The Sumerians were a religious people!!

I believe I have proof that the Sumerians were a religious people and their religion was divine, contrary to what many believe in saying that the Sumerians were actually "the inventors of religion".

Please bear with me, as this will explain and debunk and old myth, but I have presented it in a video format for those who would rather see it visually presented. Please tell me what you think, here is part 1

The Epics of Sumer, Akkad, and the Divine Religion

reply to post by Dubz310


Wow, just simply wow. Did you make this video? It's very vivid, and I can tell the speaker is not a native English only talker very good work.

Yes production could be a bit smoother, but really I want to see parts 2-10 +.

This is a subject that can be Broken down so much we as a people have such a rich history.

Please continue, I am enjoying the education all over again.

Peace be on you and yours.

Treespeaker
reply to post by Dubz310

 

Wow, just simply wow. Did you make this video? It's very vivid, and I can tell the speaker is not a native English only talker very good work.

Yes production could be a bit smoother, but really I want to see parts 2-10 +.

This is a subject that can be Broken down so much we as a people have such a rich history.

Please continue, I am enjoying the education all over again.

Peace be on you and yours.

Thank you for your feedback! Parts 2-4 are available as well, let me know if you have a hard time finding it

Dubz310..... ''the Sumerians were actually "the inventors of religion".-........................................................................ The Sumerians invented writing, and so obviously were the first to write it down. But the ancient stories of Adam and Eve, Noah etc. were already known to nearby cultures as oral legends. Just because the Sumerians made the first physical copies of the oral legends doesn't mean they ''invented'' religion.

I for one would love to have more information on these early people, I read all I can on them. The Enuma Elish, and various sources help but there has to be more out there. They were intelligent, imaginative and spiritual, and no telling what else. The earth's past is still a mystery I hope we solve before we destroy it........

sk0rpi0n
Dubz310..... ''the Sumerians were actually "the inventors of religion".-........................................................................ The Sumerians invented writing, and so obviously were the first to write it down. But the ancient stories of Adam and Eve, Noah etc. were already known to nearby cultures as oral legends. Just because the Sumerians made the first physical copies of the oral legends doesn't mean they ''invented'' religion.

edit on 30-11-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

Yes I totally agree with you! They were the first to write it down, but these stories were circulating orally. So logically, they must have been distorted more when they were told verbally than in its written form.

@Dubz310... ''they must have been distorted more when they were told verbally than in its written form.'' .......................................................................... Well, the Sumerians could have only written down their version according to their own oral tradition, complete with its own mistakes. They would have also weaved in their local gods and goddesses. In other words, even in written form, the Sumerian account would have still had its distortions. Again, just because the Sumerians produced the first physical copy does not automatically mean that their version is 100‰ accurate.The Bible and the Korans account come from divine revelation to prophets, so I'll trust them more.

reply to post by Dubz310


The Sumerians weren't the inventors of religion. Religion is as old as our species. The first ancestral human being who looked up at the Sun and saw, symbolically or literally, that it was vital to his continuation, and so praised it, "invented" religion. What the Sumerians did was mythologize religion. Where once the world had only oral stories and legends to expound upon their religious beliefs, the Sumerians created textual accompaniments. Essentially, the Sumerians moved religion out of a purely verbal sphere, and into the noosphere of humanity.

I'd also like to point out that Inanna (Ištar, Astarte, Qadesh, Shuashka) was not the Mesopotamian mother-goddess archetype. That role belonged to Ninhursag (Ninmah) in Sumer; Damgalnuna (Damkina) in Babylon; Asherah in Ugaritic myth; and Hannahanna, Kybele, and Hecate in Anatolian mythology. What Inanna was, as your video adequately demonstrates, was a goddess of sovereignty, sexuality, and war. She was the Queen of Heaven, the origin of the cult of the prostitute, and the Shamhatu of En, Lugal, and Ensi alike.

