From my own investigation, I have discovered that as per Jewish Folklore, the "original" man Adam, actually had 2 wives before he decided that Eve was the right one. One known by the name of Lillith and the other... well some references state her name is not known, but other sources claim it was Naamah (or something akin to that).
I was hoping that someone could confirm this?
Thanks.
I look forward to any and all replies.
Question for followers of Judaism
Moderator: Moderators
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Question for followers of Judaism
Post #2The idea of Lilith being Adam's first wife comes from 10 century Jewish follklore... it's not very biblical. The concept of Lilith being one of the demons was in Jewish tradition since it's beginning though, and probably comes from the earlier Sumerian texts.catalyst wrote:From my own investigation, I have discovered that as per Jewish Folklore, the "original" man Adam, actually had 2 wives before he decided that Eve was the right one. One known by the name of Lillith and the other... well some references state her name is not known, but other sources claim it was Naamah (or something akin to that).
I was hoping that someone could confirm this?
Thanks.
I look forward to any and all replies.
The story which you are referring to is probably the The Alphabet of Ben-Sira, which was a satirical piece.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Post #3
Hi Goat and thanks for the reply,
From what I have been reading, lillith was the sumerian goddess Belit-ili and to the Caanites, Lilith was Baalat and a tablet was found, allegedly circa 2000BCE commemorating her, but the translated spelling came out (in english) as Lillake.
There is also a speculative connection between Lilith and the Etruscan divinity Lenith.
Lillith is also mentioned in the Tanakh in Isaiah: 34:14 as far as I have been told and that was by a Jew. It may not have made the christian OT "take", but not really much of the original writings did as "written", did they.
My quandry was more towards the other woman...either unnamed of named Naamah. Is it she who this comment: The story which you are referring to is probably the The Alphabet of Ben-Sira, which was a satirical piece" relating to her or stil to lillith?
From what I have been reading, lillith was the sumerian goddess Belit-ili and to the Caanites, Lilith was Baalat and a tablet was found, allegedly circa 2000BCE commemorating her, but the translated spelling came out (in english) as Lillake.
There is also a speculative connection between Lilith and the Etruscan divinity Lenith.
Lillith is also mentioned in the Tanakh in Isaiah: 34:14 as far as I have been told and that was by a Jew. It may not have made the christian OT "take", but not really much of the original writings did as "written", did they.
My quandry was more towards the other woman...either unnamed of named Naamah. Is it she who this comment: The story which you are referring to is probably the The Alphabet of Ben-Sira, which was a satirical piece" relating to her or stil to lillith?
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #4
It was referring to Lilith. I have not seen another reference to Adam having other wife. Lilith has also been found in a document found in the dead sea scrolls, and referred to a couple of times in the Talmud, referring to a demon with long hair and wings.catalyst wrote:Hi Goat and thanks for the reply,
From what I have been reading, lillith was the sumerian goddess Belit-ili and to the Caanites, Lilith was Baalat and a tablet was found, allegedly circa 2000BCE commemorating her, but the translated spelling came out (in english) as Lillake.
There is also a speculative connection between Lilith and the Etruscan divinity Lenith.
Lillith is also mentioned in the Tanakh in Isaiah: 34:14 as far as I have been told and that was by a Jew. It may not have made the christian OT "take", but not really much of the original writings did as "written", did they.
My quandry was more towards the other woman...either unnamed of named Naamah. Is it she who this comment: The story which you are referring to is probably the The Alphabet of Ben-Sira, which was a satirical piece" relating to her or stil to lillith?
From the Sumerian sources, Lilith is also associated with the prologue in Gilgamesh. It does look like the Lilith myth had an influence on the ancient Jews for many centuries.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Post #5
Hi Goat,
Yes you are right. It appears that Lilith was influential over many and varies ancient mythologies.
As to Naamah, I have been able to sus out a little more and this is what I found.
After the Lilith debarcle, Adam wanted another helpmeet so God allegedy tried again. God let Adam watch while he built up a woman's anatomy. Using bones, tissues, muscles, blood and glandular secretions, then covering the whole with skin and adding tufts of hair in places, he formed a second 'wife'. Watching her creation caused Adam such disgust that even when this woman stood there in her full beauty, he felt repugnance. This second wife (whos name was Naamah) was taken away to "heaven" and was never mentioned again.
Then came Eve who was formed, allegedly from Adam's rib whilst he slept...the rest is..."supposedly"...history..
Yes you are right. It appears that Lilith was influential over many and varies ancient mythologies.
As to Naamah, I have been able to sus out a little more and this is what I found.
After the Lilith debarcle, Adam wanted another helpmeet so God allegedy tried again. God let Adam watch while he built up a woman's anatomy. Using bones, tissues, muscles, blood and glandular secretions, then covering the whole with skin and adding tufts of hair in places, he formed a second 'wife'. Watching her creation caused Adam such disgust that even when this woman stood there in her full beauty, he felt repugnance. This second wife (whos name was Naamah) was taken away to "heaven" and was never mentioned again.
Then came Eve who was formed, allegedly from Adam's rib whilst he slept...the rest is..."supposedly"...history..
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #6
It looks like that story was mentioned in the Zohar, which is a 12th century book of Jewish Mysticism. According to one source, it seems that the story was made up around that time to be an injunction against the practice of religious celebracy , as was being started in Christianity.catalyst wrote:Hi Goat,
Yes you are right. It appears that Lilith was influential over many and varies ancient mythologies.
As to Naamah, I have been able to sus out a little more and this is what I found.
After the Lilith debarcle, Adam wanted another helpmeet so God allegedy tried again. God let Adam watch while he built up a woman's anatomy. Using bones, tissues, muscles, blood and glandular secretions, then covering the whole with skin and adding tufts of hair in places, he formed a second 'wife'. Watching her creation caused Adam such disgust that even when this woman stood there in her full beauty, he felt repugnance. This second wife (whos name was Naamah) was taken away to "heaven" and was never mentioned again.
Then came Eve who was formed, allegedly from Adam's rib whilst he slept...the rest is..."supposedly"...history..
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/humm/Topics/L ... tress.html
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Post #7
Hi Goat,
So when we are "talking" 12th Century this or that as to the writings, are we talking BCE or CE?
I see you mentioned that part of the 'tale" seems that the story was made up around that time to be an injunction against the practice of religious celebracy , as was being started in Christianity, but as christians claim the 'beginning' of christianity was supposedly circa 30 (ish) CE, to me neither "12th centuries make sense.
So when we are "talking" 12th Century this or that as to the writings, are we talking BCE or CE?
I see you mentioned that part of the 'tale" seems that the story was made up around that time to be an injunction against the practice of religious celebracy , as was being started in Christianity, but as christians claim the 'beginning' of christianity was supposedly circa 30 (ish) CE, to me neither "12th centuries make sense.
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #8
The Zohar was written in 12th Century C.E. I was looking further, and the date which the Alphabet was written was between 8th and 12th century c.e.. and was quite bawdy.catalyst wrote:Hi Goat,
So when we are "talking" 12th Century this or that as to the writings, are we talking BCE or CE?
I see you mentioned that part of the 'tale" seems that the story was made up around that time to be an injunction against the practice of religious celebracy , as was being started in Christianity, but as christians claim the 'beginning' of christianity was supposedly circa 30 (ish) CE, to me neither "12th centuries make sense.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella