The beginning of this stage of creation which is the fourth and latest was marked with a global flood and at the end will be a global incineration that also signals the transition into the fifth stage. Within the fourth stage are six alternating but progressive substages which can be called ages of which we are in the fifth. The alternation is patterned after the beginning of creation by Akamara who created something from nothing, the visible from the invisible. It is also seen in the movement of beings from ọrun (the invisible dimension) to aye (the physical dimension) and vice versa. In addition, the progress of the ages is akin to the fractal ranyinranyin (spin) of the okoto (snail shell) which is anticlockwise and expanding – depictions of this spin can be seen on page 47 of À Yà Gbó, À Yà Tó: New Perspectives on Edan Ògbóni (Lawal, 1995).
Thus, the first, third and fifth ages are similar in that they are similar to life in ọrun with the Aku people living as the “sons of gods” and interacting physically with irunmọlẹs a lot and the ages ending with the drowning of enemies in floods, while the second, fourth and sixth stages are similar in certain respects like ending with fires, the Aku people interacting a lot with orishas and forgetting their (Aku) identity. One historical fractal that has occurred in all the ages is the death and resurrection of Ẹla the Saviour by his own power. This historical fractal is well known to the Akus but many do not realize its fractal nature, that is, its self-similarity as it is repeated in different ages, as they tend to believe it occurred just once and that the slightly different accounts are versions of one occurrence. Many have also been influenced by the lies about history from the colonizing and enslaving oyinbo, Cushites and African nomads like the Fulani and Tuaregs.
When the flood was over, Olodumare and the four hundred and one irunmọlẹs came to this planet and set up the Ọgba Ashẹ (Garden of Manifestation; cf. Matt 13:24-30, 36-43) to bring to manifestation that which would be on the earth and as fractals, and prepare the planet for the ènìyàn (chosen ones). It was established in seven days during which the eníyán (the rejected ones whom Olodumare had sought to wipe out with out with the global flood) tried to invade and abort it.
At the end of the fifth day, the irunmọlẹs, Ẹla inclusive, returned to ọrun to get some materials needed to accomplish their mission. Those rejected beings then used the opportunity of the absence of the irunmọlẹs to invade the Ọgba Ashẹ and then came up with three plans to abort it.
- Plan A – they would try to prevent Ẹla from returning to this physical dimension on this planet;
- Plan B – if Plan A did not work they would try to prevent Ẹla from carrying out his mission which was to complete the establishment of the Ọgba Ashẹ;
- Plan C – if Plan C did not work they would try to prevent him from completing his mission successfully.
Hence, the sixth day was named Ọjọ Abamẹta (Day of three tries/attempts) of which the English name is Saturday. None of them worked as Ẹla and all the irunmọlẹs returned and completed the Ọgba Ashẹ the following (seventh) day which was called Ọjọ Aiku (Day of longevity/not dying/overcoming death).
The important point to note in this account that is relevant to this essay is that Ẹla was here for some days, departed for ọrun and returned on the third day to complete his mission. This pattern would be repeated in subsequent ages. Also, since the Holocene wet period is estimated to have ended c. 8,000 BCE and it has been suggested as having been brought about by the global flood, the event just described might have occurred just before or towards the end of the period.
At the beginning of the second age, humans were created and brought to this planet and they include the black, yellow and red peoples. They all have Ile-Ifẹ as their origin on this planet. Sometime later, the oyinbo were created also at Ile-Ifẹ and then expelled for committing unnatural wrongs and rejecting the irunmọlẹs and rejecting the word of Olodumare which is Ifa. They were expelled to eastward into the Igbo (a wilderness of no resources) and thus began to launch sudden attacks on Ifẹ, plundering her resources including humans for use as slaves.
