Understanding Satan, (he’s really a nice guy!)
|
|  Yüklə 195.5 Kb.
|
A quick shout-out to the Genie’s out there Djinn, Genie, Jinn, Jann, Jinun, jin, jan, Genii, whatever, were believed to be creatures that are half-human and half-demon, existing from pre-Islamic times. In the earliest mytho's, they were various spirits of nature that caused madness in humans. They have several similarities with humans, they could reproduce, they have the same bodily needs, and they die. Although they die, their (natural) life span is longer. The Arabic word "jinn", which translates into the word "spirit", is usually used to convey the image of neutrality. Some of the jinni serve Allah, while others do not. Here I would like to quote the Qu'ran, "Some of us (Djinn) are righteous and some of us are otherwise; we follow different ways. We know that we cannot frustrate Allah's design in the earth, nor can we frustrate it by flight. When we heard the call to guidance, we believed in it." The Arabs believed that the jinni would usually take the form of an ostrich, or would ride on one of them. Jinni's can do either good or evil, and are mischievous. In myth's, they often enjoy punishing humans for doing things against them, even unintentionally. From this, accidents and diseases are usually considered to be their handcrafts. They are made of either fire or air, and can assume either animal or human form. They are almost everywhere, in inanimate objects, air, animals, flame, under the Earth, in human form, possessing a human, etc. This is just another type of spirit, as has been submitted multiple times through the above diatribe. Just making sure I cover these ones as well so we don’t get too mixed up.
The Bible gives so many varying names to Satan that’s impossible for me to line through line with all of them and explain their origins. This would lead to lots of long, boring written pieces, so I’ll concentrate on the big stuff for now. Lucifer, the former Greek God who ends up in a Roman story connected to a Jewish religion…. The original name in Greek for “Lucifer” was “Phosphor”, both meaning, “Light-bearer”, or “Bringer of light”. This is perhaps the most clumsily woven part of the Christian story. Phosphor is the personification of the morning star, and it is also he who “brings in the day”. Another name is “Phosphoros”, from the Greek words phôs (light) and phoros (bearer). It is from this meaning that the element, phosphorus, gets its name. Here’s some references to Phosphor. “O morning star, farewell!
Sweet Phosphor bring the day, Whose conqu’ring ray May chase these fogs, --- sweet Phosphor bring the day. Quarle’s rendering of Psalm xiii. Fairest of stars, last in the train of night, If better, thou belong not to the dawn --- Sure pledge of day, that crown'st the smiling morn With thy bright circlet ! --- Morning Hymn. What is actually being talked about is the Planet Venus. Another Greek God of the same origin is that of Hesper, or Hesperos. He was the god of the Evening Star (the Planet Venus). He was depicted as a white-winged god crowned with a starry oreole - a male version of Astraia. In vase-paintings usually only his face was shown shining in the heavens. With Phosphor and Hesper, we need to understand this. “'The Eosphoros (Dawn-bringer, i.e. the Morning-star) and Hesperos (Evening-star) are one and the same, although in ancient times they were thought to be different. Ibycus of Rhegium was the first to equate the titles." -Greek Lyric III Ibycus Frag 331 (from Scholiast on Basil, Genesis) Erigenia [Eos] bare [to Astraios] the star Eosphorus (Dawn-bringer), and the other gleaming Astra (Stars) with which heaven is crowned." -Theogony 378 “And as a star moves among stars in the night’s darkening, Hesperos, who is the fairest star who stands in the sky.” -Iliad 22.317 “At