes place in two regions, namely: the lower - in the unstable wave, and the highest - in the solid layer of the winds; the first is learned by the swimmer, and the second by the fly. So we see that animals are given two senses corresponding to this element - smell for the sensation of vapors and taste for the sensation of liquids. And if we also feel water and winds through touch, this means that the dense (beginning) of the earth is included in the composition of all elements, and especially water and winds. That is why in two parts of the world, waters and winds are for the most part meant under the general name of earth, as the above psalm shows, listing everything higher from one beginning: “Praise the Lord from heaven” (Ps. 149:1), and everything lower from the other: “Praise the Lord from the earth” (Ps. 149:7), moreover, the stormy wind, and all the abysses, and fire are mentioned. And although the latter, by the nature of its nature, strives upward, it cannot rise to the silence and calm of the highest heavenly region, because, overcome by the air and resolved into it, it goes out; in our region, which is more susceptible to damage and more inert, it is blown by the movements of the wind to soften the cold, as well as for the benefit and intimidation of mortals. And since the flow of waves and winds can also be felt through the sense of touch, which relates to the earth, the bodies of aquatic animals, especially birds, feed on earthly things, rest and reproduce on the earth, for that part of the moisture that rises in the form of vapor is spread over the earth. Therefore the Scripture, saying: “Let the waters bring forth living things; and let the birds fly over the earth,” adds: “Through the firmament of the heavens” (Gen. 1:20), from which what previously seemed dark appears somewhat clearer. For Scripture does not speak “in the firmament,” as was the case with the luminaries, but “in the firmament,” that is, near the firmament, since that moist environment where birds fly is adjacent to that where birds can no longer fly, and which already refers to the sky. So, birds fly in the sky (which is why they are often called heavenly), but only in that sky, which the above psalm refers to the earth. Others believe that reptiles are not called a living soul, but “the reptiles of the souls of the living” (Gen. 1:20) because of the dullness of their feelings. But if this were so, then birds would be called living souls. Meanwhile, this definition applies equally to both, i.e. it must be understood in such a way that both reptiles and flying ones belong to such souls. True, some argue that fish are called “the reptiles of living souls,” because they have neither memory nor any other manifestations of intelligent life. But such statements should be attributed to little life experience. Moreover, many writers left messages about what amazing things they observed in fish cages. And even if much is exaggerated here, it is nevertheless obvious that fish have memory. I had the opportunity to verify this myself: while walking over one of the Bullen springs full of fish (I noticed that) people often throw there any food that the fish pick up, swimming (to the surface) in whole schools and often entering into a fight with each other. Accustomed to handouts, they sometimes follow passers-by for a long time, whose presence they somehow feel, waiting to see if they will throw something to them. Thus, both aquatic animals are reptiles, and birds are called flying, I think, not in vain; even if the lack of memory or dullness of feelings deprived fish of the right to be called “a living soul,” then this right, undoubtedly, cannot be taken away from birds, whose singing, skillful nesting and raising of chicks testify to good memory and liveliness of feelings. I am also well aware that some philosophers attributed their own animals to each element, calling not only reptiles or four-legged animals terrestrial, but also birds, since they, tired of flying, rest on the ground; further, aerial - demons, and, finally, heavenly - gods (however, we often call heavenly bodies and angels). The same philosophers, in order not to leave any of the elements without their animals, attributed fish and aquatic animals to the waters, as if there was no bottom under the water, and it can be proven with certainty that fish do not rest and do not reserve strength on the land of the bottom (although they would have to do this less often, since water is more suitable for supporting bodies than air, which is why many terrestrial animals swim, guided by instinct, and even people can learn to swim without much difficulty). And if they object to us on the grounds that fish do not have legs, then it turns out that there are neither seals in the water, nor snakes and snails on the ground, for the former have legs, and the latter do not, which, however, does not in the least prevent them from not only resting on the ground, but also not leaving it at all. Dragons, they say, have no legs and rest in caves and fly through the air; although it is difficult to find out anything about these animals, they are reported in the writings of both ours and pagan writers. That is why, even if demons are aerial beings, since they live and act in the air and are not destroyed by death because below them there are two elements, water and earth, and above them there is one, star fire, and therefore the active elements predominate in them, that is, fire and air, and not the passive ones, which are