This went on for years until Mọrẹmi, a woman of Ile-Ifẹ and wife of Ọbalufọn, let herself be captured by the oyinbo but later escaped with the acquired knowledge that they could be defeated using fire. So, the next time they attacked Ile-Ifẹ they were not just defeated but cremated. However, Mọrẹmi’s son who was known as Ẹla had to be offered as the Tẹlẹ (the person that carries the negative spiritual load/burden of the people in the form of sacrifice) at the Esinminrin river in Ile-Ifẹ which serves as a boundary between aye and ọrun (Aremu, Ijisakin, & Ademuleya, 2013). When it was time for him to be executed he died of his own accord – this should come as no surprise to those familiar with Ifa rites as sacrificial animals can be left to die without being killed by the priests but the divinity being propitiated. The people of Ifẹ mourned his death and then departed from the river back to their homes. After some time he resurrected and ascended into ọrun of his own accord (Wyndham, 1921). This event is celebrated annually in Ile-Ifẹ as the Edi festival (Walsh, 1948).
We can see from the above that
- A certain individual known as Ẹla was living on this planet as one of the Aku people
- When he died he departed for ọrun (via the Esinmirin river)
- After some time he returned to this physical plane by resurrecting
- He departed and returned of his own accord, just like Ẹla of the first age
It was during this age that various black, yellow and red peoples migrated to the lands that had been assigned to them and Pangaea broke apart into the continents and islands that we see today.
There is an account in pages 8-9 of The history of the Yorubas by Samuel Johnson (Johnson, 1921) of how each of the children of an Ọba who had presented before them various items as inheritance each scrambled for what they considered was the best. Ọranmiyan who was the youngest of them was left with the only item remaining which was a water-logged portion of land that the others had considered as being of little value. However, this portion became in this third age the coronation city of the Aku people that, in every age, is called Ile-Ifẹ (‘Ur’ of the bible and ‘Urfa’ of Jewish and Muslim fables that have argued that it is situated in Turkey until this was disputed by Leonard Wooley who excavated the Sumerian city in 1927). This Ile-Ifẹ is therefore not the same as that of the second age which was founded by Oduduwa and was of Pangaea. Rather, it was the coronation city of the place oyinbo scholars refer to as Sumer, Shinar and Šumeru (Shumeru), names obviously derived by same from Oshumare (also Eshumare) the Rainbow Spirit.
Supporting this is the corresponding bible account of the foundation of Sumer, including the ilu (city) called Ur, by a giant allegedly called Nimrod (Genesis 10:8-12). According to Ifa, Ọranmiyan was a great hunter, warrior and a giant who also lived as a diplomat as he was usually sent to foreign lands on request by the peoples of those lands to rule over them for a while in order to establish order and bring them praise and fame. This is the same biblical description of Nimrod. It is worth noting that the name Nimrod is a mischievous metathesis and transliteration of Ọranmiyan:
Ọr(an)mi(ya)n > Ormin > Nimro > Nimrod;
while Ur is derived from the truncation of the Koranic Urfah which is a transliteration of Ile-Ifẹ:
Il(e-I)fẹ > Ilfẹ > Ur(fah) > Ur.
From Sumer he went to ancient Egypt and started the revolution that brought praise and fame to that land that had previously been sort of like a collection of villages. He was the founding ruler of the First Dynasty of Egypt during which all the rulers were from Sumer. Thus, there are duplicated records from Ifa of events about the foundation, middle and end of that age and the roles of various divinities. One of such is the murder and resurrection of Ọbatala, the divinity of pure/white light who is also known as Orisha, Orishan’la, Oseeremagbo (Ancient of Days), and so on.
According to Ifa, Orisha was out one day near a cliff. One version has it that he was at a cliff edge and someone who envied him bitterly pushed him off the cliff. Another version has it that he was at the bottom of a cliff and on top at the cliff edge was the envious one who pushed a boulder off the cliff and unto Orisha (Soyinka, 1967). Whichever the version, the outcome was that Orisha was smashed into pieces that were scattered everywhere – one thousand and sixty-four pieces according to Soyinka. Ọrunmila the prophet of Ifa then tried to use all his wisdom to gather and put back the parts but could not accomplish this due to the greatness of Orisha which he acknowledged. Somehow, he resurrected and became known as Orishan’la, that is, the great (or most senior) Orisha, while the other parts became the four hundred Orishas. Thus the number of orishas corresponds with the number (401 also) of irunmọlẹs that shuttle between ọrun and aye.
