Adam Kadmon

Adam was not the first man
‘Though the Bible tells us soEden

There was one created before him
Whose name we do not knowNara

He also lived in the garden
But he had no mouth or eyesAdam-3 2

One day Adam came to kill himAdam-4 3

And he died beneath these skiesAdam-5 2


These verses are taken from the song Pet Politics by the Silver Jews:

Pet Politics – The Silver Jews

The featured image for this post comes from this website:

Piper Mackay Photography

See post: Nara

Advertisements

Nara

The Nara-Narayana theme is common in the story-telling of many ancient civilizations.  It involves an adventure between the primeval man (Nara) and a spiritual figure (Narayana.)

The Epic of Gilgamesh (Sumerian mythology),  The Bhagavad Gita (Hindu mythology), and The Hero Twins (Mayan mythology) are all variants of the Nara-Narayana theme.

Enkidu, Arjuna, and Xbalanque are identified with Nara or the primeval man.

Additionally, a modern variant of the Nara-Narayana theme exists in the Captain Newfoundland series where Captain Canada is identified with Nara.

Even the Hebrew spiritualists eventually stumbled upon the fundamentally important energy of Nara.  The Kabbalists identify an “original man” separate from Adam from the Book of Genesis.  They refer to this “original man” as Adam Kadmon and treat him as a disembodied spiritual entity so as not to displace Adam Ha-Rishon’s status as first human.  However, had the Kabbalists used The Epic of Gilgamesh instead of the Book of Genesis, they would have easily linked Adam Kadmon to Enkidu and the primeval man.

Science and anthropology tell us that humans lived as hunter-gatherers for hundreds of thousands of years before civilization emerged.  Ancient spirituality makes reference to the primeval man in their story-telling.  Even Hebrew spiritualists make reference to an “original man” separate from Adam from the Book of Genesis:

The Source and the Infinite Light

The relationship between the Ein Sof and the Ohr Ein Sof is fundamentally the same relationship between Brahma and Vishnu.

The Ohr Ein Sof, or the Infinite Light, is a very ancient concept.  Hindus use Vishnu to symbolize the Ohr Ein Sof while Buddhists use Amitābha (“The Buddha of Immeasurable Life and Light“).

The Ein Sof is what most people refer to when they say “God.”  The Ein Sof is “The Source.”  The Ein Sof is the Atik Yomin (“Ancient of Days“).  Hindus use Brahma to symbolize the Ein Sof.

Necessary Sacrifice

To sacrifice one’s life for a just cause is a great sacrifice, but an even greater sacrifice is to endure that which is worse than death while one is still alive.

I think that sacrifice and martyrdom for that which is right is necessary.  The ancient spiritualists upheld psychological martyrdom as something special.  In my opinion, Chhinnimasta from Hinduism and Hanahpu from Mayanism represent the importance of psychological martyrdom and sacrifice.

The Hebrew spiritualists treat crossing the realm of the martyr as unnecessary pain (as in the Book of Job.)  The Hebrew spiritualists make it seem like a bad thing to cross into the realm of the witness to truly understand the difference between good and evil (on all levels of society from everyday relations to larger scale political issues.)

I agree with the ancient spiritualists that psychological martyrdom and other forms of sacrifice for that which is right are good things.

This doesn’t mean everybody has to cross the realm of the martyr, but those with the capacity and the responsibility to probably should.


There are some fake ascended masters who tell people to just save themselves and be selfish and some fake Buddha quotes that imply that people should have more compassion for themselves rather than for others.  The Book of Job makes it seem like martyrdom is a waste of time or that after one discovers one is not evil by crossing the realm of the witness, one can just focus solely on oneself again.  However, the whole point of crossing that realm is to help others.

I’m pretty sure more authentic Buddhist teachings say that people are already naturally self-concerned and don’t have to consciously try to be any more selfish than they already are.  The point is to continue to have compassion for others.


I think part of the problem also stems from the realm of the pratyekabuddha.

The bodhisattva realm is endlessly altruistic, compassionate, and sacrificial.  Obviously, Jains uphold it as the highest realm.  Some Jains will starve themselves to death if they feel they have done all they can in the direction of true goodness and have fulfilled their purpose.  Because the desire to push towards ideal righteousness is so great, many end up crossing the realm of the witness as they push towards the ideal.

From that realm, extreme agnosticism and idealism prevail.  The Jain notion that no single, specific human view can claim to represent absolute truth applies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anekantavada

The idea of people who have deviated too far from God (representing ideal morality) killing themselves to please God seems understandable.

From the bodhisattva path, the Buddha path is considered unfamiliar territory.  Buddha went from an ascetic to accepting a bowl of rice and eventually becoming healthy again.  The bodhisattva path which knows only extreme sacrifice does not have great familiarity with what type of great revelations lie on the path where one begins trying to obtain Enlightenment (and still continues to help others, but in a way that does not do so much harm to oneself.)

Thus, after the bodhisattva realm comes the pratyekabuddha realm where one stops focusing on ideal sacrifice to experiment on how much one should nourish oneself.  It takes time to experiment with such things and one can easily start being misled by Hebrew spirituality, fake Buddha quotes and fake ascended masters who tell people to just save themselves.  One can start going too far and becoming too self-serving.