that time when Eosphoros (Dawn Star) passes across earth, harbinger of light, and after him Eos 9Dawn) of the saffron mantle is scattered across the sea.” -Iliad 23.226 “Her beauty shines forth in gleaming splendour like Eosphoros, beyond all other lights of heaven.” -Pindar Isthmian 4 str2 "Hesperos, bringing everything that shining Eos scattered, you bring the sheep, you bring the goat, you bring back the child to its mother. [Hesperos] the fairest of all astera (stars)." -Greek Lyric I Sappho Frag 104 "We waited for the Dawn-Star (astera meinamen), air-roaming (aerophoitas), white-winged (leukopteryga) fore-runner of the sun." -Greek Lyric IV Ion of Chios Frag 745 "Ceyx a son of Eosphoros." -Apollodorus 1.52 “Hesperos from the clouds marks the time of its coming [the festival of Demeter called the Thesmophoria]: Hesperos, who alone persuaded Demeter to drink, what time she pursued the unknown tracks of her stolen daughter [Persephone].” -Callimachus, Hymn VI to Demeter 8 “Hesperos of the curling locks looks down upon thee.” -Callimachus, Hymn IV to Delos 303 "[Apollon] let loose an arrow which landed inside the Gardens of Hesperos (the Evening Star) [at the Western-most end of the earth]. " -Babrius, Fabulae Aesopeae 58 “Ceyx, son of Hesperus (also called Luciferus).” -Hyginus Fabulae 65 “Sons of Apollo ... Philammon by Leuconoe, daughter of Luciferus.” -Hyginus Fabulae 161 "The fourth star is that of Venus [Aphrodite], Luciferus [Hesperos] by name. Some say it is Juno’s [Hera's]. In many tales it is recorded that it is called Hesperus, too. It seems to be the largest of all stars. Some have said it represents the son of Aurora [Eos] and Cephalus, who surpassed many in beauty, so that he even vied with Venus [Aphrodite], and, as Eratosthenes says, for this reason it is called the star of Venus. It is visible both at dawn and sunset, and so properly has been called both Luciferus and Hesperus.” -Hyginus Astronomica 2.42 “The Stars took flight, in marshalled order set by Luciferus [Hesperos] who left his station last. Then, when Sol (the Sun) perceived the morning star setting and saw the world in crimson sheen … he bade the nimble Hours go yoke his steeds.” -Metamorphoses 2.117f “Luciferus’ star more brilliant shines than all the stars.” -Metamorphoses 2.724 “Until Luciferus (Morning-Star) should wake Aurora (Dawn), and Aurora call forth the chariot of day.” -Metamorphoses 4.630 “Brilliant in the dawn Luciferus (Morning-Star) had mounted high, the star that wakes the world to work.” -Metamorphoses 4.660 “Luciferus (Morning-Star) revealed the shining day, Night fled.” -Metamorphoses 8.1 “Here [in Trakhis] the son of Luciferus [Hesperos], King Ceyx, reigned without bloodshed or force and in his royal face his father’s brightness shone, though at that time, unlike himself, he mourned in sorrow for his brother’s loss …
“Ceyx [his ship destroyed in a violent storm] in his hand, that once had held the sceptre, clutched a plank, and prayed to his wife’s father [Aiolos] and his own [Hesperos] for help in vain.” -Metamorphoses 11.564 So, for starters, we have the planet Venus as the fallen angel? Okay, that makes a lot of sense. Yet, Bible scholars will tell us that the Bible isn’t like just any another mythology. The plagiarism runs much deeper than ordinary religions. Let’s keep going.
Is actually a combination of characters, the first being from Egypt. The name for Set was “Set-Anup” or “Set-An”. He was later on called “Shaitan” by the Chaldeans. Originally, in earliest times, Set was the patron deity of Lower (North) Egypt, and represented the fierce storms of the desert whom the Lower Egyptians sought to appease. However, when Upper Egypt conquered Lower Egypt and ushered in the First Dynasty, Set became known as the evil enemy of Horus (Upper Egypt's dynastic god).