There is a corresponding account of this event from the records of ancient Egypt which have been provided by the oyinbo who have always been invading and colonizing that land and enslaving her people. The summary of the story is that a certain Set (also Seth) who is the biblical Satan murdered Osiris, cut his body into several pieces and then scattered them. Osiris however resurrected as Horus who then battled against and defeated Set (Voss DDD: 649).
The storyline is similar – Osiris was murdered and then resurrected, just like Orisha. Also, the name Horus is actually Orisha, and Osiris is likely a metathesis of Orisha or might have been derived from a wrong reading of Oseeremagbo. The age came to an end when the Aku people finally left Sumer in waves with the last wave leaving c. 1800 BCE.
This one happened towards the end of the fourth age but is no longer well known to the Aku people because there have been conspiracies mainly by three groups to quench any attempt at documenting and publishing the details. Some of them do make passing references to it in acknowledgement of its existence but then describe it as another version of the second instance but influenced by Christian feedback. These groups include
- the oyinbo
- those Akus who are pro-Christian and pro-Islam
- those Aku traditionalists who believe that the stories in Ifa literature are myths and that they are more intelligent than their ancestors.
The fourth age began when the Akus left Sumer in waves to settle in the land popularly known as the Promised Land. The final wave of migrants were led by Oduduwa (a.k.a. Iwa and Oluiwa) whose name the rejected beings mischievously altered to Abraham for their fraudulent historical texts. Some or all of the Akus later spent some time (430 years) in Egypt but when they returnedthey met the rejected beings in that land and successfully waged war against and expelled them. Neighbouring relatives of the Akus in the region of Mesopotamia who followed them into the Levant where the Promised Land of Canaan is situated also have till date accounts of encountering and expelling other sets of these rejected beings (cf. Deut 2:8-13). Their invasion of the Levant before the arrival of the Akus and others was a repeat in the same pattern of the invasion of the Ọgba Ashẹ during the first age.
These rejected beings would keep trying to come back, resulting in repeated colonization and enslavement and colonization of the Akus. The scanty information about the Saviour’s death and resurrection has it that Ẹla was born to Mọrẹmi and chosen as the Tẹlẹ bear the negative spiritual load of his people the Akus. The distinguishing feature of this event this time is the scale of the sacrifice in that the offer of salvation was open not just to his people as in the second age but also to other peoples like the relatives of the Akus and other blacks and some of the oyinbos in that region of the Levant, Mesopotamia and all the surrounding areas where his people had been scattered to and oppressed. This is what irks those who have been trying to silence the record.
They argue that this account and that of the second age are too similar to the Christian account of the death and resurrection of Jesus for the salvation of the world. To them, the story of Ẹla must have been concocted by someone or some people with Christian sympathies trying to ‘convert’ the Akus in to Christians and/or pro-Jews and thus should be dismissed. A number of them believe that the biblical genealogy of the Jews and others who label themselves Semites is true, whereas they are all lies mischievously fabricated from the records of Ifa.
A similarity obvious in the account of the fourth instance and that of the bible the name of the woman who gave birth to the savior: Mọrẹmi and Mary. Mary is short for Miriam which is derived from Mọrẹmi. Another is the name of the savior which the rejected beings who speak Hebrew and Aramaic render as Yeshu and Yeshua but which is derived from the name in the language of the Aku people that is Eshu which is short for Eshumare. According to Ifa, Eshumare is the irunmọlẹ of rainbow light and begotten by Olodumare from whom he proceeds and whose message (Ifa) he decodes for man. Eshumare is Ifa.
