An ancient Mesopotamian poem, The Babylonian Theodicy, is a short text about two friends who are debating their opposing opinions about divine justice. The main disagreement is that one friend believes that no matter how much he serves the gods, it will not help his situation and the other believes that service to the gods is directly related to how successful one will eventually become. The former is referred to as the “sufferer” because he is poor and has had an unfortunate life, and the latter is just referred to as the “friend”; he is fairly wealthy and has lived comfortable. The misfortune of the sufferer has led him to loose faith in the justice of the gods. He has come to believe the good is never rewarded and evil is not punished. He even states, “God does not block the progress of a demon.” The friend tries to convince him otherwise saying, “He who bares a god’s yoke shall never want for food.” This argument is demonstrative of a commonly debated flaw in religion: the lack of explanation for why good people can suffer and bad people seem to always prevail. Another poem, Elegy for a Woman Dead in Childbirth, narrates the story of an innocent, faithful woman who begs for her life but it killed while going through labor. Both of these stories share a common theme of divine justice. They both show that good people may end up with horrible lives.
The final poem, Poem of the Righteous Sufferer, describes the downfall and later redemption of a man named Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan. After having social and financial problems, and falling sick for no obvious reason, Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan begs forgiveness. Unlike the fate of the sufferer and the women in the other two poems, the man in this poem is actually saved by the god Marduk, because he apologized for what he did wrong. This is a sharp contrast to what is shown in the other two stories, where righteous people ultimately continue to suffer. The author of this poem believed that the gods were indeed there to help those who deserved help.
All three of these poems respond to the issue of divine justice within religion. Sometimes good people are rewarded and sometimes they seem to be doomed. We often observe that national leaders, business executives, and those who hold power can be greedy. We also see that many hard working people, who are barely making a living, can be the most pure hearted, generous people in society. So many people ask the question, how could a god let something like this happen?
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Babylonian Theodicy
The Babylonian Theodicy, is an interesting work because not only is the conversation between humans, but this is also the first time we see that man had doubts concerning the gods. Up until now, Atrahasis was the only being that was characterized and allowed to talk – and even then, his actions demonstrated complete obedience to the gods. So having this young unfortunate boy question the necessity of the god’s implies that as social classes began forming, so did doubts on religion.
The sufferer gives names a number of scenarios where the gods should have done something and did not. He states that in his “youth I tried to find out the will of (my) god, with prayer and supplication… I bore a yoke of servitude.” He’s words bring about the argument: How can you do more for the god’s and others around you, and still be less successful than they are? The fact that the sufferer dedicated his life to the god’s and got nothing makes it evident that the god’s are unreliable, if not nonexistent. And it makes the reader consider, if we are unwilling to rely on other unreliable human beings, why would we trust god’s that are biased and imperfect. Thus the sufferer epitomizes all lower class people of this society who are beginning to turn against their gods; and it also hints to why religions that came after decided to believe in only one perfect god.
The Gods' Whims
The poems Babylonian Theodicy and Poem of the Righteous Sufferer both share the similar theme of negative things occurring to those who worship the gods. This reoccurring theme is likely used to tell the Mesopotamian reader that humans are helpless to the gods whims, and that the reader should accept what the gods have occur to them.
In Babylonian Theodicy, the protagonist wonders why his goddess would make his “assets vanish,” his “resources dwindle,” and bring his “prosperity [to a] standstill” (28-9). This occurs to him even though he worships the gods. As he says, “those who pray to a goddess have grown poor and destitute” (71). Even though the protagonist worships the gods, less devout people exist who are much more successful than he is. This reinforces the poet’s message that humans are at the whim of the gods, even if those whims are not fair.
Poem of the Righteous Sufferer also depicts a story of a devout man falling from wealth. The story begins with the protagonist proclaiming his ‘praie [for] the lord of wisdom, solicitous god… Marduk” (1-2). Though the protagonist reveres his god, Marduk still brings misfortune upon him. The protagonist deals with losing friends, wealth, and eventually his health. The protagonist suffers until Marduk has a change of mind, and saves him from death. Marduk exemplifies the message that the gods can bring someone to ruin or save someone from death, and that humans can do nothing to change this.
The purpose for such a negative outlook on humans’ position with the gods is probably used to explain why troubles fall on everyone. Like, the Epic of Creation, the story probably serves to explain events in the world, so that humans can understand why both devout and not devout people are vulnerable to good or bad events, and how to conduct oneself in the gods’ eyes.