When we look at Set, we realize he is the Dark Serpent aspect of the God. He is God of the drought and storm, Lord of the Red Land (the desert, and remember what the desert has to do with being evil?), and God of War. It may be significant that the word "set" is also defined as "queen" or "princess" in Egyptian. “Au Set”, which came to be known as “Isis” by the Greeks, is defined as "exceeding queen". In the myth of the combat, Seth tries to mate sexually with Horus; this is usually interpreted as being an insult. If we go further back, we will have to trace a little timeline to see what all this is talking about. The earliest incarceration of Set is the serpent of darkness known as “Zet”. This God came to be known by the Classical Greek writers as “Typhon”, the serpent of the goddess Gaia. Zet may have once been female, or symbolic of the Goddess religion. This could be related to the Goddess “Au Zit”, the “Great Serpent”, who was the Cobra Goddess of Neolithic times. The last way to look at this is by going to the battle between Set and Horus. We know that Horus was a Solar Diety. We then look at Isis as being the “Full Moon” (because she is the Goddess of Magick). If we connect from the earlier assumptions that Set was originally a female, then add it to the story of Set trying to mate with Horus, and then taking his eye, this could be the story of a Solar Eclipse. So, let’s talk a little bit about the history of Set. (Acharya S says that: “What few people realize is that the principal God/Devil of the Old Testament are also derived in this way from older traditions, specifically the Egyptian, Indian and Zoroastrian. In fact, the God/Devil construct comes in part from derivation of the Dual God of Persia, Ahura-Mazda/Ahriman, or the Egyptian Horus/Set. Set and Horus, for example, were the Dark and Light aspects of the one God. These were the first elements out of the Void, as even the Hebraic bible claims. Set, or "Darkness," was the primary god in a number of very ancient cultures along the Nile River. It is of the Temples of Set, in fact, that we have possibly the oldest identified ruins on earth. Set eventually came to be the God of the South, where his peoples resided. At that time, Horus was only a vague entity somewhere to the North. As the peoples migrated towards the North, Set, as symbolized by the South Pole Star, began to become less and less visible, and it came to be believed that Set was descending into the underworld to become God there. Sooner or later, as the people continued to migrate north and became more focused on the Lord of the North Pole Star, Horus, they began to view Set as less important and Horus of greater significance. No doubt this led to conflicts. Set continued to be worshipped along the Nile, but it became clear that factions arose who desired to make Horus supreme. This ploy would be, once again, for political and material reasons. The movements of the astral bodies that corresponded with and symbolized these entities, such as the Pole Stars, and the Moon and Sun, were crucial to life along the Nile. These heavenly bodies were closely charted and calendared. Such movements provided a semblance of order in what would ordinarily seem like a chaotic and unkind world full of yearly flooding, terrific sandstorms and unbearable heat. By measuring the movements of such planetary bodies, those who later became regarded as priests of these bodies could determine when would be the most auspicious time for planting, reaping and harvesting. This was intrinsic to life along the Nile, and without it there was no life. If, as happens frequently in history, some sort of natural calamity or disaster were to strike a particular culture, group or people, the priests would look towards the displeasure of the god behind any one of the various planetary bodies or elemental forces such as wind (which was represented by the Egyptian "Shu"). The priests would then determine that such deity needed to be propitiated so that order would return to the world. The priests would sometimes battle as to which god would be appeased, and during difficult transition times - for example, the movement north when Horus came to usurp Set in importance - these conflicts could become ugly and violent. Indeed, the priests would resort to all sorts of name-calling and propaganda to make sure their particular interpretation was set in stone, so to speak. In the case of Horus and Set, Set - who was once considered an equal of his twin brother Horus - became viewed as something bad or evil. Set, as "Prince of Darkness" and "Lord of the Underworld," came to be seen as an enemy of the people. This characterization also came about because of the fear of the dark and the insecurities felt throughout the night. But, as can be evidenced by the later story of the Greek god Hades, the Lord of the Underworld was not always, and did not continue to be, viewed by all peoples as evil. Hades was, in fact, simply another god doing his job. It