Given that the Aku account of the fourth instance has the savior identified by the name Ẹla which literally translates to “Saviour” – the root “-la” is a verb meaning “to save” or “to breakthrough” (e.g. dispersal of Euphorbia seeds by force or the elevation of an electron from energy level to a higher one) while the “E-” stem is a derivational affix that nominalizes the former into a noun – and evidence from the bible points at Eshumare being the name of the savior, Ẹla must be Eshumare. Furthermore, he must also be Ọbatala – pure white light and the rainbow are essentially the same but for the medium through which they pass – as seen better in the description of the sixth instance later below.
Thus, the bible account can be summarized correctly as follows: Eshumare whose totem is the DNA or the rainbow snake around a pole (cf. Numbers 21:1-9) was rejected again by his people who had him impaled, not crucified, unconsciously in conformity with his totem, and before he could be killed he departed on his own for ọrun and then returned on the third day.
The fourth age ended sometime after the 1st century CE and the transition into the fifth age was marked by an ‘aye to ọrun’-like migration of the Aku people and their relatives. They settled south of Canaan in the new Ile-Ifẹ that was also known by the name Eshumare, but renamed Axum (also Aksum) by the people of Geʻez (Habesha/Amhara) – the biblical Gehazi (2 Kings 5:20-27) – and Somali by some brethren of the Geʻez. It was also renamed YHWH Shammah by the rejected beings among the oyinbo (Ezekiel 48:35).
Eshum(are) > Axum
Ge(h)az(i) > Geʻez
Many Akus are not aware of the existence of ages, and even if they are, they are not aware of the migrations they have been undertaking. As a result, the accounts of the events of the fifth age, as with those of previous ages, have been viewed as occurring in the same age. Included is the account of the saviour’s death and resurrection which must have occurred since it is a fractal. Nevertheless, I have come across an unverified account (Akintola, 2013) which just might be the ‘missing piece’ of the puzzle. According to the narrator, there was once a flood in Ifẹ that was increasing and thereby causing trepidation among the inhabitants. They sought Ọbatala for the solution, that is, to stop the flood, which he somehow failed to do (perhaps he got drunk on palm wine and dozed off just like he had done before during the second age). When the people noticed this they sought for Ọrunmila to consult Ifa for the solution to the flood. He did so and told them that Olodumare would send someone to save them, following which Oduduwa arrived and saved the day.
Thus, Ifẹ became divided between the supporters of Ọbatala and Oduduwa, and a conflict ensued. A majority of the people was also in support of Oduduwa and sought to expel Ọbatala who eventually left in company of his supporters. The people of Ifẹ then began celebrating what they thought was their victory but after a while noticed that their lives had become dysfunctional with no rain, no fertility, no growth, and the likes. Oduduwa and the people were thus forced to acknowledge the supremacy and importance of Ọbatala. With humility they sought for and pleaded with Ọbatala for forgiveness and to return, following which normalcy returned to Ifẹ.
The distinguishing part of this account is the exit of Ọbatala from Ifẹ followed by his return after a while. This is obviously according to the pattern of the previously described four instances and therefore seems credible. However, the narrator did not mention the duration and location of this exile. A marker that might be useful in the verification of this account is the flood. Here, it was local and the location was populated and thriving. Thus, it cannot be a corrupted version of the traditional account of the global flood that marked the end and beginning of the third and fourth stages of creation respectively. Similarly, it cannot be a corrupted version of the foundation of Ile-Ifẹ at the beginning of all the ages from water-logged regions.
The Borgawa (Borgu nation a.k.a Bariba) who have been neighbouring relatives of the Akus throughout the ages have among their records an account of a flood that occurred sometime during the latter part of the fifth age and during which a great multitude of their enemies drowned. This is recounted as part of the “Kisra Legend.” They say that they, along with others were living by a river somewhere east of their present location for a while. Then a time came when an enormous horde of their enemies had gathered together with the aim of wiping them out. Thankfully, the one “who gave his life for the sins of the world” rescued them by parting the river and guiding them across on dry ground. Then they had finished crossing, he caused the parted waters to come together again, thereby drowning their enemies who had been in hot pursuit. Also, the river became much wider from then onward (Mockler-Ferryman & Day, 1892).
