“ANCIENT EGYPT - To Become a Magician”

4/27/11 9:22 PMANCIENT EGYPT : To Become a Magician

Page 1 of 27http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm

To Become A Magician

the sacred Great Word, its divine record by the ante-rational mindand the magic of the everlasting existence of Pharaoh's light-life

by Wim van den Dungen

Thoth, Lord of Divine Scriptureafter Champollion, J.F. : Panthéon Egyptien, planche 30C

"The sky quivers, the earth quakes before me, for I am a magician, I possess magic."

Pyramid Texts, utterance 472 (§ 924)



MotivationIntroduction

1 The genesis and growth of cognition.

1.1 The origin of cognition : in the beginning was the action.

1.2 Summary of the findings of Piaget.

1.3 An eclectical model on cognitive growth & the historico-psychological paradigm.

1.4 The early stages specified : mythical, pre-rational & proto-rational.

1.5 The importance of an integrated rationality.

1.6 The place of schema-theory.

2 The "Great Word" and divine scripture.

2.1 Brief predynastic chronology and the primeval goddess of the sacred.

2.2 The "Sia", "Hu", "Heka" & "Maat" of Re and Pharaoh in the Old Kingdom.

2.3 The mummification of the divine words.

2.4 Philosophy of language and the Egyptian language.

2.5 Early cognition and Archaic, Old and Middle Egyptian.

To Become A Magician

3 "Heka" : the magic of Re & the sacred Sky-goddess.

General considerations

3.1 The origin of Egyptian magic : the Great Sorceress & divine kingship.

3.2 The primeval "heka" of Hathor and Isis : love, life, death & resurrection.

3.3 The Ogdoadic "heka" of Thoth : let it be written, let it be done.

3.4 The core of Egyptian magic : the power of the Great Word.

ConclusionsBibliography

Motivation

Parapsychology prompts philosophy to reconsider the importance of magic and the magical. Egyptology mustbear the exercise too, for we know in Ancient Egypt magic ("heka") was the cornerstone of all major & minorstate cults as well as being crucial in the personal piety of the commoner.

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm#motive

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm#intro

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm#1a

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm#1.1a












http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm#text


http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm#gen





http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/heka.htm#conclusion

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/egyptbiblio.htm



"The evidence for Extra Sensoric Perception (ESP) and Psychokinesis (PK) -and I have presented only briefsummaries of a few examples of it- seems to be adequate. Serious attention to the evidence should beconvincing to all except those who are irreversibly committed to the worldview of materialism andsensationalism, according to which ESP and PK are impossible in principle."Griffin, D.R. : Parapsychology, Philosophy and Spirituality : a Postmodern Exploration, State University ofNew York Press - New York, 1997, p.89.

The egyptologist Jacq wrote :

"Un égyptologue qui ne croit pas à la religion égyptienne, qui ne partage pas une sympathie totale avec lacivilisation qu'il étudie, ne saurait, à notre avis, qui prononcer des paroles desséchées. L'intellectualisme, sibrillant soit-il, n'a jamais remplacé le sentiment vécu, même dans une discipline scientifique."Jacq, 1983, p.7, my italics.

The fact "remote viewing" (the ability to access and provide accurate information through psychic means,about a person, place, object or event, that is inaccessible through any normally accepted means, regardlessof distance, shielding or time) actually exists, begs the question 'How' ? Instead of focusing on the objective(like a physical theory allowing for these unexplainable events - cf. "actio-in-distans"), contemporary magicaltheory tends to view magic as the result of a particular magical state of consciousness accompanied bycorresponding actions and external forms. The latter are necessary, for the magician wants to direct theprocess of the physical world.

"La magie égyptienne est une vision du monde qui éclaire des zones à la fois lumineuses et obscures del'âme humaine. Bien avant la psychanalyse, elle a été une voie de recherche féconde pour la connaissancede l'ultime réalité qui est en nous. Elle a également servi à manipuler, non sans danger, une énergiepsychique que la science la plus rationnelle commence à redécouvrir, à tâtons et avec un certainétonnement."Jacq, Ch. : Ibidem, p.35, my italics.

Introduction

In this paper, I try to understand how Ancient Egyptian thought arrived at its proto-rational stage. Such anunderstanding can not deny that magical features prevailed in the earliest stage of their cognitive growth(pre-logical or mythical thought). However, in Ancient Egypt, magic is particularly "mental" and it continuedto play a dominant role in the next stages of cognitive development. As magical rituals and techniques assuch are of no interest here, I will not present a comprehensive list of magical activities (as has been doneby others). Instead, I will try to focus on the "mental" core of Egyptian magic itself.

A life lived according to truth & justice (cf. "Maat") and the ceremonial release at death of the subtle foci ofconsciousness and their co-relative bodies (cf. my paper on the Ba) out of the "net" of the physical plane were the two major goals of the Ancient Egyptian. The former guaranteed that one would exist as a happyhuman being on earth, the latter that one would put off one's humanity at death and continue to exist as adeity in the afterlife, while having access to the physical plane via the mummy. Both goals were related, forif one had been unjust on earth, no deification could be expected and total annihilation would ensue (to thename of the justified deceased, the epithet "just of voice" was added, i.e. his or her heart had neverconceived unjust words and hence only truth had been uttered).

To realize these goals, the Egyptians placed their trust in the power of speech, or the ability to create byuttering the proper words (creative utterance or "hu") insightfully conceived beforehand in the mind ("ab" orheart). In the Memphis Theology, this power of creation through the word is cosmogonic and associated withPtah, but we find the independent concept as early as the Pyramid Texts. In fact, without "words of power",there would be no Egyptian magic, rituals or ceremonialism. It is true that all kinds of actions accompaniedthis use of words, but the deities would never send their doubles ("kau") souls ("bau") & power ("sekhem")if the priests did not know what to say. The magical actions were important, but absolutely impotent without

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/egyptbiblio.htm#j

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/ba.htm

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/memphis.htm



the words necessary to empower them. Moreover, to assume the form of the deities needed, preciserecitation was deemed necessary. Hence, Egyptian magic makes ample use of the auditive faculty (hearingthe words of justice and -if silence is not indicated- speaking the words of power). Besides uttering thesewords of power, the auditive was also stimulated and underscored by using analogical languages like bodylanguage, music and art to give magical rituals their full suggestive effectiveness.

Instead of understanding magic as a tool to change objective circumstances directly, I suggest (based on theevidence from the earliest sources) that magic is a technology aimed at altering the magician's state ofconsciousness in such a way that he or she has access to psychic abilities which do not only allow fortelepathy and telekinesis, but which make it also possible to influence the collective unconscious in such away that out of it particular, collective events may emerge & crystalize. Compare this with the effects ofstrong suggestions during a deep state of hypnosis, but then on a collective scale. Direct suggestion of thiskind is like the empowering effect some charismatic leaders have on crowds.

In Ancient Egypt, Pharaoh and his Residence provided for the continuous presence of a power said to havederived from "the gods" (Pharaoh as son of Re). In the Old Kingdom, he alone was the real center of thedivine on earth, for the spirits and souls of the deities existed in the sky. These gods & goddesses couldallow their "kau" and "bau" to accept the invitation spoken and enacted by the priests. In these ceremonialperformances, only the deities spoke, listened & moved. The priests (brought into trance through theongoing litanies ?), enacted complex mystery plays, divine interactions and events between the deities. Thepriests identified themselves as much as possible with the pantheon.

The initiatic as well as the funerary rituals make use of this magical technique called "the assumption ofgodforms", i.e. the total, personalized identification of a single priestly mind with a pure archetype, i.e. aconscious, symbolical (albeit proto-rational) approximation of a natural forca & a cultural form. Ergo, it ispossible to view the Egyptian deities as forms or symbolizations of natural processes leading to a complexsyncretism in harmony with the fundamental unity of the "first time" in which all the deities were (andcontinuously are) (re)created, (re)generated and (re)juvenated. The epistemic status of these godforms arenot rational but proto-rational. They are the archetypes of the collective unconscious of the Ancient Egyptian,i.e. forms & symbolizations reflecting a collective understanding of certain processes of nature & culture.

"The Egyptians were the first to practice a Jungian psychology of archetypes and to recognize thefundamental restorative power of the unconscious. They realized that in sleep and dreams, one experiencesthese depths as a psychic reality in which one may encounter gods and the deceased alike."Hornung, 1992, p.95.

In order to understand proto-rationality, we need an objective standard to measure these stages of cognitivegrowth. In my Naar een Stuurkundige Antropologie (1993) I already developed an eclectical model oncognitive development. It was based on the work of Piaget, Kohlberg, the neo-Freudian school and Maslow.See also : Criticosynthesis, 2008.

Once the role of magic in the proto-rationality of the Ancient Egyptians has been understood, it may bepossible to contrast this knowledge with Greek philosophy, especially with the thought of those Greeks whovisited Egypt and studied there. It may become clear then, that many of the themes developed by Greekphilosophy did not arise "ex nihilo".

In a later stage, these comparisons will be helpful to clarify the relationships (resemblances and differences)between Ancient Egyptian civilization and the Semitical cultures of the Jews and the Arabs, both influencedby Ancient Greece.

1.The genesis & growth of cognition.

