A Thank You to the Professor

One thing that I have noticed throughout this semester is that this class has related to many of my other courses I am taking this year. In my human sexuality class, as I am studying for my final, there is a whole section about Augustine, his views on the sinfulness of sexual desire, and his views based on Adam and Eve. In fact, in my text, it says that the story of Adam and Eve has contributed to many negative views on sex. And as we stated in class, Augustine interpreted the covering of genitals (and how sex was generally practiced privately) as a sign that sex was sinful in general, since it was driven by passion, rather than by will. I just thought it was very interesting and I thought you would find it satisfying to know how important your course really is.
Another thing that striked me, and most likely why I absolutely had to email you, is that in my Genetics class, our professor was talking about the scientific basis of a common ancestor (and actually used the term Adam and Eve to describe them!) What we were learning was that a Y-chromosome and Mitochondrial DNA can be used to trace common ancestors. It has been used over time to confirm or deny ancestry of modern people who claim to be related to famous figures (one of the examples used in class was Thomas Jefferson). Anyways, it was found that humans have a common ancestor from around 100,000 years ago, and what makes this unique is that it is much later than most other species common ancestors. The common ancestor of a chimp, I believe, was about 3 million years ago. Furthermore, they used their genetic screening to determine the origin of this common ancestor, and it resided in northeastern Africa (around the Nile River). Our professor also pointed out that there is evid
ence showing that an event recently after the origin of man almost caused man to become extinct. He did not mention the Ice Age, but rather a flood (Noah's Ark) or volcano. I thought this was absolutely incredible and I thought you would like to know about. And maybe, if you already haven't done so, you could further research this and use it for one of your books!
Also, I decided to look at Michelangelo's depiction of Gen 2-3, many different images.
When I saw the depiction of Adam and Eve's expulsion from Eden, I noticed that the snake was anthropological, half man, half serpent. This, of course, comes from the notion that the serpent was Satan. Also, I noticed that Adam and Eve before the fall were much more beautiful, and after the fall, they are depicted much darker, Eve has a more deformed face, and they seem to be in great pain. This obviously manifested the punishments. The human-serpent is also seen giving Eve the fruit, which shows Michelangelo's own interpretation of Genesis. Michelangelo also depicted Genesis 1 on the cieling of the Sistine chapel, not just Genesis 2-3. In his creation of Adam, the much more famous piece, Adam is seen almost completely created, right before God touches him. This, of course, is somewhat of a depiction of Genesis 2, in which God infuses Adam with the breath of life. But here, rather, Michelangelo interpreted this breath of life as a spark of life, in which God makes Adam alive
by his touch. Also, the many angels around him represent the multiplicity of beings we discussed in class. Each angel has a different facial expression, which of course comes from the Vita, in which some angels support the creation of Adam, while others don't. In his depiction of the creation of Eve, I noticed that Eve was created from Adam's rib, while he is asleep on a dead tree, that has been cut in half. Here, unlike the creation of Adam, God is seen much older and wiser. Also, as a Catholic, I cannot help but look at this depiction of Adam as a comparison to Christ. The tree is like a cross, and Adam almost looks dead upon it. I believe this depiction attempted to connect Adam with Jesus, much like Augustine and many of those after him. This, of course, manifests the common belief that Jesus was what made the Genesis story go "full circle," in which Jesus was the second Adam, and the last.

A Final Note

This course has taught me many different concepts relating to both the Garden of Eden story, and beyond. It has taught me the importance of original texts, and the significant impact of interpretations of the two creation stories presented in Genesis 1-3. It has had significant impacts in world of religion, particular in Muslim, Jewish, and Christian traditions. The story itself not only depicted the creation of the earth and mankind, but also the etiologies of multifarious traditions that are significant in today's society. The two stories also provide a basic infrastructure for various theories, such as feminist and anti-feminist view points, abolitionist and white supremacy views, gay marriage advocates and opponents, etc. Many significant moments in history trace their conflicts back to this ancient story, such as the Civil War (in which slavery was a major issue), the medieval and colonial Witchcraft trials, and many others. Furthermore, one of the greatest works of fiction, Paradise Lost, provides much of its basic story line to the book of Genesis.

One of the key points emphasized in this course was the importance of the original text, proper translation, and proper interpretation of the text. Many times, authors of the articles and essays read traced many of their beliefs back to the Genesis stories, but incorrectly quoted the actual text. Of course, this leads to misinterpretation of the text. Rather than reading interpretations of texts, one must initially read the actual text of Genesis, and form their own basic interpretations. Others can distort the text to favor their argument, or simply misinterpret what the original author intended to say. Another key aspect learned in this class was the concept of close reading. The Genesis text was not originally written down, but rather was written down after centuries went by. The Genesis story was originally spread by word of mouth. Thus, the text should be read with an open mind, rather than take completely literally. Furthermore, proper translation of the earlier texts is another significant concept to grasp before interpreting the book of Genesis. Since Hebrew has no vowels and is rather difficult to translate, one must recognize the various possibilities of what the actual text, without translation, means. For instance, the use of the term Adam could mean a single male individual or could represent all of mankind, male and female, since the original Hebrew word can be used in both cases.

