invocation of earth elemental
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"No. Adam (ADM) is DM, dam, blood, with an Aleph before it. The "redness" is in the DM part, and the whole name shows humanity as blood infused with the life-breath."
What is the interpretation of Genesis 2:7 where it states God formed Adam from the “dust of the ground”? Is there any connection between Adam and the element of Earth?
@Jim Eshelman said
"That's the symbolic reading. The grammatical part is that the Hebrew triliteral root ADM means "make, produce." ADM, "humanity," is "the made.""
That’s very interesting. My own research suggests the concept of “manu” in terms like “manufacturer”, symbolized by the hand, may signify the earliest humans. Namely humans characterized as manufacturers, creators with their hands, handicrafts, etc. We are distinguished from apes by having opposable thumbs. Curiously the five fingers of the hand could symbolize the five elements as well. That suggests another interpretation of the Elohim creating Adam “in Her Image”: in the same way that Adam was made by the Divine Creator, Adam is “a maker of things”.
-
In that verse, "the ground" (ha-Admah) from which the soil/dust is taken is the same root as Adam
-
@he atlas itch said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"No. Adam (ADM) is DM, dam, blood, with an Aleph before it. The "redness" is in the DM part, and the whole name shows humanity as blood infused with the life-breath."What is the interpretation of Genesis 2:7 where it states God formed Adam from the “dust of the ground”? Is there any connection between Adam and the element of Earth?"
First point to note is that this is sometimes referred to as "the second creation story of Adam." The first creation of humanity is in 1:27, where Elohim created ha-Adam (male and female) in Elohim's image.
Then we come to a version so different as to seem a different telling of the story, or even a different event. In 2:7 it is not Elohim, but Y.H.V.H. Elohim that is doing the task; and it is not creation (b'ra) for formation (yetzer) that occurs. The simplest (but not only) explanation is that 1:27 tells of the Briatic creation of humanity by Elohim, and 2:7 the Yetziratic formation by Y.H.V.H. Elohim. (We haven't even reached the "making" or Assiah level yet.)
Yes, Adam was made from adamah as Av' said. Both of these come from the same triliteral root (the first of the two roots spelled ADM). Adam was made from adamah, "the adam thing." An identical Arabic word, by the way, means "skin," and then "smear" (as in "spread over the surface" - what the skin does to the body). From the basic meaning, it also means "land, territory, country."
BTW, Adam was made from this mudpie by Y.H.V.H. Elohim breathing the living neshamah into the nostrils so that Adam became a nephesh.
"That suggests another interpretation of the Elohim creating Adam “in Her Image”: in the same way that Adam was made by the Divine Creator, Adam is “a maker of things”."
Interesting... but remember that Elohim was creator (-> Briah) which is a different word from maker (-> Assiah).
The curse in 3:17 is against "the ground," i.e., ha-adamah. In 3:19 he is told that he will "return to ha-adamah." ("Dust," though, is OPhR.)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
First point to note is that this is sometimes referred to as "the second creation story of Adam." The first creation of humanity is in 1:27, where Elohim created ha-Adam (male and female) in Elohim's image.Then we come to a version so different as to seem a different telling of the story, or even a different event. In 2:7 it is not Elohim, but Y.H.V.H. Elohim that is doing the task; and it is not creation (b'ra) for formation (yetzer) that occurs. The simplest (but not only) explanation is that 1:27 tells of the Briatic creation of humanity by Elohim, and 2:7 the Yetziratic formation by Y.H.V.H. Elohim. (We haven't even reached the "making" or Assiah level yet.)"
Questions:
-
Does the male/female aspect of Adam in the first creation story correspond to the active and passive aspects of Spirit - i.e. the First Adam was pure spirit without a physical body and this pure spirit was tempted by the serpent in the Garden?
-
Does the second creation story imply that Second Adam developed a physical body whereupon aging and death entered the world?
-
What do you mean by the comment "We haven't even reached the "making" or Assiah level yet"?
-
Does Adam Qadmon correspond to the first creation story and where does the concept of tzim-tzum and Tikkun Olam fit into all this?
Thanks for feedback.
-
-
@he atlas itch said
"1. Does the male/female aspect of Adam in the first creation story correspond to the active and passive aspects of Spirit - i.e. the First Adam was pure spirit without a physical body and this pure spirit was tempted by the serpent in the Garden? "
The word adam just means humanity. (Onoy later did it become a male human's name.) Humanity is inherently created "male and female." But, separate from that, yes, I do read the creation story as first a Briatic and then a Yetziratic formation, subsequently incarnated in flesh when they wrapped themselves in skins.
"2. Does the second creation story imply that Second Adam developed a physical body whereupon aging and death entered the world?"
See above. Also remember that the consequences you ask about didn't accrue until expulsion from Eden.
"3. What do you mean by the comment "We haven't even reached the "making" or Assiah level yet"? "
I mean it doesn't occur in either of the two stories quoted above. (See above.) I also pointedly used "making," the translation of the root of Assiah, in contrast to "forming" (= Yetzirah) and "creating" (= Briah).
"4. Does Adam Qadmon correspond to the first creation story and where does the concept of tzim-tzum and Tikkun Olam fit into all this? "
I don't answer Luria-based questions.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@he atlas itch said
"1. Does the male/female aspect of Adam in the first creation story correspond to the active and passive aspects of Spirit - i.e. the First Adam was pure spirit without a physical body and this pure spirit was tempted by the serpent in the Garden? "The word adam just means humanity. (Onoy later did it become a male human's name.) Humanity is inherently created "male and female." But, separate from that, yes, I do read the creation story as first a Briatic and then a Yetziratic formation, subsequently incarnated in flesh when they wrapped themselves in skins.