was a certain bias that eventually led to the establishment of the Prince of Darkness and Lord of the Underworld as an evil and sinister character. "Evil" is Subjective And speaking of sinister, how many people realize that the word "sinister" actually means "left" in Romance languages? Here is a classic example of how cultural bias has attached a judgment upon something so simple and benign as a direction, view or aspect. And how did this judgment come about? Left-handers, for example, were considered dangerous to the social status quo because their use of the left appendage kept the creative, right side of the brain open, leading to new and dangerous ideas - indeed, to creativity and union with the creator itself. But because these new ideas upset the status quo and could lead to its reduction in wealth and position, left-handers, or "leftists," were considered bad and evil. Hence, they became "sinister." It is possible that the word "evil" itself is also derived from something equally innocuous but through cultural bias has become judged as something bad. Some claim evil has its roots in "Eve," or the primary female. Things of Eve would be evil. In this circumstance of etymological development, the aggressive male ego actively worked to make things of Eve bad or "evil." In any event, although it was not previously this way, and in some places he is still worshipped - leading critics to make claims of devil worship - Set came to be viewed as something bad and evil. He came to be seen as the cause of all problems to the peoples along the lower or northerly Nile. That he was not always viewed by all peoples as evil is exhibited by the fact that several Egyptian pharaohs over the centuries called themselves "Seti." The pharaoh was considered the living embodiment of deity, to rule in the earthly place of the entity, whether it was Ra, Horus, Osiris or Set. The Nile kingdoms have a long and colorful history of such traditions.) So, going into the history of Set, we find this. Predynastic: Set was an important deity appearing in the art of the Hamitic people, particularly those living in the Ombos and Naquada regions. (Generally, that word deals with Afro-Asiatic languages, particularly, the word “Hamitic” deals with a member of a group of North African peoples, including the ancient Egyptians and Berbers, supposedly descended from Ham, son of Noah. I think I’ll comment on this subject in minor amounts. (From the Africentric Studies Research Group) “She begins with a discussion on Guiseppe Sergi, Professor of Anthropology in the University of Rome. It is Sergi she believes who first becomes one of the major proponents of the concept of a Mediterranean Race. Through the usage of craniometric data, Sergi classified the Mediterranean and Eurafrican into three separate subgroupings: the African Hamites, the true Mediterraneans such as Southern Italians, and the Nordic race. In his examination of the Hamite, Sergi found his closest modern relative in East Africa, specifically the Horn of Africa. Reynolds makes the following critique of Sergi's findings: This so-called Hamite or Abyssinian man was immediately inducted by scholars into the saw no irony in portraying such phenotypically diverse people as the Ba-Himas of Uganda, long-headed Russians, Scandanavians, Italians, and Arabs, as representative of his superfamily of Eurafricans. Phenotypical characteristics like skin coloring and hair form were proclaimed 'external traits without diagnostic value' because they were 'subject to environmental influence.' At the same time, for Sergi, cranio-facial measurements were not viewed as subject to such influence. Reynolds attributes much of this erroneous interpretation of data to the fact that scholars believed the form of the human skull was a permanent racial character. Sir Grafton Elliot Smith was the next figure to whom Reynolds attributed the proliferation of the Mediterranean myth. A Professor of Anatomy at Cairo's Egyptian Museum in the early 1900s, Smith based his findings on his examination of a wide variety of human bodies belonging to predynastic and dynastic Egyptians. His findings revealed what he described as people having an effeminate and frail build, poorly developed eyebrows, small broad noses and slight prognathism. Of course it would seem with such words, to many, that Smith is describing an African type. But he classifies these people of predynastic and dynastic times as members of the Brown race and, according to Reynolds, vehemently "rejected the thought of a Negroid or Black affiliation of the type generally called Hamitic or Brown." Reynolds makes the following summary of Smith's findings: Smith initially designated this type the Brown race on the basis of the coloring of the ancient Egyptian iconography and, secondly, because of what he considered to be the close osteological and cranial affinities with the mainly Cushitic-speaking peoples of East Africa, now called Bedja, Somali, Beni Amer, and Oroma (Galla) in Sudan, Ethiopia, and Eritrea. In this manner did Smith make the ancient Egyptians non-Africans, placing them in the Caucasian branch of humanity. Of the ancient Egyptians, modern Somali, Bedja and other East African types, he asserted there was only a minor Negroid element .Smith goes further in stating that careful examination of the body of West and Central Africans would reveal a profound gap separating the Negro not only from Egypt, but the rest of mankind. Reynolds takes note that Smith, "harshly criticized William Z. Ripley's 1899 work--- The Races of Europe--- for asserting that the entire ancient 'Mediterranean race' was descended from 'African Negroes.'" Carleton S. Coon is the next major advocate of the Mediterranean Race pointed out by Reynolds. Using craniometric analysis he describes this Mediterranean type as, "a man of short stature with a cranial index of 73-75, browridges and bone development weak, short face, variable nasal form, paedomorphic and sexually undifferentiated 'with a slight negroid tendency.'" It is this type he finds to predominate in early Egypt. Reynolds shows that Coon makes an even more grandoise claim of these Mediterranean types. She reveals the following about Coon's assertion of Mediterranean dominance: Coon reported that excavations in Kenya and Tanganyika had uncovered the remains of a tall, extremely long-headed Mediterranean type with a tendency to great elongation and narrowness of face. Recognizing the morphometric similarities, with characteristic abandon, Coon pronounced the are of the late stone age sites in East Africa, such as Elmenteita and Naivash, ' a second southern periphery of the white racial stock: peripheral in this case to the world of the African Negro.' He speaks of the East African 'Hamite' as being 'without doubt derived from this Palaeolithic racial type.' Thus Reynolds shows that Coon made Caucasians not only of the ancient Egyptians and modern East Africans, but early stone age African man as well. Reynolds points out that Coon is not alone in such thought. She documents another specialist in African prehistory, Sonia Cole, in describing the tall dolichocephalic peoples of Gamble's Cave, Naivasha, and Olduvai, as Caucasoids. It is this manner in which the Hamitic or Mediterranean African is separated from other Africans. And thus by populating Egypt with these Mediterranean-Hamitic types, the culture and people of the region can be designated as non-African. But along with Reynolds, there are a host of scholars who question the validity of this Hamitic hypothesis. Historian Cheikh Anta Diop makes the statement, "Coon's work contributes nothing new. If all the specimens of races and sub-races described by him lived in New York today, they would reside in Harlem." In his article The Racial Identity of Ancient Egyptian Populations Based on the Analysis of Physical Remains, Keith Crawford critiques Coon's findings. In an examination of Coon's Hamitic hypothesis, Crawford notes the following: Coon (1965) displays a picture of a Shilluk man with Black skin, ulotrichous (wooly) hair and somewhat thickened lips. Under the photo of this unquestionably "Negroid" person is the caption "A Shilluk with European features…' To the lay person such a statement is most puzzling. Understand that Coon is referring to features of the cranial anatomy, erroneously thought to have resulted from Caucasoid admixture. In this passage Crawford reveals the inherent contradictions of Coon's Hamitic arguments. At the center of this debate is the notion of what many have referred to as the "true Negro." Diop borrows this term from anthropologists who use this racial classification to differentiate what they term to be Black Africans and Hamites. This "true Negro" has such characteristics as black skin, long arms and legs, tall stature, broad shoulders, narrow hips, black and kinky hair, doliocephalic cranium, considerable prognathism, a flat nose and thick often everted lips. This definition holds to the idea that Black Africans share one set morphology which is static and unchanging. Thus one can classify those who do not fit this description precisely enough as Hamites with Caucasian features. But Diop criticizes this monotypic classification of Black Africans in the following statement: Anthropologists have invented the ingenious, convenient, fictional notion of the 'true Negro,' which allows them to consider , if need be, all the real Negroes on earth as fake Negroes, more or less approaching a kind of Platonic archetype, without ever attaining it. Thus African history is full of 'Negroids,' Hamites, semi-Hamites, Nilo-Hamitics, Ethiopoids, Sabaeans, even Caucasoids!