water and earth, even if, I say, this is so, such a difference (of elements) does not in any way contradict the Scripture, which posits the origin of birds not from air, but from water, i.e. That is, it defines their habitat as moisture, although not dense, but thin, evaporating into the air and expanding in it, but still moisture. Air fills all space from the luminous sky to liquid water and dry earth. Meanwhile, moist vapors do not penetrate this entire space, but reach only those limits from where the air begins to be called earth, according to the words of the above psalm: “Praise the Lord from the earth” (Ps. 149:7). The upper layer of air, quiet and windless, connects with the sky, with which it is associated and by whose name it is called. If, before their fall, the fallen angels were with their prince, then the archangel, and now the devil, in this area (some of ours believe that they were not heavenly or super-heavenly angels), then there is nothing surprising in the fact that after their fall they were cast into that foggy environment where the air is saturated with vapors, which, at the command of God, who governs all creation from the highest to the lowest, produce winds and lightning with their movements and thunder, condensing, creates clouds, condensing even more - rain, condensing and freezing - snow and hail, etc. If the fallen angels, before their fall, were clothed in heavenly bodies, then in this case it is not surprising that these bodies received airy properties as punishment, so that they could endure some suffering from fire, as an element of a higher nature. Thus, they are allowed to occupy not the upper layer of air, but the foggy layer, which serves them as a kind of prison until the Judgment itself. But we will talk in more detail about the fallen angels in another place more appropriate to this subject, for now it is enough that it is clear: if this foggy and stormy region, thanks to the nature of the air, extending to the very waves and dry earth, can support airy bodies, then it can, thanks to the subtle vapors rising from the water, support the bodies of birds produced from the water. These vapors themselves, cooling at night and becoming heavier, are deposited in the form of dew, and in cold weather - in the form of white frost. “And God said, Let the earth produce living creatures according to their kinds, cattle and creeping things and wild beasts of the earth after their kinds. And so it became. And God created the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and the cattle according to their kinds, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good” (Genesis 1:24–25). Now the time has come to decorate with your animals the other part of the lower region, often called, together with all its abysses and foggy air, the earth, to decorate precisely that half of it, which, in fact, is the earth. The kinds of animals that the earth produced according to the word of God are known. But since all animals devoid of reason are often called cattle or beasts, it is appropriate to ask what kind of animals and what kind of beasts he is talking about here (the writer of everyday life). In fact, by the reptiles of the earth, snakes are undoubtedly meant, and although snakes can be called beasts, never cattle. Animals are usually considered lions, leopards, tigers, wolves, foxes, even dogs, monkeys and many other such animals. Livestock is considered to be those animals that are used by humans or for work, for example, oxen, horses, etc. etc., or to obtain wool or food from them, for example, sheep and pigs. Who are the four-legged ones? Although, with the exception of snakes, all animals are four-legged, but if (the writer of everyday life) did not want to designate some special animals with this name, he would not have mentioned them (however, in the repetition nothing is said about four-legged animals). Perhaps he gave this name to deer, wild asses and wild boars, which are in many ways similar to cattle, although they do not live with humans. Or this (mention) was made in order to be able to repeat the expression “by kind” three times, in order to draw our attention to the three known genera of animals. Then, it is possible that having started with four-legged creatures, and then moving on to reptiles, (the writer of everyday life) wanted by four-legged to designate four-legged reptiles, namely: lizards, garduns, etc. Having used the expression “by kind” for the second time in relation to animals, (the writer of everyday life) could thereby emphasize that we are talking about those animals whose strength lies in their teeth and claws. Finally, saying “by kind” for the third time, when talking about cattle, he singled out animals that defend themselves with the help of horns and hooves. There can be many interpretations here; we just wanted to make it clear how certain words used in Scripture can be explained, of course, not by chance. It is not in vain that readers wonder about the purpose for which the expression “according to kind” is used (Gen. 