The Cruelty of Fate
In these poems lie the fate of unfortunate humans who must endure suffering from the gods. But the matter that these texts deal with is not their misfortune, but the cruelty of their fate. In Poem of a Righteous Man and Elegy for a Woman Dead in Childbirth, the misfortune of having to suffer despite being good (in Poem of a Righteous Man) or having done nothing but pray (in Elegy for a Woman Dead in Childbirth), the protagonist nevertheless suffers pain and death. These texts show that the humans have no control over their fate, despite what good or bad they may or may not do, nor what respect they pay to the gods.The unpredictability and arbitrariness of one's fate in exemplified in the texts.
For example, despite the woman's desperate prayer to Belet-ili, the goddess of birth, to save her life in childbirth, Belet-ili just replies while "shrouding," "Why do you keep praying to me?" In spite of the emotional plea for life, the woman was "forced ..from [her] house" and "cut ..off from [her] lover." It is a brief but tragic poem from an emotional point of view of a lady who suffered, but that lady could have been anybody else.
Again, in Poem of the Righteous Sufferer, the narrator suffers punishment despite his leading a justified life, a moral life. But the fact is the gods do not see him as such, and as the man continued in life, he say his life transform into suffering. His "hunger is chronic" and "debilitating disease is let loose upon [him]" despite "prais[ing] the lord of wisdom, the solicitous god." The god Marduk lay pain upon him while the man had no opportunity to determine his fate. The poem again shows the unpredictability of the gods' will toward humanity. Life for men is practically random and there is no way to alter one's fate while knowing it.
Sorrow, Suffering and Faith
After having read several different stories that focused on the lives of deities in Near Eastern literature, I found it very interesting to take a new perspective of the gods through the people, their creation. While looking up the stories in the Contents, I was not surprised at all by the fact that they were all categorized under “Sorrow and Suffering.” People have the tendency to depend or rely on mystical deities for condolence and plead for help. Whenever they encounter challenges or struggles that seem out of their control, or whenever they need any favor, people of all different kinds of religion always turn to their gods. As seen through the three stories, it is easy to see a pattern in which people usually reach out to their gods only when they are met with sorrow and suffering.
The “Elegy for a Woman Dead in Childbirth” and the “Poem of the Righteous Sufferer” illustrate the pain and despair in the human characters and their plea for aid to the gods, Belet-ili and Marduk. As the woman who just gave birth realized she was about to die, she desperately pleas out with her hands out, “You are the mother of those who give birth, save my life!” In their emotional last moment, the husband and wife reach out to Belet-ili and fail. Interestingly, in “The Babylonian Theodicy”, the sufferer is the resulting character of someone who is tired of relying on his gods. After much suffering and pain, watching injustice go unnoticed and continued, he realizes that his gods must not be fair, for they never heeded to his pleas. It seems that these characters all believe that since their gods have the divine ability to help them, they “must.” People and their faith and trust in their gods seem to be “strong” especially or maybe only when they encounter sorrow and suffering.
The “Elegy for a Woman Dead in Childbirth” and the “Poem of the Righteous Sufferer” illustrate the pain and despair in the human characters and their plea for aid to the gods, Belet-ili and Marduk. As the woman who just gave birth realized she was about to die, she desperately pleas out with her hands out, “You are the mother of those who give birth, save my life!” In their emotional last moment, the husband and wife reach out to Belet-ili and fail. Interestingly, in “The Babylonian Theodicy”, the sufferer is the resulting character of someone who is tired of relying on his gods. After much suffering and pain, watching injustice go unnoticed and continued, he realizes that his gods must not be fair, for they never heeded to his pleas. It seems that these characters all believe that since their gods have the divine ability to help them, they “must.” People and their faith and trust in their gods seem to be “strong” especially or maybe only when they encounter sorrow and suffering.
Myth vs reality
The “Poem of a Righteous Sufferer” is the first work that we have read from the perspective of a human rather than that of the gods or some third party narrator. In fact, the gods never actually speak and are never actually seen in action; this means that this story is the first that steps slightly more towards what we know as reality rather than myth.
It seems to me that the “sufferer” simply gets stricken with some sort of sickness which causes him to be socially outcast due to his now changed appearance that he blames on Marduk. Because the protagonist “so grand, became servile” (302), he is now looked down upon since he does not longer fits in. Now, also, we see visions in the sufferer’s dreams that claim to be sent from the gods. Notice however, that the gods are never actually seen. This type of vision can relate all the way to present day when people claim to see things such as “the light at the end of the tunnel,” etc. Therefore, this piece is much more relatable to real life as we know it today rather than the previous stories about the battles between different tiers of gods, etc.