This chapter provides information enabling one to understand "ante-rationality", so that "instinct" may bedistinguished from "intuition". To arrive at this, the genesis & growth of cognition will be investigated. Two

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/egyptbiblio.htm#h

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/nstuurk.htm

http://sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/criticosynthesis.htm



barriers are discovered : between reason and its ante-rational foundation, the early layers of cognitiveactivity (mythical, pre-rational and proto-rational thought) and between reason and its intellect, the post-formal layers of cognition related to intuition, creativity, inventivity, gnosis & the direct experience of the

Divine (mysticism). I argue for an integrated rationality able to make use of these barriers when necessary.

1.1 The origin of cognition : in the beginning was the action.

In his Le Structuralisme, Piaget defines his pivotal notion of "structure" as a system of transformations whichabides by certain laws and which sustains or enriches itself by a play of these transformations, which occurwithout the use of external factors. This auto-structuration of a complete whole is defined as "auto-regulation". In the individual, the latter is established by biological rhythms, biological & mental regulationsand mental operations. These can be theoretically formalized.

Piaget refuses to accept that "real" dialectical tensions between physical objects are the true foundations ofthought and cognition (its possibility, genesis & progressive development). Piaget never fills in what realityis. He maintains no ontological view on reality-as-such, considered to be the borderline of both thedeveloping subject and its objective world, stage after stage.

The cognitive is approached as a process, for rationality grows in developmental stages, each calling for aparticular cognitive structure on the side of the subject. What reality is, is left open. Why ? Every objectiveobservation implies an observer bound by the limitations of a given stage of cognitive development, i.e. asubjective epistemic form, containing ideosyncratic, opportunistic and particularized information.

Neither did Piaget choose for a strictly transcendental approach. Conditions which exist before cognitionitself (like in Foucault) are not introduced. What Popper called the "problem-solving" ability of man, can beassociated with Piaget's notion on "re-equilibration". Popper introduced the triad : problem, theory &falsification. In anthropology and psychology Piaget introduced : activity, regulation & re-equilibration (auto-regulation).

Living substances begin their existence with action. This is rooted in biological processes. Action implies theformation of cognitive structures which -at first- are exteriorized in coordinated external movements. Afterrepeated actions, interiorization, permanency, invariant principles and imagination allow for the emergenceof internal cognitive structures.

So the following sequence appears :

external actions (system) & reactions (environment) ;

interiorization and permanency ;

internal cognitive structures and auto-regulation ;

novel external actions.

These internal cognitive structures are constantly being transformed and regulated in order to adapt thesystem to new situations. This process is recurrent and so always more complex cognitive structure emerge.Ergo, the continuous emancipation of the different cognitive forms of equilibrium (an always increasingcognition) is the pivotal notion (cf. The Development of Thought, 1978). This increase is the natural result ofsuccessfull re-equilibrations, in which logico-symbolical functions plays a major role.

Auto-regulation is also the result of the interactions between the system and its environment. Hence,intersubjectivity is always essential in the construction of new and stronger cognitive structures. This impliesthat cognitive processes not only appear as resulting from organical auto-regulation (of which they reflectthe essential mechanisms) but also emerge as differentiated organs of this regulation in the arena ofinteractions with the environment. Cognition is the most differentiated biological organ of survival human



beings have.

Piagetian psychogenesis (based on the observation of children) shows that knowledge implies a developingrelationship between a thinking subject and the objects around it. This relationship grows and becomesmore complex. Stages of cognitive development can be defined by means of their typical cognitive eventsand acquired mental forms. This development is not a priori (pre-conditions), a posteriori (empirical) butconstructivistic : the system is always adapting and creating new cognitive structures, causing novel behaviorwhich may be interiorized and form new internal cognitive forms, etc. The foundation of this process isaction itself, the fact that its movements are not random but coordinated. It is the form of this coordination,the order, logic or symbolization of the pattern of the movements which eventually may stabilize as apermanent mental operator.

Two main actions are distinguished :

sensori-motoric actions exist before language or any form of representational conceptualization ;

operational actions ensue as soon as the actor is conscious of the results & goals of actions and themechanisms of actions, i.e. the translation of action into some early form of conceptualized thought.

1.2 Summary of the findings of Piaget.

In Piaget's theory on cognitive development, two general functional principles are postulated : organization &adaptation.

The former implies the tendency common to all forms of life to integrate structures (physical &psychological) into systems of a higher order. The latter (to be divided in assimilation & accommodation)shows how the individual not only modifies cognitive structures in reaction to demands (external) but alsouses his own structures to incorporate elements of the environment (internal). Organisms tend towardequilibrium with the environment. Centration, decentration (crisis) & re-equilibration are the fundamentalprocesses forcing the cognitive texture of humans to become more complex.

Mental operators are the result of the interiorization of this cognitive evolution. An original, archaic sense ofidentity is shaped. After prolonged exposure to new types of action -challenging the established originalcentration and its equilibrium- a crisis ensues and decentration is the outcome. A higher-order equilibrium isfound through auto-regulation (re-equilibration).

In this way, several strands, levels, layers or planes of cognitive texture unfold. The process can be analysedas follows :

1. repeated confrontation with a new kind of action ;

2. action-reflection or the interiorization of this novel action by means of semiotic factors ; this is the firstlevel of permanency or pre-concepts which have no decontextualized use ;

3. anticipation & retro-action using these pre-concepts, valid insofar as they symbolize the original actionbut always with reference to context ;

4. final level of permanency : formal concepts, valid independent of the original action and context & theformation of permanent cognitive (mental) operators.

Mental operators identify (symbolize) actions in sets, strands, layers of conscious, informational & materialactivity. In this way, Piaget defined four layers of cognitive growth :

1. sensori-motoric cognition, between birth and 2 years of age ;

2. pre-operational cognition, between 2 and 6 ;



3. concrete operatoric cognition, between 7 and 10 ;

4. formal-operatoric cognition, between 10 & 13.

1.3 An eclectical model on cognitive growth & the historico-psychological paradigm.

The work of Piaget, the findings of neo-Freudian theory (Lemay), Kohlberg's research on moral development& some major theories on post-formal cognitive growth (Maslow, Tart, Wilber) yield a genetico-cognitivemodel which integrates the three main perspectives on the living human being, namely the cognitive (Piaget,Kohlberg), the socio-affective (Freud and his school) and the moral (Maslow and transpersonal psychology).These explain the stability, continuity and architecture of a system of cognitive relationships, structures &operators.

This part of the model is "vertical", in the sense that it explains how cognitive structures stand erect.Complementary to this is the approach of Prigogine, who investigated the horizontal, dynamical features,found to be irreversible (cf. infra).

Each phase is characterized by matter (pragmatics) and the complexification of its biological operations, byinformation (syntax) or the synthetical symbolizations of these operations, and by consciousness (semantics)summarizing the meanings & intentions which occur as a result of the activities of a living substance (casuquo the body).

These findings can be expanded in three ways. Firstly, the Piagetian model did not only prove valid in thepsycho-cognitive realm, but can also be used as a tool to understand the evolution of cultural forms and thecrisis undergone by societies & civilizations (understood as living systems - cf. the historico-psychologicalparadigm). Secondly, the stages encountered in the cognitive growth of individuals correspond with thedevelopment of cognition in the human species as a whole (from mythical to rational thought and beyond -cf. Jaynes, 1976). Thirdly, stages beyond the formal stage of cognitive growth can and will not be a prioriexcluded.

The historico-psychological paradigm used in my hermeneutical studies is a synthesis of Piaget's geneticalepistemology and the historical approach of civilization, seeking the general mental form or formsunderscoring the economical, socio-political, scientific, artistic, spiritual and symbolical (codified, written)expressions of a given civilization in general and its overall, common cognitive structure (or cultural form) inparticular (cf. Jaynes, 1976). Its main principles are :

1. thought originates from action, i.e. coordinated movements. This coordination is a "form" which is : (a)executed by the biological organism at hand, i.e. its matter, (b) explained through the interactions withits environment or information and (c) given meaning by the unique identity or consciousness typicalfor each member of a species ;

2. thought is based on an indirect, functional contact with the physical world, i.e. thought is alwaysmediated, by a third term (whereas fysiological processes are direct) ;

3. thought is a finite process which is an integrated part of a particular living organism but simultaneouslythought is also the extension with which consciousness may touch the universal, unconditional, infinite& absolute ;

4. the development of thought depends on the successive improvements of the variety of its abstractforms of equilibration, which is a historical process ;

5. the construction of more stable cognitive forms becomes necessary to resolve the contradictions whichcharacterize the previous stage, and so they are regulations of regulations, etc.

6. to explain the historical development of these equilibrations both individual as social factors are to betaken into consideration. Society is a system of activities based on actions which influence each other

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/matter.htm

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/information.htm

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/consciousness.htm



reciprocally ;

7. the rise and development of a cultural form, especially its cognitive features, is understood as acollective, historical equilibration on a higher, more stable level of civilization which allows for theconstruction of new inner operators (actional, affective, cognitive, intuitional) and novel outer behavior(as families, societies, cultures & civilizations), eliminating those tensions which disrupted thedevelopment of civilization in an earlier stage of its cultural development.

To complete this model, we need to consider non-equilibrium dynamics or the notion of irreversible processas developed by Prigogine in the context of his study of complex, open, communicative & energy-consumingwholes, i.e. dissipative systems or organizations.