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25); Does genus mean that the genus existed before, although in the narrative it appears to have just been created, or is genus meant the higher and spiritual ideas in accordance with which (all things) were then created? But if this was the case, then why is not the same said about the light, sky, earth and luminaries? For what is there between them, the eternal and unchanging idea of ​​which does not dwell in Wisdom itself? Meanwhile, the expression “by kind” is applied starting with herbs and trees and ending with earthly animals. So, rather, “according to kind” is said because animals appeared so that others, that is, their offspring, would be born from them and would successively retain their original form. Hence, “according to kind” is what is thought of as the power of the seeds, and the similarity of successors to their predecessors, since nothing was created in such a way that it existed once, as if it could disappear without leaving behind offspring. Why is it not said about man: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, after his kind”? After all, human reproduction is an obvious fact! Perhaps because God created man in such a way that if he kept the commandment, he would not die, and therefore would not need successors; but after the Fall he became like cattle, so that the sons of this age are already born and give birth, as a result of which the human race exists. But what, in this case, does the blessing given at the creation of man mean: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Gen. 1:28), which is achieved, of course, only through birth? However, we will talk about this when we come to consider the corresponding passage of Scripture, but now we will only note that it is not said about man “according to kind” because he was first created alone, and only after that a wife was created from him. And there are not as many genera of people as there are (genera) of herbs, trees, fish, birds, snakes, cattle and animals, so that (in relation to a person) the expression “by kind” is understood in such a way that it implies the unification of entire classes that are similar to each other and belonging to the same beginning of the seed (beings). They also ask why only some aquatic creatures, like humans, were blessed. For God blessed them too, saying: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters of the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth” (Gen. 1:22). Perhaps it was enough to bless only one type of animal, so that then (this blessing) would spread to all those who reproduce through birth (of their own kind)? About trees and herbs, created earlier than others, (God did not say) anything like that, considering it unworthy of blessing that which does not experience within itself the desire for this and gives birth without any sensations. But regarding man, it was necessary to repeat the blessing, so that no one would think that the sin lies in childbearing, and not in the lust of fornication. Questions also arise regarding the smallest animals: were they created during the original creation, or during the subsequent corruption of mortal things? For many of them appear when living bodies are wounded, many from dirt, rotting and decomposition of corpses, others from rotting trees or spoilage of fruits. But it cannot be said about all of them that their creator was not God. In all of them there is a kind of natural beauty that evokes wonder in those who contemplate, for God does not leave formless the very last of things, which are destroyed in accordance with the order of their kind and whose destruction terrifies us because of our mortality, and creates animals with tiny bodies, but with keen sense, so that we may observe with greater amazement the swift flight of a fly than the measured tread of a beast of burden, and be more amazed at the work an ant than the heavy load of a camel. But the question remains open: did they arise during the initial six-day creation, or during the subsequent destruction of bodies? We can say that those smallest (creatures) that arise from water and earth arose in the beginning, and it is possible that they arose even before the creation of the luminaries (that is, with trees and herbs), since they rather complement the inhabited environment than are (in the literal sense of the word) its inhabitants. But to say the same about those that are born from the bodies of mainly dead animals is absurd, unless by this we mean that all animate bodies already had a certain natural force and, as it were, some basic principles invested in them in advance, which should have arisen from the damage of mortal bodies, according to the genus and difference of each, according to the immutable will of the Creator, who gives movement to everything by His ineffable control. People often ask about some poisonous and dangerous animals whether they were created after the fall of man to punish him, or whether they were initially created harmless and only later began to destroy sinners. Even if everything were exactly like this, then there would be nothing surprising in it, for no one in this difficult and calamitous life is so righteous as to dare to call himself perfect, as the apostle rightly notes: “Not because I have already achieved or become perfect” (Phil. 3.12); on the other hand, for the exercise of our weakness and the improvement of virtue, trials and physical adversities are necessary, as evidenced by the same apostle, saying: “And so that I would not become exalted by the extraordinary revelations, a thorn was given to me in the flesh, the angel of Satan, to depress me, so that I would not become exalted. Three times I prayed to the Lord to remove him from me. But the Lord said to me: “My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor 12.7-9). However, St. Daniel, confessing in prayer to God not only the sins of the people, but also his own, remained, being