Chapter 300 of 401

The Literal Meaning of Genesis

The Literal Meaning of Genesis

250 NOTES terial substance created by God? This is the problem of this chapter.

"Gens 1.26, >Msen.1.27. 5%Free of any such activity": hoc vacans (z). The pronoun in the abl. with vacans refers back to the notion contained in agebatne aliquid. The reading hoc vacans apparently has the support of all MSS collated by z, and it is found also in Pal. Bod reads boc vagans. Haec vacans is the reading of m, but no MSS authority is cited for it.

60Cf. Wisd. 7.24-25. 61Cf. Wisd. 8.1. 62The word "heaven" in Gen. 1.1 refers to the angels conceived of as created in a formless state, and the creation of light in Gen. 1.3 refers to their illumination and formation. In reality, Aug. points out, they were created and formed at one and the same moment. The first day, therefore, is taken to mean the whole company of angelic spirits. See 1.9.15-17; 1.17.32; 2.8.16.

63The conclusion reached in this chapter is put forth modestly as a probable solution to the problem Aug. has been considering. He has been speculating about the creation of the human soul and has asked where its causal reason (if any) was placed in the days of creation. He has considered five hypotheses, finally adopting the fifth as probable:

1. There was no causal reason (ratio causalis) of the soul laid away in created works; there was only the eternal reason (ratio aeterna) in God. But this does not explain the statement in Gen.

1.27 that God created man on the sixth day. See 7.22.33.

2. The causal reason was laid away in some undetermined spiritual creature. But no such creature has been mentioned; and if there were any such creature, it would have no other function than to beget the soul. This is hard to comprehend. See 7.22.33.

3. God placed the causal reason of the soul in the spiritual and intellectual creation (the angels) made on the first day. But it is hard to understand how the human soul could be the child of an angel or angels (7.23.34). Aug. does not elaborate on this difficulty here, but in 10.5.8 he observes that this explanation i is

↑ Back to top

↑