The Babylonian Theodicy
The Babylonian Theodicy explores the thoughts of a sufferer and friend who respectfully argue over the gods’ relationship with man in regards to the deliverance of justice and injustice. The sufferer makes multiple claims to social issues plaguing society, such as how the robber or thief can get away with his crime and riches, how the second born is stronger than the first, how he himself, the sufferer, was orphaned, and how though he considers himself pious he is still hungry and destitute. The friend, on the other hand, states how the wicked eventually receive an ill fate, that some things can be contributed to blasphemy or a lack of faith, and often repeats “The strategy of a god is [as remote as] innermost heaven” (VIII. Friend), simply alluding to the idea that there are some things that can’t be understood. The debate turns from the responsibility of the gods in regards to justice, to both parties ultimately recognizing the injustice stemming from the gods as well, for the friend agrees in XXVI that “They make him suffer every evil because he has no wherewithal” when speaking of a poor man’s inequality in face of the rich. Overall, this story is not only inconclusive as well as anti-climactic, but equivocating as well. The sufferer doesn’t reach a moral epiphany of any sort that will affect his thought process or daily actions, rather, he settles for the sympathy of his friend. Furthermore, the sufferer, after raising multiple points which were three times (VI, VIII, XXIV) countered with mere opinion of how the way of the gods can’t be understood, ends by saying “The shepherd Shamash will past[ure] people as a god should” (XXVII). In terms of their faith, both remain static throughout the entire story, as neither ever considers any other religion or even the entire absence of one. It was incredibly equivocating to have such a solid theme conveyed throughout the beginning and middle only to have a resolution completely off topic and with no tangible solution to the sufferer’s, or protagonist’s, problems.
Absence of the Common Man
While reading Oppenhiem’s essay on Mesopotamian religion, I found that the evidence that formed the strongest argument to support his thesis was the lack of literature based around the common man’s purposes in daily life and religious activities. Oppenhiem argues that “a large part of what we assume to be Mesopotamian religion has meaning only in relation to royal personages” (page 181), or in other words, texts that depict rituals or relay instructions are centered around the priestly and royal duties without the inclusion of the lower class. I found this to be quite understated in its importance. The common populace creates a huge majority of the peoples of ancient Mesopotamia–certainly over 80 percent–and to not have any evidence as to their habits and lifestyles leaves a huge gap in our knowledge of their entire culture. We can create theories from what we can find in archeological digs, but it is literature that truly can explain exactly what they are used for and their cultural value in the community. If there is nothing to be explained, then the best we can come to is a educated guess with no fair degree of certainty. We cannot know about important habits, morals, and relations of the majority of the populace’s daily life, nor even what role they play in religious institutions. In our minds, the hierarchy of their culture is strictly defined by what is written and what is not written, which may cause us to misunderstand the true values of the common man in their time, whether we perceive them to play more or less of a role then they truly do. Indeed, the ancient mythological texts such as The Epic of Creation depict nothing more than the creation of the common man to feed and serve the gods, and yet we find nothing in newer literature about the common man. Instead it is the priesthood and royal lineage that is held enough prestige to be accounted for in cuneiform.
Sorrow and Suffering
In these poems the people are no better off from worshipping the gods than ignoring and denouncing their faith. The "Poem of the Righteous Sufferers" shows that despite the characters 'natural discourse' for prayer and faith in his gods, he is still plagued with bad luck and misfortune. He is constantly plagued with problems and even though he aims to please the gods his faith is neglected. This poem reminds me of "Inanna's Descent" because of how she decided who would take her place in the Netherworld, by sending Dumuzi for not grieving at Inanna's descent into Hades. Inanna tested her followers by going down into Hades and the gods are testing the narrator of this poem by plaguing him with disease and misfortune to see if the really will remain strong and devout.
The varying motivations of people are brought up and he mentions that "in good times, they speak of heaven", which shows that unlike the narrator other peoples faith in the gods is weak and in only times of success do they expect to be bound for heaven while in times of misfortune they expect none but hell. This point proves that while others are weak in their faith, our narrator is strong and resilient in the gods tests of his faith, and even though the tests grow harder and harder he remains strong against their doubts.
Just as all but Dumuzi had passed Inanna's test of faith, the narrator of this poem passed the tests of faith the gods threw at him. Though I don't know why the gods would treat such a strong follower so awfully, they should take after Inanna and condemn the unfaithful to Hades just like Dumuzi was.
One Big Happy Near Eastern Family
Reading these three poems reminded me a great deal of other stories I have read before from proximal regions. Not just in the plots stories themselves, but also in the imagery and the way the gods behave both towards each other and towards us lowly humans. Practically all of the major stories we have read have ties with neighboring mythology.