While she did have two children—Lulal (Latarak) the tutelary god of Bad-Tibira; and Shara the tutelary god of Umma—this is a rather weak lot for a mother-goddess, when you consider that Ninhursag's children include, among others:

Abu, god of the steppe
Asarluhi, god of magic and exorcism
Azimua, goddess of dream divination
Enšag, the tutelary god of Dilmun
Marduk, state-god of the Babylonian empire
Nanše, goddess of social justice and the Persian Gulf
Ninkasi, inventor of beer
Ninšar, goddess of vegetation
Ninsutu, goddess of healing, wife of Ninazu
Ninti, keeper of the Tree of Life
Nintulla, tutelary god of the city Magan

To use Inanna as "evidence" that the worship of a mother-goddess is faulty is, in itself, faulty. Mother-goddess worship exists all across the ancient Near East, in Egypt, Sumer, Babylon, Assyria, as well as neolithic sites like Çatalhöyük. Worship of the feminine did exist, and was universally acknowledged, because of the importance of women in a culture. Not just as mothers, but as gatherers, for the raising of children, for the continuation of the tribe/clan, and so on. Mother-goddess worship, like monotheistic All-Father worship, has its place and time in history. To ignore it is a grievous insult to the evolution of man's religious and spiritual ideologies.

Anyway, outside of that, I'm very happy to see interest in the Sumerians and other early Mesopotamian cultures alive and well still. Star and flag for a very interesting video, even if we don't necessarily agree on the validity of the information.

~ Wandering Scribe

sk0rpi0n
@Dubz310... ''they must have been distorted more when they were told verbally than in its written form.'' .......................................................................... Well, the Sumerians could have only written down their version according to their own oral tradition, complete with its own mistakes. They would have also weaved in their local gods and goddesses. In other words, even in written form, the Sumerian account would have still had its distortions. Again, just because the Sumerians produced the first physical copy does not automatically mean that their version is 100‰ accurate.The Bible and the Korans account come from divine revelation to prophets, so I'll trust them more.

edit on 1-12-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

Why? Why do you think the books you are reading in the bible, which are newer, are more divinely "correct"? Why wouldn't you believe the earlier word of "god". Is it just because the books you read say they are correct? Is that all it takes?

Not every author of your bible books stated "I am being divinely inspired while writing these words" nor do they mention one another. Why would you deny the obvious conclusion?

Even going that far back in time, I still find using the term God just means being Holy or above anything else! It could be fair to say God would be better Being a Poor Bum and not going around thinking this idea of some God on top of....

Their are only 3 Things that have any real Meaning. The Sun, The Earth, and Life. Without the first two, their would Not being Life.

So why would one need to include God into the equation? To set boundries of course, rules to follow by someone; Man who made them rules to follow. Still I do not see that there is a God included in the last sentance!

Now some Claim God has Spoken to them. Okay fine, who was there at the Time He was Talking to God to say it was God? Then we can play it out how this went about, that happened and the like. Have You Yourself seen God yet? If so, keep it to yourself since you will actually be Lock-Up or find yourself receiving some of the New Happy Pills they give out today Freely!

I'll go with the 3 things for now. So much simpler, less role playing and not be above anyone! If one would like to say that their is a God. Please do talk to Him! Not only do we need His Help now, we needed it back then!

Peace

infoseeker26754
Even going that far back in time, I still find using the term God just means being Holy or above anything else! It could be fair to say God would be better Being a Poor Bum and not going around thinking this idea of some God on top of....

Their are only 3 Things that have any real Meaning. The Sun, The Earth, and Life. Without the first two, their would Not being Life.

So why would one need to include God into the equation? To set boundries of course, rules to follow by someone; Man who made them rules to follow. Still I do not see that there is a God included in the last sentance!

Now some Claim God has Spoken to them. Okay fine, who was there at the Time He was Talking to God to say it was God? Then we can play it out how this went about, that happened and the like. Have You Yourself seen God yet? If so, keep it to yourself since you will actually be Lock-Up or find yourself receiving some of the New Happy Pills they give out today Freely!

I'll go with the 3 things for now. So much simpler, less role playing and not be above anyone! If one would like to say that their is a God. Please do talk to Him! Not only do we need His Help now, we needed it back then!

Peace

Belief of the unseen has always been at the core of religion. Just because you dont see, does not mean it doesnt exist.