Their relocation across the river to the other side was the trigger for the westward migration to their present location in West Africa. But they did not come alone as they recall that there were others including the Akus, amongst others (who all have not forgotten the “Kisra Legend”). Furthermore, they all assert that this place in the east is the southern Arabian Peninsula. This strongly suggests that the river in question is the watercourse that has been renamed “Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb” by the oyinbo and that the northeast separation of the Arabian Peninsula from the East Africa occurred less than two thousand years ago and not 23 to 33 million years ago as taught by the oyinbo. It is not for nothing that the Arabs named it Bab-el-Mandeb which is translated into English as Gateway of tears or Gateway of anguish or Gateway of scars. They named it thus in memory of the huge number of their people that drowned during the earthquake that they say separated the Arabian Peninsula from the African content. The rejected beings know about this incident very well but dubiously dismiss it as mythical, as an Arab legend.
Given that these peoples began settling in West Africa c. 5th to 6th century CE – the Akus had three waves of migrants with the last batch arriving c. 9TH century CE – this period can be safely assumed to be the time of occurrence of the flood. It is quite likely that the re-joining of the waters of the river and its simultaneous or subsequent widening could have resulted in a flood affecting Ile-Ifẹ which was also known as Eshumare. The very likely occurrence of an earthquake or a series of earthquakes would have resulted in the expansion of the Red Sea and the north eastern shift of the Arabian Peninsula, with an accompanying tsunami. Perhaps this earthquake was the consequence of the eruption of the volcano that created the island of Jabal al-Tair halfway between Eritrea and Yemen. The problem with this hypothesis is that the land of Eshumare is quite elevated, around 6,991ft above sea level. Perhaps the flood could have resulted in increased precipitation and/or a sharp rise of the water table in that region.
There is also the issue of the time of Oduduwa’s arrival. During the transition from the third age to the fourth, Oduduwa, who is also known as Iwa (transliterated along with ‘Ohun’ to ‘Ham’) and Oluiwa (transliterated by same to ‘Noah’), led the last wave of migrants from Ile-Ifẹ of Sumer to Canaan but was not the ruler throughout that age as he arrived for the transition into the next age and there had been other rulers prior. Hence, the aforementioned unverified account might have to do with his late third age arrival. However, in that age Oduduwa was born to Suuru (as mentioned in the common saying from odu Ogbe Ogunda that “Suuru ni baba Iwa” or “patience is the father of character;” biblical ‘Terah’), that is, as an Orisha, while the unverified account has him depicted as arriving directly from ọrun, that is, as an irunmọlẹ. This account is therefore not of the third age.
According to information (a prophecy) gleaned from the bible (Ezekiel 37:24-25), a certain Dôd (also dd, etc.) would be the ruler of the land of (Axum) Eshumare throughout the fifth age. The oyinbo who transliterated this name have also transliterated another name which they have assumed as equivalent to dwd and further as Daud/David (Barstad DDD: 259), whereas it is the Aku appellation Daodu (also Dawodu). They have however admitted that their proposed etymologies are problematic. Thankfully, Ifa teaches that the one Olodumare has assigned that position is the irunmọlẹ known as Oduduwa. A common elision of Oduduwa is Odudua and from this can be seen the oyinbo derivation of the modern Hebrew Dod from the original Aku (not biblical Hebrew) alphabets that did not have vowel marks:
- (O)dud(ua) > Dud > Dod.
If Oduduwa was the reigning Ọba (royal father; ruler) throughout that age, then the beginning of his tenure would appear to be in disagreement with the information from the unverified account that has Ọbatala as initially in charge before being displaced by Oduduwa. There is an account in the odu called Ogbe Otura of a particular incident that, if truly connected, might be useful in resolving the disagreement.
