From: João Simões Lopes Filho
Message: 3835
Date: 2000-09-18
----- Original Message -----
From: John Croft <jdcroft@...>
To: <cybalist@egroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 12:24 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: Religion
>
> In reply to my post
>
> > >Glen, pre-exilic Sheol was not associated with the colour red.
> > >[...] The association with fire only came after contact with the
> Iranians.
> >
> > >Baal was never a "God of the Underworld". Rather he was a weather
> > >god, (eg. "a thunderbolt weilder") son of El (Semitic father god).
>
> Glen replied
> > What of Babylonian deity Nergal, the fire god, associated with Mars
> (the
> > fire star), king of the Underworld? Is he Iranian too then? Check
> out the
> > following link:
>
> Glen, see my point about the late insertion of Nergal as divinity of
> the underworld in post Sumerian times. He certainly was not god of
> the underword before but grew in importance as originally a minor god
> of the plague. Nergal was never a fire god.
>
> Thanks for the link, to
>
> > http://www.good.co.uk/oneworld/sumeria.html
>
> Perhaps you should read it yourself. It clearly states that Nergal's
> colour was "black" and not red. He was responsible for Enkidu's
> death
> by pestilence, not by war, and that he only became associated with
> War
> in Babylonian times, with the rise of Marduk to King of the Gods (and
> the replacement of many goddesses, eg. Ereshkigal as Goddess of the
> Underword and Inanna as Goddess of War!) You are confusing events of
> circa 1700 BCE with those supposedly 7,000 BCE, or 5,000 BCE.
>
> Regarding your quote of Baal
>
> > It says that Baal truely _IS_ "the UNDERWORLD or mountain god, the
> son of El
> > or Dagon whose sister Anath was goddess of WAR but much later he
> was
> also
> > associated with the rain and fertility." He "declared that he would
> no
> > longer recognise the supremacy or authority of Mot (DEATH)" We have
> the
> > underworld, war and death, all in the same paragraph. I
> particularly
> like
> > the sentence later on saying, "When [Mot] refused [Anath] tore Mot
> limb from
> > limb with a knife, scattering his pieces and grinding him in a mill
> and
> > finally BURNING his remains in an OVEN" My god, looks like fire!!!
> The
> > relationship with fire may be one of cremation. This automatically
> creates
> > an association between fire and the underworld of the dead that Mot
> rules.
>
> Glen please quote your own references correctly. The site states
> verbatum
>
> "The most important Ugaritic Myth forms a cycle of three episodes and
> features the storm-god Baal, the liturgical texts were
> probably intended for recital around the late autumn."
>
> Interesting Glen, Baal was a storm god, not a mountain or underword
> god as you assert.
>
> "The first text deals with Baal's defeat of Yam - the Sea God or
> Dragon, which is equivalent to the Sumerian TIAMAT, who is
> granted supreme power by El if he can firstly overcome Baal. However,
> the young Baal armed with magical weapons supplied
> by the divine craftsman and after much tension and conflict finally
> defeats and kills Yam scattering his dismembered body.
> Essentially this myth demonstrates how to deal again with the forces
> of chaos, that is Yam - the flow of waters from heaven."
>
> This myth came originally from Sumeria during the Ubaid and later
> spread of Sumerian myths northwards into Syria.
>
> "The second text describes a banquet held to celebrate Baals'
> victory,
> then how his worshippers are slaughtered by Anath - this
> symbolises perhaps the eventual return of the dry season. Baal
> attempts to reconcile matters with her by promising to reveal the
> secrets of lightning, while he is also anxious to secure a palace for
> himself. Anath agrees to go to El and plead his case, but El at
> first refuses to grant Baal his wishes until he is eventually
> persuaded by his consort Ashera. The building of Baals' palace at
> Ugarit is described and when complete a commemorative festival is
> held
> to celebrate Baals' sovereignty."
>
> This is a classic case of the role of an older god's role being
> superceded by a yonger one. One with clear Sumerian affinities.
>
> "The third of these texts describes Baal's confrontation with death
> itself. At this point in the story Baal then decides to issue a
> challenge to the God of Death - Mot a primeval earth monster who
> presides in the underworld. Mot forces Baal to descend
> into his underground kingdom, whereby Baal is subsequently replaced
> by
> Asheras' son Ashtar. As Ashtar is unsuited to the
> task, Anath goes in search of Baal and confronts Mot and kills him by
> threshing and burning his remains, despite the obvious
> paradox that death can only be assuaged by the intervention of the
> supreme Gods and never vanquished. Baal eventually
> returns to power and resumes his duties as sovereign largely due to
> the intervention of Shapash the Sun Goddess. In a second
> confrontation Mot ascends and confronts Baal in a fierce battle which
> eventually ends in a draw. El finally persuades Mot to
> acknowledge Baals' sovereignty and return to his own underground
> kingdom."