Another significant part of this course was learning how various traditions were not originally stated in the Genesis text. For instance, documents such as the Vita, Paradise Lost, Jewish midrash, and New Testament readings have provided a basic infrastructure for various beliefs. Biblical figures in Christian tradition did not originate in the Genesis text, but rather from later interpretations by Jewish and Christian scholars. The Christian concept of Lucifer/Satan came from both the Vita and more popularized by Paradise Lost, but no indication of the snake actually representing the devil was present in the Genesis text. Thus, this course effectively emphasized the notion that many traditions do not arise from reading of an earlier text, but rather from other individual interpretations of the text, or interpretations of interpretations, and so on. It is important to read original texts yourself and forming individual opinions, rather than hearing another's opinion.

Another key concept of the Genesis story and this course is the historical development and viewpoints of human sexuality. The Genesis 2-3 story has been suggested to be an etiology not only for marriage, but for sexual attraction. Because of this, many scholars, such as Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, have condemned various sexual acts and promoted a more celibate lifestyle, in which one focus' on God. Many have viewed that the Genesis story is a clear indication that sex should only be for procreation, and that sex purely for sexual pleasure is wrong and sinful. However, over time, especially in more contemporary writings, the Genesis story has been used as a basis to promote a life of sex for procreation, and suggested that single men (even if in the clergy) were inferior to those men who had a women. This of course originated from Genesis, but opposed the views of Augustine and other earlier scholars. Thus, the Genesis story has much room for interpretation, and has been a basis for the arguments and theories based on human sexuality. It has also been had a significant impact on the lives of women. Anti-feminists used the story as a means of proving the inferiority of women, while feminists use the story as a means of promoting equality of the sexes. The Genesis story leaves plenty of room for interpretation, which makes it even more interesting!

On a final note, it is important to realize that the Genesis story, especially with the advent and evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution, is merely a story, passed down from generation to generation by word of mouth, written down years after it was originally told. It was an ancient attempt to explain various etiologies and traditions relating to human nature. Rather than literally interpreting the creation of the world form these texts, readers are encourage to interpret the text as a means of seeing how this ancient culture saw the distinction between humans and the rest of nature. Though the Genesis story has a basic, prominent place in many different religions and cultures, modern technology and science have provided humans with more possible and theoretically more likely ways in which mankind came into being. As such, it is important to not take the story literally, but to interpret the story as a piece of history, and elucidates the origins of multifarious aspects and beliefs ingrained in cultures around the world.

Modern Christianity: Male Supremacy and Gender Equality

The Head of the Woman is the Man: Susan Foh

Foh argued that the two creation stories complemented one another to give a "complete picture," rather than just one story being true and the other false. She argued that the reason Eve was created from Adam's bone was because it signified her correspondence to man (not superior/inferiority), man being the beginning and woman being the end of the creation, Adam as the source of all mankind, and the one flesh principle essential to the institution of marriage. Also, she believed that the creation of woman did not demonstrate her natural inferiority to man, but rather her subordinate role or function as a human being to man. Man should be the leader, while women should be man's helper. However, there was no indication of this role in Gen 2-3 until the punishments, and thus, woman was not born naturally subordinate to man. Thus, this argument seemed invalid.

Also, Foh stated that the fact that Adam named woman, which he did also with the animals in order to demonstrate his authority over them, was reason enough for establishing man's authority over woman. This argument seemed very valid, considering that Adam did name Eve. But rather, this may not have demonstrated authority, but rather a divergent task given to Adam. It was not a superior function given to Adam, but rather his task as the original creation of God to do so. Thus, this was not a demonstrate of Adam's authority over woman, but rather a manifestation of one of his many tasks given to him by God.

Foh also discussed the different principles that existed before and after the Fall. The before principles indicated that man and women were equal, with different roles, in which women's role was subordinate to man, and husband and wife would become one flesh. After the fall, however, Foh, unlike many other interpreters, believed that these principles still were held to be true. All of these did still hold to be true, but the principle that existed before the fall, in which woman was subordinate to man in function, seemed contradictory to the fact that they were created equal. Since they were created equal, their functions to should be equal. Women's helping of man was in no way subordinate, but rather equal. This was where Foh made errors. There was no explicit statement in Gen 2-3 that stated before the fall, Eve had a subordinate role to man. It was the punishments that indicated that woman shall be ruled over her husband. But again, Foh correctly pointed out that the punishment did not change the roles of woman and man. Rather, the punishments prophesized the roles of woman and man in relationships because of the consequences of the Fall. Foh also pointed out that since men and women were one in flesh, their sins, guilt and reaction were one in the punishments. This was why both Adam and Eve experienced the effects of the Tree simultaneously. The differences in sexes were merely a result of the sin and judgment that resulted from the disobedience of the two beings.