…If the African anthropologist made a point of examining European races 'under the magnifying glass,' he would be able to multiply them ad infinitum by grouping physiognomies into races and sub-races as artificially as his European counterpart does with regard to Africa. He would, in turn, succeed in dissolving collective European reality into a fog of insignificant facts. Thus Diop holds that the rejection of the idea of the true Negro will do away with the notion of Hamites. Crawford states the following regarding this monotypic classification of Africans: A critical point to understand when studying the racial makeup of Nile Valley populations is that the full diversity of Africoid variants was not often appreciated by the early anthropologists. What anthropologists called the 'Negro' identified only one form of Africoid variant common to the forest zone of West Africa…Other Africoid variants are important to our discussion of Nile Valley populations because their range of distribution overlaps or is in close vicinity with the Nile valley. Their physical traits were likely present in ancient Egyptian populations. Crawford's statements reveal one of the fundamental errors in the classification of racial types within Africa and the Nile Valley in particular. Crawford identifies several of these Africoid variants. Two of these he describes as the Elongated African variant and the Nilotic variant.28 He notes that, "the Elongated variant is distinguished by a generalized elongated body, narrow head, face and nose, dark skin and spiralled hair, thick but not everted lips." He identifies these Elongated types with the such groups as the West African-Saharan Fulani, the Great Lakes Region Tutsi and Hima, the Masai of Kenya, the Galla of Southern Ethiopia, Tigreans and Amharas from Ethiopia, Somalis and the Beja of Northern Sudan. Crawford cites Hiernaux as stressing, "there is evidence for the continued presence of Elongated traits since Pleistocene times, with no evidence of gene flow from populations outside of Africa…Elongated traits arose as an adaptation to dry heat." Crawford also cites Hiernaux in his description of the Nilotic variant who are described, in comparison to the Elongated variant, as taller, more narrow headed, lower and wider nosed, of slender build, long legs and little fat. These Nilotic types include the Nuer, Dinka, Shilluk and Anuak who occupy the Nile river basins in the southern Sudanese region. In conclusion of these observations Crawford makes the following statement: The preceding discussion should make it clear that African populations display an entire spectrum of phenotypes including those attributed to being characteristic of other races. This must be the case since all races evolved from an African prototype and it was necessary that this type possess the potential to express multiple traits which could then be modified further by the environment. The so-called 'true Negro' does not even represent the majority of African types on the continent. This passage confirms Crawford's belief that African populations are "poly" rather than monotypic. In conclusion it can be said that past examinations of Nile Valley remains have yielded faulty conclusions due to erroneous stereotypes of African morphology. Numerous works have shown that Africans do not share one set morphology. Thus deviations of this stereotype are not inherently the products of admixture and thus to be classified as Hamitic, Mediterranean, Eurafrican, or Caucasoid.” In other words, this didn’t really have much of anything to do with the story of “Ham”, but we get stuck with it anyway. My apologies to the Egyptians. Archaic Egypt: Set generally occupies a secondary role to his enemy Horus, champion of the people of the North (except in the 2nd dynasty when one pharaoh took a "Set" name rather than a Horus name.) Set is intimately connected with teaching astronomy, the methods of agriculture, medicine, and above all magic. He is said to have opened the mouth of the other gods, and is the patron of the sem ritual. His cult titles include "Great of Magic" and "Eternal". There is indeed evidence that Set is set apart from other gods to die (Bonnet's commentaries on the Pyramid texts). The astronomical cult, which placed the afterlife in the region of the Northern heavens -- particularly in and around the constellation of the Great Bear, was replaced in the Fourth dynasty by a growing sun cult centering on Re and Horus. The great stellar monument that Imhotep designed were replaced by the solar pyramids of the Fourth and Fifth dynasty's. (Notably Cheops took no chances in the great Pyramid's design, although outwardly a solar monument he had a hole bored through, so that the stones aligned with the position of Alpha Draconis (a star in the Great Bear called Thuban = "the Subtle One", a possible Set cult title,) just in case that was where his ka was heading. During the next few dynasties (4 - 17), Set is generally ignored. His functions are absorbed into other gods. Thoth picks up the attributes of magic, Osiris picks up the attributes of Mysterious time “djet” as opposed to exoteric time “neheh”. Set keeps his attributes as a storm and stellar god, and gradually comes to be associated with all night fears. (Remember the demons and night?)He