Nature Sex: Jesus and Adonis / Tammuz Similarities

Tammuz (Sumerian Dumuzi) was the consort of Ishtar. He is mentioned, already in the Epic of Gilgamesh, as a suffering lover of the goddess, a shepherd beloved and scapegoat of the netherworld. When Ishtar tries to become Gilgamesh’s lover, he points out that her past lovers have not fared well. “Dumuzi, the lover of your youth, year upon year, to lamenting you doomed him.” (Gilgamesh 137) When Gilgamesh is mourning the death of Enkidu, he presents a carnelian flute for “Dumuzi, shepherd beloved of Ishtar”, so that he may welcome his friend and walk at his side (epic of Gilgamesh, translated Andrew George, 68). Thus Dumuzi, who was thought to have been originally a historical king that entered into sexual union with the goddess, had also been considered a god in his own right more than three thousand years ago. His demise is tied to the story of Ianna’s descent into the underworld. The reason she gives for entering the underworld is to attend her brother-in-law’s funeral rites (Gugalana, the Bull of Heaven which had just been killed by Gilgamesh and Enkidu). After she decides to go down into the Great Below, she leaves instructions for her rescue in case she does not return. As she descends, she is required to remove one of her seven layers of clothing at each of the seven gates, until she stood before Ereshkigal, queen of the underworld, naked and humble. Ereshkigal ‘fixed the eye of death’ upon her and she was turned into a corpse, and hung from a hook on the wall like a piece of rotting meat. After three days and three nights, her servant Ninshubar, following instructions, tried to get the gods to save her. Only one, Enki, agreed to help. He fashioned two sexless creatures from the dirt under the fingernails of the gods, and gave them the food and water of life to sprinkle on Ianna’s corpse. She returned to life, and Ereshkigal agreed to release her, but she had to provide another in her place. When she came back to heaven she found Dumuzi enjoying himself in her absence (on her throne or under a tree), rather than mourning for her, and ‘fixed the eye of death’ upon him. The demons took him down to Hell; however his sister loved him so much she wanted to go in his place. So, Dumuzi spends half of the year in the underworld, while his sister spends half. During the time that Dumuzi is in the underworld, his lover Ianna misses him; this infertile time was fall and winter. When Dumuzi returns from the underworld and he is with Ianna, their love fills the world with life, causing spring and summer. The poetry of their love is graphic – but also reminiscent of the biblical Song of Songs.

“My untilled land lies fallow.
As for me, Inanna,
Who will plow my vulva!
Who will plow my high field!
Who will plow my wet ground!”

“Great Lady, the king will plow your vulva.
I, Dumuzi the King, will plow your vulva.”

“Make your milk sweet and thick, my bridegroom.
My shepherd, I will drink your fresh milk.
Wild bull, Dumuzi, make your milk sweet and thick.
I will drink your fresh milk.
Let the milk of the goat flow in my sheepfold.
Fill my holy churn with honey cheese.”

This story is remarkably similar to the myth of Demeter and Persephone; both explain the coming of winter through a goddess grieving for a lost loved one, who then returns.A cult ritual for Dumuzi as the Dying God “began with laments sung as a sacred cedar tree growing in the compound of the temple Eanna in Uruk. The rite seems to have closed with a triumphant procession that followed the god downstream. The god appears to represent the sap lying dormant in the rushes and trees during the dry season but reviving, to the profound relief and joy of the orchardman, with the river’s rise.”  – Thorkild Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness.

The mourning of Tammuz was a widespread annual ritual, which even appears in the Bible. Yahweh, giving Ezekial a sort of tour of the idolatry being practiced by the Israelites, points out the women sitting by the entrance to the north gate of the Temple of Yahweh, weeping for Tammuz. “Son of man, do you see that? You will see even more loathsome things than that,” he says (Ezek. 8:14). In Greek communities, Tammuz was called Adonis, and he was considered a consort of Aphrodite. The cult of Adonis existed in Sappho and Lesbos as early as 600BC. As Adonis is a mutation or evolved form of Tammus, in a different cultural setting, the two figures are not exactly the same. The cult of Aphrodite’s paramour Adonis held a special appeal for Greek women, combining the erotic adoration of a beautiful youth with the emotional catharsis of lamentation for his death. The Adonis cult was an early import from the Levant, probably via Cyprus, but while many of the outward forms remained the same, its cultural context and significance changed.

