• Temples are constructed with an ascending floor and descending ceiling to give the feeling of heaven and earth joining at a focal point , the inner chamber. There was a central axis by which one could peer from the farthest outer room into the inner most chamber (like Herod's Temple). Thus, a temple is a the ideal place for a god to meet Earth. It is a sort of pyramid layed on its side.
• Columns represent reeds, palm trees and the general prosperity of nature. The temple is also a source of prosperity and therefore filled with columns. Not necessarily for structural reasons.
• The inner chamber has an alter where a sacrifice is placed in front of the idol. It is hoped the god is thereby tempted to enter the idol to eat the offering. The god eats the essence of the offering leaving the outer shell for the priest. In Judaism the part for G-d is burnt. This maybe be in order to prevent one trying to feed a real idol. Priests also eat parts.
• Idol is a place for a god to reside, like Temple in Jerusalem; thus our system differs mainly in that it requires centralized worship. This created a more politically unified religion. By placing food before the idol it was hope the god would choose to dwell in the idol to eat the food. He was tempted into the idol. The idol was made to resemble or symbolize the god so that he would view the idol as similar to him and therefore hospitable and would be further inclined to inhabit the idol. Once in the idol, the god was trapped at least for a time and could be controlled in a magic fashion, doing the will of the priest. The material of the idol was never worshiped. The Bible is against this kind of amoral sympathetic magic. It instead promotes success based on moral behavior and allegiance.
• Creation myth : Bird flies over water to find land.[like Noah's dove.] The son of the earth-god Geb and the sky-goddess Nut, Osiris is credited with teaching the skills of agriculture to the Egyptians. Osiris was murdered by his brother Seth. Osiris and his sister Isis loved each other and Seth was jealous. [Like medrash that Cain and Able fought over Eve.] In the Bible the women are noticeably absent from the story of creation. This is perhaps in order to deny this Egyptian myth, or perhaps for political reasons relating to male exclusivity in the priesthood. In the biblical story itself we find "And Cain spoke to his brother Abel. And it was that they were in the field and Cain rose up on Abel his brother and killed him. " The commentators note that the conversation is cut short. We are not told of what they spoke. Perhaps the subject was their sister's love and was left out to deny the Egyptian account. In fact in our story, Cain and Able have no sisters. Strangely, Cain marries someone later in the story. Probably the Bible removed the women to eliminate women from the priesthood. Female priests had been used in fertility ceremonies with local kings. It was either for political reasons (male domination) or ethical ones that woman were removed from the rite. After Osiris' death, Isis recovered the 14 (or 42) scattered parts of his dismembered body and restored him to life. Osiris, however, remained in the underworld as king, while his posthumous son Horus (conceived with Isis) became king of the living. This myth was favored by Ptolemy since he too married his sister. Isis and her sister Naphthas hide the child Horus in reeds to prevent Seth from finding him. [Like Yochevet and Miriam hiding Moses] Seth is the Egyptian god of chaos who embodied the principle of hostility - he was the adversary (and brother) of the god Osiris.
• Dead people are represented as having one leg, like a bound mummy. For example, Osiris is depicted with one leg (or rather two legs bound together), stiff like a mummy. This is similar to Jewish idea of angels having one leg. During kiddusha Jews stand with their legs together to immitate the angels who also say kiddusha. They are pretending to have only one leg, or at least a stiff, bound together leg like a mummy. Angels are said to have no knees. One who has no knees, cannot walk, i.e. can progress. Men, however, do progress in life. Angels are perfect from their creation and do not progress. Having no knees and having one leg symbolize the same thing, a lack in the the ability or need to progress. This is true of man in the afterlife and of angels. It source is in the physical form of a man after being embalmed. The afterlife is a place of closeness with the gods and of greater wisdom. Thus oneleggedness signifies both the afterlife and greater wisdom and closeness to the god. All this applies to the Jewish conception of angels as well.