>
> It is Mot who is God of the underword, not Baal, who retains his role
> as weather divinity and King of the Gods.
>
> It is important that you get the seasonal cycle symbolism here Glen.
> "Milling, Threshing and Burning" is the milling, threshing and the
> roasting of barley that is being referred to here. This is a
> fertility cult that is being spoken of, linked to the seasonal cycle.
> It has little to do with any "fires of Sheol".
>
> The site continues
> "Again this myth appears to parallel that of the Sumerian Ishtar who
> also journeys into the underworld to find Tammuz."
>
> Glen, Sumerian... not Semitic, or Semitish, Europo-Semitish or
> anything else. Tammuz was the Sumerian Dammuzi... Hope you get it
> now.
>
> > Gee. How might we blaim Mot, Baal AND Nergal with Sheol, all on our
> beloved
> > Iranians now, John? Do you know what you're talking about at all?
>
> Mot was god of the underword, a dark and gloomy place, not a place of
> fire and red. Nergal's colour was black (read the site you
> quoted again Glen) not red. And the Sumero-Semitic underword was
> similarly black and lightless. Baal was a weather god, the
> association with Tammuz came later as a result of Sumerian influence
> and was not in the original Semitic mythos. In fact Baal was a
> relatively late God, his name just means "lord" - it was a title
> (Like
> Adonai) not a Gods name. And Nergal (from Sumerian Ner = sickness,
> and gal = great) was god of the plague, not originally the underword
> divinity. Cannot you see how how you are taking a mixmash of
> elements
> drawn out of historical context and stitching them together using a
> faulty "colour" system drawn from many non contemporary sources?
>
> And your
> > Iranian excuse only brings up another important question: "How the
> hell
> > would Iranian's have a fire myth at all if it weren't for the
> IndoEuropean
> > mythos and further why would the IEs have a firey underworld view
> at
> all if
> > the underworld was clearly watery??"
>
> The watery underword of the Sumerians was weakened as one moves away
> from Southern Iraq and into areas where flooding was not an ever
> present danger. Invasions of southern Iraq by mountainous
> tribespeople (Gutians, Subartu, Luallabi, Amorites, Elamites, and
> Iranians, over the centuries) weakened the watery association of
> early
> Sumero-Akkadian identification until it was possible for the Iranian
> concepts to prevail under Cyrus and Darius. Glen, you were talking
> about the Semites having a firey underword, linked to the colour red.
> Now you are speaking of IE's.... get your story strait please.
>
> Glen the watery association of the underword was Middle Eastern, not
> IE. And yet you have been claiming the Middle East was the location
> for the development of a firey underword. It wasn't.
>
> > Nice try.
>
> To my point
>
> > >Do tell. Monotheism was a creation of the Jewish religion only
> after
> > >the Babylonian captivity. Before then they were as polytheistic as
> > >the next person. No evidence of Monotheism in Akkadian, Eblaite,
> > >Canaanite or Aramaean areas Glen.
>
> Glen wrote
>
> > John, I clearly said time and time again already that the Semitoid
> religions
> > were NOT monotheistic. Only the Old European ones. Reread, my
> friend, get
> > out the glasses. And the Semitish didn't have to travel either
> because this
> > myth (like all information technology) radiates outwards naturally
> despite
> > human movement or linguisto-cultural identity.
>
> Old Europe monotheistic! Surely you jest. Even Gambutas makes no
> such claim. There is a huge gap between henotheism and monotheism.
> There is no examples of monotheism anywhere in the world until the
> closure of the Oecumene in the Axial Age of Karl Jaspers (post 700
> BCE). As Zaehner shows, it was Zarathushtra who developed the first
> monotheism, and the Deutero-Issiah writings that occurred during (at
> earliest) the Babylonian captivity was heavily influenced from this
> source, as any student of comparative religion could tell you.
>
> I repeat my conclusion
> > >Come on Glen, please start talking about real research, based on
> > >evidence and sources rather than fanciful reconstructions based on
> > >god knows what?
>
> Regards (somewhat ruefully)
>
> John
>
>
>
>