Moses and Monotheism by Sigmund Freud - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub for a complete version.

part signifies the

ram-headed

city-god, whereas Re is the name of

the hawk -headed Sun -God of On.

Magic and

ceremonial, amulets and formulas, dominated

IF MOSES WAS AN EGYPTIAN

33

the service of these gods, as they did the

daily

life of the

Egyptians.

Some of these differences may easily derive

from the contrast in principle between a strict

monotheism and an unlimited polytheism. Others

are

obviously consequences of a difference in

intellectual level; one

religion is very near to the

primitive, the other has soared to the heights of

sublime abstraction. Perhaps it is these two

characteristics that

occasionally give one the

impression that the contrast between the Mosaic

and the Egyptian religion is one intended and

purposely accentuated: for example, when the

one religion severely condemns any kind of

magic or sorcery which flourishes so abundantly

in the other

; or when the insatiable zest of the

Egyptian for making images of his gods in clay,

stone and metal, to which our museums owe so

much, is contrasted with the way in which the

making of the image of any living or visionary

being is bluntly forbidden.

There is yet another difference between the

two religions, which the explanations we have

attempted do not touch. No other people of

antiquity has done so much to deny death, has

made such careful provision for an after-life; in

accordance with this the death -god Osiris, the

ruler of that other world, was the mosj;

popular

and indisputable of all Egyptian gods.^The early

Jewish religion, on the other hand, had entirely

34 MOSES AND MONOTHEISM

relinquished immortality; the possibility of an

existence after death was never mentioned in

any

place. And this is all the more remarkable since

later

experience has shown that the belief in a

life

beyond can very well be reconciled with a

monotheistic

religion.

We had hoped the suggestion that Moses was

an

Egyptian would prove enlightening and

stimulating in many different respects. But our

first deduction from this

suggestion that the new

religion he gave the Jews was his own, the

Egyptian one has foundered on the difference,

nay the striking contrast, between the two

religions.

II

A strange fact in the history of the Egyptian

religion, which was recognized and appraised

relatively late, opens up another point of view.

It is still

possible that the religion Moses gave to

his

Jewish people was yet his own, an Egyptian

religion though not the Egyptian one.

In the

glorious Eighteenth Dynasty, when

Egypt became for the first time a world power,

a

young Pharaoh ascended the throne about

1

375 B.C., who first called himself Amenhotep (IV)

like his father, but later on

changed his name

and not only his name. This king undertook

IF MOSES WAS AN EGYPTIAN

35

to force

upon his subjects a new religion, one

contrary to their ancient traditions and to all

their familiar habitsXIt was a strict

monotheisn*,

the first

attempt of its kind in the history of the

world as far as we know and

religious intoler-

ance, which was foreign to antiquity before this

and for long after, was inevitably born with the

belief in one God. But

Amenhotep's reign lasted

only for seventeen years; very soon after his

death in

1358 the new religion was swept away

and the memory of the heretic king proscribed.

From the ruins of his new capital which he had

built and dedicated to his God, and from the

inscriptions in the rock tombs belonging to it, we

derive the little knowledge we

possess of him.

Everything we can learn about this remarkable,

indeed

unique, person is worthy of the greatest

interest. 1

Everything new must have its roots in what was

before. The

origin of Egyptian monotheism can

be traced back a fair distance with some cer-

tainty.

1

In the School of the Priests in the Sun

Temple at On (Heliopolis) tendencies had for

some time been at work developing the idea of an

universal God and

stressing His ethical aspects.

Maat, the Goddess of truth, order and justice,

was a daughter of the Sun God Re. Already

1

Breasted called him " The first individual in human history."

2

The account I give here follows closely J. H. Breasted's History

of Egypt, 1906, and The Dawn of Conscience, 1936, and the corre-

sponding sections in the Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. II.

36 MOSES AND MONOTHEISM

under Amenhotep III, the father and predecessor

of the reformer, the worship of the Sun God was

in the ascendant,

probably in opposition to the

worship of Amon of Thebes, who had become

over

prominent. An ancient name of the Sun-

God Aton or Atum was rediscovered, and in this

Aton religion the young king found a movement

he had no need to create, but one which he could

join.