Dubz310

Belief of the unseen has always been at the core of religion. Just because you dont see, does not mean it doesnt exist.

To finish your sentence: "but it can make it highly unlikely though."

Krazysh0t

Dubz310

Belief of the unseen has always been at the core of religion. Just because you dont see, does not mean it doesnt exist.

To finish your sentence: "but it can make it highly unlikely though."

Not true, as dreams are from the unseen as well, yet are symbolic and therefore requires clarification and interpretation at times.

Hence, dreams are a big factor in religion as well, as the Torah, Gospels, and Quran contain many of them. And may I add that the Sumerians were also believers in the unseen.

reply to post by Dubz310


Yet, how is that even Relg related? I had a Dream, I see Dead People!



Just because it is Unseen does not imply anything doing with Relg. Most dreams anyway have something to do about yourself or what you did Watch on TV that night! You work out your Problems While Dreaming Too!

Here is why Relg could have been created. No One wants to deal with the Unseen! Your mind has no idea on how to play this out so it Create something actually out of Nothing! Then it Can Deal with it! Or the best it can though!

That is why Dream Books are crap! It tale out the person and groups all togetter as one! To some a Bird is a Bird and nothing more! Now if you do see dead People, then it is how your mind wants to use an idea for you to understand something. What ever that person related, acted, etc. it uses to get the message to you.

Hard part is meeting people in your Dreams YOU never have met before, nor met in this Lifetime anyways. So something touches your body while you were sleeping. Why call it a Demon? It could have been Aunt Birtha, you know!

Peace

reply to post by Dubz310


Father Abraham came from Ur in Chaldea, another name for Sumer. Genesis is basically a compendium of Sumerian mythology. Creation, Eden, the concept of angels and giants, the Flood-- they're all originally Sumerian stories Abraham brought with him on his journey to the Promised Land and that ended up in the Torah a couple millennia later.

Utnapisjtim
reply to post by Dubz310

 

Father Abraham came from Ur in Chaldea, another name for Sumer. Genesis is basically a compendium of Sumerian mythology. Creation, Eden, the concept of angels and giants, the Flood-- they're all originally Sumerian stories Abraham brought with him on his journey to the Promised Land and that ended up in the Torah a couple millennia later.

We are left with 2 conclusions, either:
1) The first is that the religion was made by the Sumerian man and that the Torah, Gospel and Quran are only a rumination of the Sumerian religion (the creation of the first man Adam, the story of Abel and Cain, the story of the Flood, sin, the afterlife, heaven, hell, etc.)

2) The second conclusion is that the Sumerian religion is the religion of Adam and Noah itself but it was related and written in a distorted manner and believed in by the Sumerians and Akkadians (Babylonians and Assyrians) in its distorted form.

This will elaborate on the 2nd conclusion:

reply to post by Dubz310


I feel like there is a lot more supposition in part two of the series than in the first. Again, as with my last post, I'm not trying to "debunk" or "discredit" the video, as I am very interested in the Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, and Assyrians myself. These are just the areas where I, and the narrator, disagree.



1) The historicity of the events recorded in texts.

I have seen, many times, the belief raised that the Jewish accounts of man's creation, the flood, a paradise garden, and so on are "more accurate" than the Sumerian accounts because the Jewish scribal art was more strict. I, personally, disagree with this theory, and believe instead that the Jewish accounts are examples of "literary borrowing" (a topic covered in Kramer's "History Begins At Sumer," chapter 23).

Whether or not you believe in the historicity of Biblical figures (Abraham, Noah, Moses, and so on), archaeology does support a series of Babylonian captivities circa 600 BCE. During this time Jews were prisoners in the Chaldean empire of Babylon (the Neo Babylonian empire). However, the majority of Sumerian and Babylonian accounts detailing myths such as Atrahasis, the Epic of Gilgamesh, Enki and Ninhursag in Paradise, were all created significantly earlier than the Babylonian captivity.

My own personal belief looks something like this:

Seasonal flooding of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers caused massive damage to harvests, villages, and food stores. This lead the oral Ubaids and Sumerians to tell a story about the time that the Anunnaki became upset with them (overpopulation being the common reason given in Atrahasis) and tried to kill them all.

