(no subject)
Reading Genesis immediately after the Epic of Gilgamesh is fascinating because of a number of similarities in the early stories, (ie Genesis 1-9). The main links are between the story of Enkidu and that of the Fall; and between the two flood stories.
Enkidu and The Fall
Enkidu is created directly by the gods rather than having human parents. He lives wild among the animals. After a prostitute from the city seduces him, the animals flee from him, and Enkidu can no longer run fast enough to catch them.
"And now the wild creatures had all fled away; Enkidu was grown weak, for wisdom was in him, and the thoughts of a man were in his heart." p65
The woman tells him this is a good thing:
"You are wise, Enkidu, and now you have become like a god." p65
Enkidu had been naked before, but the woman gives him clothes to wear.
Compare Genesis 3. Adam and Eve, the innocent creations of God, live in a natural paradise. They succumb to temptation, eating the forbidden fruit, something that has long been associated with sex even if this is not explicitly said in the Bible. The fruit gives them wisdom (the knowledge of good and evil). As a result, they become aware of their nakedness and wear clothes for the first time. Also as a result, they are expelled from Eden.
God says "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil" (Gen 3:22). I presume "like one of us" means "like a god", echoing the woman's comment above.
A key difference is that in Genesis, the Fall is said to be a punishment from God and, according to Christians, the basis of original sin. In Gilgamesh, Enkidu's rejection by the animals is presented as a natural consequence of his awakening from savage to man.
The Flood and The Flood
The two flood stories are remarkably similar, much more so than the stories of Enkidu and that of the Fall. There are lots of flood stories around, but the oldest extant copy we have of any flood story is the incomplete so-called Eridu Genesis, dating from the 17th century BC. Even in Gilgamesh, the flood story is thought to be ancient.
According to the semi-historical Sumerian King List, Gilgamesh is the 5th generation king at Uruk after the flood. The city mentioned in the King List immediately before the flood (Shurrupak), is the same one mentioned in the Gilgamesh flood story (and in the Eridu Genesis). According to Wikipedia, archaeologists have found evidence for a big flood there in about 3000 BC.
The King List itself also has the same kind of incredibly long lifespans/reigns that turn up in Genesis, only more extreme. Methuselah (lifespan 969 years) is a mayfly compared to En-men-lu-ana who is said to have reigned for 12 sars (43200 years).
(I wonder whether they translated "sar" correctly?)
Anyway, back to the flood.
The main plot of the story is the same in both Genesis (hereafter Gen) and the Epic of Gilgamesh (hereafter Gil), with differences in the details.
In both accounts, the god(s) decide to destroy mankind with a flood. One man - Utnapishtim (Gil) or Noah (Gen) - is warned in advance and builds a huge boat, for which detailed building specifications are given.
"The ground space was one acre, each side of the deck measured one hundred and twenty cubits, making a square. I built six decks below, seven in all" (Gil p. 109)
"The ark is to be 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high. Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within a cubit of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks." (from Gen 6:15-16)
As well as his family, he is told to take breeding pairs of animals on board.
"take up into the boat the seed of all living creatures." (Gil p.108)
"You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you." (Gen 6:19)
On the appointed day, it begins to rain.
"Then the gods of the abyss rose up; Nergal pulled out the dams of the nether waters" (Gil p.110)
"For six days and six nights the wind blew, torrent and tempest and flood overwhelmed the world, tempest and flood raged together like warring hosts." (Gil p. 111)
"on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And rain fell on the earth for forty days and forty nights." (from Gen 7:11-12)
Eventually, the boat runs aground:
"on the mountain of Nisir the boat held fast" (Gil p 111)
"the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat" (from Gen 8:4)
The man sends out birds to find out if the flood waters have receded. The first two (or three) return and the final one does not. Utnapishtim sends out a dove, a swallow and a raven; Noah sends out a raven and then the same dove three times.
Everyone gets out of the boat onto dry land and makes a sacrifice to the god(s), which meets with approval:
"When the gods smelled the sweet savour, they gathered like flies over the sacrifice." (Gil p.111)
"The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma" (from Gen 8:21)
The key difference between the two accounts is the role of the god(s). Why do they decide to destroy mankind; why warn one person; what is their reaction afterwards?
Enlil's Flood
In Gil, the gods decide to get rid of mankind because they are noisy neighbours.
"In those days, the world teemed, the people multiplied, the world bellowed like a wild bull, and the great god was aroused by the clamour. Enlil heard the clamour and he said to the gods in council, 'The uproar of mankind is intolerable and sleep is no longer possible by reason of the babel.' So the gods agreed to exterminate mankind." p.108
Enlil, "the father of the gods" (Gil p 118), proposes the idea, although it's not his responsibility alone - the rest of the gods agree. But Ea warns Utnapishtim "because of his oath" - presumably a promise to protect Utnapishtim, but we're not told.
During the flood, the gods themselves are "terrified at the flood", "cowering like curs". The goddess Ishtar regrets her support for Enlil's proposal, saying "Alas, the days of old are turned to dust because I commanded evil; why did I command this evil in the council of all the gods?"
Ishtar is not alone: "The great gods of heaven and of hell wept, they covered their mouths." Why did they weep? Was it in grief, regret, fear or shock?
When the flood goes down, Ishtar condemns Enlil for bringing such destruction on the world. Enlil is at first unrepentant. When he sees the boat, he asks "Has any of these mortals escaped? Not one was to have survived the destruction."
Ea replies, arguing against such a harsh punishment for mankind:
"Lay upon the sinner his sin,
Lay upon the transgressor his transgression,
Punish him a little when he breaks loose,
Do not drive him too hard or he perishes;" (Gil p.112)
Ea makes two points about punishment.
Firstly, he says that you should only punish the person who committed the crime. The flood unfairly killed many innocents.
Secondly he says that punishment should not be so severe as to kill the sinner - otherwise how can he learn? Ea seems to be comparing humans to an animal to be driven (perhaps an ox). If the ox goes in the wrong direction, you should hit it a bit, but if you beat it too severely, you end up with no ox.
Enlil is apparently persuaded by Ea's words. He blesses Utnapishtim and his wife and grants them everlasting life.
God's Flood
In Genesis, God is presented as having a much stronger reason to destroy mankind. They aren't just noisy neighbours, they are wicked (we aren't told why).
"The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time." Gen 6:5
God warns Noah, not because of a promise, but because Noah is righteous and blameless.
After the flood goes down, God promises never to do it again.
"The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma [of Noah's burnt offerings] and said in his heart: "Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done." Gen 8:21
God is not said to regret the flood. In fact, his only expression of regret in the story comes at the beginning:
"The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain." (Gen 6:6)
Punishment
Ea advocates punishment to educate and deter. If the sinner (alone) is punished a little when he "breaks loose", he will learn correct behaviour. Not wishing to be punished (even a little) will deter him from reoffending.
Neither Enlil nor God intend the flood to be a deterrent, much less educational. Enlil intends to destroy everyone, so there will be no-one left to deter. God promises that he will never use such a punishment again, whatever man does. So clearly it will not act as a deterrent against future crimes.
God's flood (like Enlil's) mainly seems to punish by removal. The offenders are dead, and so cannot practise wickedness any more. It's not completely successful, because, as God says, "every inclination of [man's] heart is evil from childhood". If he's right, then the descendants of Noah will probably be wicked.
Complete removal would have meant destroying everyone and starting again with a new creation. Given that "The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth", it's surprising he didn't do that. Enlil did intend to destroy everyone.
Another possible reason for punishing the wicked is retribution. Retribution is the idea that it is good for the criminal to suffer, even if it has no other benefits. A flood causes more suffering than, for example, having everyone die in their sleep, which a god could surely achieve. But retribution also demands that the punishment should fit both the crime and the criminal.
Neither flood works as an example of retributive justice. Enlil's flood is clearly a disproportionate punishment for noisy neighbours. In the case in Genesis, we don't know the nature of the wickedness. Nevertheless, the Genesis flood is, well, overkill, because the dead include lots of babies and animals who could not reasonably be called wicked.
On this basis, I'd rather live in a world ruled by Ea than either Enlil or God.
Enkidu and The Fall
Enkidu is created directly by the gods rather than having human parents. He lives wild among the animals. After a prostitute from the city seduces him, the animals flee from him, and Enkidu can no longer run fast enough to catch them.
"And now the wild creatures had all fled away; Enkidu was grown weak, for wisdom was in him, and the thoughts of a man were in his heart." p65
The woman tells him this is a good thing:
"You are wise, Enkidu, and now you have become like a god." p65
Enkidu had been naked before, but the woman gives him clothes to wear.
Compare Genesis 3. Adam and Eve, the innocent creations of God, live in a natural paradise. They succumb to temptation, eating the forbidden fruit, something that has long been associated with sex even if this is not explicitly said in the Bible. The fruit gives them wisdom (the knowledge of good and evil). As a result, they become aware of their nakedness and wear clothes for the first time. Also as a result, they are expelled from Eden.
God says "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil" (Gen 3:22). I presume "like one of us" means "like a god", echoing the woman's comment above.
A key difference is that in Genesis, the Fall is said to be a punishment from God and, according to Christians, the basis of original sin. In Gilgamesh, Enkidu's rejection by the animals is presented as a natural consequence of his awakening from savage to man.
The Flood and The Flood
The two flood stories are remarkably similar, much more so than the stories of Enkidu and that of the Fall. There are lots of flood stories around, but the oldest extant copy we have of any flood story is the incomplete so-called Eridu Genesis, dating from the 17th century BC. Even in Gilgamesh, the flood story is thought to be ancient.
According to the semi-historical Sumerian King List, Gilgamesh is the 5th generation king at Uruk after the flood. The city mentioned in the King List immediately before the flood (Shurrupak), is the same one mentioned in the Gilgamesh flood story (and in the Eridu Genesis). According to Wikipedia, archaeologists have found evidence for a big flood there in about 3000 BC.
The King List itself also has the same kind of incredibly long lifespans/reigns that turn up in Genesis, only more extreme. Methuselah (lifespan 969 years) is a mayfly compared to En-men-lu-ana who is said to have reigned for 12 sars (43200 years).
(I wonder whether they translated "sar" correctly?)
Anyway, back to the flood.
The main plot of the story is the same in both Genesis (hereafter Gen) and the Epic of Gilgamesh (hereafter Gil), with differences in the details.
In both accounts, the god(s) decide to destroy mankind with a flood. One man - Utnapishtim (Gil) or Noah (Gen) - is warned in advance and builds a huge boat, for which detailed building specifications are given.
"The ground space was one acre, each side of the deck measured one hundred and twenty cubits, making a square. I built six decks below, seven in all" (Gil p. 109)
"The ark is to be 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high. Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within a cubit of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks." (from Gen 6:15-16)
As well as his family, he is told to take breeding pairs of animals on board.
"take up into the boat the seed of all living creatures." (Gil p.108)
"You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you." (Gen 6:19)
On the appointed day, it begins to rain.
"Then the gods of the abyss rose up; Nergal pulled out the dams of the nether waters" (Gil p.110)
"For six days and six nights the wind blew, torrent and tempest and flood overwhelmed the world, tempest and flood raged together like warring hosts." (Gil p. 111)
"on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And rain fell on the earth for forty days and forty nights." (from Gen 7:11-12)
Eventually, the boat runs aground:
"on the mountain of Nisir the boat held fast" (Gil p 111)
"the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat" (from Gen 8:4)
The man sends out birds to find out if the flood waters have receded. The first two (or three) return and the final one does not. Utnapishtim sends out a dove, a swallow and a raven; Noah sends out a raven and then the same dove three times.
Everyone gets out of the boat onto dry land and makes a sacrifice to the god(s), which meets with approval:
"When the gods smelled the sweet savour, they gathered like flies over the sacrifice." (Gil p.111)
"The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma" (from Gen 8:21)
The key difference between the two accounts is the role of the god(s). Why do they decide to destroy mankind; why warn one person; what is their reaction afterwards?
Enlil's Flood
In Gil, the gods decide to get rid of mankind because they are noisy neighbours.
"In those days, the world teemed, the people multiplied, the world bellowed like a wild bull, and the great god was aroused by the clamour. Enlil heard the clamour and he said to the gods in council, 'The uproar of mankind is intolerable and sleep is no longer possible by reason of the babel.' So the gods agreed to exterminate mankind." p.108
Enlil, "the father of the gods" (Gil p 118), proposes the idea, although it's not his responsibility alone - the rest of the gods agree. But Ea warns Utnapishtim "because of his oath" - presumably a promise to protect Utnapishtim, but we're not told.
During the flood, the gods themselves are "terrified at the flood", "cowering like curs". The goddess Ishtar regrets her support for Enlil's proposal, saying "Alas, the days of old are turned to dust because I commanded evil; why did I command this evil in the council of all the gods?"
Ishtar is not alone: "The great gods of heaven and of hell wept, they covered their mouths." Why did they weep? Was it in grief, regret, fear or shock?
When the flood goes down, Ishtar condemns Enlil for bringing such destruction on the world. Enlil is at first unrepentant. When he sees the boat, he asks "Has any of these mortals escaped? Not one was to have survived the destruction."
Ea replies, arguing against such a harsh punishment for mankind:
"Lay upon the sinner his sin,
Lay upon the transgressor his transgression,
Punish him a little when he breaks loose,
Do not drive him too hard or he perishes;" (Gil p.112)
Ea makes two points about punishment.
Firstly, he says that you should only punish the person who committed the crime. The flood unfairly killed many innocents.
Secondly he says that punishment should not be so severe as to kill the sinner - otherwise how can he learn? Ea seems to be comparing humans to an animal to be driven (perhaps an ox). If the ox goes in the wrong direction, you should hit it a bit, but if you beat it too severely, you end up with no ox.
Enlil is apparently persuaded by Ea's words. He blesses Utnapishtim and his wife and grants them everlasting life.
God's Flood
In Genesis, God is presented as having a much stronger reason to destroy mankind. They aren't just noisy neighbours, they are wicked (we aren't told why).
"The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time." Gen 6:5
God warns Noah, not because of a promise, but because Noah is righteous and blameless.
After the flood goes down, God promises never to do it again.
"The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma [of Noah's burnt offerings] and said in his heart: "Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done." Gen 8:21
God is not said to regret the flood. In fact, his only expression of regret in the story comes at the beginning:
"The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain." (Gen 6:6)
Punishment
Ea advocates punishment to educate and deter. If the sinner (alone) is punished a little when he "breaks loose", he will learn correct behaviour. Not wishing to be punished (even a little) will deter him from reoffending.
Neither Enlil nor God intend the flood to be a deterrent, much less educational. Enlil intends to destroy everyone, so there will be no-one left to deter. God promises that he will never use such a punishment again, whatever man does. So clearly it will not act as a deterrent against future crimes.
God's flood (like Enlil's) mainly seems to punish by removal. The offenders are dead, and so cannot practise wickedness any more. It's not completely successful, because, as God says, "every inclination of [man's] heart is evil from childhood". If he's right, then the descendants of Noah will probably be wicked.
Complete removal would have meant destroying everyone and starting again with a new creation. Given that "The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth", it's surprising he didn't do that. Enlil did intend to destroy everyone.
Another possible reason for punishing the wicked is retribution. Retribution is the idea that it is good for the criminal to suffer, even if it has no other benefits. A flood causes more suffering than, for example, having everyone die in their sleep, which a god could surely achieve. But retribution also demands that the punishment should fit both the crime and the criminal.
Neither flood works as an example of retributive justice. Enlil's flood is clearly a disproportionate punishment for noisy neighbours. In the case in Genesis, we don't know the nature of the wickedness. Nevertheless, the Genesis flood is, well, overkill, because the dead include lots of babies and animals who could not reasonably be called wicked.
On this basis, I'd rather live in a world ruled by Ea than either Enlil or God.