The Poem of the Righteous Sufferer has many parallels to the biblical parable of Job, both being stories of a man with nice things and enjoyable life being put through awful trials and having everything taken away from him. While the stories have different lessons and take-aways, both in a way show how unpredictable and incomprehensible the will of the gods can be, and also extol the virtues of maintaining faith despite seemingly being forsaken.
The imagery of the Elegy for a Woman Dead in Childbirth reminds me a great deal of Greek mythology. Talk of boats, crossing the river, and having moorings cut, etc. remind me of crossing the river Styx, where the boatman Charon would take the dead to the gates of the underworld. This woman speaks of being taken to a land from which she cannot return, just how the Greeks saw the underworld to be as well. Continuing with the common underworld theme, the story of Innana’s Descent explaining the seasons has many similarities to the story of Persephone, who needs to stay in the underworld for half the year and as a result we have the colder seasons.
It seems stories, most likely originally told by word of mouth, had found their way all over the region we now refer to as the Near East. It will be no surprise if stories we continue reading have similarities to ones I have come across before.
The Poem of the Righteous Sufferer has many parallels to the biblical parable of Job, both being stories of a man with nice things and enjoyable life being put through awful trials and having everything taken away from him. While the stories have different lessons and take-aways, both in a way show how unpredictable and incomprehensible the will of the gods can be, and also extol the virtues of maintaining faith despite seemingly being forsaken.
The imagery of the Elegy for a Woman Dead in Childbirth reminds me a great deal of Greek mythology. Talk of boats, crossing the river, and having moorings cut, etc. remind me of crossing the river Styx, where the boatman Charon would take the dead to the gates of the underworld. This woman speaks of being taken to a land from which she cannot return, just how the Greeks saw the underworld to be as well. Continuing with the common underworld theme, the story of Innana’s Descent explaining the seasons has many similarities to the story of Persephone, who needs to stay in the underworld for half the year and as a result we have the colder seasons.
It seems stories, most likely originally told by word of mouth, had found their way all over the region we now refer to as the Near East. It will be no surprise if stories we continue reading have similarities to ones I have come across before.
Why depend on unreliable gods?
Humans are always doubting the gods, yet they still beg them for mercy. I think they would be better off forgetting about the gods instead of begging to someone who is obviously fickle.
In “Poem of the Righteous Sufferer”, the speaker Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan describes how the god Marduk’s personality has two sides: one that is violent and furious and another that is calm and caring. This already suggests that Marduk cannot be relied upon. He then goes on to complain about how Marduk betrayed him and gave him bad fortune, and how none of the gods or goddesses helped out even though he was pious. After all this complaining, Marduk sends a woman to relieve the speaker of all his illnesses and he suddenly becomes thankful and subservient again. Just as the gods in “Epic of Creation” were easily moved by anyone who flattered them, Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan is manipulated by the gods. As soon as his ailments are gone, he no longer remembers how negatively he felt toward gods previously.
In “The Babylonian Theodicy”, the gods are just as fickle. “The gods take no notice of strict obedience to their rites and concede nothing to the serious seeker after understanding” (316). Still, when the sufferer complains about how greedy people seem to get good fortune when he gets nothing for his prayers and sacrifices, his friends tries to justify the gods. He advises the sufferer to pray and follow religious rites, even though they obviously did not work before. It is as if the people are trying the same thing over and over hoping for a different result because they can’t think of anything better to do.
The Problem with Pain in the Ancient Near East
In these three poems we see an attempt to understand pain and suffering. Surely it is one of the great mysteries, even amongst us today. Though all three narratives are different all seem to look to the gods as the source of all things. Even the source of their hardships and sorrows.
In the first poem it seems that all the events in Shabshi-meshre-Shakkan's life are under the influence and power of the gods. His sufferings are brought upon him by the gods, and ultimately through Marduk he is relieved of his sufferings. All in all the main character seems to accept his fate, accepts that he is not as great as the gods and accepts that they can control his life.
The second and third narrative seem a little less accepting, both seem to show anger towards the gods because of the trials that have been heaped upon them. It is interesting to note that none seem to find a reason for the suffering. Indeed the characters point out repeatedly that the punishment is not just and that it is beyond their understanding.
In the first poem it seems that all the events in Shabshi-meshre-Shakkan's life are under the influence and power of the gods. His sufferings are brought upon him by the gods, and ultimately through Marduk he is relieved of his sufferings. All in all the main character seems to accept his fate, accepts that he is not as great as the gods and accepts that they can control his life.
