Page:Legends of Old Testament Characters.djvu/37

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
III.]
EVE.
15

III.

EVE.[1]

THAT man was created double, i.e. both male and female, is and has been a common opinion. One Rabbinical interpretation of the text, "And God created man in His own image, male-female created He them," is that Adam and Eve were formed back to back, united at the shoulders, and were hewn asunder with a hatchet; but of this more presently. The Rabbis say that when Eve had to be drawn out of the side of Adam she was not extracted by the head, lest she should be vain; nor by the eyes, lest they should be wanton; nor by the mouth, lest she should be given to gossiping; nor by the ears, lest she should be an eavesdropper; nor by the hands, lest she should be meddlesome; nor by the feet, lest she should be a gadabout; nor by the heart, lest she should be jealous; but she was drawn forth by the side: yet, notwithstanding all these precautions, she has every fault specially guarded against.[2]

They also say that, for the marriage-feast of Adam and Eve, God made a table of precious stone, and each gem was a hundred ells long and sixty ells wide, and the table was covered with costly dishes.[3]

The Mussulman tradition is, that Adam having eaten the bunch of grapes given him as a reward for having preached to the angels, fell asleep; and whilst he slept, God took from his left side a woman whom He called Hava, because she was extracted from one living (Hai), and He laid her beside Adam. She resembled him exactly, except that her features were more delicate, her hair longer and divided into seven hundred locks, her form more slender, her eyes softer, and her voice sweeter than Adam's. In the meantime Adam had been dreaming that a wife had been given to him; and when he woke, great was his delight to find his dream turned into a reality. He put

  1. It is unfortunate that I have already written on the myths relating to the formation of Eve in "Curiosities of Olden Times." I would therefore have omitted a chapter which must repeat what has been already published, but that by so doing I should leave this work imperfect. However, there is much in this chapter which was not in the article referred to.
  2. Rabboth, fol. 20 b.
  3. Eisenmenger, i. 830.