Political conditions in

Egypt had about that

time

begun to exert a lasting influence on

Egyptian religion. Through the victorious sword

of the

great conqueror Thothmes III Egypt had

become a world power. Nubia in the south,

Palestine, Syria and a part of Mesopotamia in

the north had been added to the

Empire. This

imperialism was reflected in religion as Universal-

ity and Monotheism. Since Pharaoh's solicitude

now extended beyond Egypt to Nubia and Syria,

Deity itself had to give up its national limitation

and the new God of the Egyptians had to become

like Pharaoh the

unique and unlimited sovereign

of the world known to the

Egyptians. Besides,

it was natural that as the frontiers extended

Egypt should become accessible to foreign

influences ; some of the

king's wives were Asiatic

princesses,

1

and

possibly even direct encourage-

ment of monotheism had penetrated from

Syria.

1

Perhaps even Amenhotep's beloved spouse Nofertete.

IF MOSES WAS AN EGYPTIAN

37

Amenhotep never denied his accession to the

Sun Cult of On. In the two hymns to Aton, which

have been preserved to us through the

inscriptions

in the rock tombs and were

probably composed

by him, he praises the sun as the creator and

preserver of all living beings in and outside

Egypt with a fervour such as recurs many

centuries after

only in the psalms in honour of

the

Jewish god Jahve. But he did not stop at this

astonishing anticipation of scientific knowledge

concerning the effect of sunlight. There is no

doubt that he went further: that he

worshipped

the sun not as a material

object, but as a symbol

of a Divine Being whose

energy was manifested

in his

rays.

1

But we do scant justice to the king if we see in

him only the adherent and protector of an Aton

religion which had already existed before him.

His

activity was much more energetic. He added

the

something new that turned into monotheism

the doctrine of an universal

god

: the

quality of

exclusiveness. In one of his

hymns it is stated in

1

Breasted, History of Egypt, p. 360: " But however evident the Heliopolitan origin of the new state religion might be, it was not merely sun-worship; the word Aton was employed in the place

of the old word for

'

god

'

(nuter), and the god is clearly dis-

tinguished from the material sun." " It is evident that what the king was deifying was the force by which the Sun made itself

felt on earth "

(Dawn of Conscience, p. 279). Erman's opinion of a

formula in honour of the god is similar : A. Erman (Die JEgyptische Religion, 1905). " There are

. . . words which are meant to

express in an abstract form the fact that not the star itself was

worshipped, but the Being that manifested itself in it."

38 MOSES AND MONOTHEISM

so

many words: " Oh, Thou only God! There

is no other God than Thou.

55

1

And we must not

forget that to appraise the new doctrine it is not

enough to know its positive content only; nearly

as

important is its negative side, the knowledge of

what it repudiates. It would be a mistake, too,

to

suppose that the new religion sprang to life

ready and fully equipped like Athene out of

Zeus

5

forehead.

Everything rather goes to show

that

during Amenhotep's reign it was strength-

ened so as to attain greater clarity, consistency,

harshness and intolerance.

Probably this develop-

ment took

place under the influence of the violent

opposition among the priests of Amon that raised

its head

against the reforms of the king. In the

sixth

year of Amenhotep's reign this enmity had

grown to such an extent that the king changed

his

name, of which the now proscribed name of

the

god Amon was a part. Instead of Amenhotep

he called himself Ikhnaton.

2

But not only from

his name did he eliminate that of the hated

God,

but also from all

inscriptions and even where he

found it in his father's name

Amenhotep III.

Soon after his

change of name Ikhnaton left

Thebes, which was under Amon's rule, and built

a new

capital lower down the river which he

1

Idem, History of Egypt, p. 374.

2

I follow Breasted's

(American) spelling in this name (the

accepted English spelling is Akhenaten). The king's new name

means approximately the same as his former one : God is satisfied.

Compare our Godfrey and the German Gotthold.