Next, Foh discussed the validity of various texts from the New Testament, establishing the role of women in society. She came to the conclusion that the texts hold it true that women could not be ministers or demonstrate authority in church, but were allowed to pray and even teach in church. This was clearly a contradictory statement, since teaching demonstrated authority, which Timothy clearly denied to all women. Thus, Foh's arguments seemed contradictory, much like when she stated that women were equal to men but had unequal roles. A person's role in life is essentially how their equality to others is judged. Thus, unequal roles means inequality in life.

Eve and Adam: Genesis 2-3 Reread

Phyllis Trible beautifully argued against the subordination and inequality of women caused by Gen 2-3. She urged society to reread the texts that strongly influenced the superiority of man over woman. First of all, she discussed the ambiguity of the word for Adam as an argument against this. Adam could be used to describe a man or humankind generically. It could also mean that Adam meant an androgynous creature, with both male and female characteristics. In Gen 1, Adam was created in one act, both male and female, suggesting an androgynous creature.

Furthermore, Trible's argument against the belief that man's creation before woman was an indication of his superiority was both beautiful and very well stated. In Gen 1, humans were created last, even though they were explicitly stated as the dominant creatures on the planet. Thus, woman's creature after man was not necessarily a statement of her inferiority or superiority, but it could be interpreted both ways. Thus, Trible exquisitely and effectively negated this argument. Furthermore, the explicit creation of woman as man's helper has been widely interpreted as another manifestation of woman's subordination to man. However, Trible explained that God, animals, and woman had all been described as man's helper. Thus, this was not an indication of authority, since God above all other's had authority, and he was Adam's helper as well. Trible elucidated further, stating that "God is the helper superior to man; the animals are helpers inferior to man; women is the helper equal to man." Well said.

Trible also argued against the belief that woman's creation from man's rib demonstrated her inferiority. However, she indicated that man was asleep when woman was created and thus had no part in her creation. Rather, her creation from his rib rather than dust merely distinguished the two creatures as male and female, but since they had the same creator, they were equal in the image of God. Furthermore, she stated that the notion that Eve was created from Adam's rib merely established her equality to man, since she was created from man himself. She was man's flesh, and thus, equal.

Lastly, Trible discussed the snake's temptation and the Fall of man. Many believed that since Eve was the first to be tempted, she was clearly the inferior creature. However, Trible explained that there was no indication in the Bible stating that woman was picked by the snake for any particular reason. Furthermore, Eve demonstrated superior responsibility than Adam. Eve contemplate eating the fruit, and after deciding independently that the fruit was good to eat from, she independently chose to eat from the fruit. She made her own decision, without the authority of man. Adam, however, did not contemplate or question his wife's actions. Rather, he immediately ate the fruit without any contemplation. Thus, it was invalid to argue that the snake's initial temptation of Eve demonstrate her inferiority. It was also invalid to say that Eve was inferior by eating the fruit first, when Adam was the one who ate the fruit without even contemplating the consequences and without stating God's command to not eat from the Tree of Knowledge.

Overall, I thought Trible was superb!

I believe that Gen 2-3 should be read as a story, rather than as a literal interpretation of the creation of humans. It is merely a creation story, attempting to establish very etiologies of human nature. It should not be an infrastructure for strong and frigid beliefs, but rather as a story to entertain and to learn from. The fact that the story was not written down until centuries after it was told by word of mouth clearly establishes its lack of authority in religious laws. Cultures have based their entire religions and law systems on the Genesis 2-3 story. The subordination of woman and inequality in society arises partly because of this story. It should not be read literally, but more as a tale of entertainment. It should not be used to support or deny inequality.

Modern Judaism: Marriage and Gay Marriage

The Authorized Daily Prayer Book:

Here, Joseph Hertz discussed the importance of marriage in Jewish tradition. He claimed that marriage was apart of "the scheme of Creation," intended for all human beings. He then stated that the two purposes of marriage were "posterity and companionship." He discussed each of these in detail. He elucidated that posterity originated from Genesis, in which God commanded humans to be fruitful and multiply. He then pointed out the importance of children in the bible. For instance, when Abraham's wife had not yet bore a son at such an old age, he claimed that his marriage failed. In other words, without children, a man could not have someone carry on his work. It was through the children of couples that they would be able to make an impact on history. They would be unrecognized, and could not influence the future. As such, bearing children and having them carry on traditions and work of their parents was a form of immortality. Without Abraham's son, Abraham could not pass on his knowledge and work of God, and thus, would not be remembered.

Next, Hertz discussed companionship, which he also claimed originated from the book of Genesis, in which women are described as the man's helpmate. In fact, since women were created from man's rib, without women, men were incomplete. This also originated from Genesis 1, in which male and female were created together. Thus, if a man did not have a women, he would be lacking in completeness of body, soul, and spirit. Because of this, any sexual activity outside of marriage was considered an abomination in Judaism, which included homosexuality, bestiality, etc. Another important concept arising from this notion of companionship was monogamy. According to Hertz, the Creation story clearly demonstrated that men should establish union with one woman, since Adam's sole companion was Eve.