In his famous book, La Nouvelle Alliance, Prigogine poses the question how highly intelligent systems escapethe constant chaotic movements which surrounds them ? Indeed, Piaget (psychology) focused on the formsof equilibrium which characterize the relative stability of a given stage of cognitive development. These formsrepresent order, structure or architecture (stability, conservation, repetition). Prigogine (physics), aware ofthe entropic qualities of physical systems with complex trajectories (initial position + dynamical process),emphasized the chaotic dynamics of the environment and is therefore impressed by the architecture of orderevidenced by complex systems. The fact that crisis (decentration) is necessary to trigger re-equilibration, aswell as the observation that crisis is initiated by interacting with the environment, were put into evidence byPiaget and are confirmed by the analysis of complex trajectories by Prigogine (cf. Chaos).

Both positions are complementary, and focus on a different functional horizon of complex systems. Prigoginestudies the horizontal, dynamical characteristics of a system, the fact that they constantly reorganize tosurvive the entropic decay around them. Piaget investigates the vertical, static architecture of a system, thefact that it has a strong backbone which is the result of many years of evolution and uncountable trials &errors.

Both acknowledge that systems go through crisis and define auto-regulation (Piaget) and auto-structuration(Prigogine) as explicative for the continuous reorganization (permanent reformation) to which highlyintelligent systems submit themselves, especially when the number of interaction with the environment islarge (increasing the arrival of new input). Because fluctuations rise, more interactions increase the chanceof crisis and trigger crisis (decentration). Only crisis will increase the survival-needs of a system and triggerauto-structuration which can be measured as :

a decrease of entropy or negative entropy (i.e. negentropy in a galacy largely composed out of entropicmatter). Complex life is a refutation of the "black box"-model, the "closed systems"-theories and the"stimulus-reflex"-thinking ;

a more comprehensive database which allows for more information to be stored, assimilated and madeto work to solve problems ;

a more coherent field of consciousness, able to attribute meaning to the objects which are part of it.

"Le calcul montre que plus un système est complexe, plus sont élevées les chances que, pour tout état,certaines fluctuations soient dangereuses. (...) Il est probable que dans les systèmes très complexes, où lesespèces ou les individus interagissent de manière très diversifiée, la diffusion, la communication entre tousles points du système est également très rapide. (...) Ainsi, ce serait la rapidité de communication quedéterminerait la complexité maximale que peut atteindre l'organisation d'un système sans devenir tropinstable."Prigogine, I. & Stengers, I. : La Nouvelle Alliance, Gallimard - Paris, 1979, p.178, my italics.

A swift communication indeed increases fluctuations, but the latter do not destroy the system because acritical balance has been realized.

"La taille critique est donc déterminée par une compétition entre le 'pouvoir d'intégration' du système et les

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/nchaos.htm



méchanismes chimique qui amplifient la fluctuation à l'intérieur de la sousrégion fluctuante."Prigogine, I. & Stengers, I. : Ibidem, p.178.

Hence, auto-regulation through the dynamics of conflict, implies both external (environment) and internal(power of integration) changes. The latter, vertical aspect of a system, defies entropy as long as it can andthis with an exemplary tenacity. But if no power of integration is operative or if it is not strong enoughcompared with the fluctuations at hand, then an increase of chaos is the most likely outcome. This reducesthe existing heterogeneity and variety to a more standardized and uniform format. It makes the systemwithdraw and collapse. For this reduced system avoids communication and hence fossilizes out of the lack ofnew input and the absence of auto-regulation.

1.4 The early stages specified : mythical, pre-rational & proto-rational.

When investigating ancient cultures in general and Egyptian civilization in particular, the first three layers ofcognitive growth are essential.

Let me list their specifics :

! MYTHICAL or PRE-LOGICAL THOUGHT :

First substage :

1. adualism and only a virtual consciousness of identity ;

2. primitive action testifies that a quasi complete indifferentiation exists between the subjective and theobjective ;

3. actions are quasi not coordinated, i.e. random movements are frequent.

Second substage :

1. first decentration of actions with regard to their material origin (the physical body) ;

2. first objectification by a subject experiencing itself for the first time as the source of actions ;

3. objectification of actions and the experience of spatiality ;

4. objects are linked because of the growing coordination of actual actions ;

5. links between actions in means/goals schemes, allowing the subject to experience itself as the sourceof action (initiative), moving beyond the dependence between the external object and the acting body;

6. spatial & temporal permanency and causal relationships are observed ;

7. differentiation (between object and subject) leads to logico-mathematical structures, whereas thedistinction between actions related to the subject and those related to the external objects becomesthe startingpoint of causal relationships ;

8. the putting together of schematics derived from external objects or from the forms of actions whichhave been applied to external objects.

Comments :

The earliest stage of mythical thought is adual. The only "symbols" and "forms" are the material eventsthemselves in all their immediacy and wholeness. This non-verbal core makes myth as analogical as art(music). In mythical thought, everything is immediate and the immediate is all. Ergo, myth goes against the



differentiation which feeds the complexification of thought & cognition.

"But while the true tendency of scientific, analytical-critical thinking is toward liberation from this substantialapproach, it is characteristic of myth that despite all the 'spirituality' of its objects and contents, its 'logic' -the form of its contents- clings to bodies."Cassirer, E. : The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, Yale University Press - Yale, 1955, vol.2., p.59.

Even before the rise of language, we see that knowledge has forms which are part of action itself, namelyby differentiating between object & subject of experience and by being conscious of the material,exteriorized schematics connected to both.

The first differentiation occurs when, on the level of material, actual, immediate actions, the object is placedbefore the subject of experience. This emergence of subjectivity implies the decentration of the movementsof the physical executive agent (the body), which unveils the subject as source of action and prepares forthe interiorizations of pre-rational thought. By this foundational difference between the body and theempirical subject, consciousness can be attributed to a focus of identity (ego).

This stage of mythical thought is non-verbal. Nevertheless, actions are triggered by a subject which isconscious of a whole network of practical and material actualizations, although without any conceptualknowledge but only through immediate, exteriorized material schemes. Mythical thought is irrational, i.e.runs against the principle of logic itself. Irrationality is the foundation of all ante-rational thinking, the "good"reason why rationality is called for ...

! PRE-RATIONAL THOUGHT :

1. because of the introduction of semiotical factors (symbolical play, language, and the formation ofmental images), the coordination of movements is no longer exclusively triggered by their practical andmaterial actualizations without any knowledge of their existence as abstract forms, i.e. the first layer ofthought occurs : the difference between subject & object is a signal and gives rise to the sign ;

2. upon the simple action, a new type of interiorized action is erected which is not conceptual because theinteriorization itself is nothing more than a copy of the development of the actions using signs andimagination ;

3. no object of thought is realized but only an internal structure of the actions in a pre-concept formed byimagination and language ;

4. pre-verbal intelligence and interiorization of imitation in imaginal representations ;

5. psychomorph view on causality : no distinction between objects and the actions of the subjects ;

6. objects are living beings with qualities attributed to them as a result of interactions ;

7. at first, no logical distinction is made between "all" and "few" and comparisons are comprehended inan absolute way, i.e. A < B is possible, but A < B < C is not ;

8. finally, the difference between class and individual is grasped, but transitivity and reversibility are notmastered ;

9. the pre-concepts & pre-relations are dependent on the variations existing between the relationalcharacteristics of objects & can not be reversed, making them rather impermanent and difficult tomaintain. They stand between action-schema and concept.

Comments :

A tremendous leap forwards ensues. The formation of a subjective focus was necessary to allow for the nextstep : interiorization and the actual articulation of pre-concepts, leading up to pre-relations between objects,



but the latter remain psychomorph.

! PROTO-RATIONAL THOUGHT :

1. again a radical change occurs : concepts and relations emerge and the interiorized actions receive thestatus of "operations", allowing for transformations. The latter make it possible to change the variablefactors while keeping others invariant ;

2. the increase of coordinations forms coordinating systems & structures which are capable of becomingclosed systems by virtue of a play of anticipative and retrospective constructions of thought (imaginalthought-forms) ;

3. these mental operations, instead of introducing corrections when the actions are finished, exist by thepre-correction of errors and this thanks to the double play of anticipation & retroaction or "perfectregulation" ;

4. transitivity is mastered which causes the enclosedness of the formal system ;

5. necessity is grasped ;

6. constructive abstraction, new, unifying coordinations which allow for the emergence of a total systemand auto-regulation (or the equilbration caused by perfect regulation) ;

7. transitivity, conservation and reversibility are given ;

8. the mental operations are "concrete", not "formal", implying that they (a) exclusively appear inimmediate contexts and (b) deal with objects only (i.e. are not reflective) ;

9. the concrete operatoric structures are not established through a system of combinations but one stepat a time ;

10. this stage is paradoxal : a balanced development of logico-mathematical operations versus thelimitations imposed upon the concrete operations. This conflict triggers the next, final stage, whichcovers the formal operations.

Conclusion :

Proto-rationality is always limited by a given context. Moreover, there is no reflection upon the conditions ofsubjectivity (just as in the pre-rational stage objects remained psychomorph). This contextualization leavesin place uncoordinated actions and concepts which are the expression of many serious & fundamentalcontradictions.