Adonis was modeled upon Tammuz, the consort of Ishtar whose death was annually lamented by women, and his name is a direct borrowing of the West Semitic adon, Lord (Larson 124). There are multiple versions of Adonis’ birth story, but the commonly accepted version is that Aphrodite urged Myrrha to commit incest with her father, Theias. Myrrha slept with her father in the darkness, until he used and oil lamp to learn the truth and chased after her with a knife. Aphrodite turned Myrrha into a myrrh tree, out of which Adonis was born (either when Theias shot an arrow in the tree, or when a boar tore of the bark with its tusks).

He was such a beautiful baby that Aphrodite locked him in a trunk and gave him to Persephone, queen of the underworld, for safe keeping; however Persephone was so enthralled by him that she refused to return him. Finally Zeus decided that he would be shared – six months with Aphrodite, who later seduced him, and six months with Persephone. (Hamilton) According to Ovid in The Metamorphoses, Adonis met his death by a wild boar. Aprhodite (Roman Venus), who’d been pricked by Eros’ arrow of love, specifically warned him to be careful and stay away from wild beasts:

The wild and large are much too wild for you; My dear, remember that sweet Venus loves you, And if you walk in danger, so does she. Nature has armed her monsters to destroy you –Even your valour would be grief to me. (Ovid, Metamorphoses X)

But the young Adonis ignored her warning (due to “pride and manliness”) and headed off into the wood with his hunting dogs, where he woke a great boar. The boar pierced his white loins with a great thrust, and Adonis bled to death. Although the cult of Tammuz “enjoyed near-universal recognition in Mesopotamia and his festival was so important that a Babylonian month was named after him” (Larson 124), worship of Adonis, although popular, rarely gained state sponsorship. It was viewed as a foreign cult; moreover Adonis was mostly mourned by women, in rituals not tied to a sanctuary, temple or sacred space.Women sit by the gate weeping for Tammuz, or they offer incense to Baal on roof-tops and plant pleasant plants.

These are the very features of the Adonis cult: a cult confined to women which is celebrated on flat roof-tops on which sherds sown with quickly germinating green salading are placed, Adonis gardens… the climax is loud lamentation for the dead god. (Burkert 177)

To perform the Adonia, which took place in late summer, women ascended to the roof, where they sang dirges, cried out in grief, and beat their breasts. Sappho (fr. 140a LP) mentions that the women tore their garments, a standard sign of mourning. Other features of of Adonis’ ritual belon to the cult in Classical Athens. A few days before the Adonia, garden herbs and cereals were sown in broken pots. These tender young plants were brought to the rooftops during the festival, to be withered in the hot sun as emblems of the youthful Adonis’ death. Another custom involved the laying out of Adonis dolls for burial. (Larson 124)

Frazer notes the similarity between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the cult of Adonis; the tradition is much the same even today. They bring out an effigy of the dead Jesus and parade it through town, mourning. They bury it, fasting, and then at midnight on Saturday, cry “Christ is risen!” (Incidentally, it may be noted that “Christ”, like Adonis, is a title meaning lord, or messiah, rather than a specific name; Adonis is even a name for Yahweh in the Old Testament). The resurrection of Jesus was met with joy, shouting, shrieks, and partaking of the Easter lamb (Frazer, 416). Frazer concludes that the Christian celebration of Easter was modeled on the earlier ritual concerning Adonis:

When we reflect how often the Church has skilfully contrived to plant the seeds of the new faith on the old stock of paganism, we may surmise that the Easter celebration of the dead and risen Christ was grafted upon a similar celebration of the dead and risen Adonis, which, as we have seen reason to believe, was celebrated in Syria in the same season. (Frazer 416)

More recent research has denied the claim that Adonis’ resurrection was celebrated; instead the focus always seems to be on the mourning of his death rather than his revival. However, Frazer may have had the cult of Attis in mind, which was very similar to that of Adonis, and did stress, not only the death, but the return of the god.

2 Comments
  • Ron Stewart
    February 13, 2010

    It would seem that Christanity maybe another way Lucifer has tricked the world into worshiping him in one of his many forms as an angel of light. I remember reading Ezekiel when I was a boy and the thought occured to me . Could Jesus really be Lucifer in the flesh instead of God. It seems that other people have come to this conclusion also, even if they are not bold enough to say it outright.

