I didn't think Adam had the capacity for error until Eve was created...

From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Tue Jan 21 2003 - 20:03:25 EST

  • Next message: Jim Armstrong: "RE: I didn't think Adam had the capacity for error until Eve was created..."

    I made this statement:

    You are saying that Adam demonstrated the capacity for error before the Fall?
    I didn't think he had it until Eve was created.

    And got these derisive responses:

    If Adam didn't have the capacity for error until after Eve was created from
    his rid,[sic] this means that God took the one perfect part of him to create

    Everything makes sense to me now!


    So He accidentally marred Adam in the process of creating Eve? Oh yes,
    there is that missing rib! I never made the link between a missing rib
    and capacity for error!

    I admire your dry sense of humor! JimA


    Where did I ever get such a sense of humor?

    Perhaps from Gershom Scholem, author of the Messianic Idea in Judaism. In the
    preface, Scholem is called the "master builder of historical studies of the
    Kabbalah." What does that have to do with Genesis and the fall? For that we
    look to Adolphe Franke:
    From Adolph Franke's The Kabbalah, the religious philosophy of the Hebrews.
    "In the Mishna (Haggiga Sec.2) we find this remarkable passage: "The story of
    Genesis (the Creation) is not to be explained to two men, the story of the
    Merkaba (Heavenly Chariot) not even to one, unless he be wise and can deduce
    wisdom of his own accord."

    "If we are to believe Maimonides, - who, although a stranger to the
    Kabbalah, could not deny its existence - the first half, entitled the "Story
    of Genesis," taught the science of nature, and the second half, called the
    "Story of the Chariot," contained a treatise on theology. This opinion was
    accepted by all the Kabbalists.

    So, the concensus among scholars of Jewish mysticism and the Kabbalah is that
    Genesis is allegorical since they're not allowed to reveal its real meaning.
    That is how they study it. So, what do they say?

    "The soul of all mankind was originally contained within Adam. Now its sparks
    were scattered throughout the terrestrial universe, and the continued
    existence of sin has ever more increased their dispersion. They are in exile
    and must be led home and restored to their primordial spiritual structure,
    which is at the same time, the structure of Adam and the structure of the
    Messiah." p.187 Scholem

    Then on page 227, "Man and God are each only a half finished, incomplete
    form. Man without God is really not man, adam, a sublime and spiritual being,
    but only dam, blood, a biological entity. He is lacking the a or alef, which
    is God, alufo shel olam, the master of the world. Only when the alef and dam,
    God and man, get together, the two form a real unity, and only then does man
    deserve to be called Adam. But how is such unity, ahdut, to be accomplished?
    By kisuf which means the constant striving for union with God. If man casts
    off all earthly or material elements and ascends through all the worlds and
    becomes one with God to the degree of losing the feeling of separate
    existence, then will he be rightly called adam, Man." Scholem

    Again from Adolphe Franke: "The first, says the Zohar text, is the Ancient,
    seen face to face. It is the supreme head, the source of all light, the
    principle of all wisdom, and can be defined only as unity. From this absolute
    unity, distinct from the various forms and from all relative unity, issue two
    parallel principles, opposite in appearance but inseparable in reality. One
    male or active is called Wisdom; the other passive or female, is designated
    by a word customarily translated as intelligence." p. 96

    So, if the structure of God is perfect unity including the male and female
    principles, then the structure of the Son of God must also contain male and
    female principles. The Jewish Messiah is said to share the structure of Adam
    before he had the feeling of separate existence from God, when dam was Adam
    and there was perfect unity.

    If Jesus is messiah in the Kabbalistic sense, and why shouldn't He be? Then
    somewhere in Christian texts there must be allegorical reference to the
    perfect unity of Jesus including male and female.

    I found these fascinating references to the messiah in Nag Hammadi texts, for
    example, the Gospel of Philip:
    "When Eve was still in Adam, death did not exist. When she was separated from
    him, death came into being. If he enters again and attains his former self,
    death will be no more."

    We do accept that Jesus conquered death, do we not? To do so, he must attain
    his former self, and forsake multiplicity for unity (with God/as God).

    The Gospel of Thomas:
    "They said to him, shall we then, as children, enter the kingdom? Jesus said
    to them,"...when you make the male and female one and the same, so that the
    male not be male nor the female female."

    Jesus said to her, "I am he who exists from the undivided."

    Jesus said,"I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she
    too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will
    make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."

    1 Corinthians: 15-22: As in Adam all men die, so in Christ all will be
    brought to life."

    This is what I had originally written that provoked the one line responses:

    You are saying that Adam demonstrated the capacity for error before the Fall?
    I didn't think he had it until Eve was created.

    Now you know why I didn't think Adam demonstrated the capacity for error
    until Eve was created. Because it was at that point that he was 'separated,'
    no longer enjoyed unity and was susceptible to desire which was not an issue
    when MALE AND FEMALE WERE ONE. When male and female were one, there was
    nothing to desire as everything was contained in one unity and perfection.
    With the creation of Eve, Adam was no longer complete in himself and neither
    was Eve. The first desire, now that desire could rise from the incompleteness
    and separateness of Adam and Eve, was to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge
    of Good and Evil. They did this together but as 'separated' beings.

    Now you not only understand what I was trying to say, but what the Kabbalists
    and the Gnostics also said which prompted it.

    Using non-canonical works seems to lead to my being misunderstood. I mean to
    give you good information and I find that there is a thread from the
    allegories in Genesis to gershom scholem and adolphe franke's interpretation
    of the Kabbalah to the coptic nag hammadi texts that suggests my remark that
    "I didn't think Adam had demonstrated the capacity for error until Eve was
    created," is absolutely appropriate, in line with all of these texts, their
    philosophies and the Biblical scholars who study them and no laughing matter
    at all. What I might point out is that in each derisive response the writer
    addressed the surface meaning of the allegory, the "rib," - the one meant
    for the common people.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 20:04:05 EST