• In Egyptian paintings, the snake is often depicted with legs and wings. He leads (or carries on his back) men to the underworld. He is source of wisdom; the underworld is a place of true wisdom and it is his realm. He spits venom which is a life and a death force. He is equated with the mail organ which also "spits" and gives life. This relates to Eve being tempted by a snake and gaining wisdom. Also explains that snake used to have legs. It seems the Bible wants to refute/deny the conception of a positive worship-able snake. It turns the snake into a more evil form. It becomes, perhaps unwittingly, the source of man's downfall, that which removed man from the idylic realm of Eden and brought him away from the true wisdom which is to serve G-d. Though, in the creation story, the snake does retain his role of imparting wisdom. Moreover, in the desert Moses uses the snakes as a positive healing force. A later king destroys Moses' snake in fear it would be worshiped as an idol.
• Egyptians probably considered snakes as knowing the way to the underworld because when one sees a snake, seemingly without moving, it instantly dissapears even while one is looking at it. It is as though he vanishes into a secret hole in the ground, into another realm. In the Biblical story the snake leads Eve into the underworld since he is the cause of her ultimate death and entry into the next world. Thus this ancient Egyptian notion is preserved in the Bible.
• Snakes are the only one legged animal. Perhaps this is the origin of the connection between snakes and the afterworld.
• The Jewish story that the first man Adam had scales for skin may indicate that he was snake-like. Adam saw his body as if it were his cloths because he identified himself with his soul. His body was a covering for his soul. Snakes shed their skin. They are therefore an animal which graphically represents the idea of ones body actually being a clothing on ones true self. A snake and his skin are two separate entities. Therefore, Adam's body was compared to the skin of a snake to explain his nakedness before the sin.
• Hathor the god of cow and laughter (cows were a source of prosperity), was a very popular god. Golden calf was inspired by it. Kings (Pharaohs) were depicted sucking from cow to show they were divinely approved.
• Hebrew word for cow is para. Two letter base root is p-r. Pharaoh comes from this word. So does fruit "pri" in Hebrew. so does Joseph's son Ephraim, and boss Potifar. It means fruitfulness and power. Both things the cow represents. In Ezekiel's vision the cow is the king of the domestic animals. (lion king of wild animals, Eagle king of birds, and man king of all creation.)
• Lake of purity was situated next to temple to allow priest to bath to purify self before each sacrifice. like Yom Kippur service. There were mikvaot and a laver in Herod's Temple.
• I believe the priest would wear the mask of the god he was serving. Paintings in the tombs of the kings depict men with the head of various animals. The graphic depiction seems to be of a real man wearing a mask, and not of a fantastical man with the head of an animal. The priest was representing the god on earth. He was infused with powers of the god when he wore his mask. Similar to tefillin (which have the hair of a calf in them and resemble a cows horns) and to priestly parting of hands in birchat cohanim, the cohen "splits his hooves" like the cow.
• This also explains why Jeroboam made a golden cow to take religious center away from Jerusalem. The cow was the popular god of the region. Also idol worship in general implies a decentralization of religion, since there can be many idols of the same god and he can reside in each person's house. I distinguish between idolatry and polytheism. One can be either without being the other.
• I think that originally in Egypt there was a less central worship. Then there was some kind of institutionalization of relgion and the creation of an institutionilized priesthood, complete with schools and ordination. The religion was more central in the sense that each town had one place to worship and its priest, but it was not truly central. There were many places of worship, there were many gods, it was a grassroots religion backed by years of cultural indoctrination. Then one Pharaoh, Amenhotep IV-better known as Akhenaten the monotheist came along. ( See touregypt for more about him.) He wanted political control of religion, so he forbid any worship other than that of the sun god. He was the high priest. He got rid of other priests. Then his son, Tutankhaten, a.k.a. Tutankhamun, a.k.a. King Tut went back to the old ways, probably because this was the deep desire of the people. the Jews probably had decentralized worship at an early stage. This appealed also to their deep sensibilities. The forefathers worshiped at all kinds of places in all kinds of ways. They were independent of the high priest Avimelech. But the Torah is aimed at centralizing things, perhaps to bring politcal unity. After all, the people faced many enemies. They must unite behind one banner if they ere to keep control of the land of Israel. The Judges period still lacked centralization, but David did centralize things a bit. The people revolted and the northern kingdom has several (2) temples. It worships the calf. This is kind of a similar story to what happened in Egypt. History repeats itself. The Korach story can be understood in this context. It is a story of the rebel demanding egalitarian , decentralized worship, and G-d telling him, forget it. A pretty good lesson for the pro-centralization period. So, I would not say there was a historical development in the early Israelite period regarding centralization of the religion. It was not first one and then the other, but rather there was a constant battle, a give and take between political needs for central authority and the peoples long felt need for local worship. ( Another example is Shilo. It seems Shilo was basically left alone; no one visited it. Channa was special because she would go every year, not even three times a year, just every year. So centralization never really was popular.) It was not until the Second Temple period that centralized worship was universaly supported. Perhaps teh Babylonian exile finally weened the Jews of their Egyptian influences. Did it replace them with Babylonian influences?
