Does any Hindu scripture mention anything about Adam and Eve?
According to Hinduism, who is the first person (man or woman) in this world?
No, Hindu scripture doesn't talks about Adam and Eve... However some people compare the story of Bhavisya Purana containing name Adam and Havyavati as Adam and Eve and their story sounds pretty much similar. But we can't be sure about stories of Bhavisya Purana because it is supposed that it suffered high interpolation. Even if we consider story of Bhavisya purana as genuine then still Adam and Eve[Havyavati] aren't progenitor of mankind.. They are just progenitor of mlechha dharma [Foreigner religion]. Still if you are interested in that story of Bhavisya Purana, the story goes like this:
At that time the Kali purusha prayed to Lord Narayana along with his wife. After sometime the Lord apperared to him and said, "This age will be a good time for you. I will fulfil your desire having various kinds of forms. There is a couple named Adama and his wife Havyavati. They are born from Vishnu-kardama and will increase the generations of mlecchas. Saying this, the Lord disappeared. Having great joy the Kali purusha went to Nilacha
Vyasa said: "Now you hear the future story narrated by Suta Goswami. This is the full story of of Kali-yuga, hearing this you will become satisfied."
In the eastern side of Pradan city where there is a a big God-given forest, which is 16 square yojanas in size. The man named Adama was staying there under a Papa-Vriksha or a sinful tree and was eager to see his wife Havyavati. The Kali purusha quickly came there assuming the form of a serpent. He cheated them and they disobeyed Lord Vishnu. The husband ate the forbidden fruit of the sinful tree. They lived by eating air with the leaves called udumbara. After they had sons and all of them became mlecchas. Adama's duration of life was nine-hundred and thirty years. He offered oblations with fruits and went to heaven with his wife. His son was named Sveta-nama, and he lived nine-hundred and twelve years. Sveta-nama's son was Anuta, who ruled one-hundred years less than his father. His son Kinasa ruled as much as his grandfather. His son Malahalla ruled eight-hundred ninety five years. His son Virada ruled 160 years. His son Hamuka was devoted to Lord Vishnu, and offering oblations of fruits he achieved salvation. He ruled 365 years and went to heaven with the same body being engaged in mleccha-dharma. For more read here
Coming to your second question:
Practically it is impossible to find the first man and women in this world. You have to understand Hindu cosmology to understand this.
Literally Manu are the progenitors of Mankind hence humans are called Manushya. For eg. Present Manu is Vaivasvata Manu , son of sun God. But he is not the 1st Man of the world. He is the 7th Manu of this Kalpa [Shewta Varaha Kalpa]. 1st Manu of this Kalpa was Swayambhu Manu and his wife Shatrupa. But still they are not the first man and women of world. They are just first progenitor of man kind of this kalpa. Before this kalpa there was Pitri Kalpa and there were 14 Manus in that kalpa. Before that also there were 14 Manus in the before kalpa and so on goes... For scriptural reference see the answer here. How many Manus have been there? ________________________________________
Summarizing the cosmology in shortcut. Brahma lives for 100 years of Brahma loka. Each day of Brahma is equivalent to 4.3 billion years and so is his night ie. 4.3 billion years. 4.3 billion year is 1 Day of Brahma which is called Kalpa. We are now in 2nd Parardha of Brahma ie. Brahma is now 51 years old . Hence about 51×360=18360 Kalpas has already passed in this time of Brahma. Each Kalpa is ruled by 14 Manus. Hence up to now about 18360×14=257040 Manus ie.progenitor of mankind have already passed. Hence there are about 2 lakh 57 thousands progenitor of Mankind up to this time of Brahma. _______________________________________
Now you may ask,
1st day of Brahma is known as Brahma kalpa. There were also 14 Manus ruling that kalpa. 1st Manu of 1st Kalpa is not also the first Man of this world. It is because there were also previous Brahmas before current Brahma. We cannot even get information about origin of 1st Brahma they go back and back and back in time up to infinity. Hence we can't find the origin of 1st Man and Women in world.
_______________________________________ Hence it is impossible to find the first man and women as nature of time is cyclical. But Kalpantak pralaya occurs after each kalpa and physical, celestial and lower realm suffers destruction. Hence it is possible to find 1st man kind generator after that destruction ie, 1st Manu of Kalpa. _______________________________________ We are currently on 28th Kali of Vaivasvat Manwantar of Shewta Varaha Kalpa. For the scriptural reference that we are in 28th chatur yuga see the answer here.
Vaivasvat is 7th Manu of present kalpa. Each manu is slightly greater than 71 chatur yugas.
