FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465  
466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   >>   >|  
takes precautions lest mortals eat of the tree of life and 'live forever.' The problem presented by the Hebrew and Babylonian stories is the same: why should not man, who is descended from the gods, who is created in the likeness of a god, who by virtue of his intellect can peer into the secrets of heaven and earth, who stands superior to the rest of creation, who, to use the psalmist's figure, is only 'a scale lower than god,' why should he not be like the gods and live forever? The Hebrew legend solves the problem in a franker way than does the Babylonian. God, while as anxious as Ea to keep man from eating of the tree of life, cautions Adam against the act, whereas Ea practises a deception in order to prevent man from eating. That in both tales eternal life is contained in food points again (as we have found to be the case with the Biblical narratives of Creation and of the Deluge) to a common source for the two traditions. Similarly the phrase 'waters of life' is a figure of speech of frequent occurrence in Biblical literature in both the Old and the New Testaments. It is no argument against a common source for the Hebrew and Babylonian stories explaining how man came to forego immortality, that the waters of life should be found in the one and not in the other. If we assume with Gunkel[1108] that the stories embodied in the first chapters of Genesis were long current among the Hebrews before they were given a permanent form, the adaptation of old traditions to an entirely new order of beliefs involves a casting aside of features that could not be used and a discarding of such as seemed superfluous. The striking departures in the case of the Hebrew legends from their Babylonian counterparts are as full of significance as the striking agreements between the two. The departures and agreements must both be accounted for. For both there are reasons. So, to emphasize only one point, in a monotheistic solution of the problem under consideration, there was no place for any conflict among the gods. In Genesis God simply wills that man should not eat of the tree of life. In the Adapa legend the gods, including Anu, are willing to grant a mortal the food and water of life, simply because they believe that Ea, the creator of man, wishes him to have it. Accordingly, Anu and his associates are represented at the close of the legend as being grieved that Adapa should have foregone the privilege. Anu looked at him[1109] and
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465  
466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Babylonian

 

Hebrew

 
legend
 

problem

 

stories

 

Genesis

 

common

 

figure

 

simply

 

source


waters

 
eating
 
striking
 

departures

 
forever
 

traditions

 

agreements

 

Biblical

 

legends

 

Hebrews


counterparts

 

beliefs

 

permanent

 

adaptation

 
involves
 

casting

 
discarding
 

features

 

superfluous

 

creator


wishes

 
mortal
 

Accordingly

 

associates

 

privilege

 
looked
 

foregone

 
grieved
 

represented

 

including


reasons

 

emphasize

 
accounted
 

significance

 

monotheistic

 
conflict
 

solution

 
current
 

consideration

 

phrase