• The gradual development of Pyramids: Graves would be dug up by hungry Jackals. This seemed a disgrace to the Egyptians. Thus Egyptians began to be obsessed with preventing the jackal from eating their dead. They started covering the grave with a large square rock to keep the jackal away. After some time, one pharaoh decided to put smaller and smaller stones above the one stone. Thus a stepped pyramid. Therefore pyramids have square not triangular bases. In the large pyramids the grave is carved deep into the bedrock beneath the pyramid.
• The Jackal became the symbol of the underworld since he seemed so interested in corpses (in reality he was merely hungry). He is said to eat the heart of anyone not deserving entry into the afterworld.
• A boat brought people to after world because boat was only means of transport they knew. Perhaps they had never reached the source of the Nile and so considered that place to be the after-world, or Eden. Note that Biblical Eden is the source of several rivers. The land of Israel has very few flowing rivers and the Jordan is not mysterious, both its end and beginning are easily discernible. By and large boat travel is non-existent in Israel. The biblical association of Eden with the source of rivers seems to flow from a Egyptian river based culture or a Babylonian one. In general it seems that albeit Biblical law and Myth seems generally to be based on Babylonian law and myth, Biblical rite is based on an Egyptian model. Let us not forget that these two peoples were the main and only two powers of Biblical times. Thus, Biblical Judaism may be said to be Egyptian rite with Babylonian laws and morals.
• The burial of Pharaoh's innards in [bottles placed in] a gold-covered box, which is carried by poles is conspicuously like the Ark. Even more like the Ark is the throne in which the king is carried parade style through the streets. The Israelites carry the Law in such a way; they are showing that their king is the Law. Abba Eban sees the Jewish concept of a singular G-d/King as derived from Babylonian civic kings who created laws which bound their citizenry. When the Hebrews left these city-states they brought with them their law but not their king. Thus they conceived of a invisible all-present king to be the source of their law. This law is therefore binding even outside the city, even in the roamings of the shepherds. This concept is aptly symbolized by the empty (or at least empty of any personage) throne the Hebrews carry.

  Some other thoughts about modern Egypt

• Egypt today has a culture, but lacks any signs of civilization. Civilization means order out of chaos. Perhaps centuries of flood washing away all refuse and construction has forever instilled within Egyptians a disregard for civilization.
• The Egyptians have a highly filtered view of history. In their view, Israel has been the aggressor in '56 and '67 , aiming at stealing the Sinai. The peace was the forcing of Israel to accept Egyptian right to Sinai. Thus the belligerent Israel was tamed by Sadat, though it still vents belligerence toward the Palestinians. The only things which are not distorted are simple facts: there was a war, Israel took land there was a peace. The reasons for the war, the causes, the aims, all this will be lost in the translation. But the facts have a certain power. Thus the only thing which will influence Arab sentiment at large is fact. If there is a peace. If there is a victory. If Israel hold land for a hundred years, that means something. But as for justify a war, there is no point in attempting this, except maybe to the U.S. We can fight with or without justification. Either way the Arabs will see it as unjustified. So too retreat or peace is weakness. It will not be seen in the context of good will. But peace itself is also a fact, and the longer it lasts the more it defines Israel as a partner in the Arab world.
