Paradise Regained?

Question

Was not the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, morality? Before they ate of it, Adam and Eve were innocent - innocently naked, for instance. They were, to use Nietzsche's phrase, beyond good and evil. But the serpent gave them the teaching, *seduced* them to adopt the teaching, that certain things were right and certain things wrong: for instance, being naked before someone else than your own spouse (including before God). So what really *spoilt* their happy innocence, what really made them lose Paradise, was morality - Judeo-Christian morality, to be precise. And is not the following teaching the fruit of the tree of life?

"1. Man has no Body distinct from his Soul[...].
2. Energy is the only life and is from the Body[...].
3. Energy is Eternal Delight."
[William Blake, The Marriage of Heaven and Hell.]

Take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever.

The concept of "free will" and the concept of "evil" are intimately related. Their child is the concept of "sin". Without either one, there would be no sin and, therefore, no bad conscience (no "Hell"). I don't believe in either free will or evil. I don't believe in sin. I don't believe in Hell. I believe in the innocence of all existence.

A good sentence, b2bking. I sympathise with you, as taking religious texts *literally* is the greatest stupidity I can think of. I take them metaphorically, however, and think this is one of the most psychologically rewarding things to do.

Answer 1

The Tree of Knowledge was a trap. There is no logical or definable reason for the presence of the Tree other than to create a paradox in which mankind loses regardless of choice. Remember first that Eve was an afterthought based on the Genesis account. She was not created until Adam had observed that all other species maintained the ability to procreate and self perpetuate. Only Adam was left without that gift until he beseached God to provide him with a mate. Now with the presence of another, the concept of Good-v-Evil had a forum. The Tree simply served as the medium for demonstration. "For you will be like God, knowing both good and evil." Choose not to eat of the Tree and you voluntarily surrender your freedom of choice. Choose to consume of the Tree and you are not obedient. The innocence lost was that Adam and Eve were coerced and taken advantage of, they were no longer niave. Upon eating of the Tree Adam and Eve no longer accepted exactly what they were told, they began to use their own experience to guide their concious actions. The Tree of Life was left untouched and still persists as the final aspiration of mankind. The blessings of this Tree are only to be bestowed upon the most loyal of followers, therefore creating an environment of subserviant followers blindly adhering to an already disproven philosophy. The Serpent didn't lie, we have that knowledge. From this account to current times the control of information and knowldge is the foundation for the architecture of the power grid of the Religio-Political construct of control.

I like the direction of your thinking.

Answer 2

I think the whole idea of a man living in paradise, having his rib made into a woman, the woman being coerced into eating an apple by a talking snake, and me being a sinner because of it is the most ridiculous story I've ever heard and people should be ashamed to say the believe it's a factual story.... man, that was a long sentence:)

Answer 3

according to the bible the fruit of the tree of life was made inaccessible to humans after the fall...i wonder if the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good in evil wasnt an actual fruit or plant like marijauna...maybe the fruit of the tree of life was an acyual plant also that contained a substance that halted aging....i think ur reading way too much philosophy into the equation.

Answer 4

In Use and Abuse of History, N. outlines how life comes first and knowledge should serve it. How the best historical usages fall on the suprahistorical person -- who knows the past so well, effortlessly activates and flourishes out from his vast knowledge. While the ahistorical is free to be active, in their forgetting, to do as they please; as a dog or any animal who face no gravity or anxiety over their past and fate.

Knowledge for its own sake can be very dangerous. It can lead us to the most far places of interest, and make us subservient to its upkeep. And all our notions of truth and justice are derived from our history, from the symbolic order we're thrown into. We can't truly live as dogs, though they seem quite happy. And yet we must make horizons, and forget at times to live actively in this world.

It's a very delicate tightrope to walk.

Answer 5

I think that the fruit was the "free will".