FAQ

There is no difference between a "woman" and a "wife"; that is not the issue. What differs are the two accounts of the creation of the world and of man, which comprise the 1st and 2nd chapters of the Book of Genesis, respectively.

The oral tradition, originating from Moses, existed in profound antiquity in several variants; they were recorded quite late, around the 9th to 7th centuries B.C. One variant of the creation account was recorded in the Northern (Israelite) Kingdom, the other in the Southern (Judean) Kingdom. It is possible that there also existed separate sub-versions, likewise reflected in the written tradition. During the compilation of the final redaction of the text, which was completed in the period of the Second Temple (late 6th century B.C.), both variants of the account were included in the text, because they differ significantly and mutually complement each other.

The first account speaks more to the sequence of events during the creation of the world; its main idea is progressive creation, where increasingly complex created things appear not simultaneously, but one after another. The first account concludes with the words of Gen 2:3 (the division of the text into chapters and verses was done in the Middle Ages and is not always felicitous). The second account, conversely, speaks predominantly of the meaning and "inner" logic of the creation of the world, abstracting itself from the sequential chronology of events.

This is particularly evident in Gen 2:5. The first account speaks of the creation of man, stating that he was created in the image and likeness of God on the sixth day of creation, that humanity as a phenomenon encompasses both male and female, and that man was appointed to have dominion over creation. The second account conveys that the creation of man gives meaning to the entirety of creation, that man consists of spirit and flesh, that he is endowed with freedom and responsibility before God, and that human beings (male and female) are created in need of one another and mutually complement each other.

The word "rib" in the modern Russian translation sounds traditional, but is highly unfortunate. In the original text and in translations into ancient languages, the woman was created from the "side" or "flank" of the man; into modern language, it would be better translated not as "rib", but, say, as "aspect". As you can see, there is no contradiction here, but rather a mutual complementarity of two accounts presented from different perspectives.