And the man called the name of his wife, Eve, because she became the mother of all living. Genesis 3:20
Eve – Of course, we know that the name Eve is a corruption of the real text. The man did not call her Eve. He called her by the Hebrew name Havvah. Why is it important to make this change in the translated text? Because once we see what he really named her, other things come to light. In particular, we discover Adam’s second sin.
Immediately following the punishment, Adam names his wife. This seems innocuous enough, but it is not. Notice that this naming pattern is a repetition of the same process Adam enacted over the animal kingdom. In Genesis 2:19, Adam is allowed to “call” the animals according to their essential being. The same verb qara is used in both naming occurrences. It has the same implications as well, namely, authority over. The process of naming is the declaration of authority over the thing named. Adam fulfills the descriptive warning of the Lord regarding the woman by putting himself above her in an artificial hierarchy of his own making. By naming her, he elevates himself as her authority. It has been so ever since. Wherever the Fall dominates the relationship between men and women, men strive for authority over women. Notice that this is a result of the Fall. It is not part of the original design. It is not intended in the relationship between the zakar and the ‘ezer kenegdo. It comes into play because the man seeks revenge on the woman.
How can we make such a strong statement? Nahum Sarna offers an insight into Adam’s naming process that reveals a much deeper animosity.
Hebrew havvah, which seems to be an archaic form of hayyah, could mean “living thing,” life personified. This is how the Septuagint understood it when it rendered the name here Zoe. The vocalization suggests an intensive form, so that “propagator of life” is also a possible meaning. There might, in addition, be a word play involved, for Aramaic hivya means a serpent, as noted in Genesis Rabba 20:11; 22:2. In the Sifre inscription (I.A.31), the word for serpent is actually written hvvh. 
The possible implication here is shocking. If Adam chose the name havvah because of its relationship to the meaning “snake,” then we see that Adam not only asserts authority over Havvah but he also gives her a name that will forever remind her of her sin. In other words, Adam never forgives her! In fact, rabbinic legend suggests that after the birth of Cain and Havel (Abel), Adam left Havvah for 130 years and sought relationships among other beings. According to these rabbinic sources, this constitutes the first separation between married partners. It is hard to imagine that there is any other ground for this legend than the animosity engendered as a result of twisting the divinely-ordered complementary relationship into a hierarchy of control.
Imagine what would have happened if Adam had taken responsibility and forgiven his ‘ezer kenegdo? He would have acted according to the character of God. He would have remembered the Lord of creation as compassionate and merciful. Would there still be sin? Of course. He participated in it. But by not forgiving his wife, he perpetrates the brokenness rather than allowing healing to take place. He starts the downward spiral with the second sin.
We cannot undo the first sin. The door has been opened and it has taken residence in the house. But we can undo the second sin. We, men and husbands, can do what our father Adam did not do. We can forgive. We can restore the ‘ezer kenegdo by accepting our responsibility and granting her the grace she so desperately needs.
Topical Index: Havvah, Eve, sin, forgiveness, ‘ezer kenegdo, Genesis 3:20, serpent
 qara is also found in Genesis 1:5, 8 and 10; Genesis 2:19, 20, 23 and Genesis 3:9
 Nahum Sarna, , Genesis: The JPS Torah Commentary (The Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia: 1989), p. 29.
 Three references may be consulted about this legend. Maimonides, Guide for the Perplexed, Part 1, chapter 7; Talmud Eruvim 18A and Jerusalem Talmud Peah 1:1