IF MOSES WAS AN EGYPTIAN

39

called Akhetaton

(Horizon of Aton). Its ruins

are now called Tell-el-Amarna. 1

The persecution by the king was directed fore-

most against Amon, but not

against him alone.

Everywhere in the Empire the temples were

closed, the services forbidden, and the ecclesias-

tical

property seized. Indeed, the king's zeal

went so far as to cause an

inquiry to be made into

the

inscriptions of old monuments in order to

efface the word " God " whenever it was used

in the

plural.

2

It is not to be wondered at that

these orders

produced a reaction of fanatical

vengeance among the suppressed priests and the

discontented

people, a reaction which was able

to find a free outlet after the

king's death. The

Aton religion had not

appealed to the people;

it had

probably been limited to a small circle

round Ikhnaton's

person. His end is wrapped in

mystery. We learn of a few short-lived, shadowy

successors of his own

family. Already his son-in-

law Tutankhaton was forced to return to Thebes

and to substitute Amon in his name for the god

Aton. Then there followed a

period of anarchy,

until the

general Haremhab succeeded in 1350

in

restoring order. The glorious Eighteenth

Dynasty was extinguished; at the same time their

1

This is where in

1887 the correspondence of the Egyptian

kings with their friends and vassals in Asia was found, a cor-

respondence which proved so important for our knowledge of

history.

2

Idem, History of Egypt, p. 363.

40 MOSES AND MONOTHEISM

conquests in Nubia and Asia were lost. In this

sad interregnum

Egypt's old religions had

been reinstated. The Aton religion was at

an end, Ikhnaton's capital lay destroyed and

plundered, and his memory was scorned as that

of a felon.

It will serve a certain

purpose if we now note

several

negative characteristics of the Aton

religion. In the first place, all myth, magic and

sorcery are excluded from it.

1

Then there is the way in which the Sun God is

represented: no longer as in earlier times by a

small

pyramid and a falcon, but and this is

almost rational

by a round disc from which

emanate rays terminating in human hands. In

spite of all the love for art in the Amarna period,

not one

personal representation of the Sun God

Aton has been found, and, we may say with

confidence, ever will be found.

2

Finally, there is a complete silence about

the death

god Osiris and the realm of the

dead. Neither

hymns nor inscriptions on graves

1

Weigall (The Life and Times of Akhnaton, 1923, p. 121) says that

Ikhnaton would not recognize a hell

against the terrors of which

one had to guard by innumerable

magic spells. " Akhnaton flung

all these formulas into the fire.

Djins, bogies, spirits, monsters,

demigods and Osiris himself with all his court, were swept into

the blaze and reduced to ashes."

8

A. Weigall, I.e., p.

103, " Akhnaton did not permit any

graven image to be made of the Aton. The true God, said the

king, had no form; and he held to this opinion throughout his

life."

IF MOSES WAS AN EGYPTIAN

41

know anything of what was

perhaps nearest

to the

Egyptian's heart. The contrast with the

popular religion cannot be expressed more

vividly.

1

Ill

We venture now to draw the following con-

clusion: if Moses was an

Egyptian and if he

transmitted to the

Jews his own religion then it

was that of Ikhnaton, the Aton religion.

We compared earlier the Jewish religion with

the

religion of the Egyptian people and noted

how different they were from each other. Now

we shall compare the Jewish with the Aton

religion and should expect to find that they were

originally identical. We know that this is no easy

task. Of the Aton

religion we do not perhaps

know enough, thanks to the revengeful spirit of

the Amon

priests. The Mosaic religion we know

only in its final form as it was fixed by Jewish

priests in the time after the Exile about 800 years

later. If, in

spite of this unpromising material,

we should find some indications fitting in with

our

supposition then we may indeed value them

highly.

1

Erman, /.., p. 90: " Of Osiris and his realm no more was to

be heard." Breasted, Dawn of Conscience, p. 291: "Osiris is completely ignored. He is never mentioned in any record of

Ikhnaton or in any of the tombs at Amarna."