The second and third narrative seem a little less accepting, both seem to show anger towards the gods because of the trials that have been heaped upon them. It is interesting to note that none seem to find a reason for the suffering. Indeed the characters point out repeatedly that the punishment is not just and that it is beyond their understanding.
Monday, September 20, 2010
The Relationships of Humans and Gods
The Story of the Flood is another ancient Mesopotamian myth that attempts to explain the origin of humanity just as The Epic of Creation. In this story the more powerful Anunna gods have enslaved the Igigi gods, and human kind is only created so that the burden of labor will be passed on from the gods to the humans. In the Epic of Creation, the birth of humanity is only a few short lines in the story, giving no detail or emphasis to the actual creation. The story mainly focuses on the political power struggles between the gods and how Marduk came to be the supreme leader of the universe. The Story of the Flood however focuses more on the humans and their relationship with the gods. Atrahasis and "the elders" serve as actual human characters in the plot.
While reading The Story of the Floor, I drew a sharp contrast between the religion of Mesopotamia, and modern Christianity and Judaism. The relationship between the gods and the humans is very much different. In Judaism and Christianity the relationship illustrated in the bible, is a more loving relationship such as parent to child. In the polytheistic Mesopotamian religion, the relationship between the gods and humans can be more like a master to slave relationship. It seems as though humanity was only created to serve the gods. In line 185 Enki even says, "Let man assume the drudgery of god" when he is giving his reason for creation of man kind. Later when the humans become too noisy for Enlil, he is annoyed and easily decided to wipe them out with a flood.
Although there are many similarities between the two religions and the behavior of the gods, this does show a significant difference. The Judeo-Christian god in the bible to be more wise and completely pure. The Mesopotamian gods seem to behave more like humans. They can be greedy, impatient, deceptive, and their utmost concern is their own well being.
While reading The Story of the Floor, I drew a sharp contrast between the religion of Mesopotamia, and modern Christianity and Judaism. The relationship between the gods and the humans is very much different. In Judaism and Christianity the relationship illustrated in the bible, is a more loving relationship such as parent to child. In the polytheistic Mesopotamian religion, the relationship between the gods and humans can be more like a master to slave relationship. It seems as though humanity was only created to serve the gods. In line 185 Enki even says, "Let man assume the drudgery of god" when he is giving his reason for creation of man kind. Later when the humans become too noisy for Enlil, he is annoyed and easily decided to wipe them out with a flood.
Although there are many similarities between the two religions and the behavior of the gods, this does show a significant difference. The Judeo-Christian god in the bible to be more wise and completely pure. The Mesopotamian gods seem to behave more like humans. They can be greedy, impatient, deceptive, and their utmost concern is their own well being.
The Flood
“The Flood” follows a pattern that has appeared multiple times in the literature we have covered so far: something is created, begins to cause too much “noise,” upsets its creator, and then has its destruction plotted by this creator. However, in this case there is a twist to this conventional pattern. The creator, Enki, not only creates mankind out of a rebellious god, but also commands that this god’s rebellious spirit live on in humanity. First, this is interesting because if mankind was created to just serve the gods and relieve them of their burden, it would seem unnecessary and even counterproductive to give them a rebellious spirit. Slaves cannot revolt if they have no concept of revolution. Considering the gods’ past with rebelliousness and the trouble it has caused, especially the trouble that caused human beings to be created in the first place, it is interesting that they did not foresee any problems with giving humans the ability to be “noisy.” This would imply that humans are actually created for a higher purpose than just working to serve the gods.
Second, it is surprising that the gods become upset when mankind becomes too rowdy. The very gods who are upset are gods that have been plotted against for being too “noisy” as well. Besides this, the gods knew humans were capable of being “noisy”! They had also seen what happens when those who have this capability are forced to labor- the “noise” ensues. Whatever their reasons for getting surprised were, the moral message of the story is clear: human beings ought not exercise this ability for rebelliousness. However, this is not morality in the sense we know it today. It does not stem from some higher good, but rather out of fear of punishment, the very first stage of Kohlberg’s stages of moral reasoning. Because moral systems are a critical part of any religion, does this primitive moral system mean that Mesopotamian religion was primitive as well? Does this mean, as Robert Wright suggests in “The Evolution of God,” that religion has evolved with moral systems over the years, and if so is monotheism a more efficient streamlining of polytheism?
Sunday, September 19, 2010
More Than Human
This story seems to have been written to instruct, rather than inform. Its purpose appears to be to explain how if humans want to survive and reproduce, they should follow the instructions of the gods. In the story, Enki informs to Atrahasis how he must save people and animals from Enlil’s flood. Because humans are at the mercy of gods in the story, if Atrahasis had not heeded Enki’s warning, humanity would have ceased to exist. This reinforces the story’s message of how humans are inferior to gods, and to survive, they must heed the gods’ warnings.