• Having traveled throught El-Arish on the way to Israel, I must confess that El-Arish seems from a geographical point of view to be part of Israel. The whole Sinai is basically sand, as opposed to the Negev which has trees and small plants but reaching El-Arish which is situated at the mouth of a major wadi, where there seems to be some natural well-water, a kind of oasis, one is struck by the similarity to Israeli floral life. At least plant life seems to be increasing from this point onward. There are fields of date trees and general semi-arid flora. Also there are houses built with Jerusalem stone, perhaps a legacy of the period of Israeli control. ( The only other remnant of an Israeli presence I could see was several orange, rusting bus shelters circa 1976. It seems the Sinai now lacks any regular bus service, but the old Israeli bus stops are left there to rust, or perhaps as a reminder of a more well arranged time.) The town itself has charm. In the western part of the town the road is closer to the sea and there is a single row of modest but comfortable houses lining the beach, lying between the road and the beach. What a nice place to live. Then, as one travels eastward, the road gets further from the shoreline and one finds oneself in a small city center with several narrow roads leading out in all directions. There was even a policeman directing traffic. All in all it was quaint, at least by Egyptian standards. One has to ignore the ubiquitous rubish and building materials and other mess. In any case, El-Arish is proposed by some as the Biblical Nahal Mitzraim, or Egyptian Wadi which the Bible considers the southeastern Israeli border. This is also supported by historical records from Pharonic times that El-Arish was considered the beginnning of Israel, or at least the end of the Egyptian land. It certainly is the end of the Sinai desert which was probably a kind of no-man's land, or nomad's land. So for geographical, Biblical and historical reasons, it would appear El-Arish is Israeli's border town.

other observations :

1. The emphasis on resurrection [after all, the sun reappears, why not man ? ] - P.D.
2. The multicolored short kilted garment with various marks of rank resembles priestly clothing and tzitzit. - P.D.
3. The Jewish (Babylonian) prohibition against incest seems in stark contrast to Egyptian customs. - P.D.
4. The procession through doors [pylons]; through a court; into an inner place visited only by the High Priest reminds one of the tabernacle: of the Temple. - P.D.
5. The explosive use of hieroglyphics [most of which are naturalistic images], covering everything in sight, is countervailed by the Biblical proscription of images [very. UN-Egyptian]. - P.D.
6. Interestingly, the "monotheist" sun-worshiping pharaoh encouraged naturalistic hieroglyphics while at the same time discouraged mythic hieroglyphics. This was obviously in order to eliminate or at least diminish the belief in the various gods of these myths. Out of sight, out of mind. After all, all the stories of other gods contradict his notion of one god. His son god was an effort to take power from the various high priests and take sole authority. The Bible seems to even more strictly prohibit image creation, perhaps for the same reason, to remove any lingering belief in false mythology, to encourage belief in the Torah G-d, and to unite the people.
7. The Egyptians practiced circumcision (and still do today in Egypt, but at birth, not at 13).
8. Preservation of corpse contrasts with our preference for disintegration. - P.D.
9. There were Jewish customs to be buried with lye to speed the decay process.
10. The Jewish belief in resurrection closely resembles the Egyptian one.
11. King Tut's head-mask is gold and blue. Torah speaks of decorating tabernacle with gold and lapis [blue]. - P.D.
12. In general, the priests wore the same colors as required in Biblical law.
13. The ancient Egyptians believed in Kai, the force of life that the recently popular interior design theory fung-shway is based on. They had coffins the inside panels of which were painted with doors and windows for the Kai to go out. Perhaps all the false doors that were put in tombs were not just to fool robbers but were to let life forces flow in and out, to help give life to the dead. Also, the real tomb was often behind such a false door. Perhaps the dead man could walk through these carved doors just as the Kai could pass through them. In a sense, the door was a special door which kept the living out, but let the dead through. Modern fung-shway is based on this idolotrous practice.

See www.reshafim.org.il for a good explanation of Egyptian Mythology.

© Nachum Danzig