Dialogue ~ 41

Having become aware of an ancient cult of Athens which had grouped together Prometheus, Athena and Hephaestus, I would like to explore this triad or trinity further, but with the deities being representative of: ‘intent, comprehension (through intellect) and consequence’. Effectively this is being-intellect-life.

To begin with Prometheus - Wikipedia informs, ‘although the etymology of the theonym Prometheus is debated. The usual view is that it signifies ‘forethought’, as that of his brother Epimetheus denotes ‘afterthought’.

When I hear about brothers or consorts in ancient mythology, I tend to think that they are representative of differing sides of the same coin, i.e. syzygy.

By what manner are forethought and afterthought woven together – is it through life and the wisdom of one’s experience in time? Time doesn’t guarantee wisdom, as the intellect has to be attentive to the shadow that one is casting. There is only so much clarity that Athena and Hephaestus can provide if Prometheus is asleep at the wheel.

Remember that Prometheus is associated with the fire of the gods, was punished by Zeus for his hubris and has a regenerative capacity. Interestingly, the ‘punishment’ allowed for him to learn something about himself, in that if he hadn’t been chained to a rock and an eagle hadn’t devoured his liver each day, he wouldn’t have been made aware of his regenerative capacity. There is something of a redemptive feature to the consequence of his actions and perhaps this is justice at work, in a way that we might not always appreciate at the time; wisdom gives insight into this.

Was Prometheus being ‘corrected’ for hubris, of going against the gods, of aiding humanity’s survival? Rather than getting lost in the story of Prometheus, it might be helpful to frame this in the idea that he represents first thought, possibly even intent. Does it fit the traditional narrative of Prometheus if the gods punish or correct first thought or intent because it had ‘strayed’ (remember that an original meaning of ‘sin’ was to have erred or ‘missed the mark’)?

First thought or intent arises from an impression of what one knows of the world and of one’s place in it. Consider the difference in nature between whether one is behaving as if one is entitled to and is competing with life to procure resources for one’s own benefit  - and whether one is recognising one’s origin and the ‘gift’ of life in all of its facets. Intelligence is not the same as wisdom.

What is the purpose of time? Does time provide a ‘medium or space’ for a person to recognise themselves as (in relationship with) life – and for however long that shift of thought and comprehension takes? Even that imagery is flawed, in that it suggests something (time as a medium or as space) exists which is ‘other’ than self. Perhaps time as space IS synonymous with movement of mind? Not quantitative (which is how we are accustomed to measuring time) but qualitative?

Consider that when infinity gives way to necessity, there is an opening for one’s truth (aleithia). Are Prometheus, Athena and Hephaestus representative of aspects of one’s inclination, as it charts the course of one’s will? If this is true, it is a sobering thought that what shows up in one’s experience of life is truly a manifestation of one’s will, consciously created or otherwise.

To explore these ideas further, it might be helpful to look into whether there are parallels within other pantheons of gods and cosmologies. For instance, Greek mythology was heavily influenced by ancient Egyptian myths.

From the time of the Old Kingdom of Egypt (c. 2700 BC), the deity Nun or Nu, along with his female counterpart Naunet, represented the primordial waters (of chaos), although their names are written with the determiners for sky and water.

That which was attributed as being representative of Atum, the earliest form of the creator god, dwelt inside the primordial waters of Nun/Naunet. At the point of creation, Atum exercised his will (or by uttering his own name), so as to emerge from the waters to bring himself and the other gods into existence.

Historically, Atum’s myth merged with that of the sun god Re (who was said to be the son of Nun) and became associated with the deity known as Re-Atum. Since the primeval ocean was said to have surrounded the ordered cosmos – the creation myth was re-enacted daily as the sun god Re-Atum rose from the waters. The myth of Re-Atum later became Amun-Ra.

The pantheon of ancient Egyptian gods was referred to as the Ogdoad (eightfold) of Hermopolis. Aside from Nun/Naunet (and from which the creator god Atum seems to have been incorporated, even after his emergence), there were three further pairs of male/female gods (but which Atum may have engendered?):

Hehu/Hehut (although no readily identifiable determiners exist for their names, a suggestion made by Brugsch in 1885 was that they are associated with a term for an undefined or unlimited number, heh, suggesting a concept similar to the Greek aion. Brugsch also suggested that the names may be a personification of the atmosphere between heaven and earth, otherwise Shu/Tefnut (who have been associated with the first descendants of Atum), who were in turn the parents of Geb/Nut (earth and sky/cosmos).  

Kekui/Kekuit (their names are written with a determiner combining the sky hieroglyph with a staff/sceptre used for words related to darkness and obscurity). In some aspects they appear to represent the transition from night into day and from day into night.

Qerh/Qerhet (their names seem to be associated with inertia/inactivity and to Amun/Amunet or ‘the invisible one’).

Interestingly, the male gods were portrayed with the heads of frogs, whilst the female gods were portrayed with the heads of serpents. I am wondering if this is representative of the male gods being attributed to the active/definitive principle of creation; that which emerged from the primordial waters (amphibious), whilst the female was the counterpoise, representative of returning to one’s source? Aside from the negative connotations of the serpent in the Old Testament, the serpent has long been associated with cycles, healing/regeneration/rebirth and wisdom.

I will allow for the phenomenon that one sees what it is that one wants (or expects) to see. Nevertheless, within the Ogdoad are the characteristics of a creator god which uses the power of its will (intention) to emerge from a realm of potentiality (which could be interpreted by the human mind as chaos). This in turn engenders ‘gods’ which are representative of a ‘space or medium’, of an axis from which one’s space pivots through night and day and of an ‘unseen or invisible’ element – possibly representative of one’s unconscious?

Within this ancient cosmology, I find similar characteristics which were later portrayed through the Greek mythology of Prometheus, Athena and Hephaestus. Still, I am aware that there is more to consider if I am to address my earlier questions with regards to the more human dynamics of intent–intellect–consequence or in other words, of being–intellect–life.