The Biblical Story of

ADAM and EVE

Its origin in the Upanishads.

Adam, according to the Old Testament, is the first man, created by God on the sixth day of
creation. Eve is the first woman not born but created by God to be the wife of Adam.
The word 'Adam' may mean one of the three things - a human being, a man or mankind
collectively, (Collier's Encyclopedia Vol. I p. 88). Its source is Adamah meaning earth, the derivation
appearing in the statement, "God formed man of the dust of the ground". Some scholars maintain that
Adam is associated with the Assyrian 'Adaman' meaning 'make' or 'produce' and hence 'Adam' means
maker or producer. Thus the word Adam has no definite meaning and origin.
The name Eve in Hebrew is 'Havah' and is associated with the root 'hayah' or 'hay' meaning
life. Eve was given this name because she was the mother of living.
There are two accounts of creation of Eve in the book of Genesis. According to the first
account, God created man in his own image male, and He then created female. The second account
states, 'The Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and He took one of his ribs from which
He made a woman.' Eve was created because it was not good that the man should be alone.
Both Adam and Eve lived in the child -like innocence in the Garden of Eden enjoying, God's
bliss. They were told that they could eat freely the fruit of every tree in the garden except that of the
true knowledge of good and evil. However, tempted by the serpent, Eve ate the fruit of knowledgetree and gave it to Adam. As a result, they became conscious of their nakedness and sin, made
themselves aprons of fig leaves. To prevent from eating the fruit of tree of life, God banished them
from Eden; and thenceforth they were obliged to till the ground to obtain food. Eve's further
punishment was decreed in the following words-"I will multiply thy sorrow and thy conception, in
sorrow, shalt thou bring forth children..........
Bible critics see in the Eve-narration a reflection of the ancient Hebrew concept of the origin of
the human race. The story can be regarded as a culture myth to explain the origin of the pains of
childbirth and to show how it became necessary for man to submit to grievous toil for the means of
subsistence. Though a Babylonian parallel to the biblical story of Eve has not been found, its adoption
from a Babylonian myth has not been ruled out. (Collier's Encyclopedia Vol. 7 page 258).
From these quotations it will be clear that the origin of the story is not yet clear. So I put
forward my own theory about how the story came into existence and how it has its roots in the
Upanishads. From the narration in the story that the God prepared man on the 6th day etc., it is
evident that the composer of the story was not conversant with the real knowledge of the Genesis of
the world. It is not told in the story who prepared the serpent and how the serpent became equal and
opposite to the God. So the foundation of the story is ignorance. Such stories are told by the people
who are not so intelligent, but who hear higher knowledge from the wise man. They cannot bear that
high knowledge so they prepare their own version. In this activity they mix up the knowledge of two
or more streams.
The principle of the story is that some God (whom the composer does not understand) made
a pair of male and female, which was also unknown to the storyteller. This principle is found in the
famous Prashnopanishad at 1/4. There, Kabandhi, a student asked the sage named as Pippalada,
"Sire, from where all these things and animals come into existence? The question is very intelligent and
its reply also shows very high level of knowledge. Sage Pippalada replied, "The originator thought of

producing different things and He performed Tapa and produced a coup le, Rayi and Prana; and said
that these two will produce variety of things and animals."
A person who does not understand what is Rayi may take it as a woman because the word
appears feminine in gender. He may take Prana as a man because the word appears masculine in
gender. Actually the sage has used the word Rayi to depict the matter, and Prana to depict the
Energy. This is evident from the very next statement of the sage that the Sun is Prana and the Moon is
Rayi, not only the Moon but any form is Rayi.(1/5). Further he states that the Sun supports and
maintains all the life by his rays. (1/6)
It is true according to the modern science that it is the energy of Sunrays, which maintains all
the life on this Earth. If the Sun disappears life will also disappear. Thus the sage Pippalada discloses
the knowledge equal to that of the modern scientists. First he told that the Moon is Rayi; but
immediately he noticed the loophole in the statement. It is clear that though the Sun emits energy, it
has some matter and some form, while the Moon may shine by the reflected light of the Sun, but she
has also, some energy of her own. Thus a specific demarcating line between Rayi and Prana is
impossible. Even today it is impossible to demarcate between the Matter and Energy, because pure
matter without energy is impossible to exist. So the Sage corrected his statement and said, "Whatever
may be the form, it is Rayi." Further he noticed that this statement is also limited in truth because the
water, light and wind have no form but still they are Rayi. So he added that any thing formless but
which is manifest is Rayi. Whatever is seen or experienced is Rayi; and inside Rayi resides Prana.
The minutest form is an atom or a subatomic particle, it is nothing else but Rayi. Inside this subatomic
particle is Prana. It is true to the modern science that a subatomic particle contains energy; this energy
is Prana.
Thus it is clear that the pair of matter and energy is called as Rayi and Prana. It is absolutely
true that from this couple every living and nonliving thing came into existence. Thus sage Pippalada
theorized the highest knowledge, which then spread and descended through generations. In this
process of descent, which means coming down, the level of the knowledge also descended, came
down and then some person, thinking that the couple was a human couple, compiled the story of the
couple, Adam and Eve, who produced this world. Thus the root of the story of Adam and Eve is seen
in the Prashnopanishad.
Now the question comes about eating of the fruit and falling in trouble thereby. This part of
the story also has its origin in one Upanishad namely the Mundaka. It is told in Mundakopnishad 3-11 that there is a twin of birds on a tree. They always stay together and are fast friends. Out of the two
birds, one eats the fruits of the tree, while the other does not eat the fruit, but only looks at it. The next
stanza states that the one, who eats the fruit falls in sorrow. The sage of Mundaka Upanishad tells
about Jeeva, the life and Paramatman, an energy controlling the life, which is still unknown to the
modern science. The tree on which these birds-Jeeva and Paramatman - stay is the physical body of
an animal and the fruits means the effects of our deeds (Karma). Anybody suffers due to his own
deeds. Hence it is said that the one who eats the fruits of the tree gets sorrow.
Being ignorant about the twin birds, Jeeva and Paramatman, some person thought of the pair,
a human couple and made one of them Eve, to eat the fruit first so that the wrath of God fell on her
more than Adam. A man, who is not conversant with the high Philosophy always makes such
mistakes. So I think that the root of this part of the story is in the Mundakopanishad.
It is to be noted that both the Prashna and Mundaka are the Upanishads of Atharva Veda.
Hence it is possible that some Atharva-Vedi person might have gone to the west to preach the
Upanishadic philosophy. The people there did not follow the high quality of the knowledge, so they

converted it into a simple story. In the later Puranas this pair is called as Shiva and Shakti. Shiva is
called as Adinath, Adideva. Adim means the first, primitive, or original, which may have turned into
Adam. Shakti is called as 'E'. This 'E' may have converted into Eve. Thus the names are also
explained.
It is usually believed that the knowledge flew from the West to India, but it is a wrong idea.
The knowledge went from India to west and east. In support of my view is an archaeological finding
of a dead body of a Yogi seated in Vajrasana, at the border of Yugoslavia and Romania, at Lepenski
Veer, on the bank of river Danube. The German scientists have dated the body to be of 5000 years
B. C. Yoga is a treasure exclusively of India. So it is definite that Indian Yogis must have marched to
Europe 5000 years B. C. These Indian Yogis had spread the Upanishadic philosophy to the wild
tribes of Europe. But later on perversion of the knowledge took place and absurd stories flourished.
The root and the original knowledge is still preserved in India. It is our duty to investigate this
treasure.