Through the Eras

Religioncan hardly be separated.” At the basis of all moral andethical behavior in ancient Egypt was the concept ofmaat, which was also an essential element of kingship.It was every Egyptian’s duty to conduct his or her lifein accordance with maat (truth), and to avoid committingdeeds considered isfet (“wrongdoing”) or gereget(“falsehood”), the opposite of maat. In this way, the continuedexistence and prosperity of Egypt was assured.Our main source of knowledge concerning what behaviorwas in accordance with maat is the instruction literaturefrom ancient Egypt. These texts, similar to thebiblical book of Proverbs, date from the Old Kingdomto the Roman Period (2675 B.C.E.–395 C.E.), and wereused as exercises for student scribes. They are portrayedas books of practical wisdom written by famous sages inwhich they distilled their lifetime of experience concerningwhich actions were and were not in accordancewith maat. Living a life in accordance with the principlesof maat was not only good for Egypt, but also goodfor the individual, and the instruction texts assured theindividual that living a life based on maat was the pathto success.JUDGMENT AFTER DEATH. Maat was not onlygood for the living, but was also beneficial to a personafter death. In The Eloquent Peasant, the peasant exhortshis audience (and the reader) to “speak maat, do maat,for it is great; it is important; it is everlasting; its usefulnesswill be discovered; it will lead (a person) to ablessed state (after death).” The ancient Egyptians believedin a post-mortem judgment of the individual,symbolized as the weighing of his or her heart againstthe feather, a writing of the word maat. The earliesthints of such a judgment appear in the Pyramid Texts(2371–2194 B.C.E.), but the first certain reference of apost-mortem ethical judgment is found in the First IntermediatePeriod (2130–2008 B.C.E.) text known as theTeachings for Merykare, where reads “a man survives afterdeath, and his deeds are laid before him in a heap.”In the Coffin Texts, it is the balance of Re which weighsthe individual against maat. The idea of post-mortaljudgment reaches its peak during the New Kingdom(1539–1075 B.C.E.) in the Book of the Dead, Spell 125.This spell is accompanied by an elaborate scene, showingOsiris presiding over the weighing of the heart ofthe deceased against the feather of maat, while the 42judges watch. The god Thoth is present to assure theaccuracy of the balance, and to record the results. Standingnearby is the demon Amemet, who swallows thedead. He gobbles up the heart which fails to measureup to maat, assuring the eternal destruction of thesinner.NEGATIVE CONFESSION. In order to prevent the deceasedfrom suffering this fate, the scene was accompaniedby a text that scholars call the Negative Confession.This spell consists of two long lists of denials of wrongdoingby the deceased. One list is spoken before Osiris,the other before the 42 assessor demons/judges. A studyof the lists reveals the types of activities the Egyptiansbelieved were contrary to maat. Deeds found in the listsinclude blasphemy, thievery, murder, damaging offeringsto the temples, being dishonest in weights and measures,and stealing cattle from the temple herds. Sexualsins such as adultery, pederasty, ejaculation, and copulation(when in violation of purity regulations) also turnup. Less physical offenses include coveting, lying, sulking,“prattling,” and boasting.HEAVY BURDEN. The negative confession placed aheavy burden on an Egyptian wishing to live a life in accordancewith maat. The question has been raised as towhat extent the list of offenses in the confession served asa guide to daily life. The purpose of the Book of the Deadwas to provide the deceased with safe passage to the afterlife,and by including spell 125 the deceased purchasedfor himself absolution of his sins. In view of the fact thatliving a life in accordance with maat was thought to leadto success, and that the declarations of innocence were notmade only after death, but by the king during the NewYear’s ceremony and by priests entering temples to performtheir duties, it is probable that the lists did serve asa general code of conduct for at least some Egyptians.GODS’ DISPLEASURE. But what happened whensomeone committed an offense against maat and againstthe gods? The gods showed their displeasure with an individualby means of a bau (“curse”). A person under thecurse of a god could be described as being, as in this Ramessideinscription, “… the abomination of men. The sundoes not rise in his presence, while the inundation doesnot flow for him. He is a mouse surprised by the inundation;he cannot find a place to rest himself. He is a birdcaught by the wings by the hand of man; he finds no meansof flying away.” One sinner, Neferabu, admits in his stelethat he swore falsely by Ptah, and as a result he was madeto see darkness by day. He described his condition as thatof “the dogs of the street.” The occasion for dedicating thestele was apparently Neferabu’s release from Ptah’s “doghouse.”Other deeds which are recorded as bringing abouta manifestation of the gods’ displeasure are stealing, lying,and the most common offense, committed by the haplessNeferabu, swearing a false oath in a god’s name.APPEASEMENT. Once under a manifestation of a god,a person had to appease the offended deity to have the236 Arts and Humanities Through the Eras: Ancient Egypt (2675 B.C.E.–332 B.C.E.)