among the lions, alive and unharmed (Dan 6.22); in the same way, the deadly viper, hanging on the apostle’s hand, did not cause him any harm (Acts 28.3–5). Thus, even having been created, they could not have done evil if there had been no reason for this, that is, there was no need, on the one hand, to frighten and punish vice, and on the other, to test and strengthen virtue, since examples of patience are also necessary for the improvement of others, and man himself in trials knows himself more accurately, and, finally, eternal bliss, shamefully lost through pleasure, is firmly achieved only through sorrow. Why then, they will object to us, do animals harm each other, although they have no sins and do not achieve virtue through such a test? Of course, because some of them serve as food for others. For everything, as long as it exists, has its own magnitude, its parts and its ranks; taken as a whole, it evokes our fair approval, and even when one passes into another, the proportionality and beauty inherent in each type, partly hidden from us, remains. Fools cannot understand this, but to those who strive for perfection, it is accessible to some extent, but to the perfect it is clear as day. And there is no doubt that by all these movements in the lower creature, saving examples are given to man, so that he can see how much he must do for spiritual and eternal salvation, surpassing (the capabilities of) irrational animals; after all, he cannot help but notice that all of them, from the mighty elephants to the smallest insects, whether defending or attacking, do everything they can for their bodily and temporary well-being, given to them as their lot in accordance with their lower purpose; indeed, we often see how some of them seek to restore their body at the expense of the bodies of others, while others protect themselves either by defending themselves, or by fleeing, or by hiding in a safe place. And the very physical pain experienced by animals is an amazing and powerful spiritual force that, with incomprehensible threads, binds them into a living union and leads to a certain unity, an attempt to destroy which causes them a kind of indignation. Perhaps someone is also interested in the following question: if the attack of other animals on living people is for the latter either a punishment, or a saving exercise, or a useful test, or, finally, hidden learning, then why do some animals devour the bodies of already dead people? As if we care about the ways in which our soulless flesh goes into the deep recesses of nature, from where it will be retrieved in a restored form by the wondrous omnipotence of the Creator! However, let prudent people learn a lesson from this - to rely in everything on the immutable will of the Creator, who mysteriously controls everything, great and small, by Whom even the hairs of our heads are all numbered (Luke 12.7), rely to such an extent that they do not fear one kind or another of death, but with pious courage be ready to accept it in any form without hesitation. Sometimes they also ask about thorns, thistles and some barren trees, why and when they were created, since God said: “Let the earth produce greenery, grass yielding seed, and fruitful trees” (Gen. 1:11). But those who ask such questions are unfamiliar with some legal terms, in particular what “ususfructus” is. This word denotes a certain benefit from something that brings profit through its fruits. And what obvious or hidden benefit comes from everything that the earth-nurse feeds through its roots, let them either try to find out through observation, or ask knowledgeable people about it. Regarding thorns and thistles, a simpler answer is possible, since the words: “Thorns and thistles it will bring forth for you” (Gen. 3.18) were spoken to man about the earth after the Fall. But it is difficult to say that it was then that they emerged from the earth, because their seeds contained many different benefits, and therefore they could exist regardless of the punishment of man. But that they began to grow precisely in the fields, the cultivation of which was determined for man as a punishment, I think, was significant as an increase in this punishment, while in other places they grew either as food for birds and livestock, or for some of the needs of man himself. However, the words spoken can also be understood in such a way that the earth had previously given birth to thistles and thorns, but not for human labor, but for animal food; for man, exacerbating the hardships of his labor, she began to give birth to them from the time from which, as a result of sin, he began to cultivate the land. Moreover, they continued to grow in the same fields as before, but now for humans, as it is said: “It will grow for you,” i.e. for you, for your labor, the earth will now begin to give birth to what was previously born only as cattle feed. “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that moves on the earth. And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed that is on all the earth, and every tree that has fruit yielding seed; - This will be food for you; And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to every thing that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food. And so it became. And God saw everything that He had created, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning: the sixth day” (Gen. 1.26–31). Below we will have the opportunity to explore in detail the question of human nature more than once. Now, concluding