There was a time when the irunmọlẹs interacted openly with and lived among the Akus. However, quite a number of the people would devise and in vain try to execute evil schemes against them. Eventually, the irunmọlẹs decided that they had had enough and resolved to make themselves invisible to the people. If it happened during the fifth stage, perhaps there was consequently some sort of interregnum during which Ọbatala might have had to intervene before a return of Oduduwa.
Perhaps all these permutations concerning the fifth instance have been a wild goose chase. But there is still the curious claim by archaeologists that 90% of Aksum is buried.
It occurred sometime during the 9th or 10th century CE when the third and final wave of Aku migrants arrived at the present Ile-Ifẹ, which is in the Guinea (Canaan) region of West Africa. This marked the end of the fifth age and the start of the sixth. These set of migrants were led by Oduduwa who, upon arrival, challenged Ọbatala who had been in charge. The result was a war between them with both sides having their supporters. For seven days they fought, a repeat of a similar war between them during the second age that lasted for two hundred years. Thereafter, Ọbatala who does not like confrontations and conflicts headed for the Esinmirin river, went across and past the bank where the domain of Ọbameri – who is commonly known as Iku (Death; the ‘-meri’ in ‘Ọbameri’ has been transliterated by the oyinbo to ‘Môt’ and ‘Ọba-’ to ‘Baal’) – has his domain, towards the domain of Ọbaluaye (also known as Sọpọnna; another Baal; the irunmọlẹ in charge of plagues). By crossing the river, he had left aye and entered ọrun. When Ọbaluaye sighted Ọbatala his friend and senior, he vacated his throne for him out of respect.
Meanwhile, Oduduwa and his supporters including Ọbameri had been celebrating what they thought was their victory. Furthermore, Ọbameri poured some ẹmu (palm wine), a taboo of Ọbatala, along the path that Ọbatala took to prevent him from returning. The celebration very brief as crises enveloped Ile-Ifẹ with life-generating and -sustaining activities ceasing. For instance, semen dried up, trees failed to bring fruit, rain (and perhaps dew) ceased, pregnant women and animals could not give birth, conception failed, and so on. These happened because Ọbatala is responsible for the fertility and continuity of life. By withdrawing to ọrun rather than engage in face-to-face combat he forced Oduduwa and his supporters to humbly acknowledge his seniority and role in their existence. Eventually, they conceded and sought for reconciliation with Ọbatala but not directly as they first sought Yemọja his wife, who had not followed him across the river, to plead with him on their behalf. Ọbatala then returned of his own will on the tenth day. Till date this event is remembered in Ile-Ifẹ as the Itapa festival which is celebrated annually as part of the traditional new year celebrations (Lange, The dying and the rising God in the New Year Festival of Ife, 2004).
Here, we can see that just as in the previous ages, Ọbatala departed of his own will from aye to ọrun and returned after a short while. This is proof of my argument on this blog that Ẹla is not Ọrunmila as taught by many Ifa historians. Rather, he is the same person as Ọbatala and Eshumare:
Ẹla ≡ Ọbatala ≡ Eshumare.
Also, Ọbatala returned on the third day, just like in the first and fourth ages. Thus, it can be safely assumed that in all the ages he departs and then returns on the third day, something happens to trigger the three-day departure for ọrun by Ẹla the Saviour, and this is a historical fractal.
The existence of these instances of the saviour’s death and resurrection, especially the sixth instance, is clear proof that the claims of the rejected beings among the oyinbo and some other non-Aku groups that he has been born to them repeatedly and is to come again from them are fraudulent. An example is that of the Hindus – one of the oyinbo families who all from the Caucasus region troubled Sumer so much during the third age that even though they eventually took that Ifẹ (heaven) by force (c.f. Matthew 11:12) as and after the Akus had fully left at the end of that age, and then built the Tower of Babel, the irunmọlẹs punished the oyinbos with speech confusion (Genesis 11:1-9). That is, the irunmọlẹs suddenly broke their then single language into many languages and dialects. Their chief god Zeus, also known as Theos, Deus, Jesus, Satan, etc, was cast down from the tower like lightening and burnt to ashes (Isaiah 14:12-21). Consequently, the oyinbos could not live together but began spreading into other lands and, in the process, overwhelmed, displaced and swallowed the indigenous black, yellow and red peoples they met and claiming not just their identities but also copying their religions and languages and twisting the histories of all those lands including the Mesopotamian region.
