This is, of course, all symbolic. It would be incredibly naive, and simplistic of us ... to say something like,
"here is the single, cultural origin of all Humanity." And so it has been tried.
Yet we can investigate these things, and discover that
Adam is in fact,
not meant to refer to a single individual. Biblical literalists think that this is the case, yet Kabbalistically (and in the sense intended in the Holy Bible), Adam is a
type of `man,' not one lone individual out there who initiated the entire Human heritage.
Inasmuch as, according to some teachings, there are
"root races," we can certainly find certain
names appear again and again, and are of great significance ... such as
Noah, Xisithus, or Vaivasvata Manu. We can even see the evolution of the name
Noah, and how it comes to us from the Chaldean.
Likewise,
`Adam,' which is Hebrew for
red or
ruddy, has
everything to do with original Humanity, but not quite in the sense that many a Christian will insist. Let's face it, one person insists
Adam was a person, another says, Adam represents the earliest of human origins ... while a third will say, this represents God's connections with, and guidance of, early humanity - and so on.
From an online
Encyclopedia Theosophical Glossary, we find some insight:
Adam 'adam (Hebrew) [from 'adam to be red, ruddy] Used in Genesis for man, original mankind; the Qabbalah enumerates four Adams. The Archetypal or Heavenly Man ('Adam Qadmon) is the prototype for the second, androgyne Adam. From these two emanates the third Adam, preterrestrial and innocent, though still further removed from the divine prototype Adam Qadmon. The fourth Adam is "the Third Adam as he was after the Fall," the terrestrial Adam of the Garden of Eden, our earthly sexual humanity (Qabbalah Myer 418).
With regard to the elohim bringing man forth "in their own image" (tselem), Blavatsky says: "The sexless Race was their first production, a modification of and from themselves, the pure spiritual existences; and this as Adam solus. Thence came the second Race: Adam-Eve or Jod-Heva, inactive androgynes; and finally the Third, or the 'Separating Hermaphrodite,' Cain and Abel, who produce the Fourth, Seth-Enos, etc." (SD 2:134). Again, "finally, even the four 'Adams' (symbolizing under other names the four preceding races) were forgotten; and passing from one generation in to another, each loaded with some additional myths, got at last drowned in that ocean of popular symbolism called the Pantheons. Yet they exist to this day in the oldest Jewish traditions, as the Tzelem, 'the Shadow-Adam' (the Chhayas of our doctrine); the 'model' Adam, the copy of the first, and the 'male and female' of the exoteric genesis (chap. i); the third, the 'earthly Adam' before the Fall, an androgyne; and the Fourth -- the Adam after his fall, i.e. separated into sexes, or the pure Atlantean. The Adam of the garden of Eden, or the forefather of our race -- the fifth -- is an ingenious compound of the above four" (SD 2:503). See also `OLAM; SEPHIRAH
Regarding Amen, we find that:
Amen 'amen (Hebrew) [from 'aman to be firm, faithful, trustworthy, sure] Firmness, permanency, durability, truth, fidelity; as an adverb truly, certainly, verily, so be it. The significance of amen is in many cases almost identic with that of the Sanskrit Aum (Om). For this reason in Christian prayers or church services it has been adopted as the final word closing a prayer -- another usage closely similar to the way in which Om is used in Sanskrit writings. In later Gnostic times Amen was one of the angelic host.
And the name Jesus, like Joshua, appears
often in the Hebrew scriptures, these being variations on one and the same. My own belief, in keeping with certain esoteric teachings, is that Jesus of Nazareth was the last incarnation
which Christians would easily recognize, in keeping with a
Hebrew lineage, of
the same Soul that finds earlier mention in the Bible as Joshua - not once, but twice. Again,
this is what I believe.
Jesus was born at Bethlehem in 105BC, may or may not have survived the crucifixion
in the flesh - yet taught the disciples from the subtle world for several decades following his "death," regardless. We can find this recorded in
numerous stories in various apocryphal gospels, however much elaboration or hyperbole may exist in such. And as Appollonius of Tyana, Jesus took an additional birth,
became perfected as Asekha Adept ... and one account I have seen suggests that he was also Sri Ramanujacharya, of India.
Before rejecting such accounts because
"they are not what we have been taught," I challenge the earnest seeker to
make inquiry on his or her own. Disprove it by investigation (however you conduct it) - for there is no other way.
Master Jesus, as he is known to esotericists, works in the world today, serving at the right hand of the Christ, being one of perhaps 2 or 3 Masters who know the Christ
as no other Master ... while another Great One, the Christ of several thousand years hence, also can be said to serve
closely with the
present Christ.
Remember, it is possible to believe
quite different than a Biblical literalist, or even different than Catholics, Lutherans and Methodists - and
still call oneself Christian, because one sees in Christ the
model of spiritual perfection, and the
prototype for all of Humanity to aspire to. Adam, in this line of thinking, and as above demonstrated, is in several ways a demonstration of the
Alpha, while yet Christ - in several ways - shows us the Omega.
If Christ is made to say that
He is both, it is because, clearly enough,
this too, is so. Christ can be taken as the Son of God, 2nd Aspect of Divinity, or this
title can be contemplated in a much more limited fashion, as the `Annointed One' -
and the Hebrews had many christs, many messiahs (some continuing to this day to reject the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was the vessel that Christians believe he was).
Only by confusion, as I see things, does `Christ' come to mean Jesus
at all, since "The Christ" and
Master Jesus represent
two entirely different individuals ... both standing well in advance of the rest of Humanity in terms of evolution, yet one of these even
immeasurably farther than the other in that regard.
So, just for the record, there are many ways to skin this cat.
namaskar,
andrew