"The Flood” story, like “The Epic of Creation” gives valuable insight into Mesopotamian culture. Both stories show that Mesopotamians view gods as human like creatures that show more human behavior than humans themselves. The stories also help explain Mesopotamian culture, in that they instruct humans how to act and to obey the gods.
In the Story of the flood, the gods have decided to end the world with a great flood. This sort of action should be deemed normal after reading of the events of The Epic Creation, where the gods wanted to end the other gods simply do to too much noise. Despite the fact that the action of rebellion is far worse then noise making, the gods display even more human like aspects (and although an improvement to the Epic of Creation's portrayal of humans, it's not nearly as descriptive as the actions of the gods).
The writing serves as another reminder of the responsibilities of the humans and the consequences of their actions (making too much noise= death, etc).
Disease rids the world from many humans before a compromise is reached between the gods and humans. Although the humans are allowed to live, the similarities between the actions of the gods in the "creation" are very similar to the actions of the gods to the humans; so it leaves the reader with the questions: "are the humans capable of such action?" and "who would the humans do it to?"
Atrahasis, Noah, and the Ark
Yet another story similar to that in the Bible, the Story of the Flood encompasses two tales: the more detailed story of the Creation of humans than the Epic of Creation and the story of the Disease, Famine and the Flood. While the Creation story showed almost no similarities to the Genesis in the Bible, the Story of the Flood seemed like a very interesting variation of the familiar one with Noah and the Ark or vice versa.
The deities of both stories decided to bring a natural disaster on the world of mankind. However, their reasons were different. While the Christian God had decided to punish the people because of their selfish and immoral behavior, the Babylonian gods were more concerned about their own well-being and their resting time, complaining, “I am losing sleep [to their uproar].” Also, the Christian God does not intend to wipe out the entire humanity, but simply discipline them for their disrespectful behavior. In contrast, the Babylonian gods, with the exception of Enki, immediately decided to eradicate all human existence. While both stories revolve around the Flood, there are some important differences.
I easily noticed the important “prophet” in each story. Atrahasis and Noah are both approached by a deity with the message of an impending doom. Enki tells Atrahasis in his sleep, to “Flee house, build boat, forsake possessions, and save life.” However, while the Flood that Atrahasis lasted only a week, the Flood that Noah encounters lasts forty days and nights. Overall, while the stories had many similarities, they had several subtle differences too.
The deities of both stories decided to bring a natural disaster on the world of mankind. However, their reasons were different. While the Christian God had decided to punish the people because of their selfish and immoral behavior, the Babylonian gods were more concerned about their own well-being and their resting time, complaining, “I am losing sleep [to their uproar].” Also, the Christian God does not intend to wipe out the entire humanity, but simply discipline them for their disrespectful behavior. In contrast, the Babylonian gods, with the exception of Enki, immediately decided to eradicate all human existence. While both stories revolve around the Flood, there are some important differences.
I easily noticed the important “prophet” in each story. Atrahasis and Noah are both approached by a deity with the message of an impending doom. Enki tells Atrahasis in his sleep, to “Flee house, build boat, forsake possessions, and save life.” However, while the Flood that Atrahasis lasted only a week, the Flood that Noah encounters lasts forty days and nights. Overall, while the stories had many similarities, they had several subtle differences too.
Motifs: Clamor, (Attempted) Murder, and Rebellion
Out of the select Mesopotamian mythology we have read thus far, already there are strong recurring themes emerging. While the myths have inconsistencies as to who accomplished what, such as creating man, the landscapes and Fertile Crescent specifically, certain motifs pervade the stories.
In the Epic of Creation, Tiamat and Apsu, the great salt and fresh waters, mixed to create the first gods, who then created subsequent new generations of gods. After creating the gods for whatever reason, Tiamat and Apsu feel the need to kill all of their offspring due to excess “clamor,” resulting in the loss of their sleep. The great bodies of water are fairly unreasonable, creating gods as if on a whim and then deciding to kill them soon after because they are a nuisance. The gods then rise up, fighting for their lives, and defeat Tiamat and Apsu and assume rule over creation.
Moving on to this story, The Flood, as the greater gods assume power, they force lesser gods to do incredible, unbearable amounts of menial labor. Once again the gods rebel, not all of them, but this can be seen as a second rebellion of the gods. They surround Enlil declaring war, but instead of killing him as Marduk did Tiamat, they compromise, creating humans to do the labor for them. Eventually, the “clamor” of the humans proves too much for the gods. Just as Tiamat and Apsu sought to kill their creations over loss of sleep, the gods now decide to kill the humans they have created.