Furthermore, Hertz claimed that because male and female were created together and both in the image of God, both male and female shared equal dominion over the earth. Because of this, the wives of the Patriarchs all were equal to their husbands. This was also why, in the Ten Commandments, both the father and the mother were supposed to be honored by their offspring.

Homosexuality and the Order of Creation:

Samuel Dresner compared homosexuality to incest and sex with a beast. He claimed that homosexuality was a violation of the order of creation. His first argument was that since male and female were created together, male and female must find companions in one another. Furthermore, because it was not good for Adam to be alone, it was necessary for him to have a companion. He tried this with beasts, and only found completion through Eve. Thus, because of this, heterosexuality is the only accepted sexual act. However, just because one is homosexual, it does not mean they cannot have a companion. And on the other note, Adam was never given the choice of a male companion like he was given the option of animal companions. Thus, there was no point in Genesis in which Adam decided that sex with a member of the same sex was against nature. As such, homosexuality does not qualify to be on the same level as sex with beasts.

Dresner then pointed out that God commanded humans to reproduce, which is obviously impossible through sexual intercourse between members of the same sex. However, today, reproduction is possible through acts other than coitus. Many gay and lesbian couples have joined forces and contributed sperm and egg, and conception takes place in vitro. Thus, science and technology has allowed for reproduction amongst gay couples to occur.

He elucidated further that Genesis established the husband-wife relationship as apart of natural order, which can only be established through a heterosexual couple. However, as studies have shown, individuals in homosexual relationships can take on divergent gender roles. One member of the homosexual relationship takes on the "Wife" role, while another takes on the "husband." Thus, this relationship established in Genesis can still be fulfilled in homosexual couples.

Furthermore, because male and female were created together, Dresner explained that men were not fully human until they had a female mate. However, does this mean that anyone not having sex, including priests and other celibates, were not complete or less holy than others. Thus, Dresner's statement contradicts Christian doctrines, in which priests make a commitment to God and become celibate.

Dresner also stated that because God cursed the generations after Adam with a flood because of sexual deviation, this meant that homosexuality was an abomination. In fact, Dresner once again compared homosexuality with sexual deviations as whoredom, incest, and sex with beasts. He then stated that before the flood, Noah, his sons, and all male species of beasts were grouped with a female, and thus, because of this, heterosexuality was the only accepted sexual orientation. However, there was no statement in the Bible explaining this interpretation. From the text mentioned, there was no mention of sex between members of the same sex. Thus, homosexuality was merely interpreted as being apart of the sexual deviations spoken about in the Bible. Furthermore, the grouping of males and females in the story of Noah's ark was merely for the survival of all living species on Earth.

Dresner then explained that the frequent motif of family and the Patriarch and Matriarch relationship established in the Bible was a clear indication of the only acceptable form of human sexuality as being heterosexual. He explained that the concept of family was the only acceptable form of marriage, and the four features of the family were "home, permanence, fidelity, and mutuality." All four of these features, however, are also possible in homosexual relationships. Thus, Dresner clearly only assumes that heterosexuality is acceptable, when the fact is, homosexual relationships can be just as successfully monogamous and compassion as heterosexual ones.

Dresner contradicted himself numerous times in the text. He explained that the Greek tragedy of Oedipus was an indication of Greeks belief that homosexuality was a form of sexual confusion and could lead to tragedy. However, it was the Greeks that were notably acceptable of homosexual activity. One famous homosexual in Greek history was Alexander the Great, arguably one of the most celebrated Greek leaders in all history. Furthermore, this tragedy was merely fiction, and had no historical context. It's sole purpose was drama and entertainment. Furthermore, he compared the "disease" of homosexuality to the blind and deaf. In other words, homosexuality disables a gay man, and the gay man has no choice in the matter. However, he then claimed that homosexuality was a choice. Thus, he clearly contradicted himself, further deteriorating any authority he has in the concept of homosexuality and marriage.

Ever Since Adam and Eve:

This collection explained the multifarious attributes of human sexuality, how it was analogous and divergent to other species'. It began with a brief description of the general sexual activities between mammals. Men usually are polygamous, while females are usually monogamous. Males tend to compete for their wives. The author even noted that humans probably should be polygamous according the rest of nature, but the institution of marriage established by humans complicates this matter. The author then attempted to elucidate what makes humans different from the rest of the creatures on earth in this aspect of life.

Then, the author noted various instances of monogamy in nature. Female animals, especially as they become further along in evolution, tend to be more selective than males. This of course is because pregnancy and lactation require much more energy from the female. Thus, bearing children has much more energy costs for females than males, and thus a female has to be more selective. She also preferrably should have some sort of bond with her male mate, so that he can provide her with the protection and food during pregnancy and shortly after, a very vulnerable time for the female.

