By Abdu Rafiu
The way faces lit up in joy in several quarters in the South-West you would think that the coronation of Olu of Warri was exclusively and purely an affair of this part. They had keenly followed the development that culminated in the emergence of Prince Tsola Emiko as the 21st monarch. There was rejoicing and dancing. All hail the new King, Ogiame Atuwatse 111, the Olu of Warri. One can imagine what would have happened in some club houses in Lagos and Ibadan, but for the caution and restrictions of Mr. COVID-19 and its ruthless cousin, the Delta variant.
The rejoicing in the South West is proof that many must have gone to dust their history notes on what they were taught about the ancestral ties between Ife and the Itsekiri. Those who went to school in the 50s and 60s could not have missed the story. If you missed it somehow in school, you would certainly not have at the feet of the grandmother under moonlight trees: “That Itsekiri man is your brother, remember it.” If you asked how come, you would be told, he is from Ile-Ife. The Itsekiri were led out of Ile-Ife by Ajisegiri (Dandy man) whose inflection we have come to know and address as Itsekiri. And so, as my colleague, Dare Babarinsa was to write last week in his column in this newspaper, “The Itsekiri are regarded as part of the extended House of Oduduwa by the Yoruba people.” He was to remind us of how closely connected Chief Obafemi Awolowo felt with Itsekiri. Such was it that he led a high-level delegation from the West to attend the coronation of the Olu of Warri, Godwin Toritseju, Olu Atuwatse 11. It was his last public outing. And he felt fulfilled he made the journey. It was indeed this that many of his confidants confused with his premonition. He had told some in his close circle that he was going on a long journey and he was not going to take anyone with him.
The presence of the Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi at the coronation in far away Delta State of Olu Tsola Emiko could not have come as a surprise. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo was in attendance as well. Apart from the royal ties, the Ooni may have seized the opportunity of being in Warri to whisper to the new monarch that, hold it, ‘Ile-Ife’ is the cradle of humankind. Indeed, as far as his predecessor, Oba Okunade Sijuwade, was concerned the Garden of Eden was at Ile-Ife! He orchestrated the myth that man indeed first set foot on earth at Ile-Ife! Scientists who have occupied themselves with finding where man first set foot in human history would not agree with him. Some say it was in Ethiopia while others mention Kenya. Of course, the Garden of Eden could not have been on earth, how much less at Ile-Ife. The question that comes to mind when the myth is spread is if Adam and Eve were driven out of the Garden of Eden, to where were they driven? As we now know through the enlightenment afforded mankind today, the Garden of Eden is Paradise, the Spiritual Realm more referred to as Paradise. Adam was the generic name for man, that is the representative name of man on earth and Eve, that of woman. Many humans but in the garment and shape of anthropoid apes set foot scattered in several places at the same time. Indeed the latest discovery is suggesting that men may have appeared in several places at the same time. As Professor Eleanor Scerri of the University of Oxford was to observe: “Homo sapiens probably descended from a set of interlinked groups of people, who were separated and connected at different times. Each one had different combinations of physical features with their own mix of ancestral and modern traits.”
Understandably, Anthropologists not content with the Biblical account have for ages been pacing through the forests of the world from the Middle East to Europe, from Africa to China, looking for clues. As usual, scientists are wading through fossil records for a new lead: “How man began.” Until man has a clearer picture of an issue which gives him conviction, he is not likely to give up in his enquiries and digging for an answer. Findings, laudable as the efforts are, have always ended stirring up controversies on where man first appeared—in Africa or China. At the end of the day, we are not led beyond the limestone bed and cave where light is flashed for clues in relics ‘left’ behind by inhabitants now of blessed memory. The fossils have made scientists to suggest that the “first primate to look anything like modern humans and the first to use fire and create sophisticated stone tools,” dates back more than two million years.
All the efforts have not provided man the answer to the origin of man. Instead what the discoveries have supplied are proofs of the age-long journey of man through this earth. And the question remains: “When, where and how did the human race arise? At a certain stage of his development man lived in caves. That was long before he developed skills to prepare dwellings resting on structures. But trace of how he began cannot be found in caves—trace that he lived there, yes. No expectant woman will accept that the baby she is carrying may have its origin from her dwelling place. Regardless of the nature of the dwelling a woman will become expectant when she is due. But where does the baby she is carrying from? What is the origin of man? Until we answer this question with conviction we may not be able to arouse reverence within us for the perfection of the mechanism that made the appearance of man possible on the face of the earth. We will also not be able to weigh the consequences of our actions. The mystery has led to lack of accountability and a let-go feeling. Today, we see people killing their fellow human beings with glee and triumphal rejoicing totally ignorant of the calamitous burden they heap on themselves awaiting excruciating atonement in the Beyond when they are led through grinding mills. Yet, ignorance is no excuse in earthly laws, how much more the Laws of Creation which are perfect and automatic in self-enforcing.