our consideration of the six-day creation, we will make a general remark: it is very significant that if about other works (of creation) it is said: “God said: let it be” (Gen. 1:3, 6, 14), then in this case we read: “God said: Let us create.” This instills the idea of ​​a plurality of persons, for the sake of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. But then it is said about the unity of God: “And God created man.” These words should not be understood to mean that the Father (created man) in the image of the Son or, conversely, the Son in the image of the Father. But since it is said: “In the image of God,” and earlier it is written: “In Our image,” this shows that the mentioned plurality of persons is not such that we either named, or believed, or understood many gods, but so that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, for the sake of which Trinity it is said: “In Our image,” we accepted as one God, for which it is continued: “In the image of God.” It is impossible to ignore the fact that having cited the words: “In Our image,” (the writer of everyday life) then adds: “And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth” (Gen. 1:26), making it clear that the image of God, in which man was created, is in what man excels unreasonable animals. And this is called mind, or reason, or consciousness, or some other more suitable name. Therefore, the apostle says: “Be renewed in the spirit of your mind” (Eph 4.23), and also: “Being clothed with the new, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him who created him” (Col 3.10), unambiguously showing in what respect man was created in the image of God, positing (this image) not in bodily features, but in some form of an enlightened mind accessible to our senses. That is why, just as (at the creation) of the original light, which is the created intelligent light, participating in the eternal and immutable Wisdom of God, it is not said: “And it became so,” just as it is not repeated further: “And God created,” because (as was already said above) in the first creation there had not yet taken place any knowledge of the Word of God, so that after this knowledge what was created in this Word would gradually be created, but that light itself was created first, in which the knowledge of the Word of God, by which creation was accomplished, was to appear, and this knowledge was the turning of light from ugliness to the formative God, i.e. and creation, and education - meanwhile, about the rest of the creatures it is said: “And it became so”, which indicates the knowledge of the Word, reflected in the light, and then it is said: “And God created”, which indicates the origin of the most created kind of creation, which was called to be the Word of God - in the same way, during the creation of man it is not said either: “And it became so”, nor: “And God created”, for man, by his very nature, is rational, like the first light, and therefore to be created meant the same thing to him as to know the Word of God by which he was created. In fact, if these words had been spoken (at the creation of man), one would have thought that man was first created in the knowledge of a rational creature, and then (appeared) as some kind of irrational creature; but since he himself is a rational creature, he is educated in rational knowledge. For just as after sin a person is renewed in the knowledge of God in the image of the One who created him, so he was created in knowledge before he began to decay as a result of sin, which is why he must now be renewed in his knowledge. As for everything that was not created in knowledge, being created either as bodies or as irrational souls, knowledge about it was first created in a rational creature by the Word, by which it was called into existence, about which it is said: “And it became so,” so that these words would serve as an indication of the knowledge created in (rational) nature, which could have knowledge in the Word of God, and then the bodily and unreasonable creatures, which is why it is added: “And God created.” But it is difficult to explain how man was created immortal and, at the same time, along with other animals, received tree fruits and grass seeds as food. In fact, if a person became mortal after the Fall, then before that he did not need such food. And his body itself could not have been damaged by hunger. And although what was said: “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28) cannot, as it seems, be fulfilled otherwise than through the intercourse of a man and a woman, in which one cannot help but see a sign of mortal bodies, however, it can be said that in immortal bodies there could be another way, which consisted in the birth of children from one act of pious love, not associated with corruptive lust, and this method of childbearing could continue until the earth is filled with immortal bodies, that is, with a righteous and holy people, whom we expect by faith after the resurrection of the dead. But although it is possible to say this (but how to say it is another matter), no one dares to add to this that the need for food that restores bodies is permissible only for mortal bodies. Some have also suggested that the inner man was originally created, but his body was created later, when Scripture says: “And the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground” (Gen. 2:7), so that the word “created” (Gen. 1:27) refers to the spirit, and “created” to the body. But at the same time, they lose