Amos's River of Justice

Tag: Hebrews

  • The Genealogy of Adam and Eve

    The central tendency and probably the major cause of error in modern religion is the determination to separate male and female and define them as superior or inferior in relation to each other. This is often called ‘difference’ rather than inferiority, but it usually results in disadvantages for women. Even today the Catholic Encyclopedia states that women are inferior to men. (See Catholic Encyclopedia, Newadvent.org, Article, ‘Women’)

    “The female sex is in some respects inferior to the male sex, both as regards body and soul.”

    Christian fathers, such as Tertullion condemned women for the part Eve played in the Garden of Eden. But he must have known that the first chapter of Genesis is actually an independent creation story, while the second and third chapters were written by a different author and speak of traditions that are not Hebrew. The first chapter was written by ‘P’ or the priestly source. The second chapter was written by ‘J’, the J standing for Jehovah. The J source tends to be more politically minded, which can be seen in the segments attributed to him.

    In the first chapter, Elohim created humans, male and female. But the second chapter actually tells of the birth of gods, or of the man-god.

    In verse 23,

    “Said the man, This one at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman for she was taken from Man.”

    According to the Anchor Bible notes, Woman and Man are translated from ‘īš and ‘iššā. This assonance has no etymological basis in Hebrew. ((Speiser, E.A. “The Anchor Bible: Genesis”. Doubleday & Company, Inc. 1986))

    The Hebrews were persecuted by Isis,so it isn’t likely they would claim descent from her. This only makes sense if they were telling the history of their world, which included various people of that region and time period. It seems they were not speaking of themselves as an isolated entity.

    Some of the people in that region worshiped Adam as a god. Apparently the Greeks did because Luke, who wrote his gospel with the Greeks in mind, traced their lineage to Adam. This is in contrast to Matthew, who wrote for Palestinian Jews and traced their lineage to Abraham. As explained in The Community of Ancient Israel, genealogies establish identity as well as religious and political alliance. In our time they should serve to establish the identity of various people in the scriptures, but they are misunderstood and ignored.

    The story of Adam and Eve was not an allegory for human males and females. Yet, Christian theologians have claimed for two thousand years that we are all the children of Eve. Today this error is at the heart of Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

    See also:

    Adam, Noah and the Snake-king

    Nomads and City Dwellers: Institutions, Worldview

  • Cain and Abel in the Hindu Pantheon

    I should explain the reference to Cain that was in the first version of the Patriarchy article, and which I left out of this version. I wrote that in the Old Testament story Cain sinned because he forced the ground, which was how it was presented in “Mythology Among the Hebrews.” At the time I also thought it was meaningful that Cain was male. I think that approach may have created unnecessary confusion about the meaning of the myth. I suspect that the assumption that the Hebrew patriarchs are the model for modern patriarchy is incorrect, although the story of Cain and Abel wasn’t the best way to argue that point.

    In Mythology Among the Hebrews, the story had more to do with the age-old strife between nomads and city-dwellers. Cain, a solar figure was a builder of cities and an agriculturalist. Abel was a nomad. Their mutual animosity was a fact of life.

    I found another version of the story in Edward Moor’s “Hindu Pantheon.” Moor cites Mr. Wilford, who argued that the following is similar to the death of Abel.  It provides an interesting perspective on the Hebrew interpretation.

    “Iswara attempted to kill his brother Brahma, who, being immortal, was only maimed; but Iswara finding him afterwards in a mortal shape, in the character of Daksha, killed him as he was performing a sacrifice.” (Iswara is Siva or Mahadeva.)

    “There had subsisted for a long time some animosity between Brahma and Mahadeva in their mortal shapes; and the latter, on account of his bad conduct, which is fully described in the Puranas, had, it appears, given much uneasiness to Swayambhuva (Adam) and Satarupa (Eve); for he was libidinous, going about with a large club in his hand. Mahadeva was the eldest, and was indignant at seeing his claim as such disregarded in favour of Brahma, which the latter supported by such lies as provoked Mahadeva to such a point, that he cut off one of his heads in his divine form.”

    Later, Brahma, in his human shape, or Daksha, was found boasting that he ruled over mankind.

    “One day in the assembly of the gods, Daksha coming in, they all respectfully arose except Mahadeva, who kept his seat and looked gloomy, which Daksha resented; and reviled and cursed Mahadeva in his human shape, wishing he might ever remain a vagabond on the face of the earth; and ordered that he should be avoided, and deprived of his share of the sacrifices and offerings. Mahadeva, irritated, in his turn, cursed Daksha; and a dreadful conflict took place between them: the three worlds trembled, and the gods were alarmed.”

    The conflict escalated to the point that the gods separated them and effected a reconciliation. Eventually Daksha gave one of his daughters to Mahadeva in marriage. But later when this daughter, Devi, was treated disrespectfully by Daksha, she threw herself into the sacrificial fire. The battle between Daksha and Mahadeva resumed, and Mahadeva killed Daksha by cutting off his head. But before that, several of the gods were wounded in the battle, “particularly the Sun and Moon: heaven, hell, and the earth, trembled.”

    Sources:

    Moor, Edward. “The Hindu Pantheon”. T. Bensley, London. 1810.

error: Content is protected !!