Period of Each manu = 4.3 billion years/ 14 =ie. about 307 hundred million years.
The period of total 6 Manu= 6×307 hundred million years=about 1.84 billion years.
Passed years of Vaivasvata Manvantara= 28×4320000-427000= about 120 million years.
Hence total passed time from Swayambhu Manu to present = 1.84 billion year + 120 million years = about 1.96 billion years.
Hence 1st progenitor of Man kind of this kalpa was about before 1.96 billion years from now. His name was Swayambhu and Brahma created him from his skin (kaya). Brahma also gave him his wife Satrupa to populate this earth. Thus Swayambhu and Shatrupa are first Human Progenitors of this Kalpa.
[[Note that the above calculation of 1.96 billion year is obtained by using one chaturyuga equals 12000 divine year and each divine year is 360 human year. It is supported by various Purans. But some people debate on these yuga lengths. They argue multiplication of 360 is arbitrarily assigned in Puran. Hence it may also be wrong]]
Srimad Bhagvat tells countless universes appear just like dust particles around the body of Maha Vishnu. Hence if we take multiverse in account then 1st origin of something in world makes no sense, we have to solve them by using concepts of infinity.
What am I, a small creature measuring seven spans of my own hand? I am enclosed in a pot-like universe composed of material nature, the total material energy, false ego, ether, air, water and earth. And what is Your glory? Unlimited universes pass through the pores of Your body just as particles of dust pass through the openings of a screened window (Bhagavata Purana 10.14.11)
Yes, there is a concept of first man and woman in Hinduism. This is mentioned in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4 which deals with the creation of the world.
स व नैव रेमे, तस्मादेकाकी न रमते; स द्वितीयमैच्छत् ।
स हैतावानास यथा स्त्रीपुमांसौ सम्परिष्वक्तौ;
स इममेवात्मानं द्वेधापातयत्, ततः पतिश्च पत्नी चाभवताम्;
तस्मातिदमर्धबृगलमिव स्वः इति ह स्माह याज्ञवल्क्यः;
तस्मादयमाकाशः स्त्रिया पूर्यत एव;
तां समभवत्, ततो मनुष्या अजायन्त ॥ ३ ॥
sa va naiva reme, tasmādekākī na ramate; sa dvitīyamaicchat | sa haitāvānāsa yathā strīpumāṃsau sampariṣvaktau; sa imamevātmānaṃ dvedhāpātayat, tataḥ patiśca patnī cābhavatām; tasmātidamardhabṛgalamiva svaḥ iti ha smāha yājñavalkyaḥ; tasmādayamākāśaḥ striyā pūryata eva; tāṃ samabhavat, tato manuṣyā ajāyanta || 3 ||
3. He was not at all happy. Therefore people (still) are not happy when alone. He desired a mate. He became as big as man and wife embracing each other. He parted this very body into two. From that came husband and wife. Therefore, said Yājñavalkya, this (body) is one-half of oneself, like one of the two hálves of a split pea. Therefore this space is indeed filled by the wife. He was united with her. From that men were born.
Śaṅkarācārya interprets the verse as (tr. by Swāmi Mādhavānanda):
Here is another reason why the state of Virāj is within the relative world, because he, Virāj, was not at all happy, i.e. was stricken with dissatisfaction, just like us. Because it was so, therefore, on account of loneliness etc., even to-day people are not happy, do not delight, when alone. Delight is a sport due to conjunction with a desired object. A person who is attached to it feels troubled in mind when he is separated from his desired object; this is called dissatisfaction. To remove. that dissatisfaction, he desired a mate, able to take away that dissatisfaction, i. e; a wife. And as he thus longed for a wife, he felt as if he was embraced by his wife. Being of an infallible will, through that idea he became as big—as what ?—as man and wife, in the world, embracing each other to remove their dissatisfaction. He became of that size. He parted this very body, of that size, into two. The emphatic word ‘very’ used after ‘this’ is for distinguishing between the new body and its cause, the original body of Virāj. Virāj did not become of this size by wiping out his former entity, as milk turns into curd by wholly changing its former substance. What then? fíe remained as he was, but being of an infallible resolve, he projected another body of the size of man and wife together. He remained the same Virāj, as we find from the sentence, ‘He became as big as,’ etc., where ‘he’ is co-ordinate with the complement. From that parting came husband (Pati) and wife (Patnī). This is the derivation of terms denoting an ordinary couple. And because the wife is but one-half of oneself separated, therefore this body is one-half, like one of the two halves of a split pea, before one marries a wife. Whose half? Of oneself. Thus said Yājñavalkya, the son of Yajñavalka, lit. the expounder of a sacrifice, i.e. the son of Devarāta. Or it may mean a descendant of Hiraṇyagarbha (who is the expounder).