Also, where men produce 150 million sperm per day, women only produce about 450 eggs in an entire life time. Thus, men can father many more children than a women can bear. This is not just because of the costs of pregnancy for females, but because females only have a limited amount of eggs for only a fertile period in their life, whereas the males produce sperm their entire life. The author also noted that monogamy existed as apart of the natural selection mentioned by Darwin. The males compete for their wives in many species, and the female usually has not choice but to allow the physically strongest animal copulate with her, since he usually wins the battle. Thus, the "better genes" get passed on to the offspring of the two. Thus, monogamy is nature's way of preserving the good genes, and ridding nature of "bad genes." For instance, in humans, men and women usually choose their mates based on their appearance. What usually is most attractive to humans is a sign of health and fertility, since youth is usually associated with beauty. Thus, good genes will be passed on.

The author also noted that evolution has separated humans from the rest of the animal kingdom in their inclination to raise families and put much more time into the upbringing of children. Furthermore, humans and many primates have established the notion of infertile sex, in which sex is not just for procreation, but for the mere sexual pleasure associated with it.

Sexual jealous, according to the author, drives much of human monogamy. This appeared to be a purely human trait. Women of course tended to become more jealous when men were more emotionally involved, while men tended to be more jealous when their female mate was sexually involved with another. This of course leads to the idea of keeping sex private. If sex was not private, humans would all be extremely jealous of one another. Thus, monogamous and private sex were clearly and purely human.

According to studies, men had much more sexual partners than women. They usually went after younger women. This of course has its roots in science. Men choose the more attractive, which usually means youthful looking, mate because they appear to be fertile and to possess the best genes. Men are fertile until death, while women are only fertile for a limited time. Thus, women are much more selective of their mates.

Modern Islam: Two Viewpoints

Towards Understanding the Qur'an: Sayyid Abu al-A'la Mawdudi

Mawdudi began each of his arguments with a single or multiple Surahs. The first Surah he interpreted was Surah 2:34. In this verse, because all the angels were told to prostrate before Adam, Mawdudi argued that Muslim governments were set up in a similar way because of this. In other words, all government workers appointed have power over those they govern, whether the actions they order are lawful or not. However, Mawdudi pointed out that this verse more plausibly was a mere sign of the relationship between angels and man, not necessarily a way for Muslims to set up their governments. He next interpreted Surah 2:35, in which Allah commanded Adam and Eve to eat from every tree but one. He believed that this Surah confirmed that the tree was placed in the garden purely as a test. He pointed out that it was unnecessary to interpret the effects of eating from the tree, since the Qur'an did not say it. Rather, the tree should be interpreted as a test given to the original humans in Paradise to see how they react in face of temptation from Iblis. In the verse, there was no mention of the name of the tree nor the contents of what it would cause, unlike the Genesis 2-3 story. Thus, Mawdudi argued that the tree was merely a test, not a cause of the attributes associated with human beings.

He next interpreted Surah 2: 222, in which the uncleanliness associated with menstruation. Here, he noted that menstruation was not just an impurity, but also a deterioration in health that women go through. He noted that when the Qur'an stated to not approach women during this time, it meant that no sexual intercourse was appropriate during this time period, not that women should be treated as "untouchables." He next interpreted Surah 2: 223, in which the Qur'an stated how men and women should interact with one another. Because their mutual relationship must be like that of a farmer and his tilth, this meant that the act of sex was meant for both pleasure and the act of procreation. However, the primary goal of intercourse, of course, was reproduction, as he pointed out.

Mawdudi next interpreted Surah 4:1, in which the Qur'an explained that mankind was created from a single being. There are two interpretations to this. One could state that a single human being (gender not specified) was the source of all mankind, while another could state that this individual was male (Adam). However, Mawdudi elucidated that it does not explicitly state the sex of the individual, and thus, the "ambiguity" of the Qur'an must be maintained. Thus, no one should specify that the original human was male, but rather an individual whose gender was unknown.

He next interpreted Surah 4:3, in which marriage and polygamy were discussed. Mawdudi explained the many different interpretations of this passage. One was that there was no limit to the amount of wives men could have, and could subject these women to any oppression or inequality as they wished. Another was that Allah restricted Muslims to the limit of four wives so that he could plausibly treat them all equally. Mawdudi explained further that the interpretation that the limit of wives was four was the accepted tradition. However, it was important to note that every wife must be treated equally. Thus, there was a limit, since over four wives seemed implausible to Mohammed. In other words, if men could only handle one women, then he would only have one.

Next, Mawdudi interpreted Surah 4:34, which further established the relationship between men and women. He explained that this meant that God endowed one sex with certain qualities that the other sex lacked. Since both men and women lack qualities that the other sex lack, this qualified men as head of the family and women under his protection. He also pointed out that a women's duty to Allah was more important than her duty to her husband. Thus, if her husband commanded her to commit a sinful action, then she could refuse. Furthermore, the three punishments a man could commit to a disobedient wife (admonish them, not have sex with them, beat them), according to Mawdudi, did not have to be done all at once, and the particular punishment had "correspondence" with the fault.