From Mesopotamia, the Hindus invaded the Indian subcontinent and carried out the identity theft just described. Specific examples include the fabrication of the Sanskrit language, associated scriptures like the Vedas, their religion and their history. Kersey Graves noted in his book “The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviours” (Graves, 1875) that they believe that there was a 6,000 year cycle before the great flood and there is a 6,000 year cycle since the global flood during which have been ages that for six hundred years each. In each age an avatar of Vishnu their savior incarnates once per age. Since they claim that Chrishna (also spelled Krishna) is one of these avatars who was around in 1,200 BCE, we can assign dates to Graves’ avatar list. Thus we have: Matsa (5400 BCE), Vurahay (4800 BCE), Kurma (4200 BCE), Nursu (3600 BCE), Waman (3000 BCE), Pursuram (2400 BCE), Kama (1800 BCE), Chrishna (1200 BCE), Sakia (600 BCE) and Salavahana (0 BCE).
The Hindus add that Kalkin is the next and last avatar, but this then makes the whole of Hinduism questionable as the timetable shows that even though two thousand years or 3⅓ of the six hundred year cycles have passed since the alleged incarnation of the last avatar, by now there should have been three other avatars of Vishnu since Salavahana. In short, Kalkin and two other avatars should have been around latest by 600 CE, 1200 CE and 1800 CE respectively. Going further, they should presently be expecting the fourteenth avatar. These imply that either his arrival is long overdue or Hinduism is a total fraud. Doubts about their religion have been on for quite a while (Maurice, 1812), even as the Hindus keep reviewing their calendars (Misra, 2012) and no longer include Salavahana in their Vishnu avatar list.
My opinion on this is that since the beginning of the present (sixth) age, the speed at which news travels and can be verified has been increasing. Therefore, it has become increasingly difficult and impossible for a person or some persons to fabricate an avatar and his biography and claim that he performed so and so feat(s). Additionally, the stories of previous avatars were made up, copied and twisted from the literary corpus of the Akus and their relatives, upon the departure of the Akus from Sumer. They were especially taken from the Aku accounts (conversations, prophecies and so on) of the lifetimes of Ẹla, both as orisha and irunmọlẹ.
The same is true for Christianity that has been used to deceive people to believe that Jesus is the true savior whose last appearance was about two thousand years ago and is yet to return. This is contrary to the teaching of the savior as recorded in the bible that some of his disciples would still be alive to witness his return (Matt 16:24-26). Assuming that these witnesses were adolescents when he uttered that prophecy and they lived for up to one hundred years, he must have returned sometime around the end of the 1st century CE or the beginning of the 2nd century CE. This timing would be in perfect alignment with that of the end of the fourth age as proposed in this essay. Those who deny this argument should show the world as evidence those persons the savior was addressing who would be over two thousand years of age by now.
The salvation that the oyinbo have been preaching about and waiting for for over two thousand years has, according to the model of alternating but progressing cycles (ages), already taken place for that fourth age. Also, this present (sixth) age has already witnessed the saviour’s death and resurrection, thus implying that we should not expect another.
There is even evidence from the bible of the existence of ages. Eshumare referred to it when teaching about the result of blasphemy against Ẹla (Matt 12:31-32) – when he referred to two ages which were the one of that time, that is, the fourth, and the next, that is, the fifth. The propagators of Christianity have no evidence that there have been no preceding or subsequent ages or that the next one referred to in that passage was to be the last, other that dubious insertions of the adverb “forever.” Another is the reference to the release of the devil from the Pit for a while before being imprisoned again therein (Rev 20:1-2). Unsurprisingly, the propagators of Christianity have no evidence that there have been no other preceding release and jailing and that there will not be any other subsequent ones. However, they might want to use the reference to the “first” and “second” resurrections mentioned in Rev 20:4-6. In fact, the narrative of Isaiah 14:12-15 is a direct reference to the earlier episode of same that occurred at the end of the third age.