The formal operations leave these contextual entanglements behind, and give a universal, a-temporalembedding to the cognitive process. Cognition is liberated from the immediate events and able toconceptualize logical & mathematical truths (deduction) as well as physical causalities in abstract terms,without any consideration for their actual occurence, if any (as in an inner thought-experiment). Thought isable to combine propositions. Self-reflection happens and the internal, transcendental conditions of thecognitive apparatus are discovered (cf. Rules, Prolegomena, Knowledge, Criticosynthesis).

1.5 The importance of an integrated rationality.

Firstly, an integrated rationality knows how to use the mythical, pre-rational and proto-rational layers ofcognitive development in affective, non-verbal, analogical and contextual happenings. This is reason inharmony with instinct. Secondly, in its own domain, the production of empirico-formal propositions, reasonworks in harmony with a set of normative rules governing the "game" of "true knowing" or production ofknowledge that works. This is reason in harmony with the completion of itself. Thirdly, a multi-dimensionalrationality (cf. Marcuse, Maslow, Wilber) explores the meta-formal, creative and inventive operators, i.e.

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/rules.htm

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/nprole.htm

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/nkennis.htm

http://sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/criticosynthesis.htm

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/rules.htm



seeks to understand intellectual "perception" ("gnosis", "intuition") as a higher ("intellectual") complement ofreason. This is reason in harmony with intuition. Only when pre-nominal, nominal and meta-nominal thoughtis allowed to exist in the logical space of a possible cognition (cf. transcendental logic), may acomprehensive picture on the extensive potential of cognition ensue.

1.6 The place of schema-theory.

The last three decades has seen the rise of schema theory across the fields of linguistics, anthropology,psychology and artificial intelligence. Human cognition utilizes structures even more complex than prototypescalled "frame", "scene", "scenario", "script" or "schema". In cognitive sciences and in ethnoscience they areused as a model for classification and generative grammar. The schema is primarily a set of relationships,some of which amounts to a structure, generating pictoral, verbal and behavioral outputs. The elementsassociate with great flexibility & interchangeability, although connected. For the schema's first attribute isthat of being a relation. The schemata are also called mental structures and abstract representations ofenvironmental regularities. Events activate schemata which allow us to comprehend ourselves & the worldaround us.

Schema-theory is part of genetic epistemology. The term is used to define a structured set of generalizablecharacteristics of an action. Repetition, crisis & reformation yield strands of co-relative actions. Ergo,different types of schemata emerge :

sensori-motoric, mythical thought : aduality implies only one relationship, namely with immediatephysicality ; object & subject reflect perfectly ; earliest schemata are restricted to the internal structureof the actions (the coordination) as they exist in the actual moment and differentiate between theactions connecting the subjects and the actions connecting the objects. The action-scheme can not bemanipulated by a thought and is triggered when it practically materializes ;

pre-operatoric, pre-rational thought : object and subject are differentiated and interiorized ; thesubject is liberated from its entanglement in the actual situation of the actions ; early psychomorphcausality. The subjective is projected upon the objective and the objective is viewed as the mirror ofthe subjective. The emergence of pre-concepts and pre-conceptual schemata does not allow forpermanency and logical control. The beginning of decentration occurs and eventually objectificationensues ... ;

concrete-operatoric, proto-rational thought : conceptual structures emerge which provide insight in theessential moments of the operational mental construction : (a) constructive generalization ; (b) theability to understand each step and the total system (1 to 2 to 3 ... and (c) an autoregulation enablingone to run through the system in two ways, causing conservation. The conceptual schemata are"concrete" because they only function in contexts and not yet in formal schemata.

2. The "Great Word" and divine scripture.

2.1 Brief predynastic chronology

The study of predynastic Egypt started with Petrie in 1895 (sequence dating by ordering ceramics withrespect to decoration & manifacture at the sites at Nagada, Abydos and Hu). In 1923, the Badarian culturewas discovered (cf. Badari in Upper Egypt). The first major synthesis was that of Kantor in 1944 and 1952.In 1960, Butzler initiated the study of Nile floods and other elements of the palaeoenvironmental record ofEgypt. Through the 1970s and into the 1980s, studies by Hassan focused on enviromental reconstruction,subsistence, settlement & demographic investigations. He also investigated the cognitive schema ofpredynastic peoples through their rock art and the mythogenesis of the early state.

Thousands of years of prehistory left no textual witnesses, but some of its elements did determine thecultural form of Egypt :

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/clearings.htm



the landscape : life-threatening deserts bounding a narrow cultivable valley, with luxuriant growth,yearly inundated by the water of the Nile with a fertile triangle in the Delta, gaining in size when thesea of the tertiary period sinks ;

the climate : down through the neolithic period, Egypt had equatorial African features (hot and humidwith abundant rainfall). This changed after the Old Kingdom, to become the dry and desert-like climateof today ;

the people : when the last wet period (ca. 5500 BCE) ended, the Nile valley became attractive forhuman settlement. Upper Egypt assumed cultural leadership, and Badarian and Naqadan cultures spanthe fourth millenium.

Evidence suggests that the domestication of cattle and the cultivation of cereals appeared in the WesternDesert ca. 5000 BCE Mid-Holocene aridity probably encouraged desert herders and farmers to settle alongthe banks of the Nile. The following chronology of the cultures of predynastic Egypt may be helpful :

Neolithic period (so called for the Delta and the Fayum, and "predynastic period" in Upper Egypt) : theinterval between the emergence of farming villages on the banks of the Nile and the initiation of theEgyptian nation-state. The earliest evidence of Neolithic communities in the Nile Valley dates between5000 and 4100 BCE (cf. Merimda Beni Salama). The Badarians (cf. Badari, Upper Egypt) were afarming and herding community. These settlers raised cattle, sheep/goats and pigs. They cultivatedbarley and wheat and agriculture was supplemented by fishing and fowling. Pottery, glass, copper andglazed staetite were found at some sites. They provided their dead with food and placed femalefigurines in the graves.

Middle Predynastic period (ca. 4000 - 3600 BCE) : with Amratian culture (cf. site of el-Amra, Sohag -Naqada I) agriculture inceased, hunting deceased and a marked technological change took place.Pottery not yet diffused from Mesopotamia was created with geometrical and naturalistic designs,unstructured in layout. Concentration and centralization of power in its incipient stages with theformation of a managerial class. Transportation of goods along the Nile. Social status evidences infunerary cults. Religious activity around female deities such as Hathor. Graven images in tombs, headof deceased pointing South, looking West.

Late Predynastic period (ca. 3600 - 3300 BCE) : in Gerzean culture (cf. site of el-Gerza, Fayum -Naqada II), fundamantal changes, techniques were improved. Contacts with Mesopotamia. Cult centersand urban centers emerged, associated with chiefdoms, principalities, provincial states and villagecorporations united into regional kingdoms. Trade continued to flourish and wealth distinctions becamemore salient. Whole burial treasures. Cow goddess Hathor ;

Terminal Predynastic period (ca. 3300 - 3000 BCE) : The rise of the Egyptian state was the result ofwars and alliances. Over at least 250 years, fragmentation and reunification occurred. In Upper Egypt,there were the kingdoms of Naqada and Hierakonpolis, and in the Delta the petty kingdoms of Buto,Sais, Tell el-Balamoun, etc. The first major power emerged when the two kingdoms of Hierakonpolis(Nekhen) and Naqada united. The kings from Hierakonpolis, later known as the "Followers of Horus"conquered and annexed the kingdom of Naqada (Seth) and later the Delta.

The culmination of the process of unification led to a single nation state (Narmer Palette). In thisperiod, the nomes are administrative divisions in which authority rested in a local deity (this situationmay go back to the Gerzean). These divisions more or less overlap with the territorial boundaries of thehistorical nomes (a nome was also an agricultural fact, defined in terms of flood basins). In the lastdecades of the predynastic period, events dating to the beginnings of kingship were already manygenerations old and without written records. Hence, predynastic Egypt passed into myth. Stone becamethe preferred material for the eternity of the afterlife. Trade and cultural relationships occasionallyinterrupted during the late Gerzean period by war ...



painted bowl of man harpooning a hippopotamus Amratian culture - site of el-Amra - Merimda Beni Salama - ca.3800 BCE - Metropolitan

! A few important predynastic realizations :

a spoken language ;

administrative organization of provinces, groups of nomes ;

chieftains accumulating power and prestige and founding the myth of kingship leading to theunification of Upper Egypt ;

commercial and artistic activities ;

the wish to unity the Nile valley into one state (conquering Middle Egypt and the Delta) ;

a traditional notion of the sacred rooted in the worship of the primeval goddess ;

oral tradition of mythologies, stories, legends, charms, songs, hymns & funerary rituals assuring theafterlife of the deceased ;

artistic works in clay and ivory - stone increasingly becoming the preferred material to eternalize theafterlife ;

Gerzean ware design schemata reveal the lessening importance of the feminine in religion and theconcomittant increase in masculine religious principles ;

the first "mnemonic" symbols and semi-cursive hieroglyphs appear on labels of recipients, suggestingthat the first hieratic (the cursive form of hieroglyphs) was predynastic and already in use in everydaylife.