"2. Does the second creation story imply that Second Adam developed a physical body whereupon aging and death entered the world?"
See above. Also remember that the consequences you ask about didn't accrue until expulsion from Eden.
"3. What do you mean by the comment "We haven't even reached the "making" or Assiah level yet"? "
"I mean it doesn't occur in either of the two stories quoted above. (See above.) I also pointedly used "making," the translation of the root of Assiah, in contrast to "forming" (= Yetzirah) and "creating" (= Briah).
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"The word adam just means humanity. (Only later did it become a male human's name.) Humanity is inherently created "male and female." But, separate from that, yes, I do read the creation story as first a Briatic and then a Yetziratic formation, subsequently incarnated in flesh when they wrapped themselves in skins"
That’s interesting. It suggests the second creation story of Yetziratic formation and subsequent incarnation in flesh and wrapping of bodies in skin = restriction of spirit. Curiously it is only in the second creation story that Adam “became a living soul”. That suggests the consciousness of First Adam was identical to an animal or elemental.
I had always assumed First Adam had a physical body but was unaware of such fact. In other words, following the second creation story and upon eating from the Tree of Knowledge, Adam and Eve fell from the Supernals into duality (alienation from God) and became ashamed of their nakedness. This is when the first recorded event of animal sacrifice – not for eating, but for symbolic/totemic purposes - occurs in Genesis. Strangely it is God, not Adam, who performs the first sacrifice and clothes Adam and Eve in the “skins of the animal”. I trace the mythical origins of civilization back to this first act of sacrifice in the Garden (cf. the work of Rene Girard).
Whether “skins” refer to human skin covering our bodies or animal skins clothing our nakedness, the fall of Adam may be summarized as Restriction. The “skins” forbid us from looking at the obvious answer – that there is something hidden and mysterious about the physical body.
-
@he atlas itch said
"Curiously it is only in the second creation story that Adam “became a living soul”."
Specifically, he becomes a nephesh. That's totally appropriate for a Yetziratic formation.
"That suggests the consciousness of First Adam was identical to an animal or elemental."
No - a higher level. Elementals are relatively medium-to-low level Yetzirah. The first creation - which was a creation - was Briatic. Were this story to be taken literally (and taken seriously) it would totally support a world view of humanity having a special, distinctive place outside that of all the animals, for, in this story, humanity was never an animal - was never a lower life form - but was created from the "higher" (= deeper) layers outward, first being seen in Briah, then Yetzirah, then wrapped in skin as Assiah. (I don't adopt this world view, I just observe that it's what the text infers.)
"Strangely it is God, not Adam, who performs the first sacrifice and clothes Adam and Eve in the “skins of the animal”."
I think you're missing the point here. Clothing the Yetziratic (tghat is, "astral") beings in skins means giving them physical bodies for the first time.
"Whether “skins” refer to human skin covering our bodies or animal skins clothing our nakedness, the fall of Adam may be summarized as Restriction. The “skins” forbid us from looking at the obvious answer – that there is something hidden and mysterious about the physical body."
The Fall is simply the story of the emergence of self-conscious mind (i.e., acquiring knowledge) and,if Eden be taken as primordially supernal, stepping "below the Abyss." (One could, of course, develop this "from the bottom up" instead of "from the top down," and I would prefer it; but that's not how this particular story goes, since, in it, humanity was first Briatic, and then Yetziratic.)
The potential of development, tbhough, is upward: They took one step by "eating of knowledge," acquiring a Ruach. The next step would have been for them to have "partaken of the Tree of Life," i.e., followed the coded Path of Initiation, and become "like" gods. They were thrown out before they had the chance; but Y.H.V.H. Elohim nonetheless marked the way back and set signs to show the way to the Tree of Life.
-
"Were I doing this operation - first, I would never speak of invoking Ghob. He's Yetziratc. You evoke him. He's of a lower level than you are. Second, the hierachy I would use for Earth would be:
ATZILUTH: Adonai
BRIAH: Uriel
YETZIRAH:
-- Ruler: Kerub
-- Angel: Phorlakh
-- King: Ghob"So where does Evocation stop and Invocation begin? It seems weird to evoke an angel.
-
It varies with the level of the magician. Invocation is from a plane higher than your own; evocation, from a plane lower. (Among equals? I supposeconvocation is as good a term as any.)
Most magicians function in Yetzirah. Therefore, one usually only nvokes gods and archangels. (Higher Yetziratic beings, such as kerubim and higher angels, are above the magician, but one doesn't invoke them directly: one rules or compels them after invocation of their god and archangel.)
Even the lowest angels are immaterial; but their lack of physicality doesn't make them higher than the Yetziratic consciousness of a particular magician.
And an adept, consciously awake in Briah, is above the angels and becoming kin of archangel. A full Master would invoke a god and evoke the archangels.
-
"Most magicians function in Yetzirah. "
Are you referring to a specific grade or just the ritual in general?
I asked because I wanted to start working with the elements. I wanted to choose the most beginner friendly invocation (besides pentagram rituals) and to me the word Briah (Uriel) and beginner seemed like incompatible things.
-
@ForceFire said
"
"Most magicians function in Yetzirah."Are you referring to a specific grade or just the ritual in general?"
I mean that, in general, most magicians are incapable of entering a Briatic state of consciousness, let alone persistently living there. They function in Yetzirah.
"I asked because I wanted to start working with the elements. I wanted to choose the most beginner friendly invocation (besides pentagram rituals) and to me the word Briah (Uriel) and beginner seemed
like incompatible things."One can work with archangel without being awake in (or operating in) Brian. The routine method is to compose a Yetziratic form (image) for the Briatic being to occupy. That's a Yetziratic, not a Briatic, operation.