In the fourth age, the savior’s death and resurrection and then subsequent ascension into ọrun occurred towards the end of that period. One major purpose of his incarnation was to remind his people about him, his importance and reconcile them with Olodumare. After his ascension he chose someone to do carry out his work among his people in aye and have similar experiences. That person’s name is called “Paul” by the oyinbo but it looks like it is derived from the Aku name “Ọpẹ” which is a name strongly associated with the saviour’s odu called Otura Irẹtẹ. Thus, it might be that since Paul understood the savior very well and had similar experiences his is the same odu.
- (Ọ)pẹ > Paul
(Note: the plant called Palm tree has its name derived from Ọpẹ which is of a different intonation)
As I think about these, I have been pondering over some questions:
- Since the savior has since died and resurrected, when will he return to save mankind from self-destruction?
- When will we see the reincarnated John the Baptist who is Elijah preparing mankind for his return?
- When will we see the reincarnated Paul to perform signs and wonders that Eshumare would have done had the latter’s death and resurrection not taken place much earlier?
- Who will remind the people about Eshumare, his relationship with Olodumare and his coming in the name Olodumare?
- In which age did the so-called Baal-Yamm conflict (Lange, Preservation of the Canaanite Creation Culture in Ife, 2004) occur?
DDD Toorn, K. van der, et al. (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Leiden: Brill. 1995.
Akintola, M. A. (2013, January 24). EWA EDE YORUBA(The beauty of Yoruba language). Retrieved April 29, 2015, from Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AKINTOLAMA/photos/a.124570724282340.23503.110578842348195/433303103409099/?type=1&source=46&refid=17&_rdr
Aremu, P., Ijisakin, Y., & Ademuleya, S. (2013). The significance of “Igbarubi-edi” in Edi festival in Ile-Ife: a spiritual concession. Journal Research in Peace, Gender and Development, 3(7), 126-132.
Graves, K. (1875). The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors. P. Eckler.
Johnson, S. (1921). The history of the Yorubas : from the earliest times to the beginning of the British Protectorate. (O. Johnson, Ed.) Lagos: C.M.S. (Nigeria) Bookshops Lagos.
Lange, D. (2004). Preservation of the Canaanite Creation Culture in Ife. In P. Probst, & G. Spittler, Between Resistance and Expansion: Dimensions of Local Vitality in Africa (pp. 127-157). Münster: Beiträge zur Afrikaforschung n° 18.
Lange, D. (2004). The dying and the rising God in the New Year Festival of Ife. In D. Lange, Ancient Kingdoms of West Africa (pp. 343-376). Dettelbach: J.H.Röll Verlag.
Lawal, B. (1995). À Yà Gbó, À Yà Tó: New Perspectives on Edan Ògbóni. African Arts, 1, 36-49+98-100.
Maurice, T. (1812). Brahminical Fraud Detected;. London: W. Bulmer and Co.
Misra, B. D. (2012, July 15). The end of the Kali Yuga in 2025: Unraveling the mysteries of the Yuga Cycle. Retrieved April 28, 2015, from The Official Graham Hancock Website: http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/DMisraB6.php
Mockler-Ferryman, A., & Day, C. (1892). Up the Niger. London: G. Philip & Son.
Soyinka, W. (1967). IDANRE & other poems. London, Trinidad and Tobago: Methuen.
Walsh, M. J. (1948). The Êdi Festival at Ile Ife. African Affairs, 47(189), 231-238.
Wyndham, J. (1921). Myths of Ífè. London: Erskine MacDonald Ltd.
(PS: I wanted to publish this three months ago but had to delay. Before then I had been thinking there were five ages but with the delay realized that there are six, although…)