As mentioned, the kings from Hierakonpolis (later to be knows as the "Followers of Horus") conquered andannexed the kingdom of Naqada in terminal predynastic times. The deity of Naqada was Seth. The legendsof the great conflict between Horus and Seth and the subjugation of the latter by the former as well as thatof the "Two Lands" may refer to this unification (of Upper Egypt). The next step involved the annexation ofthe key nomes of Middle Egypt and the remaining Northern nomes. Finally, consolidation of the rule over theDelta (not necessarily total conquest) encouraged the conquerors to establish a new capital : Memphis. Theunification of Egypt was thus completed ca. 3100 - 2950 BCE When the two Kingdoms were newly united,Heliopolis was already important (in the first Dynasties or Thinite period). In the Pyramid Texts (881b) thefirst kings were identified or compared with "Horus, son of Atum".



The transition to the Dynastic Egyptian State was marked by a new order based on justice and the rule oflaw instead of on military power. This stabilization of this concept of order by and through Pharaoh,protecting Egypt against the chaotic forces, was the key invention of the early Dynasties and of the OldKingdom as a whole.

"The incredible amount of quality excavation and survey over the Nile Valley has allowed a very good pictureof predynastic material life to emerge. With aid from hieroglyphic writing, early Dynastic religion, and otherhistorical sources, cognitive interpretations must be made using the same artifacts which have been used foronly material ends in the past. As mentioned earlier, this is beginning to take place in Egyptian archeology."Czerwinski, 1995, p.39.

! the predynastic, sacred & feminine source of divine kingship

Although agriculture was the decisive economical factor responsible for the rise of Egyptian civilization, otherelements played their role. According to Hassan (1992), mythogenetic changes were an essential ingredientin the rise of the state and they were not merely a consequence of economic or political developments. Inmy opinion, this makes the Egyptian cultural form so exceedingly interesting.

"Ritual and myth provided individuals with a matrix of sacred meaning in which economic, social, andpolitical developments were grounded and reinforced. Similarly, economic and political developmentsprovided a framework for the transformation of ritual and myth along a co-evolutionary course."Hassan, 1992, p.307.

For Hassan, the ideational aspects involved are the assimilation of the sacred power of female deities byPharaoh. The power Pharaoh had over others was legitimated by sacred myths that linked him withsupernatural forces. In predynastic times, female deities were associated with the sacred domains of birth,death and resurrection, as well as with plants, domestic animals and the cycles of nature. The ritual domainof the gods focussed on hunting and judicature. This composite nature of female deities can be observed inancient goddesses like Hathor who was polymorphic. In addition to her image of a cow (prominent asgoddess of the sky in the Narmer Palette and as Great Mother suggestive of the idea of birth from thewomb), she was also a tree-goddess and a goddess of the sky. She was both mother as goddess of thedeceased. This complexity must, according to Hassan, be regarded as a manifestation of the primevalgoddess who combined many of the functions that later were differentiated and assigned to other deities.

This important sacred role of goddesses is confirmed by the prominent role played by goddesses in thepantheon, the representations of female figures in late predynastic Naqada II iconography, the equal statuswomen enjoyed in this society and the association of women with the sacred domains of existence (birth,fertility, creation, death and resurrection). Moreover, in the Old Kingdom, the mother of the royal heir washis official consort and on the Palermo Stone the name of Pharaoh was directly followed by that of hismother. Neither were the tombs of some of the early queens essentially different from those of Pharaoh,protected during his life by the "Two Ladies", the goddess Nekhbet -a vulture- and Wadjet -a cobra-, bothrepresenting Upper and Lower Egypt respectively ...

"You are a son of the Great Wild Cow. She conceives you, she bears you, she puts you within her wing."Pyramid Texts, utterance 554 (§ 1370).

With this unification and assimilation, all power was centralized in Pharaoh, a "Follower of Horus". This skygod, was represented by a falcon. The Horus name in Pharaoh's titulary, also called banner-name or Ka-name, shows Pharaoh as the earthly embodiment (incarnation) of Horus.

These "Followers of Horus" represented the notion of royal ancestor worship as a legitimization of malepower, for all kings were so many incarnations of the same sky-god. Each ruler became part of this upon hisdeath. Divine kingship emerged when legitimate descent was coupled with the image (myth) of divinepower, and the acquisition of such power was achieved by assimilating pre-existent goddess cults and theirsacred domains.

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/egyptbiblio.htm#c

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/egyptbiblio.htm#h



"The King is the son of one who is unknown ; she bore the King to him whose face is yellow, Lord of thenight skies."Pyramid Texts, utterance 320 (§§ 515-516).

Pharaoh became the son, brother and husband of the primeval sky-goddess (Hathor) and as such becamedivine. As these goddesses were identified with nature, they ruled over creation, resurrection, nurture &protection, i.e. the areas of the sacred and the supernatural. This assimilation was not complete, and hencegoddesses continued to play their part as mothers, sisters and wives. Marriage with a sister was henceconsidered a sacred marriage, reaffirming the divinity of Pharaoh.

"The Ennead and the Osirian myths proved to be durable schemata (organizing formats) for the cosmogonyof divine kingship. The myths conserve the power of female deities, but at the same time provide a cosmicrationale for the rule of a male king and hereditary succession. The struggle between Seth and Horus andthe triumph of Horus, as well as the judgement of the gods in favor of Horus, established the rule of Law(Ma'at) and resolves the potential conflicts between clans over kingship and succession."Hassan, F.A. : Art.cit., p.319, my italics.

life-size statue of Djoserin Sed regalia (IIIth Dynasty)

Cairo Museum

The power of Pharaoh was invigorated bythe ceremonies of the so-called "Sed"festival (cf. the statue of Pharaoh Ninetjer inSed festival garb - Dynasty II), during whichhe was recoronated to re-assert hissovereignty (cf. my paper on Akhenaten).He received the chiefs (princes) of Upperand Lower Egypt, who payed him homageand proclaimed their allegiance to thethrone.

A key feature of this ritual (the rules ofwhich are to be found in New Kingdomsources) was the Heb-Sed court (or court ofthe "festival of the tail"), which had chapelsof the various nomes, containing the statuesof their respective deities (cf. the festivalcourt at the southeast of the Step Pyramidof Djoser).

Four times Pharaoh moved round a track asthe ruler of the South and four times as theruler of the North. He was the supremeover-seer, like the falcon. With this act heshowed that all the deities accepted,reaffirmed and reinforced his divine rule andalso his physical ability to do so.

The deities in their chapels represented the temples of Egypt, for Pharaoh was the ultimate high priest,thanks to whom the deities dwelled in their statues by sending their doubles and souls (cf. my paper on the"Ba").

"Be not unaware of me, O god ; if you know me, I will know you."Pyramid Texts, utterance 262 (§ 327).

Each of the statues had thus been made alife by the "Opening of the Mouth" ritual and in the Heb-Sed courtthey were not alone (as they were in their respective places of worship) but they were together with the

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/aten.htm




doubles and souls of the rest of the pantheon, gathered around Pharaoh who metaphorically "flew above"them as a bird.

Although Pharaoh, to become a divine king, had assimilated the sacred power of the primeval goddess, hewas not yet a god himself (as Pharaoh). In the first Dynasties, Pharaoh represented divine kingship whichguaranteed the solid theocratic unity of the "Two Lands". The king was a "Follower of Horus" and his powerwas legitimized by the notion of royal ancestor worship. His divinity was not yet based on any filialrelationship (Pharaoh was not called "son of Horus") but on the sacrality he assimilated from the primevalsky-goddess allowing him to soar into the sky like a falcon, acting as sole overseer of the "Two Lands" ...

Between the IIth and the IVth Dynasties, Re gradually surpassed Horus in importance. Re became the activepower in the world, a position previously exclusively held by Horus (i.e. the king). Pharaoh was no longer anincarnation of the same Horus but he was a unique son of Re, a god in his own right. So the transition fromthe universal mother goddess to this god-king was formalized in the Solar cosmogony of Heliopolis. Pharaohassumed the title "son of Re" in Dynasty IV.

The transition from the incarnational to the filial approach of kingship also introduced a different foundationfor its divine nature : instead of being based on ancestor worship (for all kings were the same Horus),Pharaoh himself became the object of cult, and as the sole god physically abiding on Earth, he was theexclusive mediator between the deities abiding in the sky and human culture (each Pharoah was another sonof Re). Only Pharaoh faced the deities.

This Solar interpretation of kingship formalized the measurable presence of deified masculine authority whichhad started with a national justice system, set in place after unification. Divine kingship (the masculinepower of the hunter combined with the sacredness of the primeval goddess) was aiming at the theo-politicalunity of the state though the institutions of Pharaoh and his will to manifest his divine presence, first asHorus & next as a god in monumental and other sublime artworks everywhere in Egypt.

2.2 The "Sia", "Hu", "Heka" & "Maat" of Re and Pharaoh in the Old Kingdom.

! the emergence of the solar cult of Re

In the early dynastic period, the sky-god Horus incarnated as Pharaoh. But that Re was associated withkingship too is evidenced by Pharaoh Re-neb of the IIth Dynasty. The hieroglyph for the Sun -a circle with acentral dot- first appears in late predynastic times. Pharaoh Radjedef (ca. 2548 - 2540 BCE - IVth Dynasty)was the first king to bear the name "son of Re", although not in his titulary (this will be done by his brotheror half brother Khephren who completed the royal titulary).

The Solar cult which developed in Heliopolis was closely connected with the separation between the Sun (inthe sky) and Nun, the endless waters (originally Atum was worshipped in On, but he was solarized andassimilated by Re). This distinction was related to creation itself. Water referred to Nun and the Nile,whereas the luminous Sun and its rise and dusk connected with the appearence of the mound or hill ofcreation (in "zep tepy", the first time between pre-creation and creation). The overseeing qualities of Horusare also found in Re, who fused with a sky-god into Re-Harakhty.