Clearly, the gods had not learned their lesson from their progenitors, or at least fail to see the irony of their actions. Ultimately, a compromise is once again reached and the humans are allowed to exist, but only after many of the humans die. One could say a moral of these stories is sleep must have been very important to the ancient Near East, but more likely, these stories were written in a tumultuous time rife with rebellion and changes of leadership. These stories may also supply commentary on dealing with the consequences of ones’ actions, at least in a more reasonable way than creating something, getting annoyed by it, and deciding the solution is to kill it; imagine if parents were annoyed by the clamor of their babies in the middle of the night, and decided to kill them. The all-powerful gods, at least in this case, are less reasonable than humans.
In the Epic of Creation, Tiamat and Apsu, the great salt and fresh waters, mixed to create the first gods, who then created subsequent new generations of gods. After creating the gods for whatever reason, Tiamat and Apsu feel the need to kill all of their offspring due to excess “clamor,” resulting in the loss of their sleep. The great bodies of water are fairly unreasonable, creating gods as if on a whim and then deciding to kill them soon after because they are a nuisance. The gods then rise up, fighting for their lives, and defeat Tiamat and Apsu and assume rule over creation.
Moving on to this story, The Flood, as the greater gods assume power, they force lesser gods to do incredible, unbearable amounts of menial labor. Once again the gods rebel, not all of them, but this can be seen as a second rebellion of the gods. They surround Enlil declaring war, but instead of killing him as Marduk did Tiamat, they compromise, creating humans to do the labor for them. Eventually, the “clamor” of the humans proves too much for the gods. Just as Tiamat and Apsu sought to kill their creations over loss of sleep, the gods now decide to kill the humans they have created.
Clearly, the gods had not learned their lesson from their progenitors, or at least fail to see the irony of their actions. Ultimately, a compromise is once again reached and the humans are allowed to exist, but only after many of the humans die. One could say a moral of these stories is sleep must have been very important to the ancient Near East, but more likely, these stories were written in a tumultuous time rife with rebellion and changes of leadership. These stories may also supply commentary on dealing with the consequences of ones’ actions, at least in a more reasonable way than creating something, getting annoyed by it, and deciding the solution is to kill it; imagine if parents were annoyed by the clamor of their babies in the middle of the night, and decided to kill them. The all-powerful gods, at least in this case, are less reasonable than humans.
Morality
Upon reading Story of the Flood, I could not help but notice that it adds on to facts mentioned in the Epic of Creation. The significance of human life is barely touched upon in tablet VI of the first story. But The Flood dedicates more time into explaining how we were created, and hints as to how we should live our lives. In many ways, the Story of the Flood can be seen as an instruction manual on proper human etiquette.
Similar to the Bible, the necessity of marriage is implied on the top of page 61 when the first humans were “husband and wife” before the first mother-to-be gave birth. Their choice in vocabulary is important because it established that human beings had to wed before procreating. The text even continues on to say that “ On the tenth day, when the bed is laid, (then) let wife and her husband reach bliss together.” Apart from emphasizing marriage, it also states that women could not have intercourse until 10 days after giving birth. These two statements combined make it evident that at the very least, the authors of the Story of the Flood were trying to influence people to behave a certain way.
The way in which the guidelines were presented indicates that the author of this story was trying to find a way of raising awareness in unique and entertaining ways. Atrahesis for instance, was used to create a contrast between an ideal man, and he’s clamorous counterpart. By making Atrahesis incredibly wise and allowing him to survive the flood, the reader is made to believe that being loud, unproductive, and disobedient will give you a fate similar to the humans that were “annihilated.” One might easily conclude that the Babylonians when through all this trouble in order to create a set of morals and order in their society.
Writing Mesopotamian religion
I believe that Oppenheim makes a very interesting point about how our limited knowledge of ancient Mesopotamian religion causes us to make incomplete conclusions about these people’s religious practices. Oppenheim argues that there is not enough coherent information to make a “systematic presentation of Mesopotamian religion” (172). I somewhat agree with his conclusion, but I also think that it is very useful to attempt to put together what we do know about these cultures in order to better understand them.
It seems, from Oppenheim’s argument, that “Mesopotamian religion presents itself as a complex, multilayered accumulation” (180) rather than a structured religion. Based on the information that he presents, however, I feel that there is enough available information to understand a good amount about at least certain facets of ancient Mesopotamian spiritual life. For example, Oppenheim describes in great detail certain rituals that were performed annually along with the process of exorcism that seemed to be fairly common.
