[Milton-L] yet once more

Horace Jeffery Hodges horacejeffery at gmail.com
Sat Apr 5 00:55:37 EDT 2014

Adam seems to think that the tree was set apart as sacred, as we see in PL

Perhaps thou shalt not Die, perhaps the Fact
Is not so hainous now, foretasted Fruit,
Profan'd first by the Serpent, by him first [ 930 ]
Made common and unhallowd ere our taste;

The tree thus need not be evil to cause death; holiness can also be a
deadly force. Milton appears to have Adam thinking already in Levitical
categories of holy, common, unclean, and pure.

Possibly, the fruit really does have a deadly force within, the force of
holiness, which acts in judgment upon them in their unclean act of
disobeying the divine command.

Jeffery Hodges

Ewha Womans University
Seoul, South Korea

Novella: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00E18KW0K (*The Bottomless Bottle of

 (*The Bottomless Bottle of Beer*)

Blog: http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/ (*Gypsy Scholar*)

Doctoral Thesis: "Food as Synecdoche in the Gospel of John and Gnostic

Ph.D., History, U.C. Berkeley
M.A., History of Science, U.C. Berkeley
B.A., English Language and Literature, Baylor University

Home Address:

Dr. Sun-Ae Hwang and Dr. Horace Jeffery Hodges
Gunyoung Apt. 102-204
Sangbong-dong 1
Seoul 131-771
South Korea

On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 1:36 PM, James Rovira <jamesrovira at gmail.com> wrote:

> Richard Strier's reading (below) describes well my first impressions of
> reading PL and the impressions I've always had -- that the nature of the
> fruit doesn't matter -- but I've also held this idea along with the idea
> that the tree of the knowledge of etc. was somehow unique within the Garden
> of Eden, as is the tree of life. The two ideas are neither necessary to one
> another nor incompatible, and I would have never questioned this second
> idea until John Leonard's recent post.
> The two questions we have at hand are:
> 1. Is there some physical quality about the fruit that caused Adam and Eve
> to fall? I think this option is actually unacceptable within Milton's
> universe, as it would make "evil" a created thing, so by extension would
> make Milton's God the author of evil. I think we have to exclude this
> possibility from our readings.If we did believe this, though, then we would
> have to believe that the tree of the knowledge of etc. was indeed unique in
> the garden.
> I would also argue that Milton explicitly existentializes the
> communication of evil with this line:
> "Our Death the Tree of Knowledge grew fast by,
> Knowledge of Good bought dear by knowing ill."
> Adam and Eve weren't to know good by having it communicated to them
> directly. They would instead learn what evil is through disobedience, and
> then learn what good is by its contrast with evil.
> Once we've resolved the theological question (to the extent that we can),
> though, we're still left with this question:
> 2. Is the tree of the knowledge of etc. a unique tree or not? It's still
> possible for the tree to be unique without it being a means of -physically-
> transmitting evil to Adam and Eve.
> I think this question still has some validity as the tree of knowledge
> etc. is indeed a physical thing planted in the middle of the garden
> alongside the tree of life.
> I don't think there are enough textual clues about the nature of this tree
> in PL to answer our question, but there's one thing very much bugging me
> about the tree of life.
> As has been pointed out, this tree is "ambrosial," which of course is the
> food or drink of the gods in Greek mythology, the food or drink that
> confers immortality upon those who consume it. Milton appropriated Greek
> myth here to describe the Biblical tree of life. This usage indicates,
> however, that the tree of life was somehow, by nature, life conferring --
> the actual eating of -that particular fruit- from -that particular tree- --
> which is physically differentiated from all other trees in Eden by being
> the most majestic -- is what confers eternal life:
>   "And all amid them stood the Tree of Life,
>   High eminent, blooming Ambrosial Fruit"
> These trees are found in heaven so that angels can feed upon them:
> "though in Heav'n the Trees
>   Of life ambrosial frutage bear,"
> So I take it that one tree of life from among the many such trees in
> heaven has been placed on earth so that if Adam and Eve so choose they too
> may partake in eternal life. But again, in this case, the choice isn't
> purely existentialized: there appears to be something inherent in the fruit
> of the tree of life that is life-conferring.
> Not to mention that the tree of life makes an appearance in the Book of
> Revelation at the end of the age.
> So here's what bugs me: the text of PL leads us to believe (by reasonable
> inference) that the tree of life is, by nature, eternal-life-conferring,
> but the tree of knowledge of good and evil is only significant as an
> -option-. It's not similarly death-conferring. The two trees aren't truly
> parallel.
> That just bugs me.
> Jim R
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Richard A. Strier <rastrier at uchicago.edu>wrote:
>>  The point -- again -- is not what things are but what God commands.
>>  That's the point of the analogy with Luther's Eucharistic theology.  He
>> thought the Real Presence was everywhere, and that God could have made a
>> chestnut Eucharistic.  The point is not where He is, but where He wants us
>> to find him.  The idea that there is something special about the fruit of
>> the forbidden tree is (again) what Satan convinces Eve to believe -- a
>> belief that, of course, he mocks later.
>>  RS
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at
> http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20140405/76c61a5b/attachment.html>

More information about the Milton-L mailing list