Around 3500 BCE, with the refinement of Cuneiform, the Sumerian scribes began to record fanciful renditions of these oral stories. When the Babylonians came to power they borrowed these tales and modified them to match their own Semitic oral histories.

Then, dring the Babylonian captivity, the Jews also borrowed the tales, modifying them again; this time to match Jewish oral history, which was centered around worship of the northern/southern all-fathers El and YHVH. On and on this trend continued, with each later culture borrowing the earlier culture's tales.

It is not that the Muslim, Christians, Jewish, or Sumerian accounts are "more" correct or truthful. Instead, it is that they are all variations on a theme. An oral tale of a disastrous flood inspired four different peoples who all inhabited roughly the same land. A very similar theory to that of modern literature, all of which can be classified as a variation of four common conflict motifs:

Man vs Nature
Man vs Society
Man vs Man
Man vs Self

The stories change, just as the myths did, but the kernel at the center remained because it was a common enough experience that all of the different groups could relate to it in their own way.

In the ancient Near East the Tigris and Euphrates rivers were considered extremely unpredictable: flooding without warning. As such, this became a common mythological motif in Mesopotamian literature and mythology to the point where it can even be found in the Babylonian myth "Ishtar and Shukaletdua."

You'll notice, however, that, as near by as Egypt, there is no true deluge myth. The reason Egypt lacks a flood myth is because the Nile river was stable, predictable, and seldom rose up to destroy land, crops, or villages. (In case you'd ask: the account of Hathor/Sekhmet slaughtering human beings in "rivers of blood" is not a legitimate flood).

Yet, when you explore Celtic mythology you again find a deluge myth. This time it is centered around the goddess Boann, who dies tragically when the Well of Segais overflows, flooding Ireland and destroying crops, villages, and natural formations. This surge of water creates the river Boyne in Leinster, Ireland. Another notoriously unpredictable river.

They are all variations on a theme, common experiences shared by parts of the world who all undergo similar natural phenomenon, but are, predictably, missing from others parts of the world where such occurrences rarely, if ever, happened.



2) Heaven and Hell

This is disturbing to me, as the narrator is using some of the best sources for Mesopotamian religion and culture available.

Nowhere in Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, or Assyrian lore is there a Heaven that is accessible to human beings. Nor, and I must stress this, is there any equivalent to Hell.

The death-journey for Mesopotamians is well-documented in a variety of myths, including the Babylonian and Assyrian redactions of the Epic of Gilgamesh.

The first stop of a dead shade is the Land of the Living, variously called Dilmun. This is the home of the earth-bound Anunnaki, such as Enki and Ninhursag. The deceased, however, is not permitted to stay here. Instead, they must travel through what is called the Twelve Leagues of Darkness.

The Twelve Leagues of Darkness is variously described as a tunnel or mountain path through which the sun (Utu in his chariot) journeys daily. Beyond Utu's light (and that of Nanna, his father) the Twelve Leagues are haunted by the fearsome denizens of Kur, the Mesopotamian netherworld, including: the Alu, the Lilitu, Asag, the Imdugud Bird, the Rabisu, and more.

When the deceased has completed their travel, they come to the Waters of Death, over which no living being can travel. Beyond the Waters of Death are the gates of Irkalla, and Ganzir, the palace of the netherworld. Within Ganzir is a place called the House of Dust:

The house where the dead dwell in total darkness
Where they drink dirt and eat stone
Where they wear feathers like birds
Where no light ever invades their everlasting darkness
Where the door and the lock is coated with thick dust
When I entered the House of Dust
On every side the crowns of kings were heaped

The House of Dust is not a place of punishment or torture, there are no demons or devil there. It is simply a place of forgetfulness and non-being. Ereshkigal, the Queen of the Netherworld, sees to it personally that no shade who enters her House ever suffers, but also that they are never permitted to leave.

There was no Heaven or Hell in Mesopotamian religion. Only a slow erasure. The entirety of the Epic of Gilgamesh is centered around this very theme.



Beyond those two major areas, I still enjoyed this second part of the video, and thank you for presenting it.

~ Wandering Scribe