Genesis 2 : A Feminist Interpretation
Genesis 2 presents an alternative creation story to that found in Genesis 1. In this story the universe is created first, then living things and finally humanity, with the female aspect of humanity being produced as God’s final creation. A cursory reading of the text of Genesis 2 appears to suggest that it is hopelessly Patriarchal both in intent and in implication. In this account Woman is produced almost as an after thought, and then only when 'all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air' had been tried first. The wider Patriarchal implications lie in the fact that this text clearly supports both the materialistic utilitarian system that supports Patriarchy in 'The West' through it's presentation of all living things as being present for the use of Man 1. Potentially most damaging is the presentation of marriage as being inevitable and necessary with the implication that those who are not in a classical marriage are somehow less than human. Feminist biblical interpretation seeks to offer alternative 'non-sexist, egalitarian'2 readings or, where relevant; readings that go 'against the grain' 3 of the text highlighting features that require further consideration. This is the method I will use in regard to my analysis.
Genesis reads; 'And the Lord God formed the man' 4 This passage does seem to present the man as having chronological precedence over the woman, which could be interpreted as providing a form of higher importance, though such an argument would; by its own logic place rocks, trees and water as more important than humanity. It also however provides more of an insight into the reasons creation of non-human lifeforms. These are created as companions for humanity, not explicitly for use as resources but to provide some form of relationality for humanity (for more see Deep Ecology). The account proceeds to state that after Adam had met with the various life forms: for Adam 'no suitable helper was found' 5 Adam therefore could not find the companionship with those that God had provided. This indicates a fault in the process of creation. Up until this point there is no indication of any form of difficulty in the process of creation. Each event consists of a process of God willing an event and the event occurring. At this point however something is different. God wills that Adam may have a companion, yet Adam rejects those companions he is presented with.
The solution to Adam's refusal of the companions presented by God is central to many arguments for the inferiority of females to males. The NIV translation follows the traditional translation of Gods response to this situation, 'The LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man' 6. Mary Phil Korsak in her literal translation of the Book of Genesis has an intriguing variation on this theme, 'YHWH Elohim built the side he had taken from the groundling into woman // He brought her to the groundling' 7 (groundling=Adam). The word 'side' is far less specific than 'rib' according to Korsak the Hebrew word in question: tsela is a generic term used to describe both a hill-side and the side of the tabernacle 8. A side of a being such as a human however is an indeterminate factor. Whereas we can determine with some degree of certainty where one rib begins and ends, determining the extent or even the nature of a human side is a quite different proposition. While humans may refer to their left or right sides, even their front or rear sides. It is not uncommon to refer to a person as having a many sides to their personality. It is even possible to refer to two or more sides to a human soul. It would not be an unfair proposition therefore to say that the original being created from the 'dust of the earth' in Genesis 2.7 was in fact divided into two equal beings. The original singularity became a self supporting plurality. Humanity therefore is thus made able to help itself and provide its own companionship. As both male and female were aspects of the original singleton both were present in Genesis 2.19, both male and female could, as a result claim to be the 'helped' and the 'helper'. This argument places our strength in our divergence, but does not place one half of the whole in the role of master or mistress.
Further in this argument it is notable that at no point in Genesis 2.4-25 is there a mention of the word 'sin'. The action of the woman in Genesis 3 has traditionally been regarded by the Christian Church as the original sin as it is seen as directly contravening Gods will as described in Genesis 2.16. The first use of the word 'sin' however is in Genesis 4.7 where God warns Abel that sin lies in wait. Anne Primavesti points out the disparity between the two situations in which God clearly describes the act of murder as sin, and yet we are led to believe by tradition that the act of eating a fruit is of equal status 9 . The absence of an explicit declaration that to eat the fruit is a sin allows for Genesis 2.16-17 to be interpreted in a different light. What is essentially placed before humanity is a choice between a life of comfortable ignorance or a hard, short, painful life; but one with the potential for wisdom. As a responsible parent God appears to advise against the latter choice in his phasing 'you must not' 10 but does not prevent them from making their own decision. Humanity clearly selects the latter and God respects that decision, clearly outlining the consequences to them11 and as a responsible parent does; allows his children to make their own way in the world, for they have flown the nest.
Genesis 2.4-25 seen in this light presents a picture of God as parent; working to produce a safe home for his/her children (for surely this represents the drive of all good parents). God helps his children to grow, yet respects their wishes. God advises her/his children yet does not dictate. God wishes for the easy road for his/her children, yet, in Genesis 3; respects their wishes when they seek to strike out on the difficult road of self-knowledge. Genesis 2.25 ends in a golden age of childhood in which a successful home has been created, arguably before the strains that occur with dawning of self awareness in Genesis 3 and puberty.
Sources Used:
1 - Genesis 2.16 , Genesis 2.18-19
2 - Joseph Abraham, 'Feminist Hermenutics and Pentecostal Spirituality: The Creation Narrative of Genesis as a Paradigm', Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies, Vol.6, Issue 1, Jan 2003, p.3.
3 - Ibid.
4 - Genesis 2:7
5 - Genesis 2:20
6 - Genesis 2:22
7 - Mary Phil Korsak, At the Start...: Genesis made new: A translation of the Hebrew text (Belgium: European Association for the Promotion of Poetry, 1992), p.7. / Genesis 2.22
Note: the use of the word groundling is an attempt to represent the common root between adamah (ground) and adam (man). Ibid p.196.
8 - Ibid p.196.
9 - Anne Primavesti, From Apocalypse to Genesis (Tunbridge Wells: Burns & Oats, 1991), pp.223-224.
10 - Genesis 2.17
11 - Genesis 3.16-19