Lastly, Mawdudi interpreted Surah 4:116-119, in which the alteration of God's creation was discussed. In other words, any act that did not fulfill the purpose for which God created it was considered a sin. Thus, any sexual act not meant to procreate was considered an abomination towards God and his creation. Thus, sodomy, oral sex, celibacy, sterilization, etc, were all viewed by Muslims as acts that went against God's purpose, and thus, sinful.

"The Issue of Woman-Man Equality in the Islamic Tradition": Riffat Hassan

First, Hassan revealed her two sources of studies into her argument for the equality of man and woman. These included the impact of Hadith literature and Jewish and Christian feminist theologian attempts to tract the origins of anti-feminish views. She then noted the three theological assumptions in all three religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) that contribute to the basic infrastructure of anti-feminism in religion. These included that: God's primary creation was man and woman was made from man's rib, woman was the direct cause of the Fall, and that woman was created for man, not just from him.

She first pointed out that the belief that Adam was God's primary creation was not derived from the Qur'an, but from the Bible. At no point in the Qur'an does it specify the gender of the original human. She even stated that there was "no categorical statement in the Qur'an to the effect that Adam was the first human being created by Allah." In other words, the use of the word Adam did not specify a specific gender or individual, but rather represented humanity as a whole. In fact, the term Adam was often replaced by generic terms for humanity.

Hassan further supported her arguments with more references to the language of the Qur'an. Because Adam was a generic term for humanity, Adam's mate could also be a generic term merely stating that the first human had a mate. The gender of the mate of the original human as unknown, and thus, this detail had no significance in the Qur'an and thus Allah did not view this as important. But rather, all humans originated from one human being. In fact, Hassan stated that if the term "Adam's zauj", which is often interpreted as Eve, was meant to be female, it would be zaujatun, rather than zauj. This was because zauj is the masculine form, while zaujatun is the feminine form. Thus, since the grammar of the Qur'an, when it does not specify gender usually was male, then the term zauj did not specify a woman. Because the details of gender were not revealed by the Qur'an, this should be interpreted merely that all human beings, rather than separate males and females, were created from a single source.

Hassan further used the Arabic language to argue for the equality of women when reflecting on the belief that women were created for man. She stated that in the Qur'an it stated that the term mate (ha) has been interpreted as female, since it has a feminine pronoun attached. However, Hassan pointed out that if it was meant to be female according to Allah, it would be written as hunna, not ha. The grammatical rules of the language merely make it required that ha was used. Thus, the gender of the mate was not specified, and is an insignificant detail. The use of the word kum, a masculine word in the language, often is interpreted as only referring to man. However, like she stated previously, this could be used to reference male and female together.

Another case of interpretation in which the language was translated incorrectly as "her", when it actually meant "his," makes Hassan question the motifs of Muslim leaders. If some aspects of the Qur'an were interpreted accordingly, women would be directly specified as having superiority to men because they would be the primary creature. Thus, it seemed that Muslim interpreters attempted to shy away from the idea that women are created superior to men.

Next, Hassan discussed how many Muslim traditions and beliefs originated from the Genesis 2 story, rather than the Qur'an. This of course referred to the creation of woman from Adam's rib, which was not stated in the Qur'an. Rather, Hassan believed, that this tradition resulted from the assimilation in Hadith literature. She then quoted two separate interpretations of the creation of woman, both of which differ, and even contradict the Genesis text. For instance, one stated that the woman was called Hawwa because she was created from a living thing, but rather, the Genesis 3 text actually stated that she was called this because she was the mother of all the living. This variation was clearly an attempt to distort the interpretations of the Genesis text in order to benefit the idea that men were superior to women. She then quoted Mawdudi, who believed that the discussion of women's creation was a waste of time. She, however, believed it was an issue, since society had interpreted the creation of woman as a demonstration of her inferiority. But it is obvious that the Qur'an showed that men and women were created from the same substance, in the same manner, at the same time, since all humanity had the same source.

Lastly, Hassan listed various collections from Sunni Islam. What she noted that all of the references were unreliable, and thus, had to be interpreted lightly and were weak arguments. She also noted that the mention of Adam's rib creating a women had no roots in the Qur'an but originated from Genesis 2. Thus, these interpretations had no valid source and lacked substance.

Differences Between the Qur'an and Genesis

1.) In the Qur'an, God taught Adam the names of the animals, and then, Adam told the angels the names of the animals. In Genesis 2-3, Adam named the animals by himelf, and there was no mention of angels. Thus, the Qur'an gave more power to God, and less power to Adam.

2.) In the Qur'an, the creation story included the fall of Satan, who was an angel known as Iblis. This was much like the Vita, in which Satan is told to worship Adam, and he refused to do so, and thus, God banished him from Heaven.

3.) In the Qur'an, the snake of Genesis 2-3 was replaced by Satan. Thus, the Muslims believed that Satan rather than a mere snake caused the fall of mankind.

4.) In the Qur'an, the menstruation of woman was mentioned, which was never mentioned in the Genesis story. Rather, the pains of childbirth was replaced by this menstruation discussed. Here, the Qur'an elucidated that this aspect of a woman's life was a time of impurity and uncleanliness, and thus, no touching of any kind must occur with woman during this time.