Since one-half of a man is void when he is without a wife representing the other half, therefore this space is indeed again filled by the wife when he marries, as one-half of a split pea gets its complement When again joined to the other half. He, the Virāj called Manu, was united with her, his daughter called Śatarūpā, whom he conceived of as his wife. From that union men were born.
Manu-smriti 1.32 also states the same thing:
32. Dividing his own body, the Lord became half male and half female; with that (female) he produced Virag.
Brh. Up 1.4.4 further states that the same man and woman kept taking other lifeforms and created the rest of the animal world as we know it:
She thought, 'How can he be united with me after producing me from himself? Well, let me hide myself.' She became a cow, the other became a bull and was united with her; from that cows were born. The one became a mare, the other a stallion; the one became a she-ass, the other became a he-ass and was united with her; from that one-hoofed animals were born. The one became a she-goat, the other a he-goat; the one became a ewe, the other became a ram and was united with her; from that goats and sheep were born. Thus did he project everything that exists in pairs, down to the ants.
In the book, Hindu Dharma: The Universal Way of Life, Swami Chandrasekarendra Saraswati opines that the Mundakopaniṣad story of the two birds perched on a tree branch has undergone many changes over the centuries to become the current Adam and Eve story of Abrahamic religions:
You must be familiar with the story of Adam and Eve which belongs to the Hebrew tradition. It occurs in the Genesis of the Old Testament and speaks of the Tree of Knowledge and God's commandment that its fruit shall not be eaten. Adam at first did not eat it but Eve did. After that Adam too ate the forbidden fruit.
Here an Upaniṣadic concept has taken the form of a biblical story. But because of the change in time and place the original idea has become distorted or even obliterated.
The Upaniṣadic story (6) speaks of two birds perched on the branch of a pippala (7) tree. One eats the fruit of the tree while the other merely watches its companion without eating. The pippala tree stands for the body. The first bird represents a being that regards itself as the jīvātman or individual Self and the fruit it eats signifies sensual pleasure. In the same body (symbolised by the tree) the second bird is to be understood as Paramātman. It is the support of all beings but It does not know sensual pleasure. Since It does not eat the fruit It does not naturally have the same experience as the jīvātman (the first bird). The Upanishad speaks with poetic beauty of the two birds. The one who eats the fruit is the individual Self, jīva, and the one who does not eat is the Supreme Reality, the one who knows himself to be the Ātman.
It is this jīva that has come to be called "Eve" (8) in the Hebrew religious tradition. "Ji" changes to "i" according to a rule of grammar and "ja” to "ya". We have the example of “Yamuna” becoming "Jamuna” or of "Yogindra” being changed to "Joginder”. In the biblical story "jīva” is "Eve" and "Ātma" (or "Ātman") is "Adam”. “Pippala” has in the same way changed to “apple”. The Tree of Knowledge is our “bodhi-vrkṣa”. “Bodha” means “knowledge”. It is well known that the Buddha attained enlightenment under the bodhi tree. But the pīpal (pippala) was known as the bodhi tree even before his time.
The Upaniṣadic ideas transplanted into a distant land underwent a change after the lapse of centuries. Thus we see in the biblical story that the Ātman (Adam) that can never be subject to sensual pleasure also eats the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. While our bodhi tree stands for enlightenment, the enlightenment that banishes all sensual pleasure, the biblical tree affords worldly pleasure. These differences notwithstanding there is sufficient evidence here that once upon a time, the Vedic religion was prevalent in the land of the Hebrews.
(6) The story is told in the Mundakopaniṣad.
(7) "Pippala" is the pīpal or Ficus religiosa.
(8) The meaning of the original Hebrew word is indeed "life".
I cannot comment on Tezz's answer, but it should be noted that
Eve is the English pronunciation of
Havyavati ends in the feminine name suffix
-mati). This is akin to the Western feminine name suffixes
-anne and the Japanese feminine name suffixes
-mi. Though they contain meaning, the importance of this meaning is subservient to their connection to femininity.
The remaining portion
Havya is then a South Asian pronunciation of the Semetic
/χaˈva/. Thus, there is a high probability that this Bhavisya Purana story was imported. It seems likeliest that this would have entered South Asia through Ancient Semitic-speaking peoples sometime after the spread of Alexander the Great's Macedonian Empire.
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?