42 MOSES AND MONOTHEISM

There would be a short way of proving our

thesis that the Mosaic

religion is nothing else

but that of Aton, namely, by a confession of

faith, a proclamation. But I am afraid I should

be told that such a road is

impracticable. The

Jewish creed, as is well known, says: " Schema

Jisroel Adonai Elohenu Adonai Echod." If the

similarity of the name of the Egyptian Aton (or

Atum) to the Hebrew word Adonai and the

Syrian divine name Adonis is not a mere accident,

but is the result of a

primaeval unity in language

and meaning, then one could translate the

Jewish formula: Hear, oh Israel, our god Aton

(Adonai) is the only God. I am, alas, entirely

unqualified to answer this question and have

been able to find very little about it in the

literature concerned, 1 but

probably we had

better not make

things so simple. Moreover, we

shall have to come back to the

problems of the

divine name.

The points of similarity as well as those of

difference in the two

religions are easily discerned,

but do not

enlighten us much. Both are forms of

a strict monotheism, and we shall be inclined to

reduce to this basic character what is similar in

both of them.

'Jewish monotheism is in some

1

Only a few passages in Weigall, I.e., pp. 12, 19: " The god

Atum, who described Re as the setting sun, was perhaps of the

same origin as Aton, generally venerated in Northern Syria. A

foreign Queen, as well as her suite, might therefore have been

attracted to

Heliopolis rather than to Thebes."

IF MOSES WAS AN EGYPTIAN

43

points even more uncompromising than the

Egyptian, for example, when it forbids all visual

representation of its God. The most essential

difference

apart from the name of their God

is that the

Jewish religion entirely relinquishes

the

worship of the sun, to which the Egyptian one

still adhered. When

comparing the Jewish with

the

Egyptian folk religion we received the

impression that, besides the contrast in principle,

there was in the difference between the two

religions an element of purposive contradiction.

This

impression appears justified when in our

comparison we replace the Jewish religion by that

of Aton, which Ikhnaton as we know

developed

in deliberate

antagonism to the popular religion.

We were astonished and rightly so that the

Jewish religion did not speak of anything beyond

the

grave, for such a doctrine is reconcilable with

the strictest monotheism. This astonishment

disappears if we go back from the Jewish religion

to the Aton religion and surmise that this feature

was taken over from the latter, since for Ikhnaton

it was a

necessity in fighting the popular religion

where the death god Osiris played perhaps a

greater part than any god of the upper regions.

The agreement of the Jewish religion with that of

Aton in this important point is the first strong

argument in favour of our thesis. We shall see

that it is not the

only one.

Moses gave the Jews not only a new religion;

44 MOSES AND MONOTHEISM

it is

equally certain that he introduced the custom

of circumcision. This has a decisive

importance

for our

problem and it has hardly ever been

weighed. The Biblical account, it is true, often

contradicts it. On the one hand, it dates the

custom back to the time of the

patriarchs as a

sign of the covenant concluded between God and

Abraham. On the other hand, the text mentions

in a

specially obscure passage that God was

wroth with Moses because he had

neglected this

holy usage and proposed to slay him as a punish-

ment; Moses' wife, aMidianite, saved her husband

from the wrath of God

by speedily performing

the

operation. These are distortions, however,

which should not lead us astray; we shall

explore

their motives

presently. The fact remains that

the

question concerning the origin of circumcision

has

only one answer: it comes from Egypt.

Herodotus, " the Father of History,

55

tells us that

the custom of circumcision had

long been

practised in Egypt, and his statement has been

confirmed by the examination of mummies and

even

by drawings on the walls of graves. No

other

people of the Eastern Mediterranean has

as far as we know followed this

custom; we can

assume with certainty that the Semites, Baby-

lonians and Sumerians were not circumcised.

Biblical

history itself says as much of the inhabi-

tants of

Canaan; it is presupposed in the story

of the adventure between

Jacob

5

s

daughter and

IF MOSES WAS AN EGYPTIAN

45

the Prince of Shechem. 1 The

possibility that the

Jews in Egypt adopted the usage of circumcision

in

any other way than in connection with the

religion Moses gave them may be rejected as

quite untenable. Now let us bear in mind that