5.) In the Qur'an, both divorce and marriage were discussed, but neither of this were directly mentioned in Genesis 2-3. Marriage may have been mentioned in Genesis 2-3, but the word 'marriage' was not directly used to describe it, but rather the act of a man "clinging to his wife."

6.) In the Qur'an, it was explicitly stated that men were a degree above woman. There was no action of a woman that indicated that she was subordinate to men. In Genesis 2-3, it has been interpreted by many scholars that because of Eve's faults in the story that woman are subordinate to men, but it was not explicitly stated as much as in the Qur'an. Furthermore, when in Genesis 2-3 it stated and gave a reason why the husband should rule over their wives, in the Qur'an it just stated that men were above women. Thus, Allah created men and women without the presence of equality, which goes against Genesis. In Genesis 1, men and women were both created in the image of God and at the same time. It was not until Genesis 3 that women were subject to their husband's will. Thus, in the Qur'an, Allah, rather than Eve, was responsible for the inequality between man and woman. In fact, the Qur'an explicitly stated "Men are in charge of woman, because Allah hath made one of them to excel the other."

7.)In Genesis 2-3, the snake (Satan in the Qur'an) only spoke to Eve. In the Qur'an, however, Satan spoke to both Adam and Eve. The Qur'an also had Adam and Eve tasting the fruit together, rather than Eve eating the fruit initially and then giving it to her mate to eat. Thus, the Qur'an did not have any specific time in which Eve demonstrated inferiority or superiority to Adam in the Garden. Rather, it was just explicitly stated that women were inferior to men, because Allah made it so. Thus, the Qur'an gave much more power and significance to Allah, where in Genesis 2-3, humans were given much more power, and determined their own destiny. Allah made everything happen, and at the end of each passage, it was stated how "all-knowing" or "all powerful" Allah was.

8.) In the Qur'an, man was created from potter's clay of black mud, while in Genesis 2-3, man was created from the dust of the soil. In both versions, God (or Allah in the Qur'an) breathed into Adam, but in the Qur'an this was called "My spirit" rather than the "breath of Life."

9.) The Qur'an had much more emphasis on the fall of Iblis, who later became Satan, much like the Vita and Paradise Lost. Because Satan refused to worship and respect Adam, the two would be enemies. However, in Genesis 2-3, the snake and man were enemies because the snake tempted them in the Garden. Thus, the Qur'an was much more like the Vita. It emphasized Satan, rather than mankind's fall from glory.

10.) The Qur'an did not mentioned that man and woman were created in God's image. There never seemed to be an actual fall of mankind, but rather, because of Satan's fall and because he would always be man's enemy, mankind would always be tempted. Thus, Allah commanded that the children of Adam "let not Satan seduce you as he caused your first parents."

11.) The Qur'an also spoke about how women and men should live and dress. This was much like Tertullian's On the Apparel of Women, in which he emphasized modesty, covering of the bosom, and hide their adornment. The Qur'an also stated that anyone who did not have a "match" should remain chaste. This emphasis on chastity was much like that of Augustine's, in which the chaste were glorified rather than looked down upon.

12.) The Qur'an included a section that mentioned different languages, but did not contain a story about how this was so. Rather than having humans being the cause of God "confusing" humans by making them talk in different languages, the Qur'an simply stated that Allah made different languages by himself. In other words, Allah was the ultimate creator, and He alone decided to create different languages. Human actions had no influence on his decision. Thus, the Qur'an once again emphasized the all-powerful and all-knowing powers of Allan. Human's had little to no influence on the decisions of Allah.

Social Applications II: The Shakers and the Oneida Community

In the autobiography of a Shaker, Evans explained the importance of the Orders of Generation and Resurrection. This originated from Gen 1: 26-27, in which male and female are created in the image of God. Evans explained that because of this, God must have both male and female counterparts. Thus, when God sent Jesus, who cleansed the sins of all descendants of Adam, the male Heavenly Father took human form to save all from their sins. In order to complete this "saving" full circle, the "Heavenly Mother" was sent down in the form of Ann Lee, who Shakers believed was the female form of Jesus. As such, Adam and Eve were the originally generated humans, both created in the image of God. And because of this, both a male (Jesus) and female (Ann Lee) divinity had to take on human form.

Furthermore, Evans explained that men represented wisdom of the woman, while women represented the love of the man. In other words, he agreed with a former philosopher we have read about, that the "glory of man" was woman, and the "glory of God" was man.

In the section entitled God Is Male and Female, Evans explained the reasoning behind the existence of a Heavenly Father and Mother. Because of Gen 1:26-27, which explained that male and female were created in God's image, he elucidated that male and female counterparts must exist in heaven. Thus, there must be a Heavenly Father and Mother. And because without a father, there can be no mother, and vice versa, there must exist these two celestial counterparts, based on the order of nature. Evans explained that because there is an existence of male elements, since frequently God is referred to as male, there "implies the existence of a counterpart."