In the Old Kingdom (ca.2670 - 2205 BCE, from Dynasty III to VI), Harakhty was venerated in On (Heliopolis)as "Horus of the Horizon". Re-Harakhty was worshipped in his traditional form of the heroic god. He wasrepresented as a falcon bearing the uræus-encircled solar disk on his vertex. He is the Sun god emerging atdawn, sovereign of the sky.

"The reed-floats of the sky are set in place for Re.That he may cross on them to the horizon.The reed-floats of the sky are set in place for Herakhti.That Harakhti may cross on them to Re."Pyramid Texts, utterance 263 (§ 337).



Pyramid Texts, utterance 263 (§ 337).

Horus of the Horizon, combined Re and Horus, and as Re-Harakhty the translation "King of the Sky" is alsoapplicable. This god was a solarized Horus, symbolizing the emerging, dawning power of the fullyrejuvenated & regenerated Solar deity. In the Heliopolitan view, Re created the world and so he was alsoassociated with Atum. Re, as the real father of Pharaoh, played a central role in the whole of AncientEgyptian religious history, culminating in the New Solar Theology of the early New Kingdom and Amarnaculture, to merge, in late Ramesside theology, with the all-encompassing theology of Amun-Re.

The real expansion of the cult of Re came with the ruling family of Dynasty V. As the Westcar Papyrusrelates, every Pharaoh was the son of Re, begotten of the wife of the high priest of Heliopolis. These kingsdevoted a large proportion of the resources of the state to build Sun temples, open structures, surroundingthe Solar emblem of the "benben", the first place of creation and prototype of the more slender obelisk. Reremained the guarantee of every monarch's worth.

! the power of the mind, the Great Word and its protection

In the Pyramid Texts (end Vth and VIth Dynasties, ca. 2300 - 2200 BCE), Re makes use of wisdom &understanding ("Sia"), creative, authoritative utterance ("Hu") and powerful magic ("Heka"). These passagesmake clear that Sia, Hu and Heka are personifications of the creative, vertical activity and power of Re andhis son, Pharaoh, who ascends to the sky. This activity and power are however rooted in mental factors, aswas the whole cosmic (Re) and terrestial (Pharaoh) order.

For example, because every morning, specific mental processes (through ritual recitation or prayer) wereexecuted, Re was unharmed by Apophis (the place where this could happen was called the "island offlames"). By speaking the Great Word, the bolts were unlocked and creation was recreated. As long as therituals brought the ritualists (as deities around Pharaoh) back to the first time (potential full-emptiness of theeternal now), Re dawned and separated the celestial from the terrestial.

Let us first consider Sia, the deity of the sense of touch or feeling, considered to be the foundation of theempirical mind (for the Egyptians touch & hearing were primordial and not, as would say the Greeks, sight).

"I have come to my throne which is over the ka's, I unite hearts, O you who are in charge of wisdom, beinggreat. I become Sia who bears the book of god, who is at the right hand of Re. (...) I, even I, am Sia who isat the right hand of Re, the proud heart, who presides over the Cavern of Nun."Pyramid Texts, utterance 250 (§ 268).

"The Great One indeed will rise within his shrine and lay his insignia on the ground for me, for I haveassumed authority (Hu) and have power through understanding (Sia)."Pyramid Texts, utterance 255 (§ 300).

"Make salutations, you gods, to the King, who is older than the Great One, to whom belongs power on histhrone ; the King assumes authority (Hu), eternity brought to him and understanding (Sia) is established athis feet for him. Rejoice at the King, for he has taken possession of the horizon."Pyramid Texts, utterance 257 (§ 307).

"This King is a master of wisdom (sab-bwt) whose mother knows not his name."Pyramid Texts, utterance 273 (§ 394).

With Sia we touch upon the whole sphere of knowledge, both cognitive (understanding) and intuitional(wisdom). In the cognitive domain, Sia represented the perceptive mind with its empirical ego. Sia carriedthe sacred papyrus, whose contents embodied the areas of mental activity in which understanding had beenachieved. Sia was also insightful planning and insofar as the inventive side of the latter was considered,intuitional elements join the connotative field of the semantics of Sia. Hence, Sia was also wisdom and thesacredness of perfected understanding.

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/aten.htm



That Sia was important is testified by the fact that in the company of the gods, Pharaoh was Thoth, the godof knowledge, (U611, 665c - §§ 1725, 1914), who spoke "this great and mighty word" (U577, § 1523)

contenting all the gods, for in Thoth was "the peace of the gods" (U570, § 1465). Furthermore, Thothprotected, was the wing-feathers of Pharaoh and "the mightiest of the gods" (U524, §§ 1233, 1237).

Knowing was in "front of the Temple" and behind Pharaoh (U554, § 1371), who unites the minds (hearts -ab's) and the vital forces (ka's). In the Book of the Dead, Sia appeared in the Judgment Scene among thegods who watched the weighing of the heart (i.e. the mind) in the Great Balance, indicative of therelationship with the mental. This cogitation (by the mental energies of the "heart") was intimately relatedwith sensoric perception and with intent. The presence of Sia near Re indicated that Re had an extraordinary"power of mind".

Sia stood not alone, for Re had also creative speech at his side. Hu, the deity of the sense of taste,personified this verbal authority associated with the Great Word of creative command. Like Sia, Hu cameinto being from a drop of blood from the phallus of Re. Hu was the companion of Pharaoh, son of Re, whenhe had become a lone star in the sky.

"O King, they {the gods} make you live and resemble the seasons of Harakhti when they made his name.Do not be far removed from the gods, so that they may make for you this utterance which they made forRe-Atum who shines every day. They will install you upon their thrones at the head of all the Ennead(s) asRe' and as his representative."Pyramid Texts, utterance 606 (§§ 1693-1694), my italics.

"My tongue is the pilot in charge of the Bark of Righteousness. I will ascend and rise up to the sky."Pyramid Texts, utterance 539 (§ 1306).

"It is said : 'Say that which is, do not say that which is not, for the god detests falsity of words.'"Pyramid Texts, utterance 511 (§§ 1160-1161).

"My lips are the Two Enneads. I am the Great Word. I am one who is loosed. I am one who ought to beloosed, and I am loosed from all things evil."Pyramid Texts, utterance 506 (§ 1100).

"Hear it, O Re, this word which I say to you ; your nature is in me, O Re, and your nature is nourished inme, O Re."Pyramid Texts, utterance 570 (§ 1461).

"There is no word against me on earth among men, there is no accusation in the sky among the gods, for Ihave annulled the word against me, which I destroyed in order to mount up to the sky."Pyramid Texts, utterance 302 (§ 462).

The authority of Pharaoh was this Great Word which he commanded. This creative, authoritative speech canalso be found in the archaizing Memphis Theology (written in the New Kingdom).

For example, column 55 of the Shabaka Stone reads :



Ennead

his

before

him

as

heart / lips

Hu / lips

teeth / lips

semen / hands

Atum

"His Ennead (Ptah's) is before him as heart, authoritative utterance, teeth and lips.They are the semen and hands of Atum."

Memphis Theology, line 55, my italics.

Note that this powerful, omnipotent utterance is linked with righteousness and truth, the two characteristicsof Maat, the goddess who personified the great ideal of the Old Kingdom, reflected in the rule of law initiated& maintained by Pharaoh (with the plume of Maat above his head) and in the didactical literature (forexample the wisdom-teachings of Ptahhotep). Pharaoh uttered a truth which silences the deities andcommands authority. The power of the spoken word of Pharaoh could not be countered, not even by thegods. All words directed against Pharaoh were automatically annulled. He was the only living man in Egyptable to communicate with the pantheon. He was the top of the pyramidal structure of the theocracy and itsinstitutions & administration ...

The third element was Heka, used in the Coptic New Testament to translate "mageia", the knowledge andart of a hereditary priestly class among the ancient Medes and Persians (exercising supernatural powers overnatural forces). In those days they were associated with the wise men from the East guided by a star (cf.astrology) paying homage to Jesus.

In Ancient Egypt, Heka was the goddess personifying extraordinary, supernatural powers or magic. Sheappears a a child of Re, sometimes as his personification. The regard Egyptians had for magic is self-

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/memphis.htm



evident.

"'How lovely to see ! How pleasing to behold !' say they, namely the gods, when this god ascends to thesky, when you ascend to the sky with your power upon you, your terror about you, and your magic at yourfeet."Pyramid Texts, utterance 306 (§ 477).

"How lovely to see, how uplifting to behold, when this god ascends to the sky just like Atum, father of theKing, ascends to the sky ! His ba is upon him, his magic is about him, the dread of him is at his feet."Pyramid Texts, utterance 480 (§ 993).

"I will ascend and rise up to the sky. The magic which appertains to me is that which is in my belly. (...) It isnot I who says this to you, you gods, it is magic (Heka) who says this to you, you gods. I am bound for theLower Point of Magic."Pyramid Texts, utterance 539 (§ 1318 - 1324).

"The sky quivers, the earth quakes before me, for I am a magician, I possess magic."Pyramid Texts, utterance 472 (§ 924).