sight of the fact that a person could only appear as a man and a woman through his body. For although a very subtle consideration is expressed, that the mind itself, in which man is created in the image of God, i.e. a certain rational life is associated, on the one hand, with the truth of eternal contemplation, and on the other, with the management of temporary objects and, thus, a person is, as it were, both a man and a woman, for in the first case the mind is a deliberative force, and in the second - an executive one; however, with such a distinction, the image of God would, strictly speaking, only be that side of the mind that would be related to the contemplation of immutable truth. From the point of view of this concept, the Apostle Paul calls only the husband the image and glory of God, while he considers the wife to be the glory of the husband (1 Cor 11.7). So, although outwardly, in body, persons of different sexes represent what is internally understood about one human mind, yet a woman, being a woman in body, is also renewed in the spirit of her mind into the knowledge of God, in the image of the Creator. And just as women are not excluded from the grace of renewal and restoration of the image of God, although their gender designates something else, why only man is called the image and glory of God, so in the same way at the creation of man, woman, for woman - man, of course, had the same rational mind, and therefore was created in the image of God. But since (the writer of everyday life) wanted to emphasize the unity of the union (man and woman), he said: “And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him.” And so that no one would think that only the spirit of man was created, he added: “Male and female he created them” (Gen. 1:27), making it clear that bodies were also created. And since anyone could suspect that initially one person was created, who contained both sexes, (the writer of everyday life), having first used the singular in order to emphasize the unity of the union, then uses the plural: “He created them. And he blessed them” (Gen. 1:27–28). But as I already said, we will talk about all this in more detail when we examine the further narrative of Scripture about the creation of man. Now we should dwell on the fact that having said: “And it became so,” (the writer of everyday life) then adds: “And God saw everything that He had created, and behold, it was very good” (Gen. 1:30–31). In this case, we are talking about the power given to a person and the ability to eat seed-bearing grass and tree fruits. The words: “And it became so” here should be attributed to what God gave people as food, otherwise we would have to admit that people multiplied and filled the earth already on the sixth day, and yet, according to the testimony of the same Scripture, this happened many years later. That is why these words were spoken only when man was given the ability to eat (herbs and fruits) and he, according to the word of God, learned about it; moreover, he recognized it, and did not immediately begin to eat, because in this case the Scripture, following the accepted order of narration, would necessarily indicate the action that had taken place with the words: “And they took and ate,” as was done, for example, in the case of the collection of water, when after the words: “Let the water that is under the sky be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear. And it came to pass” it says: “And the waters were gathered together” (Gen. 1:9). It is also worthy of consideration that the creation of man is not specifically mentioned, as is the case with many other things: “And God saw that it was good” (Gen. 1:10, 12, 18, 21, 25), but only when both creation and the given power to rule and eat have already been said, it is added: “And God saw everything that He had created, and, behold, it was very good” (Gen. 1:31). Indeed, what did man not deserve to have special approval expressed about him, as well as about everything created on other days? Or why was this said about cattle, beasts and creeping things created (like man) on the sixth day? Is it really because they all deserved separate approval, but man, created in the image of God, did not? Or perhaps because he was still imperfect, for he had not yet been placed in paradise? What can I say? Unless the Lord foresaw that man would sin and would not stand in the perfection of the image of God. For when a created thing remains as it was created, it is individually good, but together it is very good. After all, the word “very” was not used in vain. And the members of the body, although they are good individually, are much better together. If, for example, we saw a beautiful eye separately from the body, we would hardly consider it so beautiful. However, even that which, as a result of sin, loses its former beauty, in no case reaches such a level (insignificance) that it is not in its own way good in the composition of the whole. Man before the Fall was, without a doubt, good, but Scripture is silent about this, but rather speaks of what will happen, for if he is good in himself, then even better in general. Thus (the Scripture) both speaks of the present and predicts the future. God is the most good creator of all natures and the most just provider of sinners; so that although something individually becomes ugly as a result of sin, the universe is beautiful even with it. But this and much more will be discussed in the following books. You might be interested in: