________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on
behalf of Chris Hahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 10:15 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [RC] Sacred Story Part # 3 -conclusion
An amazing work Billy. The analogies are very interesting. Your knowledge of
religions is astounding to me.
Chris
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On
Behalf Of Billy Rojas
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 2:27 AM
To: Centroids Discussions <[email protected]>
Cc: Billy Rojas <[email protected]>
Subject: [RC] Sacred Story Part # 3 -conclusion
The core of the "passion narrative" in the Inanna story concerns
her actions following Dumuzi's death.
What should be understood was that, if not at the beginning in 2650 BC,
no later than ca. 2350 BC, Inanna was regarded as an incarnate Goddess.
This was not merely something along the lines of Gilgamesh. In his case
he was said to have been one third man and two-thirds divine being in
the form of a human being. About which my skepticism could not be
greater even if, anon, Gilgamesh, also an historic person, clearly was
a "hero." Take this in the sense of leading characters in the Odyssey,
a book that was at least partly modeled on the saga of the
Epic of Gilgamesh, the world's first "novel." The Mesopotamians
did not understand it that way, for them it had the status, or close
to the status, of scripture.
In any case, the Sumerians and those who followed them, held the belief
that the "stars" -some of which were planets- embodied deities. Above
all celestial bodies was an unseen deity and his unseen female deity wife,
but after that among all deities, at the highest rank at some periods of
history anyway,
was Inanna, viz, at a later time known as Ishtar.
Her celestial brother was Shamash, Utu in Sumerian language, God of the Sun,
and deity of Justice.
Inanna first existed in the heavens as "Venus" and at some point in, say, about
2675 BC,
she manifested on Earth as a baby girl, then grown up into a young woman.
This, whatever anyone today may think, was what the Mesopotamians believed.
The point here is to establish what the Sumerians and other peoples believed,
not to pass judgement on truth claims.
The "office" of High Priestess was exalted. In some respects you can think
of her as a female pope, that was approximately her status, with the
qualification
that in some respects she was more important to the Sumerians than the pope
is for Catholics, at least to speak of the "modern" papacy starting in the
19th century. In the pre-modern era the popes had powers that were
closer to that of the High Priestess as known in the Sumerian era.
This power not only derived from her divine attributes but from the fact that
the temples of that long past era were de facto banks -that was where the
bulk of
the wealth of the state was sequestered, where economic records were kept,
where specie (gold, silver, gemstones) was kept, or large quantities were kept,
and the High Priestess oversaw the temple institution as well as acting
as landlady over large tracts of land; and many lower rank priestesses
were land owners in their own right.
Which is to say that it was no small thing when Inanna mourned for Dumuzi
and not only mourned, sought to free him from the bonds of death. For Inanna
resolved to visit the Netherworld (really not any different than the Hebrew
concept for Sheol) to secure Dumuzi's release from its grasp by sacrificing
her own life if that was what it might take.
This is the crux of the passion narrative.
The exact details of this are unclear but the story has it that Inanna
visited the entrance to the Netherworld, presumably a physical place,
perhaps in the mountains somewhere. Or possibly in or near the
city of Cutha, whose chief deity was none other than Chemosh,
in later tradition anyway, the husband of the Queen of the Underworld,
Ereshkigal. Which may sound a little complicated but, when you think
about it all, this story isn't worse in complexity than
any of the Gospel narratives.
BTW, Inanna had three sisters. You have been introduced to Geshtinanna,
and Ereshkigal was another; the third was Saltu, later known as Discordia,
as the name suggests, the deity of discord -unpredictability, biting humor,
irrationality in human affairs, and so forth.
It is Ereshkigal who concerns us now. And in the original Sumerian story,
Ereshkigal was supreme in the abode of the dead. She made all the rules
and decreed the fates of all the deceased. Ereshkigal's "residence" was in
the lowest strata of the Netherworld, its seventh subterranean level.
We learn that the body of Dumuzi was being kept in that 7th level.
Inanna had to get to that level in order to persuade Ereshkigal to
release Dumuzi. To make that possible, Inanna had to persuade
each of seven gate-keepers to allow her to enter each of their domains.
At each gate the admission was her willingness to remove one "veil."
viz., article of clothing.
As you might surmise this theme eventually was secularized as a form
of dance known historically as the "dance of the seven veils." Which,
of course, surfaces in the New Testament, in that case motivated
by the worst kind of intent, causing death to the righteous.
In the Sumerian original the motivation was the resurrection from death
of someone who was righteous.
To summarize, in the end, Inanna was as naked as she had been as a newborn
infant
when she was incarnated on Earth. She also had to pay a price and forfeit
her own life to give new life to Dumuzi. Only then could Inanna herself
be resurrected from the grave.
There is a twist to the Mesopotamian story which is strange to modern day
people. The Gods could not allow Inanna to remain in the Netherworld
forever. Inanna also was Goddess of fertility. Absent from the world
there would be no new life, no births of animals or people, no growth
of crops or fruit trees, nothing. Death would reign. OTOH Dumuzi
could not be given a free pass to new life; if he was to escape there
must be a substitute to take his place.
This is where Geshtinanna becomes crucial to the story. She agrees to
take Dumuzi's place half of each year. Dumuzi must still serve his sentence
the other half of each year. But Inanna was successful in setting all of this
in action and responsible for Dumuzi's initial resurrection. Which is a long
way to explain the historical background to the concept of substitutionary
atonement. In its origins this belief was based on what we might call
family relations and shared sense of responsibility on the part
of family members.
The similarities to the Gospel passion story should be obvious but, of course,
there are differences. However, it would be worthwhile to look at the
similarities. If this does not make you think, nothing will.
* The episode involving Inanna's death and the resurrection of Dumuzi takes 3
days.
* Christ, in the NT-based tradition of the "harrowing of hell," visits hell to
redeem the departed, or, anyway, some of the departed.
* Inanna isn't crucified but her lifeless body is hung on a meat hook
for the denizens of the Underworld to look upon.
* In the last analysis the "tomb" cannot hold Inanna, she is resurrected
and returns to life.
* While the original version of this story does not include the following
incident,
it became orthodox later, in the Assyrian period. At one point -known as
Ishtar
at that time- Inanna revisits the first gate and shouts that she will break
down
the door and release all the dead unless her wishes are acted upon. This
parallels
the "harrowing of hell" belief that Christ can release all the dead from
their graves.
* In both stories the divine person, at death, must surrender all of their
garments, as did Jesus, at his crucifixion.
* In both stories the presence of soldiers is important. This is not
immediately
obvious in the Inanna story because the soldiers in question were enemies
of Dumuzi, who were responsible for his death previously.
* Finally, mention should be made of a Babylonian custom at the time
of the installation of their king. Note that the king, by that period of
history,
this is later then the Sumerian era but before the Assyrian epoch,
was regarded as an embodiment of Tammuz. Prior to the king's installation
he is struck violently, this physical punishment a sure sign of the man's
fitness for his throne. As any Christian can tell you, Jesus was scourged
prior to his crucifixion.
Maybe some of these parallels stretch the point, and, for certain, there
are good reasons for thinking that the Gospel narratives about Jesus'
crucifixion are based on historical facts, but there are parallels nonetheless.
And, like the story of the harrowing of hell, in some cases we need to
take the world of a writer with no supporting evidence available.
It may seem somewhat strange that a woman plays a role analogous to
that of Jesus, but the facts are what they are. That is, I have recounted
a story once believed in by millions, indeed, a story that was the dominant
spiritual narrative for maybe 1500 years in the ancient world. By the time
of Christ that narrative and the religion that went with it was in decline;
regardless, it survived in some parts of the Mid East and did not
cease to exist until the first century after the Muslim conquests.
Incidentally, there is a secular explanation for the decline. The religion was
still very much alive at the time of the first Persian Empire. In fact, while
there had been some falling off in the Neo-Babylonian (Chaldean) era,
there was a major revival in the 300 BC - 200 BC era. The great temple complex
(kind of an Ishtar Vatican) at Uruk flourished as never before, at least
as never before after the fall of the Assyrians. This was due to the
success that "Ishtarism" (to call it that) had with the Greeks of the empire.
Greeks became a major source of patronage for the ancient Ishtar faith.
But there would be a price to pay when the Parthians arose and conquered
more and more Seleucid areas, sometimes replacing Mesopotamian religion
with one or another form of Zoroastrianism. As well, the Seleucids became
increasingly maginalized as pressures from the West also undercut their
realm, both from Egypt and eventually from Rome. And, needless to say.
there was a Jewish revolt that removed Judea from Seleucid rule.
Even this was hardly "the end," and there was a new lease on life in the Roman
era
when the center of Ishtar veneration shifted to Syria, where she was known as
Atargatis or simply as "the Syrian Goddess" (with a mystery religion of her
own),
but Christianity supplanted it more and more.........
In any case, for whatever reasons the Assyrians themselves
were increasingly drawn to Christianity, quite possibly partly because
of the similarities, and were the first major population in the East to
convert, almost en mass, to the new faith. Today's Assyrians,
however, often name their daughters Ishtar and their sons after
one or another Mesopotamian hero of history, like the Emperor Sargon,
who was more-or-less the St. Paul of the Ishtar religion in his era.
There is a survival of Inanna traditions, highly attenuated, in two
places in greater India among folk cultures, where her name
is still current, Baluchistan and remote parts of the Punjab.
There, Inanna has the status of something like a minor goddess,
somewhat like a local spirit.
In the West, this story was adopted wholesale in Egypt to serve
as the foundation for the story of Isis and Osiris. As noted,
much about the Inanna (Ishtar) story was incorporated in the
lore of the Virgin Mary.
-----
What is also highly interesting is what happened in Assyria in the ca 1000 BC
era
and afterward for several centuries. What can be called "mature" Ishtar
theology
arose in that period, which is mostly what had come down to us until the
discovery of numerous cuneiform texts starting in the last decades
of the 19th century. BTW, the passion narrative has served as inspiration
for one notable Classical music composition, the story translated
in his time and available to Vincent D'Indy, best know for his
Symphony on a French Mountain Aire. But you can purchase
a recording if you want, it is called, simply, "Istar." My recording
features Pierre Monteaux as conductor, taken from a concert
by the San Francisco Symphony in 1945. Monteaux later served
as conductor of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. There is a photo
of Monteaux on the "cover" of the CD; he sort of looks like John Bolton.
What happened in Assyria was that Ishtar was elevated from, we might say,
important daughter to Supreme Goddess. Ideas that were thought to be implicit
in early form were made the most of by the Assyrians. And Tammuz,
clearly with a secondary role in the story at its beginning, now became
a sort of 'son of God,' reigning in Heaven along with God on High,
whom the Assyrians called Asshur. The city of Nineveh, always important
in some sense, became pretty much the center of the civilized world
for maybe two centuries. A few scholars even take the view that
"God" was being redefined in this era and that Ishtar was increasingly
recognized as a sort of monotheistic deity, all other deities subordinated
to "Her." This did not last, but for the record.........
This is also the period when Ishtar was known universally in the Mid East
as a Divine Spirit, all present, all wise, she who makes things happen, so to
speak.
And where the Sumerians portrayed Inanna as a spunky young woman, even if
she had an "edge" to her, the Assyrians understood her as something along the
lines of Queen Victoria, sassy, bold, smart as hell, and unafraid to speak her
mind.
It was in this era that the Epic of Gilgamesh took its final form, in which
Ishtar
is responsible for the Great Flood, and who regrets all the destruction
afterward
and vows to never cause such a catastrophic deluge ever again. Ishtar in this
form
was known outside of Assyria proper and she appears in the inscription from
Deir Alla in today's Jordan, as -if the translation is correct, it is still in
dispute
among scholars- the deity who causes the destruction of Sodom for its
evil behavior. And yes, as attested in the so-called Middle Assyrian Laws,
the Assyrians were vehemently opposed to sodomy.
There are a good number of texts from this period now available in translation
which purport to recount the words of the Goddess as known in a role that is
not all that different than the Chokhma in Proverbs 8 & 9, and the Shekhina
in Wisdom of Solomon in the Apocrypha. That is, the parallelism is to
Ishtar and the female Holy Spirit of the OT / Hebrew Bible.
As far as I am concerned this parallelism is striking. Here are a few comments
from Proverbs 8:
"Hear how Wisdom [Chokhma] lifts her voice and Understanding [also Chokhma]
cries out. She stands at the crossroads by the wayside, at the top of the hills,
at the gate, at the entrance to the city" and calls out
"Men it is to you I call.....understand, you simple fools, what it is to be
shrewd..."
"Listen! For I will speak plainly, ... I speak nothing but truth and my lips
detest wicked talk..."
It must be said that, as original as this spirited speech is, the tone
throughout
is identical to some of what I have read in Assyrian literature purporting
to quote Ishtar. There is a point-of-view in common between the two "divine
females"
that is impossible to miss. How does anyone explain this?
Does the Bible support a reading that allows for the possibility that Ishtar /
Chokhma
are one and the same? Obviously this is not a traditional Western reading but
there are openings to exactly this kind of conclusion, starting with the story
of Jonah and his visit to Nineveh. The Biblical story tells us that the people
of Nineveh, at the preaching of Jonah, repented of their sins and, in effect,
were saved. But at no point did they convert to anything. If they had it would
seem to be a reasonable conclusion that we would have been told of the fact.
Which is to say that we get a city filled with devotees of Ishtar recognized
in the Bible as righteous and redeemed. We also find the same thing in Matthew
12
where the "men of Nineveh" will be with Christ at his future Advent.
OK, what does this say? And it is important that there is a population
of Assyrians who witness for Christ, isn't it? On what basis?
I don't have a way to answer my own questions on the basis of scholarship alone.
The best I can do is tell you the sense I make of all of this, and add that
what it all means, as far as I am concerned, is a responsibility to assume
a 'prophetic' voice and take that responsibility wherever it leads me.
That is, it does not matter if I am, for now anyway, a minority of one,
the truth is what it is.
You suggested that maybe the best way to think about the historical Inanna
is in terms of her having been filled with the Holy Spirit, that is, as one
possible explanation for her life in the 27th century BC. That is a good
way to think about things, but it just isn't sufficient when thinking about
the next 2000 years.
I do not believe that the Sumerians had it all figured out perfectly
but they gave us a profound beginning with which to work.
Was Ishtar "elevated" at a latter date? That is one way to think about
Assyrian theology. Or did the Assyrians, as they claimed,
which is an entirely plausible way to think about Assyrian theology,
simply "unpack" inner meanings that had long been unclear?
My view is that this is the better explanation even if maybe
in the future there will be a still better way to think about things.
At a minimum it seems altogether clear to me that the female
Holy Spirit of the Hebrew Bible is real, and there is intrinsic
appeal in thinking of her as ancient peoples thought about Ishtar.
If it is a help, and the names mean exactly the same thing,
call her Esther if you prefer.
As a final observation, it should be noted that Ishtar's prime symbol wasn't a
crescent, which was import but secondary, it was an 8 pointed star.
While no-one can say with absolute certainty that Ishtar is identical with the
Holy Spirit
it makes excellent sense to me to make the identification. Nor can anyone
say with certainty what the star of Bethlehem consisted of. But I like
to think of it as emblematic of the Holy Spirit leading the Wise Men
to Jesus. I also like to think that the star had 8 points and that the
Wise Men would have trusted the star because they knew exactly
what it represented, the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
-conclusion
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