Many wonder: was it here on earth that man was created? The Darwinists doubt the creation of man. To them he is a product of evolution…he evolved from apes. Ancient people in some cultures long came to recognition of a home for man beyond the earthly, and they say of their departed that they have gone home. In some cultures the departed is admonished about his path after the earthly, what he should eat, and what he should avoid. He is told of helpers he would meet. What this suggests is that if there is a home beyond the earthly to which a man returns after his sojourn here, he must have come from there. In such cultures, searching for evidence of the origin of man in fossil and caves will be laughable. Indeed, it will be hilarity. Although the findings of scientists will nearly always provoke debates and controversies, what is even more likely to ignite arguments and even engender contempt is the theory that no essential difference separates human beings from other animals. A school of thought believes the ‘difference’ is that the former makes tools, uses fire, reasons and laughs.
What is often glossed over in the search for the origin of man is incarnation. The knowledge of pro-creation is widespread and birth is self-evident truth. When incarnation is considered, the direction of search for the origin of man will necessarily change. Incarnation is when a man takes possession of its mother’s womb and baby and mother become separate entities. The stage when pregnancy has gone half-way in its development and entry into the womb is marked by the first movement of the baby. When this has happened, there is blissful joy in the mother-to-be and she glows peculiarly. Before the entry, the soul hovers around the expectant mother, and many an attentive mother can already sense the presence of a baby around her while the bridge which it will use for entry is being prepared by a species of Nature Beings and the body it will use throughout its journey in the earthly life is provided by the mother from what she eats which itself is derived from plants which themselves are fashioned from radiations of the soil, which is why it is said of the physical body of man, “dust thou art and to dust thou shall return.” If we accept the point about incarnation, we must accept the concept of disincarnation. If we accept the concept of disincarnation we must accept the concept of reincarnation. Then the next question should be where is the incarnating soul from? What is soul itself? Soul, as I have previously explained in these pages, is man without his physical body, the earthly cloak. It is spirit with finer coverings which coverings he discards in their appropriate points of origin beginning with the dropping of his body on earth which we call death as he makes progress towards home—the Spiritual Realm—until he finally appears there, glowing, illuminating in indescribable beauty and size with only spiritual coverings, if he fulfills the purpose of his sojourn on earth—the maturity of the spirit. According to the new knowledge—a revelation of Truth—mediated today on earth to mankind, the spiritual real exists and is tangible and firm, indeed firmer than the ground on which we stand which in any case is material and is bound to disintegrate some day—and tangible as the chair on which we sit. What this means is that spirit, which the real man is, is what we encounter as we deal with our fellowmen. He only wraps himself with substances of the planes of existence he traverses to appear and sojourn temporarily on earth. Each body he carries he sees through it, using the substance of which the body is made. Thus he sees with the physical eye, and in the ethereal with the ethereal eye and in the Spiritual with the spiritual eye. On earth his ethereal eyes may temporarily open such that he can sense faintly some affinity and connections, with some other people. A clear case of when the ethereal eyes opened was when the Three Wise Men beheld the Heavenly Hosts Who accompanied the Lord Christ on His Mission to the earth. It is only from a revelation or knowledge brought from outside the earth by beings that have lived on earth before or higher beings from Higher Realms or by the Lord that man can have knowledge of his origin and who, indeed, he is. This is the enlightenment man has been afforded for ages, but to which he has paid scant attention. Instead he digs for his origin with shovels in caves
What then is the place of the Bible account of creation of man? The account is correct; it is the interpretation that has always been amiss. When it is said that man was formed out of clay and the Most High breathed into his nostrils, it is referring to animation and the forming of the body from matter. The animation is by the spirit. What is described is the entry of the living spirit into the material. In this context, it makes sense not to expect the Garden of Eden not to be on the face of the earth. As a matter of fact, it is in the Spiritual Realm, our home, the home of the human spirit from whence it came. To set foot on earth, he had to incarnate in a species of animals which are ape-like, which by that time had reached the peak of their development. After the great event, the species of the animals had been long extinct. Also, it should be pointed out that the occurrence was only once., for it was only to enable man set foot on earth. Man took over his own propagation from there. But right from the beginning what man and animal share in common is the body. Their core differs. While man is spirit, the animal carries soul which emanates from a realm in Creation lower than that of man, the spiritual, the body which man acquired from anthropoid ape was fashioned over time into the beauty of today. Charles Darwin, the great scientist, was only able to trace the externals, and it is with these externals which the scientists of our times still pre-occupy themselves.
The Guardian