In the section entitled The Shakers on the Fall of Man, Evans discussed the significance of the fall of mankind. First of all, he incorrectly stated that the fruit Adam and Eve ate was an apple, which was highly unlikely, considering apples do not grow in that georgraphic location in the world. However, he did explain that it was not the fruit itself that caused the fall of man, but rather their disobedience that caused it. He did not believe that it was the natural order of things that the man should rule over the wife, since most times in nature, the female rules in the work of reproduction. He also pointed out that the snake represented the "sensual" nature of the man, since it was the serpent who tempted the man into eating the fruit. This however goes against the text, since it was the wife, not the serpent, who initiated Adam to eat the "apple."

In Compendium, Evans explained Shakers believed in the eternal distinction of sex, and thus, since Adam and Eve were male and female counterparts, there must be a "Second Adam" (Jesus) and a Second Eve. Since Jesus was male, he could represent the male element of God, while Ann, who was female, represented the female spirit of God.

In the Divine Book of Holy and Eternal Wisdom, many different beliefs were demonstrated and explained. It traced many of these beliefs back to Genesis. In the beginning, all sources of existence had male and female principles or counterparts, which obviously originated from Gen 1: 26-27. It also traced some of its beliefs from Genesis 2, in which God decided to created Eve. In Bates version, God decided it was not good for Adam (in other words, God's male element) to be alone, and thus, needed the existence of his Mother Spirit to achieve natural order. Thus, God created Eve in order to complete the full circle of the natural order. The Book also denounced the notion that females had no soul, since they were not made in the image of God and were merely a machine for means of reproduction. It explained that this notion could be denounced by the fact that God existed in two deities, male and female. The Book also explained that in order for the sin of Adam and Eve to be redeemed, both a male and female form of a Savior was necessary to achieve this forgiveness and cleansing of sins. Thus, the Book constantly discussed the multifarious effects of the notion that God created male and female counterparts in his image. Since there was a fall of both man and woman, both man and woman must be saved by a male and female form of God, the Heavenly Father and Mother. The author then quoted Corinthians 11, which stated that "neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man." Thus, men and women are dependent on one another for existence, and thus, this explained why male and female were created together.

In the History of American Socialisms, many different propositions were listed. Some of these originated from the Book of Genesis. Proposition 5 originated from Genesis 2-3, in which husbands are given the ability to rule over their wives. In the Kingdom of Heaven, Noyes explained, this possession does not exist. Thus, the kingdom of Heaven was what existed before the fall of mankind. Proposition 14 originated also from Genesis 2-3, in which the origin of sexual attraction and lust may or may have commenced. It was indeed possible that the fall of mankind brought about the notion that sexual and bodily desires were evil. Thus, this proposition stated that the institution of marriage merely gave into sexual appetites and desires. This was because the sexual appetite was "starved" by years of waiting for marriage. Thus, this led to multifarious bodily desires and practices that were considered at the time shameful, such as masturbation, prostitution, etc.

Noyes also explained that the fall of mankind involved two distinct separations. One was a separation of Adam and Eve from God, in which they hide from him in Genesis 3, and a separation from one another, depicted by their shamefulness of their nudity to one another. These of course, as Noyes stated, were the two physical manifestations of original sin. As such, the redemption of these two separations was the means of cleansing one's self from original sin. Thus, Noyes explained that one must reconcile with God through the reconciliation of sins through the sacraments and practices of the Mass, and bring about the "true union of the sexes."

Noyes also suggested that life before the fall of man involved Eve loving Adam unconditionally, since she of course was his first neighbor. "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," was the second part of Golden Rule given to Christians by Christ. This idea, according to Noyes, originated from the concept of Adam and Eve. Thus, before the fall, in which the world was the "kingdom of heaven," all humans would love one another unconditionally. The existence of this "kingdom of heaven" on earth would essentially establish the immortality of mankind.

Noyes also attempted to seek the reasoning behind Gods punishments and the effect these punishments have had on mankind. The punishment placed on men and women, of course, had a great effect of reproduction. Because sex could lead to pregnancy, which of course led to painful childbirths, and even disease, it was looked down upon to commence in these acts outside of marriage. However, as Noyes explained, God made this so, and thus, it must be correct. In other words, he took a Thomas Aquinas approach to explaining the punishments of God.

Noyes further explained the punishments, explaining the punishment of forcing labor upon all humans. He explained that with out this labor, natural order would not persist, and there would also be no distinction or mingling of the sexes. This of course would be a very boring life without labor. He further elucidated that the reconiliation with God opens the way for reconciliation of the sexes. This of course allows for woman to be more free and open, which makes labor "more attractive." And by doing so, one can abolish all sin, and thus conquer death, and essentially choose the path to eternal life. He of course explained that eternal life was represented by the Tree of Life, which was mentioned in Genesis 2-3. Essentially, Noyes believed that the fall of mankind led to distortions of human perception and relationships. An attempt to correct and reestablish the natural order prior to the fall of man was also an attempt to achieve eternal life, since it was a heroic attempt to bring the kingdom of heaven upon earth.