Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00719)

----------
> From: John Straughn <JTarn@envirolink.org>
>
> The allegory of the tree has always been one of my favorite mysteries of
the
> bible.  It is, obviously, the Tree of Knowledge of Right and Wrong, but
the
> biggest mystery comes with the defining of "Right" and "Wrong".

Or was it "right" and "left"?

> Before Eve,
> and later Adam, took the plunge, they were satisfied with their existence
with
> Elohim and thought nothing of empowering themselves.

Perhaps they were living in a state of innocence, like the animals, going
by
instinct alone, with no sense of duality.

> This is the only
> conclusion I have been able to make with regards to other "evils"
represented
> in other religious allegories:  When Eve bit into the fruit, she was
basically
> saying to herself, "*I* want to know.  If *I* don't find out for *myself*
what
> this is, I don't think I will ever be complete."

Or perhaps, "I want to be self-conscious".  In becoming awake and conscious
of one's actions, one would begin to perceive duality.

> This was her first selfish
> act.  Selfishness was wrong.  And after experiencing what selfishness
could do
> to her, she knew that selfishness was a very evil thing.

When first-born, the baby is dependent on its creator or mother.  At around
2 years,
it begins to explore its independence and its ability to say "no".  It is
just growing
up and becoming its own person.  Is this selfish and evil?

> Unconsciously, as you
> say later, she passed her guilt onto Adam by getting him to bite the
fruit as
> well.  Perhaps because she wanted to make sure that she was not the only
evil
> person.  Perhaps because she knew that she had done something wrong and
did
> not want to be alone with her guilt.

Or wanted to share the freedom. In which case, Adam would owe her a
debt of gratitude for her courage.

T. Robertson:
>I like Annie Besant's view of selfishness as being an inevitable step in
>evolution, without which individuality would have been impossible.  I
>recall reading, though, perhaps in "Masters and the Path," that free will
>was an "experiment," implying that it was not inevitable.

Cayce refers to this as well.

"Thus a new individual, issuing from and dependent upon God, but aware of
an existence apart from Him, came into being. To the new individual there
was given, necessarily, the power to choose and direct its own activity;
wihtout free will it would remain a part of the individuality of God.
Mind, issuing as a force from God, would naturallly fulfill His thoughts,
unless directed otherwise.  The power to do this - to direct otherwise the
forces of mind - is what man calls his free will.  The record of this free
will is the soul.  The soul began with the first expression which free will
made of its power, through the force of mind.  The first thought which it
generated of itself, the first diversion of mind force from its normal
path, was the beginning of the soul."

There is a River by Thomas Sugrue (pg.363)

-AEB