gets attributed with nightmares, desert fiends; in addition to the “bad animals” such as the Hippopotamus, and the jaguar of the South. He is mentioned in a famous 12th dynasty writing called ”The Discourse of a man with his ba” in which his solar aspect “IAA” is referred to. Bikka Reed has a great translations of this text. In the 18th dynasty a remarkable Pharoah Hatshepsut reintroduced the worship of Set, by building a Temple dedicated to him, and Horus the Elder at Ombos. This marked a strong interest in Set's eternal nature. For example, in Hatshepsut, is the prophecy (which she had placed in her tomb at Der el-Medina) that "She will not only enjoy the days of Horus, but the days of Set will be added to her span." She was also interested in the antinomian nature of the Set cult. In fact, she performed one of the most scandalous acts available to a woman, she acted as a man. This early feminist clearly found Set, a greatarchetype to Work with, (also noting that Set may have originally been a female, as all “Gods” were originally “Goddesses”.) Set was popular among her family until the Kingship of Akhenaton. The very militaristic pharaohs of the Nineteenth dynasty, who were probably descended form a family of Set priests at Tanis, delighted in Set both in his militaristic role, and as God of Foreign places. Ramses II, for example, called himself the Son of Set. The Set cult too was very popular with foreigners coming to live in Egypt. His worship has always been connected with the outsider. The Twentieth Dynasty began by looking very favorably on this god, as is shown in the name of its founder Setnakt, "Set is Mighty." There is also considerable evidence that the set cult was favored among artisans of the time. By the end of the Twentieth Dynasty, as the funerary cult of Osiris became the dominate force in popular Egyptian religion, Set’s role changed to become that of the murderer of Osiris, and Set became the Evil One. In fact by the Twenty Sixth dynasty it was a common practice to disfigure any representations of Set. He became the quintessential archetypical figure of the Christian devil. Some scholars have even derived the name Satan from Set-Hen, a cult title meaning the Majesty of Set. I don’t believe the Set-An, Set-Anup theorems, for simple reason. The worship of Set transformed under the Chaldean empire to the worship of “Shaitan”, moving from there, we get the name “Satan” So, let’s review. Set was a sun god of the predynastic Egypt, but he gradually degenerated from being a beneficent deity into being a god of evil and darkness. Seth then went to live with the sun god Re, where he became the voice of the thunder. In the “Book of the Dead” Seth was referred to as the "lord of the northern sky" and held responsible for storms and cloudy weather. Seth protected Re during his night voyage through the underworld against the Apophis-snake. On the other hand, Seth was a peril for ordinary Egyptians in the underworld, where he was said seize the souls of the unwary. Among the animals sacred to Seth were the desert oryx, crocodile, boar, and the hippopotamus in its aspect as a destroyer of boats and of planted fields. The pig was a taboo in Seth's cult. The Greeks later equated Seth with their demon-god Typhon. The rising sun is the beetle-headed Khepera; the sun at noon or midday is Ra; the setting sun is Tem. The “Kgdom of Se” was supposed to be placed in the northern sky, and his abode was one of the stars which formed the constellation of Khepesh, or the "Thigh". These have been identified with the Great Bear, and it was from this region that he made use of his baleful influence to thwart the beneficent designs of Osiris, whose abode was Sah or Orion, and of Isis, whose home was Sept, or Sothis. A little observational skills will quickly show that the northern sky was the natural domain of Set, when viewed from the standpoint of an Egyptian in Upper Egypt. The north was considered to be the place of darkness, cold, mist, and rain, each of which was a later attribute of Set. We may note in passing that the Hebrews called the region of darkness, or the winter hemisphere, Sephon, a name which appears to be connected beyond a doubt with Saphon, "North." The chief opponent of Set was the hippopotamus goddess Reret, who was believed to keep this power of darkness securely fettered by a chain; this goddess is usually represented with the arms and hands of a woman which are attached to the body of a hippopotamus, and in each she holds a knife. Her temple was called Het-Khaat. The duty of the goddess was to keep in restraint the evil influence of Set and to make clear a way in the sky of the birth of Heru-sma-taui, whom Dr. Brugsch identified with the spring sun. The texts, however, make it clear that Reret was nothing but a form of Isis. Set was the one who was condemned to pull the sun disc in its boat across the sky everyday. Like the early demons and the early Lucifer, Set was a good God that was turned bad. |