To conclude, it is clear that there is much left to the imagination in terms of knowledge of ancient Mesopotamian religion. But I believe that Oppenheim might be taking this lack of lack of knowledge a bit to extremely when he declares that we should not even attempt to write Mesopotamian religion.
The Flood
The story of the Flood contrasts with the history of the human race in that the rebelling Igigi-gods are seen as the unfaithful and sinful humans. While the Igigi are still Gods in this story, it is as if they are just holders of the title and hardly possess any strong powers like the Anuna-gods because after all if they did they would use them and their uprising against the Anuna-gods.
The Igigi-gods represent the humans that have grown weary of their forced labor, but it is as if they are just given the title of gods and are really just the humans in this story and the Anuna-gods the masters or leaders, just as slave-owners were the masters of slaves and kings the leaders of peasants--as Oppenheim discussed on pg 198. The gods may be called gods but they seem to be much more human-like than in our other readings since they are behaving in very non-god like manners.
When reading I felt as if I was reading a story about human interaction that has occurred throughout history. It showed me that the story of the flood is a story of human trials just with the perspective that they were gods. Consistent with Oppenheims idea that deities are seen as leaders or patrons, the story may have been told from the perspective of a poor or low class person that would see his superiors and their superiors as gods and higher level gods, giving the story the connotation that it is about gods.
Mesopotamian religion
Reading "Story of the Flood" made it clear that there was no one uniform religion in Mesopotamia. Depending on which story you read, the roles of specific gods and goddesses are slightly different. All the separate stories do not combine to create a cohesive plot. Instead, the stories seem to be separate creations which are based on the same basic framework.
In both “Epic of Creation” and “Story of the Flood”, gods create humans so they do not have to work. However, the details are different. In “Epic of Creation”, Marduk simply makes the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers flow from the slain Tiamat’s eyes, but in “Story of the Flood” the Igigi-gods toil to dig those same rivers. Also, in both stories there is the common theme of gods plotting to kill someone who is loud and deprives them of sleep. This suggests that these myths were not meant to be the absolute truth of how the world came to be, but rather a set of related stories.
Similar Themes
Both the Epic of Creation and Story of the Flood have grammatical similarities that include repetition and parallelism. Moreover, both stories exhibit similar themes as well such as the story of the gods, their human-like nature, and the same way of dealing with clamor.
In both the Epic of Creation and Story of the Flood, the stories tell of the gods and their hierarchy. The greater gods are named and their offspring are named as well. Along with that, there are the gods' similar characteristics parallel to that of humans. Those similar characteristics include their tendency to rebel and use violence as their answer to deal with noise.
As humans, the greater Anunna-gods employ the lower gods, the Igigi-gods, to do their work for them. The Igigi-gods, with their human-like nature in response to being overworked, want to rebel and go to battle with the Anunna-gods. As a solution to the problem, the greater gods create humans to replace the Igigi-gods to do work instead. However, the clamor of the humans are too much noise for the gods. Similar to that of the Epic of Creation, like Apsu's intentions to do away with his offspring because of the noise they make, the god Enlil also plans to send a plague to destroy the humans, the gods' creation. The use of killing to deal with clamor is evident in both the stories including the gods' human-like nature of rebellion.
Connection to Humanity
It is surprising that there is a multitude of flood stories from the past, some ancient such as the Babylonian story, some more recent such as the Noah's Ark story. In particular, those two stories share many common plot characteristics, and the latter story may have borrowed from the Babylonian story. This story, just like the Epic of Creation, holds that mankind was created for the use of the gods, and that the gods also have human-like characteristics and flaws. However, in this story, much more concentration is on humans than the gods.
In fact, in the Epic of Creation, the details about mankind and its superficial purpose were very briefly explained, but the Story of the Flood gives a thorough description of the creation and purpose of humankind. The gods, especially Marduk, were the main focus of the Epic of Creation, but Atrahasis, a human being, is the protagonist in the story. Not a single name is given to a human being in the former story. This story of the flood gives a much more emotional point of view from the perspective of mankind. Thus, to the Babylonians of the story's time, there was a more meaningful connection to the myth, than to Epic of Creation. It was the entire human population in jeopardy, and one man's dream that saved him and the rest of mankind.
Also, other analogs and similarities between the gods and humans exist. The idea of the rebellion of hard-working class gods against the higher gods is evident in the real world, because people have to go through hard work, or even slavery, under a higher authority. This, too, helps relate the readers to the story more so than the Epic of Creation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)