    • BYaakkov
      February 12, 2014

      I disagree with this. Simply because typical Christianity seems to have twisted what Yahshua (“Jesus”. Arguably spelled/pronounced Yahushua, Yehoshua, Yeshua, whatever. I may be wrong on the spelling/pronunciation but for all intensive purposes, I’ll just say Yahshua) actually said in there…

      I agree that I don’t believe Yahshua was YHWH in the flesh. I do believe He came in HIS name/behalf, and was the Messiah spoken of in the Tanakh.

      I have been thinking about a lot of this. How people use “Jesus” to say HIS (YHWH) law was done away with… but in reading the New Testament, He (Yahshua/Jesus) seems to be in support of HIS law, not trying to do away with it. That concept seems to come completely from Shaul (“the Apostle” Paul), in his letters to different “Churches”.
      A lot of what Yahshua spoke against was the stuff the “Jews” added and/or their interpretation of HIS laws. Stuff that was called “the Oral Torah”, and later became what is now known as “the Talmud”… wherein Rabbi’s can alter/modify the “rules” as they see fit.

      I am almost certain to say that satan “infiltrated” the Bible, but it is not in “the invention of Yahshua”. Yahshua was “pro-YHWH and HIS law”, and seems to have just brought a clearer and more righteous understanding of it. It wasn’t until Shaul’s letters that the idea that “it was done away with” came to “light”. For those who would argue that “God wouldn’t allow HIS word to be corrupted” (meaning anything added that didn’t belong there, or taken away that did, or even meaning lost in translation), I would simply ask “what about the Apocrypha?”. If it wasn’t supposed to be there, apparently HE let it be in there for @1300 years, and if it was supposed to be there, apparently HE let it be taken out later.

      The biggest thing I struggle with is the similarities of the story of Nimrod (becoming the sun that many worshiped) impregnating Semiramis/Ishtar/Astarte/whatever with the “rays of the sun”, and her baring Tammuz as the offspring or “reincarnated Nimrod”.

      The comparison being:

      Nimrod (later becoming the sun) = The Father
      The sun rays (coming from the sun) that impregnated Semiramis (who claimed immaculate conception, though I’m not sure she claimed to be a virgin) = the holy spirit (coming from the Father) that impregnated Miriam
      Tammuz, as reincarnated Nimrod (iow: Nimrod “in the flesh”) = the concept that Yahshua “was YHWH in the flesh”.

      I believe in Yahshua, in that He was sent in HIS name… but I fear that in the indocrination of “sun worship” into “Christianity” (around the time of Constantines reign, and the forming of the Catholic Church), some stuff was added to twist what Yahshua truly was and stood for, into something that matched their idoltrous beliefs.

      It would seem that stuff was, yet again, added to HIS word, in order to indoctrinate their ideology/theology… it would seem that there is truth in there, but now we have to decipher what in there is true, and what was added in order to twist it into what it has become today… which is a “Jesus” that came and “made obsolete” YHWH’s commandments for what is right and wrong…

      It makes more sense that satan would strive to keep people from doing “HIS will”, and a logical step to doing this would be to get people to believe that HIS commandments were done away with. This, again, is accomplished through Shaul’s letters, which seem circular in speech themselves… (in one breath, he seems to be praising the law, and in the next, speaking of it negatively.).
      Is that to say that I think Shaul/Paul may have been “satan in the flesh”? No. I believe he was a man. …but whatever was done (either by him or people later down the line) to lead people astray, I would say was likely done with the influence of satan (the adversary… HIS (YHWH) adversary).

      I’m not claiming to be “all knowing” at all… I am definitely open to righteous correction. It’s difficult to deny what’s staring in my face, though. Many will likely say I am lost, or deceived, or whatever. I may be, I don’t know… but if the comparison is there, it’s there, and it should be faced in search of the truth, rather than just intentionally blinding ourselves to it, in fear of being wrong. IF we were lead astray by the “apostle” Paul, or any of the “founding church fathers” who indoctrinated sun god worship into the truth, we should be wary and watchful for that, as we could be unknowingly following a rather broad and destructive path, simply because it was handed down to us by our fathers, and generations before them.

What do you think?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.