Heka was associated with tremendous and terrible powers mastered by Re and Pharaoh. However, althoughmagic could express in many things and different kinds of magicians existed (cf. infra), Egyptian magic wasclosely related with the expression of an idea (Sia) through creative speech (Hu). In this process of creationthrough the Great Word, Heka does not represent the power of conception (taking place in the mind), nor itsutterance (taking place on the tongue). Heka was the "protection" of this intelligent creative speech againstanything or anybody trying to counter it. So Heka was there to break resistances.

This distinction provides us with a key to distinguish religion from magic in Egypt. The former is the generalcult of the deities, the latter the inherent power of a concept expressed with authority, eliminating that whichis able to counter its realization. However, both overlap, for during the rituals the deities spoke and hencemade use of Heka, whereas magical acts (like making an amulet or talisman) involved the help of the deitieswho (through the priests) uttered their "words of power" to initiate the magical effect of the operation ...

" ... anthropologists and scholars of world religions struggled for a long time in the hope of finding moreobjective criteria for distinguishing between magic and religion. The results of decades of discussion havenot been satisfying, particularly with respect to Egyptian religion."Goelet, 1998, p.145.

In Ancient Egypt, the common ground between religion and magic is intelligent (Sia) creative speech (Hu).This sheds a completely different light on the spirituality of the Egyptians, far more concerned with mentalfactors than recent egyptology has put into evidence.

! Maat : the righteousness and truth of protected, intelligent creative speech

The importance of Maat in Egypt's didactical literature has been studied elsewhere. In the Pyramid Texts weread :

"The sky is at peace, the earth is in joy, for they have heard that the King will set rectitude (Maat) in theplace of wrong (isfet). The King is vindicated in his tribunal {the court of justice over which Re presides} onaccount of the just sentence which issued from his mouth ..."Pyramid Texts, utterance 627 (§ 1775).

"I seat myself upon the throne of 'She who preserves Justice (Maat)'."Pyramid Texts, utterance 503 (§ 1079).

"I come forth, the guardian of justice (Maat), that I may bring it, it being with me."

http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/egyptbiblio.htm#g




Pyramid Texts, utterance 260 (§ 319).

"My tongue is the pilot in charge of the Bark of Righteousness (Maat). (...) The soles of my feet are the twoBarks of Righteousness."Pyramid Texts, utterance 539 (§§ 1306 & 1315).

"You will cause me to sit because of my righteousness (Maat) and I will stand up because of my blessednessin your presence, just as Horus took possession of his father's house from his father's brother Seth in thepresence of Gêb."Pyramid Texts, utterance 519 (§ 1219).

"If you wish to live, O Horus in charge of your staff of justice (Maat), then you shall not close the doors ofthe sky, you shall not slam shut its door-leaves before you have taken the King's double to the sky, to thenobles of the god, to those whom the god loves, who lean on their staffs, the guardians of Upper Egypt,clad in red linen, who live on figs, who drink wine, who are anointed with unguent. He shall speak on theKing's behalf to the great god, he shall conduct the King to the great god."Pyramid Texts, utterance 440 (§§ 815 - 816).

"O King, I have wept for you, I have mourned you, and I will not forget you, I will not be inert until thevoice comes forth for you every day, in the monthly festival, in the half-monthly festival, at the Setting downof the Brazier, at the Festival of Thoth, at the -festival, and at the Festival of Carving as your yearlysustenance which you fashioned for your monthly festivals, that you may live as a god."Pyramid Texts, utterance 690 (§§ 2117 - 2118).

The Coffin Texts superseded the Pyramid Texts as early as the VIIIth Dynasty (First Intermediary Period,ca.2198 - 1938), but their principal sources are the later cemeteries of the nomarchs of Middle Egypt in theXIIth Dynasty (i.e. Middle Kingdom - ca.1938 - 1759).

Here we find :

"O you who are content with what you have done -four times- and who send Maat to Re daily, the liver ofRe is flourishing daily because of Maat, and he partakes of the meal of the Great Goddess."Coffin Texts, spell 165, III 6.

Pharaoh sat on his throne to do justice. Daily he uttered the Great Word and therewith he recreated the justorder of things and made iniquity and chaos vanish. By doing so he fed Re who partook of the meal of Maat.He returned the essence of his light-being ("khu") to its origin (the stars) by saying (truth) and doing theright thing (righteousness). Pharaoh sustained the order of the world through justice & truth. Maat was alsothe guarantee of the sacredness of royal insight, command and protection. By sending justice to Re, the lastand the first connected to form the infinite cycle of unending existence and harmony.

! the Heliopolitan "logos"

In Heliopolitan theology, Re and Pharaoh were the two proto-types used to describe the order of creation.Re encompassed all cosmic functions, Pharaoh all terrestial. The Osirian cycle explained the mythogenesis ofdivine kingship, leaving room for the figure of the sacred primeval mother goddess (cf. the importance of Isisin the cycle, able to outwit Re & restore Osiris, assisted by Thoth). Solar theology was a cosmogeny, amodel of creation and salvation through rejuvenation and eternal life. The harmony (unity) between bothaspects of order was justified by the generative relationship between Re and Osiris-Pharaoh, the son of Re,doing justice and feeding his father with truth in order to return to him.

In both cycles (the macrocosmic and the microcosmic), the mental played a considerable part. In fact, takeaway the Great Word spoken by Re and his son and there is no creation and no Egyptian state. It is strangethat this omnipresence of the power of the Word has not aroused more scholarly interest. Both in thePyramid Texts, Coffin Texts, as well as in the Memphis Theology, we find the rudiments of the notion of the



"logos" as a creative agent :

the senses report to the mind, able to synthesis a (proto) concept allowing for thoughtful planning,understanding, wisdom (Sia). This is the making of the Word in the mind ;

on the basis of this, authoritative commands are uttered by the tongue. This is the objective expressionof the Word (Hu), an object among objects ;

the execution of this command is guaranteed by the power of the words spoken. This is thesupernatural power to break resistances part of the "meaning" (name) of the Word (Heka) ;

the whole purpose of speech is the offering of truth and justice to the source of the Word. This is theaim of all communication : to establish truth and expell falsehood (Maat).

The Memphite theology (developed at the end of the New Kingdom) probably used the Heliopolitan theologyto develop its own interpretation of the "logos". In this view, Ptah encompassed both the pre-creational,creative and created phases of cosmogony (He is both Nun, Atum as Re) and created everything with hisword.

Heliopolitan schema

becomes

Memphite schema

Sia : thought thought in the heart

Hu : speech Hu : word on the tongue

Heka : protection inherent in Hu

Maat : truth inherent in Hu

Sia & Heka were not mentioned, for the Memphites reduced the whole Heliopolitan scheme to the formationof thoughts in Ptah's mind and the creative speech on his tongue (Hu). This creative command is able torealize itself automatically and establish the peace needed by the Two Lands. Hence, in Memphite theologyHeka is inherent in the Great Word. When spoken, "justice is done to him who does what is loved". TheMemphis Theology attempts to supersede the Heliopolitan doctrine on three accounts :

Ptah is all-encompassing : he is the Great One of pre-creation, first time & creation ;

The Great Word spoken by Ptah creates the Ennead, whereas in the Heliopolitan view, Atum createsthe deities through onanism ;

mind and creative speech on the tongue are like the semen and the hands of Atum, i.e. the GreatWord spoken is the first cause and not Atum's mythological initiatoric act of taking semen in the handand in the mouth.

2.3 The mummification of divine words.

! the predynastic origin of the Egyptian language

"Archaic" Egyptian is generally not included as an actual stage of growth of the language, for too little textssurvive to allow for a fruitful study of the underlying language. Did the Egyptians invent their own writingsystem or did they borrow it ?

The earliest Sumerian writing ante-dates the first hieroglyphs by a century and more. During the latepredynastic period, there were contacts between Egypt and Mesopotamia. A pictographic system, similar in



appearance and structure to the hieroglyphic script, was used to write the earliest Sumerian and proto-Elamite languages (cf. Proto-Elamite Tablet, Louvre), although the Egyptian signary was from indigenoussources. The form of various artistic designs and motifs (for example the felines on the reverse of the Paletteof Narmer) indeed evidence the cultural transmissions between both cultures.

Unmistaken differences refute the thesis of a direct borrowing of this early Sumerian :

in the earliest Sumerian, logography (a word is directly represented by its picture) predominates andphonography (a word is represented by a series of signs for the spoken sounds) is limited. The lattertook several centuries to fully develop ;

in the earliest Egyptian, a substantial (if not complete) phonography is present ;

the earliest Sumerian is syllabic and defines the vowel (each sign is a syllable consisting of either avowel or a consonant + a vowel) ;

the earliest Egyptian is consonantal with unstable vowels which are not recorded ;

Sumerian has no determinatives and no developed pictoral ideography (a variety of signs representingidea, context, category, modality or nuance) ;

the earliest Sumerian quickly became cuneiform, whereas Egyptian hieroglyphs remained pictoral untilthe last inscription (Temple of Philæ - 394 CE).

Indirect borrowing of the Sumerian is likely (cf. "stimulus diffusion"). But the differences show the Sumerianexample was adapted to the culture of Predynastic Egypt, its iconography and the grammar of its artisticstyles. It is possible that in Predynastic times, the population of the Delta was in contact with south-westernAsia, and settlers may have entered the region and mingled with the local population, but this was (againstDerry and the "Dynastic Race" theory) incidental to the cultural development of Egypt.

In historical times, borrowings from some Semitic languages are well attested. But there is no evidence foran "African substratum" in Ancient Egyptian (an indentifiable, specifically African language). In fact, scholarsconjecture many of these similarities are not borrowings at all, but prove both the Egyptian and the Semiticlanguages are derived from a common ancestor, the Afroasiatic or Hamito-Semitic language family ...

! the sacred power of the Great Word

The "Great Word", creating celestial & terrestial order, was, in predynastic times, foremost a spoken word.The many references to "lips", "mouth", "teeth" confirm this. This spoken command is fluent, direct,immediate and auditorial (with reference to actual listeners).

The Great Word was spoken by Re to create the world and by Pharaoh to fashion the terrestial order. Beforethe advent of writing, some kingdoms had reached a considerable level of organization and culture. But onlyfinal unification would bring lasting peace and justice. Around 3000 BCE, nomads, cattle breeders, farmers,Africans, Aziatics, Semites and Hamites united to form a single state, with each new Pharaoh uniting thedisparate elements of his kingdom by delegating portions of his authority to his elect. The advent of Pharaohestablished a vertical order (risen land, obelisk, pyramid) making the horizontal plane of the "Two Lands" tobe just & true (overseeable). Simultaneously, written records appeared. The making of the pharaonic state,the justification of divine kingship, also implied the confirmation of masculine presence by stabilizing thefluidity of the sacred spoken sound through the confines of glyphs representing these sounds only partly indivine word-images. The feminine sacrality of the Great (spoken) Word was assimilated by the enduringdivine power of word-images in stone.

! unification, the advent of writing and double script



The earliest inscriptions emerged at the end of the final predynastic period (ca. 3000 BCE) and in the archaicperiod (the first two Dynasties), i.e. during the period of the final unification of the "Two Lands" and thecoronation of Pharoah at Memphis. Inscriptions became necessary in order to date and name importantevents. The historical age of Egypt started with this unification of the Two Lands. With Pharaoh, the ancestorworship of each "Follower of Horus" had been initiated. To identify their shrines, inscriptions becamenecessary.

The assimilation by Pharaoh of the sacred power of the predynastic goddess, implied the creation of apermanent higher focus beyond all divisions, a divine authority uniting (political and theological) dualities.Upon the ongoing, horizontal processess of nature (birth, life, healing, death, resurrection) and their chaoticorigin (cf. the predynastic wars and petty conflicts), Pharaoh superimposed the vertical, sole presence of thedivine on earth (whereas all other deities abided in the sky).

The feminine, receptive (auditive) process of the use of the spoken word was assimilated by the masculine,radiating, dazzling, living written reality of the divine name of the Lord of the Two Lands, the sole landmarkof presence : Pharaoh's titulary, monumentally eternalized in word-images in stone, was a landmark whichfaced "milions of years".

spoken word written word

predynastic - prehistorical dynastic - historical

realm of sacred myth realm of divine rule

primeval mother goddessGreat Sorceress

PharoahGreat Magician

mind (Sia), speech (Hu)and effect (Heka)

image-words asofferings to Maat

Also note the distinction between hieroglyphic script and hieratic script, both attested in the predynasticperiod. Hieroglyphs were first used to write different kinds of texts, in a variety of media, but as hieraticdeveloped, the former became increasingly confined to religious and monumental works, in carved relief instone (cf. the Greek "ta hieroglyphica" : "the sacred carved letters"). Hieratic was an early adaptation of thehieroglyphic script, the glyphs being simplified and easier to outline. It became Egypt's business andadministrative script. Also employed to record literary, scientific & theological works, it can be found on allsorts of media, especially on rolls or sheets of papyrus or on pieces of stone and pottery (ostraca). This"day-to-day" script, which had been used for 2500 years, was ousted by another script, demotic, at thebeginning of the Late Period (ca. 600 BCE) and thereafter confined to religious documents (cf. the Greekscalling it "hieratika" or "priestly"). The latest demotic inscription is a grafitto in the Temple of Philæ dated450 CE

! the oldest examples of Egyptian writing

The first hieroglyphs appear in the late predynastic period, in the form of label-texts on stone and potteryobjects from various sites (ca. 3100 - 3000 BCE). Writing (in both scripts) is used to record short information,like names of persons, places and products.

Palette of King NamerLate predynastic Period (ca.3050 BCE) - Cairo Museum - JE 32169 - H. 63 cm



Obverse

The name "Narmer" is written with thephonograms of a cat-fish "nar" and a chisel""mr" and written above him, enclosed in arectangular called a "serekh" (between theHathor-heads).

Reverse

Narmer is shown engaged in a ritualprocession, with his name occuring twice,written with the same signs as on theobverse. Other identifyable hieroglyphs arepresent.

The Palette of Narmer commemorates a victory, probably the final one, ending the strugglefor the unification of the entire Nile Valley (or Delta of Lower Egypt). By this timeHierakonpolis was a powerful political and religious center in Upper Egypt. Narmer or Meneswas the legendary or historical Pharaoh who united the Two Lands, initiating the end of thepredynastic era. The "heraldic" value of this palette is unmistaken (cf. ivory tablet of Den,relief of Semerketh).

Here are some other early examples of Egyptian writing :

from a fragment of a large, globular, green faience vessel or vase inlaid with the name of Pharaoh Ahain brown-coloured faience (Ith Dynasty, ca. 3000 - 2800 BCE, in British Museum) we learn about thesophistication of the combination of faience technology and artistic talent in the early dynastic period ;

the tomb stela of Pharaoh Djet (Djer, Wadj, Uenephes, "serpent" - Ith Dynasty, ca. 2920 BCE - LouvreE 11007) has his Horus name inscribed on it ;

the tomb stela of Pharaoh Reneb (Saqqara, IIth Dynasty, in Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York)was also the focal point of the royal mortuary cult (it represents the falcon Horus surmounting apaneled facade, with the hieroglyphs "Ra" and "neb", meaning "Ra is my Lord.") ;



the statuette of Pharaoh Ninetjer in festival Sed-garb (IIth Dynasty, ca. 2760 - 2715, little over 5 inchesin height) has his royal name on it ;

the gods Geb and Seth have been identified on a fragmentary relief of Pharaoh Djoser (IIIth Dynasty,ca. 2654 - 2635, in Turin Museum) ; the mortuary temples at Maidum & Dahshur of Snofru (IVthDynasty, ca. 2600 - 2571) were simple (an altar with two tall stelæ bearing the royal titulary) but thevalley temple of the Bent Pyramid was provided with statues & relief decorations (processions of theroyal estates in the various nomes) and columns (with ceremonies like foundation rituals, scenes of theSed festival, scenes of Pharaoh being kissed by the deity) ...

The first major literary application was the so-called Offering List which contained a list of foods, ointments& fabrics. It probably already existed in the IIIth & IVth Dynasties. It was carved on the walls of the privatetombs of high officials. The written word gave a special identity to the pictoral representations, named thetomb-owner, his family, his ranks & titles and the offerings the deceased was about to receive. We have towait for Pharoah Wenis or Unas (end of the Vth Dynasty, ca. 2378 - 2348) to actually read what hadprobably been recited orally for at least since the beginning of the dynastic age (if not earlier), i.e. the spellsof the Pyramid Texts.

! the magico-religious intent of Egyptian writing

Memphis, the city of Ptah (represented in Sed garb), and the pharaonic state have always been intimatelyrelated. Indeed, in the final phases of unification, the Delta had been the most difficult area to unite.Enthroning Pharaoh at Memphis had therefore a strong symbolical meaning and this remained the casethroughout the history of Ancient Egypt. Politically, the "White Walls" of Memphis were suggestive of theunity of the "Two Lands" guaranteed by Pharaoh. The period of strife and was over and order and justicecould reign. So the king was a living divine reality bringing justice and truth. His divinity was directly linkedwith the sacred cycle of birth, life, health, death & resurrection.

This advent of order and truth was eternalized by written hieroglyphic inscriptions on stone, a craft ruled byPtah. The act of carving these icons was considered magical, for each hieroglyph was deemed to be a divinesign, a place for the ka's and ba's of the deities to dwell in, a key inviting the invisible to manifest.

Hieroglyphs were always more than just a writing system. The Egyptians referred to it as "writing the divinewords" or "divine words", whereas the individual icons was termed "image" or "form", the same word for arepresentation in Egyptian art, showing its relationship with pictoral art. Indeed, like art, the script workswith pictures and they all have a well-defined form. Governed by strict rules as to content andrepresentation, it had as its purpose to make the depicted exist eternally. In the Old Kingdom, therelationship between art and writing is consistent. In fact, it was a system of art endowed with magicalcharacteristics.

The Great Word was protected by magic to realize itself when uttered. But hieroglyphs were seen as livingbeings just in the same way as statues were considered alife after the words of the ritual of "Opening theMouth" had been spoken over them while the ritual actions had been performed . As this "life" was also anoffering of justice and truth by Pharaoh to the deities, hieroglyphs participated in the divine life of themonarch. As such, they became divine image-words depicting and giving fixed meaning to the divine order.As living icons, they were the loci for the Ka's and Ba's of the beings they represented. Their magic isprecisely this : the divine words mummify the spoken word

Documents

“ANCIENT EGYPT - To Become a Magician”